Greens right on Gillard

Written By: - Date published: 10:00 am, February 15th, 2011 - 146 comments
Categories: greens, Parliament - Tags:

It seems odd at first, blocking our closest friend’s leader from speaking in our Parliament, but the Greens were right to look at the higher principle. The debating chamber is where our sovereign assembly meets, it is not a place for foreigners to come, at the government of the day’s invitation, and lecture our elected representatives. I think the NBR put it best (not online):

“Like the Peters Sellers character in Being There, Key’s transition from “Chance the Gardener” to “Chauncy Gardiner” has been so convincing that no one dares challenge it. He now lacks advisers who can say “No, prime minister”. Where were his media people to stop him mincing down the catwalk and being blokey with Tony Veitch on radio, repeating the mistake he made with Paul Henry on television?

An even more cringeworthy mistake, although so far unremarked, is his idea of having Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard make a speech in parliament’s debating chamber. It’s a first, he says, apparently without understanding why it’s never been done before.

The chamber is designed solely for debate between members of parliament. Not only are all the seats taken; there is nowhere for her to stand. To have our elected representatives subjected to a lecture from a foreign prime minister is an act of supreme constitutional cringe. It’s a wonder that the Speaker, who control entry to the chamber, is allowing it to happen.”

Yes, a remarkable lapse from Lockwood, who is usually so keen to defend Parliament and its customs. Key, however, just doesn’t get it, like he doesn’t get anything. Most of his politics is based on the myth that he alone can somehow overturn the norms and rules of politics, that he can turn water into wine  (and smile and wave at the same time). It’s not true, and the dangerous thing is he believes the myth.

And where was Gillard meant to stand? In the Speaker’s chair?

146 comments on “Greens right on Gillard”

  1. tsmithfield 1

    Russell Norman expressed concern it might open the door for someone dreadful, e.g. George Bush, to speak in parliament. Shock. Horror. Not that I am particularly endeared to George Bush myself. But, good grief, surely our politicians are grown up enough to filter out messages they don’t like, and are able to shield their tender little egos from people who have contrasting views to their own.

    • Bright Red 1.1

      Russel.

      Parliament’s debating chamber is not a place for the government to invite whomever it wants from aboard to come and give political speeches. It’s an invitation to abuse.

      • Lanthanide 1.1.1

        Yip. Next thing you know, we get “overseas experts” coming in to address parliament about how great private prisons are, or how great it is to put the tax rate up to 50% and give everyone a universal income.

        I would agree with Key that letting Gillard in, the PM of Australia, is clearly a very conservative and sensible place to start. But Norman is right – it’s a slippery slope that has no obvious end.

    • orange whip? 1.2

      That’s not what Parliament is for, tsmithfield.

      Sheesh, why don’t you ever make an effort to learn at least a little about the subject before weighing in?

    • Jenny 1.3

      .
      By refusing to allow this precedent to be set, Thank God, we have been spared the possibility of the cringing spectacle of our house of representatives being addressed by Tony Blair.

      Go the Greens!

      Blair to visit NZ

  2. randal 2

    the nats portray themselves as conservatives when in reality they are empty headed spruikers looking for every and any main chance.
    parliament has evolved over the centuries with rules and regulations to prevent itself from being used and abuse by any extraneous factors.
    along come the tories and think they can make up the rules as they go along.
    it does not work like that and this attempt to use parliament for its own purpose only goes to show the electorate the lack of principle that undegirds all national supposed philosophy whih is actually zero.

  3. Colonial Viper 3

    Bloody hell, where does Goff and LAB stand on this constitutional sell out?

  4. prism 4

    My contention is that Australians are not our friends. They are close neighbours with the same language and similar backgrounds, and our economy is dependent on trading with them. We have a positive camaraderie and encourage mutual visits. But they will put the boot in now and then, a bit of rough from them is to be expected occasionally so we shouldn’t set up sweet little myths of closeness, be alert. Canada and the USA are close too, integrated, but Canada similarly has probably lost more than it has gained in signing up to be USA’s big buddy.

  5. Richard 5

    Yes, the Greens are absolutely right here.

    It looks like the Greens have learnt something since the Gerry Brownlee Enabling Act.

    I’m not surprised that Key, DPF et al do not see this as an issue. This is because they seem to fundamentally see government as a game with mutable rules that they play to benefit themselves. They really don’t seem to understand that the point of government is the actual governance.

  6. Colonial Viper 6

    Perhaps John Key could get the stars of The Hobbit to stand up in Parliament and say what a nice guy Peter Jackson is.

  7. SPC 7

    Even the GG (or the sovereign on the throne) cannot enter and address parliament – a convention since Charles 1 tried to enter the Commons and arrest MP’s. It’s part of the unwritten constitution of the UK and us.

    It’s a surprise that the Australians did not notice … or were too polite to notice or thought we were so ignorant we were prepared to show the form of conceding sovereignty before we discussed bi-lateral ties as “equals”.

  8. tsmithfield 8

    The slippery slope argument is stupid.

    All the Greens have to do is to agree to vary the rules on an ad-hoc basis, with the full agreement of parliament each time the case arises. Then, if the proposed speaker is someone who offends the Green’s tender sensibilities, they don’t have to agree and the speaker won’t be allowed in.

    • Colonial Viper 8.1

      There is no slippery slope. Only NZ parliamentarians get to speak in the House. Varying this, ad hoc or otherwise, confers no benefit on the business of governing the country.

      The Greens “tender sensibilities” versus John Key’s “Hollywood sensibilities”. Such a tough choice mate.

      • tsmithfield 8.1.1

        “Varying this, ad hoc or otherwise, confers no benefit on the business of governing the country.”

        Says you, oh omniscient one.

        • mcflock 8.1.1.1

          well, at the very least the burden of proof surely rests on those who want to take up parliamentary time with a non-mp addressing the house?

    • toad 8.2

      So, tsmithfield, if the Greens agreed to a Government request for Julia Gillard to speak to a sitting of Parliament, but then refused to agree to a similar request for Hu Jintao to speak, what happens next?

      I’ll tell you what happens – a huge bloody diplomatic incident that sours our relationship with China and makes New Zealand an object of international ridicule.

      • tsmithfield 8.2.1

        Na.

        The Chinese are used to the Greens antics ala Russell and his flag. So, they would just put it down to the Greens being the Greens again…and again…and again…

    • Lanthanide 8.3

      So, ts, I suppose you wouldn’t mind if they invited the CEO of a private prison organisation into parliament to give a lecture on how private prisons are so great?

      Or if they invited an educational expert to give a lecture on how badly flawed National Standards is and that it should be replaced with their own teaching and testing method that they invented?

      *That* is the slippery slope argument. We might start off with the prime minister of Australia, which seems perfectly safe, but in the end you could up with people presenting to parliament with their own vested interests at heart, and not that of NZ.

      Also your point about “let the Greens decide who should speak” – sure, that sounds fine. But the problem is it sets a precedent. In 40 years time the Greens may not be around, and the government proposes that “expert Y on subject X” talks to parliament and hold up precedent as for why it is ok for this to happen.

      The slippery slope argument is one about the creeping nature of change over time – we’re not talking 1 or 2 years here, but 40 or 50. Then again it doesn’t surprise me that you don’t care about the future.

      • tsmithfield 8.3.1

        If all parliament thought it would be worth their while, I wouldn’t have any problem with that.

        • Richard 8.3.1.1

          …I wouldn’t have any problem with that.

          You should.

          The “slippery slope” argument is a red herring, IMO.

          The issue is that Gillard herself using our parliamentary “sitting” time is not appropriate if we have a sovereign, independent parliament.

          The only thing that makes our parliament sovereign, independent and legitimate is that it acts like it is. As soon as parliament starts to act counter to such principles our system of government is undermined.

        • Bright Red 8.3.1.2

          “If all parliament thought it would be worth their while”

          And, evidentally, not all of Parliament thinks it worthwhile for any non-MP to speak in the chamber. So, that’s the end of that, hs agrees with the Green’s right to do this and by definition doesn’t object.

    • fraser 8.4

      “they don’t have to agree and the speaker won’t be allowed in.”

      such a right would have to be given to all parties – i think all of us can predict the partisan mess if that came about.

      also – what happened to the “wasting my tax payer dollars” argument? (maybe not yours specificaly, but its been a fairly constant meme from those on the right).

      I mean, sure pollies waste money all the time – but shouldnt the time set aside and funded (via our tax payer dollars) for doing government work be used for just that and that alone?

    • The Voice of Reason 8.5

      Stupid is as stupid says, in your case, TS. Did you not see comment 1.2?

      Destroying the convention on an ad hoc basis is an even dafter idea than what Key is proposing. Neither you, nor Key, seem to understand why the debating chamber is sacrosanct in a Westminster system. Try and read a few of the other comments here, maybe google it, and then come back and comment on an educated basis.

      If Key is determined to see this sovereignty confirming tradition end, he should give a reason why it should go. Ignorance of historical fact is no defence for mincing John and it doesn’t do you any favours either. I suspect you are slightly brighter than Key, TS, so why don’t you have a think about things for a while and come back with some convincing arguments as to the need for change.

      There are some valid reasons out there, BTW. For example, the two US chambers often meet together to hear from forign leaders and it has become something of a highlight in their parliamentary year. But it’s not a spur of the moment thing for the seppos, it’s something that required debate and cross party agreement many years ago and does not in any way indicate a loss of control over the house, as Key’s proposal does.

      • SHG 8.5.1

        Neither you, nor Key, seem to understand why the debating chamber is sacrosanct in a Westminster system.

        In recent memory Parliament at Westminster has been addressed by Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Mitterand, Giscard, Sarkozy, Pope Benedict, and Nelson Mandela.

        Parliament at Canberra has been addressed by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan, Prime Minister Harper of Canada, President Bush the Younger, and (apparently) three other foreign leaders I can’t bring to mind.

        Parliament at Wellington has been addressed by Winston Peters and Phillip Field, so yeah… sacrosanct.

        • Pascal's bookie 8.5.1.1

          Were those parliaments sitting when addressed by uncle tom cobley et al SHG?

          Or were those events just like the one the Greens have said is entirely appropriate.

          • Colonial Viper 8.5.1.1.1

            Yeah I’m waiting for SHG to come back with some decent answers this time, too.

  9. Ed 9

    There is a perfectly good Legislative Council Chamber that can be used – it is specifically set out for speeches / receptions. That room would have the advantage of not having members seated in party blocs – mixed seating would indicate at least some common ground on foreign affairs issues.

  10. tsmithfield 10

    “But it’s not a spur of the moment thing for the seppos, it’s something that required debate and cross party agreement many years ago and does not in any way indicate a loss of control over the house,”

    Just like what I said earlier then?

    All the Greens have to do is to agree to vary the rules on an ad-hoc basis, with the full agreement of parliament each time the case arises.

    • The Voice of Reason 10.1

      Nope, not what you said at all, TS. The US system is a permanent arrangement, not an ad hoc one, and it involves both houses suspending their business and joining together to hear the guest. In other words, it is outside the normal business of the house. Key proposes making it part of the business of the house.

      • Pascal's bookie 10.1.1

        So they did what the greens suggested, and what Key has agreed to.

        Looks like everyone agrees with the Greens, but some don’t want to admit to doing so because stupid Greens.

        • Colonial Viper 10.1.1.1

          *Sigh*

          Is it truly that out of fashion to stand up for our own sovereignty and traditions as a country? Why not officially become a state of Australia hmmm?

  11. tsmithfield 11

    Reading the comments above it looks like many posters are so addicted to the concept of nanny state that they want it extended to parliament as well.

    Well I have news for you. Our parliamentarians are all grown up, although sometimes it might be hard to believe. If they can make big decisions about things like how much tax they should take off us and whether or not we should go to war, then surely they should be able to decide whether or not someone will speak to them in parliament. If they make the rules for themselves, they are able to vary those rules as well.

    I guess if the Greens are worried their minds might be polluted by a particular speaker, they always have the option of putting their fingers in their ears and going “nah nah nah nah nah nah….” through the speech. 🙂

    • Colonial Viper 11.1

      Wow tsmithfield you really are a sovereignty sell out.

      Since Gillard is such an honoured guest, we should give her a vote in our November elections. You know, to symbolise how close our two countries have become.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 11.2

      We have allready seen an MP obstructed in the precinct of parliament, so whats to say national might stop troublemakers ( hone anyone ?) from even appearing in the chamber.

      Thats what happens when precedent is upended just to suit Keys photo opportunity of the day.

  12. The Voice of Reason 12

    BTW, a small aside on why the Aussie PM is not a good choice to be given temporary sovereignty over our Parliament.

    The Aussie parliament, at least up until the building of the new structure (and possibly in that house too), had seats set aside for the day NZ chose to become part of the Commenwealth of Australia. At the time of federation, NZ was considered to be a sovereign state in name only and it was thought to be only a matter of time before we saw the light and returned to Australian control. I understand we would have had more seats than Tasmania, though, so that’s nice.

  13. tsmithfield 13

    I fail to see how sovereignty is threatened at all.

    Look at it this way. If you invite someone into your house, you are not surrendering your house to them. You still have the right to ask them to leave if you wish. You haven’t surrendered your personal authority in the slightest. The same with parliament.

    • Bright Red 13.1

      it’s just not appropriate. she can and will talk while the house isn’t sitting but not while it is.

      • tsmithfield 13.1.1

        “it’s just not appropriate. she can and will talk while the house isn’t sitting but not while it is.”

        Not even an argument??? Is this what you’ve been reduced to? How weak!!

        • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.1

          These times in the NZ Parliament are for NZ parliamentarians.

          Not for Key’s photo ops and various celebrity appearances.

          Its not rocket science TS. The fact that you don’t understand issues of sovereignty is not our problem.

          Talk about selling us down the river for free.

    • Richard 13.2

      Sovereignty is threatened because parliamentary sitting time is time reserved for the sovereign business of parliament. A speech by Gillard, a representative of a foreign government, is not the sovereign business of parliament.

      She can give (and is giving) a speech outside the time slots in which parliament is sitting. She shouldn’t be eating into the time scheduled for the normal soverign business of parliament.

      Afterall Bronwlee, apparently, needs to go into urgency all the time, because he keeps running out of parliamentary sitting time. Surely, you are not suggesting he in fact has plenty of time, never actually needs to go into urgency, and is merely playing out a cynical piece of theatre designed to stifle legitimate, timely questioning of his government’s business?

      • tsmithfield 13.2.1

        “Sovereignty is threatened because parliamentary sitting time is time reserved for the sovereign business of parliament. A speech by Gillard, a representative of a foreign government, is not the sovereign business of parliament.”

        What utter nonsense. Parliament has the sovereign authority to determine how it spends its time. It may well be in the sovereign interest of parliament to hear from a foreign leader.

        • Colonial Viper 13.2.1.1

          It may well be in the sovereign interest of parliament to hear from a foreign leader.

          At the appropriate time, asshat, of which there are plenty to choose from.

        • Richard 13.2.1.2

          Parliament has the sovereign authority to determine how it spends its time.

          No it doesn’t. Parliament is not an elected dictatorship. Parliament has to act according to the law. And parliament has to go beyond mere technical obedience to the law. It has to act in way that is seen as legitimate.

          It may well be in the sovereign interest of parliament to hear from a foreign leader.

          Of course, and it can do so at the appropriate time. Which is what is happening.

        • Pascal's bookie 13.2.1.3

          So by your logic, if parliament was to decide that it wanted to hand over its sovereign authority to canberra, then that wouldn’t be a loss of sovereignty because that is what it decided to do?

          • tsmithfield 13.2.1.3.1

            Richard “No it doesn’t. Parliament is not an elected dictatorship. Parliament has to act according to the law. And parliament has to go beyond mere technical obedience to the law. It has to act in way that is seen as legitimate.”

            Duh. Parliament is the law.

            Pascal “So by your logic, if parliament was to decide that it wanted to hand over its sovereign authority to canberra, then that wouldn’t be a loss of sovereignty because that is what it decided to do?”

            But that would involve handing over decision-making authority. Someone speaking in parliament does not require that any authority is relinquished to that person. The person is speaking at the whim of the hosts. The hosts have the right to terminate the speech anytime they choose. You still haven’t made a case for the loss of sovereignty.

            • Richard 13.2.1.3.1.1

              Parliament is the law.

              No it isn’t.

              Parliament makes laws.

              And parliament makes laws by following due parliamentary process. Which is exactly why it is a bad idea to drop parliamentary process in order to hear the usual banal “very good friend” platitudes.

              • tsmithfield

                It can also change due parliamentary process if it wants to. If parliament sets the process, it is also able to change it. The way you are suggesting it, it seems that due process is a holy grail set in stone, never to be changed. Ever.

                If that were the case, then parliament has already lost its sovereignty. To a rule book.

                • Richard

                  It can also change due parliamentary process if it wants to.

                  Of course.

                  The crux of the matter is why parliamentary process is being changed.

                  You are proposing changing parliamentary process in order to flatter a representative of a foreign government.

                  This is not the sort of thing that a strong, independent, sovereign, democratic parliament does.

                  It is the sort of thing that a dictatorship might do. And it is the sort of thing that a fawning colonial backwater might do.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    How about a self-styled fawning colonial Prime Minister?

                    Of course, a colonial viper would never consider such a thing 😀

                    • Richard

                      I imagine that a colonial viper would bite it’s colonial masters when they were least suspecting.

            • The Voice of Reason 13.2.1.3.1.2

              “Duh. Parliament is the law.”

              Nope, this guy is the law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge_Dredd

              Given that you seem to hail from the world of fantasy yourself, I thought you would have known that!

              You know, you really are making an arse of yourself today, TS. Give it away, ffs, even your master has twigged how silly the idea was. How come it’s taking you so long?

              • Colonial Viper

                I finally figured out ts has no actual interest in the smooth, effective functioning of our democratic Government, nor in maintaining our country’s status as a sovereign power. Yeah, I know I’m a bit slow today 😛

              • tsmithfield

                TVOR “You know, you really are making an arse of yourself today, TS.”

                Given that others are vehemently asserting that sovereignty is at risk but are unable to explain why, I have to disagree with you.

                CV: “finally figured out ts has no actual interest in the smooth, effective functioning of our democratic Government, nor in maintaining our country’s status as a sovereign power.”

                Yawn. Another baseless assertion that we are at risk of losing sovereignty over this. Please, Please, Please, give me a cogent explanation of how rather than repeating the mantra.

                • Colonial Viper

                  Your disagreement is irrelevant ts, since you do not care about our nation’s sovereign status.

                  Your failure to see how giving up time and ground traditionally reserved for elected NZ parliamentarians only is a diminishment of that sovereign status is also irrelevant.

                  Haha I’m gonna stop with this now because I’m going to get a DNFT ban in a moment 😎

                  • tsmithfield

                    And you can’t seem to see that parliamentarians are using their sovereign authority to decide if, when, and where they want to here from outside speakers, and whether or not that would be useful to them.

            • Pascal's bookie 13.2.1.3.1.3

              Someone speaking in parliament does not require that any authority is relinquished to that person.

              It would involve handing over the authority to speak in a sitting parliament, so the logic is established. At the moment, to speak in a sitting parliament, you have to be elected to it. Getting rid of that is no small thing, which is why we didn’t do it.

    • Lanthanide 13.3

      It’s not about inviting someone into your house – that is exactly what the Greens are saying we should do it.

      It is about you holding a meeting once a week for organising a local community group where you decide how the community is going to be managed, and how to respond to the issues of the day. The aussie PM is welcome into your house, but is not welcome to your community group meeting because she is not a member of the community.

      A bit of a tortured metaphor, but that is really the describing the situation at hand much better than yours does.

      • tsmithfield 13.3.1

        Very poor analogy. Community groups often have outside speakers come and talk to them about salient issues. You need to find a better analogy to make your point.

        • Colonial Viper 13.3.1.1

          You need to find a better analogy to make your point.

          Why? Engaging with you is a waste.

          • tsmithfield 13.3.1.1.1

            When you start descending to this level, its a sure sign you’re losing the debate.

            • Colonial Viper 13.3.1.1.1.1

              I’ve had better ‘debates’ against rock faces.

              • tsmithfield

                By that do you mean you’ve lost debates to rock faces? 🙂

                • Colonial Viper

                  Haha I think a couple times I was definitely the one worse off 😀

                • orange whip?

                  I think he means you’re a fuckwit.

                  NZ Parliament is for Members of Parliament, representing the people of NZ.

                  Without your understanding and acceptance of this simple fact, people are wasting their time trying to draw analogies as there simply isn’t one you’ll recognise.

                  So give yourself a pat on the back tsmithfield. You’ve kept a couple of people busy for an hour or so trying to use honest reason against your sophistry about something important to them which you just don’t care about.

                  Well done.

                  • tsmithfield

                    The general consensus here seems to be that parliament can’t do what it wants to because it is bound by a rule book of immutable rules.

                    As I have just pointed out above, if that is actually the case, then parliament has already lost its sovereignty. To a rule book. However, if it has the freedom to change rules as it pleases, such as whether or not external speakers can speak to parliament, then it is exercising its sovereignty.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    thanks orange whip 😀

                    ts the guy who doesnt care about sovereignty, lecturing about what it is 😀 😀 😀

                    • tsmithfield

                      If parliament invited Gillard to decide our future in ANZUS, that would be ceding sovereignty, because it diminishes NZ’s ability to determine its own destiny.

                      If parliament invited Gillard to come to parliament to speak as a guest, that is exercising its sovereignty. Because parliament is exercising its sovereign right to decide who does or doesn’t speak to parliament. If necessary, it can exercise its sovereign right to change the rules so it is able to happen.

                      Arguing against this on the basis of perceived loss of sovereignty is just plain dumb. Don’t know why you can’t see it.

                      From what I can see from the arguments above, it boils down to wasting parliament’s time. However, parliament has the sovereign right to determine whether it is a waste of time or not.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Hey glad you made it to a dictionary to look up ‘sovereignty’ mate.

                      Next question: is giving foreign corporates the right to sue the NZ Govt for losses incurred due to NZ Govt decisions, but through a foreign tribunal and foreign laws a diminishment of the sovereignty of our government and our court system, ts?

                    • tsmithfield

                      “Hey glad you made it to a dictionary to look up ‘sovereignty’ mate.”

                      Is this some sort of concession??

                      “Next question: is giving foreign corporates the right to sue the NZ Govt for losses incurred due to NZ Govt decisions, but through a foreign tribunal and foreign laws a diminishment of the sovereignty of our government and our court system, ts?”

                      I guess we already have that to some extent with the WTO, but on a governmental scale. Foreign entities are likely to be more willing to deal with NZ if they feel they have accessible recourse if something goes wrong, so it is a bit of a double-edged sword I guess.

                      So far as sovereignty is concerned, I guess it is necessary to cede some degree of it to fit in with the rest of the world. For instance, we have ceded some of our sovereignty to the UN, WTO etc. However, we do this because we expect other nations to do the same.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Thanks for explaining your stance on ceding sovereignty to the multinational corporates 😀

                      Personally I think its a bad idea – just like selling off our strategic power assets to them.

                    • tsmithfield

                      I think ceding sovereignty at various levels is unavoidable, not necessarilly desirable, if a country wants the rest of the world to deal with it.

                      I think you will find that we do this in all sorts of ways now that you might not even think of. I don’t know if you are married, or have a partner. But imagine how things would be if you decided to exercise your “sovereign” right to go out and booze all night, or sleep around all over the place. I don’t think your partner would tolerate your “sovereignty” for too long. So, being willing to give up that sort of behaviour for the sake of the relationship involves giving up a bit of your “sovereignty”. The payoff is peace, happiness, and hopefully plenty of nooky. 🙂

        • Richard 13.3.1.2

          A better analogy is that if you are university students living in a flat, and everybody has agreed not to have parties at the flat during exam week. And then one of your flatmates decides to have a party at the flat anyway, because they are pretty convinced that they don’t need to study.

          It’s not having a party that is the problem. It is having a party during the period when you have all agreed to try to study.

          Same thing here. It is not her speaking that is the problem. It is her speaking during the time allocated to parliamentary business. Which is what Key originally proposed.

          • tsmithfield 13.3.1.2.1

            Richard: “A better analogy is that if you are university students living in a flat, and everybody has agreed not to have parties at the flat during exam week. And then one of your flatmates decides to have a party at the flat anyway, because they are pretty convinced that they don’t need to study.”

            This analogy fails too. This is because it is given in my argument that parliament as a whole agrees to the speaker giving the speech. In your analogy, that would be the same as all the flatmates agreeing to change the rules about parties so that they can occur during exam week.

            • Richard 13.3.1.2.1.1

              Yes, analogies are never perfect.

              However, I think you will find that in reality not everybody did agree to change the rules about how parliament operates just to flatter some foreign politician.

              There are also unlikely to be yard glasses involved in Gillard’s speech. So the analogy fails on that level too.

              • tsmithfield

                Not being perfect is one thing. Your analogy was plain wrong.

                • wtl

                  Actually, your argument is internally inconsistent. It comes down to this:

                  Do you agree that a party in the NZ parliament has the right to object to a outside speaker giving a speech during sitting time, for whatever reason?

                  If the answer is yes then maybe the Greens reasoning doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but it doesn’t matter. Whatever their reason, it is their right to object and there is nothing wrong with that.

                  If the answer is no, then the analogy above holds. You are saying that a party can only object if you agree to their reason (or can’t object at all). Going back to the flatmates analogy, that would mean the other flatmates can have a party even if one objects unless that one flatmate comes up with a ‘good’ reason not to. Obviously, ‘good’ being subjective means that the other flatmates can simply choose to never accept that the reason is ‘good’ and have a party regardless.

                  • tsmithfield

                    Except if you go waaaaay back to one of my earlier posts, you will find that I argued parliament as a whole should be able to make decisions on an ad-hoc basis about whether external speakers could speak to parliament or not, irrespective of what the rules are.

                    In the flat mate analogy, the flatmates may have made a rule not to have parties during exam week. Then, all later agree to change their minds and party up large anyway. So long as they have all agreed to the change, it doesn’t really matter what the rule they originally set was.

                    • Richard

                      So, it again comes to the reason why you are proposing that parliament changes its rules.

                      Changing the rules to flatter a representative of a foreign government is not the actions of an independent, sovereign state.

                    • tsmithfield

                      You have interpreted it as “flatter”. What if parliament is interested to learn something from Gillard that might help them improve their own decision making?

                    • wtl

                      So what exactly are you arguing against? The Greens decided to object. You’ve already admitted that that is their right.

                      Therefore, arguing about their reason is irrelevant, isn’t it?

                    • tsmithfield

                      Nah. From what I heard from the Greens, their position was that it shouldn’t ever happen. Under any circumstances. Because it was setting the path to a slippery slope where evil people such as George Bush would soon be spouting forth in parliament.

                      My position is that is utter nonsense. Parliament can decide to ignore its own rules on an ad-hoc basis if all parliament agrees without setting an immutable precedent. So, the Greens could agree to hear Gillard, but still quite safely refuse to hear George Bush.

                      I really don’t see why this would be a problem. Do you?

                    • Lanthanide

                      “You have interpreted it as “flatter”. What if parliament is interested to learn something from Gillard that might help them improve their own decision making?”

                      How does Gillard delivering a speech during a sitting parliamentary session somehow differ from her delivering that exact same speech outside a sitting parliamentary session? Is the content somehow going to change, or the MPs somehow going to learn less in the latter situation than they would’ve learnt in the former?

                      I think you’ll find, ts, that if there was a war on, or a worldwide financial crisis, or some other important issue at hand, then having the PM of Australia address a sitting parliament might make sense. But just because the PM wants a social visit doesn’t constitute a good enough reason to do such a thing.

                    • wtl

                      Yes, we know you don’t agree with the Greens reasoning. But they still have the right to object even if you don’t like their reason. So aren’t you just wasting time arguing about their reason?

                    • Richard

                      What if parliament is interested to learn something from Gillard that might help them improve their own decision making?

                      It’s laughable to think that parliament could really learn something from a public, political speech like this, especially one from the representative of a close, stable, allied country. It’s a photo-opportunity.

                      Even if they could learn something — what could they possibly learn which would mean that they had to suspend normal parliamentary business to do so?

                      What’s wrong with hearing the speech and following our normal parliamentary rules?

                    • mcflock

                      “Parliament can decide to ignore its own rules on an ad-hoc basis if all parliament agrees without setting an immutable precedent. ”

                      Interesting constitutional point, there.

                    • tsmithfield

                      “But they still have the right to object even if you don’t like their reason. So aren’t you just wasting time arguing about their reason?”

                      If there reason was that they didn’t like a particular speaker, I could respect that. However, the reasoning they have given is irrational, and would prevent parliament making a sovereign decision in this respect. I object to that. And I object to the banal repetition of the “loss of sovereignty” argument that doesn’t make sense at all.

                      Lanthanide: “I think you’ll find, ts, that if there was a war on, or a worldwide financial crisis, or some other important issue at hand, then having the PM of Australia address a sitting parliament might make sense.”

                      Be careful. You’re leaving the safe haven of idealism for the choppy waters of pragmatism here. So now you’re saying there are some circumstances where it might be OK. You’re stepping onto the slippery slope now.

                      McFlock: “Interesting constitutional point, there.”

                      Yes. But not without precedent. Remember, parliament was debating whether or not it should continue opening with prayer awhile ago. I guess if there was consensus (or maybe even majority, I don’t know) then the rules would have been changed in this respect.

                    • Richard

                      You’re leaving the safe haven of idealism for the choppy waters of pragmatism here. So now you’re saying there are some circumstances where it might be OK.

                      Sure, it is possible to imagine some sort of extraordinary crises where it might be a good idea for parliament to adopt different rules. Although, you could equally well argue that it is exactly during a crises that it is most important for parliament to follow the rules.

                      However, John Key meeting a redhead is not that sort of extraordinary crises.

                    • Lanthanide

                      “Be careful. You’re leaving the safe haven of idealism for the choppy waters of pragmatism here. So now you’re saying there are some circumstances where it might be OK. You’re stepping onto the slippery slope now.”

                      A slippery slope of “exceptional circumstances” that also sets the bar very high for any future attempts at the same. Not really very slippery, compared to “lets have a photo op” that Key is (was) proposing.

                    • wtl

                      “If there reason was that they didn’t like a particular speaker, I could respect that. However, the reasoning they have given is irrational, and would prevent parliament making a sovereign decision in this respect. I object to that. And I object to the banal repetition of the “loss of sovereignty” argument that doesn’t make sense at all.”

                      So you are saying that the Greens shouldn’t object unless they have a reason you agree with?

                    • tsmithfield

                      “So you are saying that the Greens shouldn’t object unless they have a reason you agree with?”

                      I think their objection should be on rational grounds. Arguing that there is a rule that says they can’t do such and such when they are part of the process that makes and amends the rules is irrational.

                    • Pascal's bookie

                      If there reason was that they didn’t like a particular speaker, I could respect that. However, the reasoning they have given is irrational, and would prevent parliament making a sovereign decision in this respect.

                      This contradicts your whole argument, such as it is.

                      The Greens can’t stop parliament doing anything. They can’t prevent parliament doing things. Key could have done it his way if he wanted to. Parliament can diminish its sovereignty if it so desires. No one is really denying that. What the Greens, (and after them pretty much everyone else), are saying is that they shouldn’t .

                      Why is parliament sovereign? What legitimises it?

                      If you think it is elections, then you should, I would think , have a problem with non elected people speaking in a sitting parliament.

                  • wtl

                    “I think their objection should be on rational grounds. Arguing that there is a rule that says they can’t do such and such when they are part of the process that makes and amends the rules is irrational.”

                    So the Greens shouldn’t object unless they have a reason that you think is ‘rational’? This is just another way of saying they shouldn’t object unless you agree with the reason.

                • Colonial Viper

                  Warning. Keep arguing with ts and pretty soon you won’t be sure which end is your cake hole and which end is your crap hole any more.

                  • orange whip?

                    It’s ok, ts is already there.

                    According to tsmithfield, Parliament can do and change and ad-lib anything as long as a simple majority of members want to. Essentially “might is right”.

                    According to tsmithfield, if a simple majority of members voted that all Parliamentary sessions would henceforth be conducted naked, then so be it.

                    Of course it isn’t true, never has been true, and ts isn’t interested in finding out.

                    • tsmithfield

                      “According to tsmithfield, Parliament can do and change and ad-lib anything as long as a simple majority of members want to. Essentially “might is right”.”

                      Wrong. I have been arguing for parliamentary agreement from all sides. Not just a majority.

                      “According to tsmithfield, if a simple majority of members voted that all Parliamentary sessions would henceforth be conducted naked, then so be it.”

                      Your premise is wrong, so your conclusion is wrong also.

                    • Lanthanide

                      Actually parliament is omni-powerful and omni-competent. They can pass any law they like, and they also cannot pass laws that they later cannot repeal. If they passed a law saying “to repeal law X, you must get 90% agreement in the house”, they could repeal *that* law with a simple majority and then repeal law X with a simple majority also.

                      The only real check in place for parliament’s powers is the governor general, who is constitutionally required to pass laws that the government wants passed and to refuse would create a constitutional crisis. And of course the public, who can vote them out at the next election (which could be forced by a ‘vote of no confidence’ in the house if they could get a simple majority).

                    • tsmithfield

                      I am not the only one pointing out how logically stupid the Green’s position is.

                      In the Stuff article linked above, Martin Kay raises some of the points I have been raising all afternoon.

                    • Pascal's bookie

                      Martin Kay doesn’t point out anything in that piece. Certainly nothing logical is involved in it. He brushes off the downsides by assuming they would never happen.

                      He says for example that bad guys would never be invited. Say Russia or China made the request to speak to a sitting parliament as a part of negotiations over trade. Trade agreements with NZ are pretty much about the symbolism for such states, and that symbolism would be enhanced by such a speech. Are you sure that the major parties would be prepared to lose a trade deal over such a request?

                      The rest of his piece is similarly poor, but yes you’re not alone.

                    • tsmithfield

                      So what if, shock, horror, some evil dictator did get invited?

                      Don’t you think our elected politicians should have the intelligence and critical analytical skills to deal with any drivel that comes out of their mouth. Perhaps our own politicians would get the opportunity to influence the beliefs and attitudes of the said dictator for good.

                    • Pascal's bookie

                      But they don’t need Parliament to be sitting to do any of that ts.

                      When parliament is sitting, it is exercising its sovereignty. It’s legitimacy stems from the fact that the members of that parliament are elected to it by those that the parliament governs.

                      Why fuck with that?

                    • Lanthanide

                      “Why fuck with that?”

                      For a photo op, clearly.

                    • orange whip?

                      “Wrong. I have been arguing for parliamentary agreement from all sides. Not just a majority.”

                      No, you’ve just been arguing against anything that challenges the supreme authority of your beloved leader.

                      You’ve changed your tune from one comment to the next so many times you can’t even remember what you’ve written.

                      Either you think the Greens objection should be overruled and ignored or you accept that it stands. It’s that simple.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    Martin Kay’s points are an ass. He’s just playing the BS politically correct card by trying to bring in the names of Aung San Suu Kyi etc.

                    Fact of the matter is that these luminaries can address Parliament. In Parliament.

                    Just not when the House is sitting – because that is when our elected Parliamentarians do the business of the country on our behalf and neither Gillard nor Aung San Suu Kyi qualify.

                    Now, that’s not rocket science is it ts?

                    • tsmithfield

                      Well if Gillard et al. get to speak during sitting time it might mean a bit less time for petty back biting and stupid interjections and a bit more focus on what is important. In fact, if they spent half their time listening to external speakers, they would probably still get just as much done because they waste so much time now on inane stupidity.

                    • Speaking Sense to Unions

                      foreign affairs and trade generally do get to be considered “business” of parliament.

                      The only reason that Gillard didn’t address parliament while sitting was because no one wanted the Greens to embarrass everyone with stupid point scoring about foreigners.

                      There was absolutely no reason why Gillard could not have. The idea that this means we’re giving up sovereignty is stupid – as Goff pointed out.

                    • tsmithfield

                      Even I agree with Goff, as is evidenced by my litany of comments here. Why can’t people here agree with their hero.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Hey you guys want to give Gillard a vote in November as well? I mean, since you want to let her speak at a time and place reserved for our elected parliamentarians who are also all NZ citizens?

                      I mean that must make her just as good as, right?

                      And in the spirit of ANZAC friendship, why not give her an honourary vote in our elections? 😀

                      Key already saw the light, it will dawn on you guys too eventually. Maybe.

    • Colonial Viper 13.4

      I fail to see how sovereignty is threatened at all.

      Your failure to see is not our problem.

      • tsmithfield 13.4.1

        Your failure to prove how it is a problem is more relevant.

        It doesn’t prove anything by repeating the mantra that sovereignty is threatened. You need to demonstrate how it is. You haven’t done this.

        • Colonial Viper 13.4.1.1

          Since you don’t understand or value New Zealand as an independent sovereign power what do you care?

  14. Alwyn 14

    There is one excellent rule that Australia uses in its Parliament.
    Members must ONLY be citizens of Australia, dual citizenship is not allowed, and if a prospective member is also a citizen of another state they must renounce that citizenship.
    There is a minor exception where the original country of citizenship, eg Greece, does not allow anyone to renounce their citizenship but provided every possible attempt has been made they are considered to have met the test and can sit in the Oz Parliament.
    I don’t know whether Dr Norman, or any other MP, is also a citizen of another country but if so I think it entirely reasonable that they should renounce that alternate citizenship, and be loyal exclusively to New Zealand.
    Incidentally only Australian citizens can vote. This is something else I think we should adopt. If you aren’t willing to take citizenship why should you be allowed to vote.

    • Lanthanide 14.1

      “Incidentally only Australian citizens can vote. This is something else I think we should adopt. If you aren’t willing to take citizenship why should you be allowed to vote.”

      This came up a while ago in the context of recent immigrants. I know that permanent residents can vote, but it might also be the case that people on temporary residence permits can also vote? There was talk about “coming off the plan 2 days before an election and then voting”, which apparently is pretty unique in the world.

      • Bunji 14.1.1

        You have to be a permanent resident, but you can have your permanent residency arranged before you enter the country – thus you could come off a plane and vote (with a special vote) 2 days later in theory. You’d have to be very organised and it would be a miniscule section of the population in this type of scenario on a given election day of course!

        I agree with Carol below – residence is more important, which is why there’s a good rule that you have to have been in NZ within the last 3 years, to show that you are still in touch.

        In the US you have to be a citizen to vote, and it can be very hard to become a citizen. Which means the whole gripe that founded their country “no taxation without representation” still applies to hundreds of thousands of immigrants in their country, taxed heavily in what has become their permanent home, but without a voice.

        • Lanthanide 14.1.1.1

          Listening to my boyfriend’s explanations of early American history, “no taxation without representation” was a load of bunk anyway. Britain was spending a huge fortune shipping supplies over to the US, protecting the ships from piracy etc. The colonies had also dragged Britain into a war with the French. The taxation and levies that Britain charged the colonies was just an attempt to get them to help pay their way – but the majority of the cost was still being borne by Britain.

          Americans like to ignore the details and pretend they’re the victims (in all things), though. Then again it’s probably not really their fault, what passes for history in their schools is much more akin to propaganda.

    • Carol 14.2

      As someone who has dual citizenship (NZ & UK), I think that it is part of the reality we live in. We don’t stay located in one country.It’s a very inter-connected world.

      I have, however, only voted in the country I am residing in at the time. I don’t know as much about the other country when I’m not living there, and the actions of that government have far less impact on me. I consider residence in a country is a more crucial basis for voting. In the period that I was living in Aussie, I couldn’t vote, but many of the things the government did impacted on me as an employee and taxpayer.

      It was frustrating as well, because I taught young Aussie people about how their government worked and about their culture and history (among other things). I had a far better grasp of their political system that most of my students.

      • Alwyn 14.2.1

        I was only approving of the Australian approach of one citizenship for politicians, not for everyone.
        I rhink that if you claim the right to rule the country you owe exclusive loyalty to that country.
        I also lived in Australia for some years but, unless I was willing to take out Australian citizenship I never thought I should have the right to vote.
        Actually, not being on the roll had one advantage, you couldn’t get called for jury service.
        I also quite enjoyed going past polling booths on election day and refusing the “how to vote lists” for the preference voting system. I would tell them I never voted, and in fact never enrolled because voting only encouraged the bastards. It was amazing how the people offering the lists would start to stutter as they tried to tell me I was breaking the law.

  15. Tel 15

    Yeah, sure, let’s open Parliament up for other counties leaders to preach to us. I’ve compiled 5 people I’d love to hear speaking from Parliament (in no particular order)…
    Julia Gillard
    Kim Jong Il
    Than Shwe
    Robert Mugabe
    Omar al-Bashir
    Anti-spam word: suspecting 😆

    • Colonial Viper 15.1

      We might learn something from Hosni Mubarak too!

      • toad 15.1.1

        Yeah, I suspect Key and the Nats would love to learn how to stay in power for 30 years and feather their own nests to the extent of somewhere near $70 billion.

        Much more lucrative than being a merchant banker.

  16. kultur 16

    So much of our system seems (emphasis on seems) changed now beyond recognition … its all been up for grabs and a free-for-all idealogues playground since 1984 with Roger Douglas and Richard Prebble etc – continued with Ruthless Richardson and now perpetuated with the Key Unplanned Economy. China seems to tell us what to do anyway – what loss if Hu Jintao or whoflungdung throws a hissyfit etc etc. At least its a Labour PM from Aussie who will address our politicians on this occasion. Perhaps it might benefit our political landscape if all these people were required to front up and represent their real aims and ambitions direct to our representatives both elected and unelected. Perhaps things have changed so damn much that there is now no going back.

  17. Speaking Sense to Unions 17

    No one has yet shown how Parliament inviting some one to speak is in any way an infringement of sovereignty. The Greens make this claim – with no basis – but no one else did. And Key decided it wasn’t worth the potential embarrasment the Greens would cause going on about foreigners.

    As far as I can tell listening to an invited guest is hardly going to compromise NZ. Or maybe I have a more robust sense of our sovereignty.

    • Pascal's bookie 17.1

      Where does parliament get its legitimacy from? What gives someone the moral right, in a democracy, to take part when parliament is doing its business?

      • Speaking Sense to Unions 17.1.1

        “What gives someone the moral right, in a democracy, to take part when parliament is doing its business?”

        when Parliament invites them to do so.

        • Armchair Critic 17.1.1.1

          when Parliament invites them to do so.
          rightly so, and quite different to “when the government invites them to do so.”

        • Pascal's bookie 17.1.1.2

          when Parliament invites them to do so.

          nah. Way I see it it’s our house. The MPs are there, and can take part, because we elect them there. They are there as representatives.

          Certainly they can legally do what they want, but they have that authority on our behalf. They could invite any one they like to take part, they could even hand authority over to a dictator. But they shouldn’t. They would lose their moral authority. The person they appointed would have no democratic legitimacy. Just as a foreign representative would have no democratic legitimacy to speak in our sitting parliament. Who would such a leader be representing, and why should such people have representation in our house?

          It’s not parliament’s sovereignty that’s being diminished, it’s ours.

          Your ‘robust’ view of sovereignty amounts to the crown having precedence over the people. That issue was sorted out centuries ago. (the people won)

          • Colonial Viper 17.1.1.2.1

            That issue was sorted out centuries ago. (the people won)

            Yeah, but the Lords have been working hard towards round 2.

  18. Has anyone asked if John is supplying a new mattress for Julia

  19. SPC 19

    Of course they’re right, their argument is based on principle – only MP’s should speak when the House is in session. The Greens were unable to force the re-location to the another room in the building to listen to Gillard (where the Queen or GG would address MP’s) because their capacity as MP’s to object only occured when the House is in session.

    As to precedent and deciding on an ad hoc basis who else could speak – why create diplomatic issues? Recently the Chinese were demanding a state visit to the USA and for their President to address the 2 houses of Congress (while together neither was sitting). If they did not have the balls to say come back and do it when you allow elections as we do, would we?

    Key, Goff, Dunne, Turia and Sharples and Hide all showed the lack of respect for our parliament and our democratic sovereignty that one would expect from those supporting things such as the TPP without question.

    Something similar happened on the enabling act as well.

  20. Norman is probably thinking about the Green Senator Nettle case in Australia when George Bush addressed a joint session of the Australian Federal Parliament in 2003. She heckled the President and was named by the Speaker. If Norman had allowed the session he could have heckled Gillard. Instead he’ll probably just sit there thinking about cuddly trees. Lots of Parliaments allow addresses from foreign leaders. Obama addressed the Indian Parliament in November last year. He said the US is the world’s oldest democracy. Yeah Right. That would be NZ with universal sufferage. There is no principle here only politics.

  21. Campbell Larsen 21

    Despite the proper response from the Green Party on this issue, One News (at 4:30) still trumpeted that Gillard speaking was a landmark occasion and incorrectly reported that she spoke during a ‘special sitting’ of Parliament – which is clearly untrue, this being exactly what the Greens had vetoed.

  22. randal 22

    so parliament is no longer jealous of its own privileges and like any old whore she is lifting her skirts for anyone now.
    if gillard needs to speak then there are other chambers in the house besides defiling the debating chamber for a mess of potage.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Close Tiwai Point
    Tiwai Point's electricity contract is up for renewal. And as usual, they're sticking their hand out, demanding a government subsidy, and threatening to close if they don't get one:The owners of the aluminium smelter said on Wednesday that there were seeking talks with the Government amid a strategic review which ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    8 hours ago
  • How volcanoes influence climate and how their emissions compare to what we produce
    Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz Everyone is going on about reducing our carbon footprint, zero ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    10 hours ago
  • ACT: Backed by Nazis
    So, it turns out that the ACT Party - which previously called itself "the liberal party" - is financed by Nazis:ACT Party leader David Seymour says his party will not return a donation from Mike Allen, a Christchurch businessman who sells mock "Make America Great Again" hats to fund advertising ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    11 hours ago
  • Counting Barretts
    Just in case you don’t have a seven-year-old boy in your house (in which case this will be obvious) a well-known brand of breakfast cereal here in NZ is currently coming with All-Blacks stats cards. Perfect for finding out your favourite rugby player’s height, number of caps, and how much ...
    SciBlogsBy Marcus Wilson
    11 hours ago
  • Bullying their critics
    Over the past month we've heard some horrific stories about bullying in the police. The police's response? Try to bully people into silence:The police have told a whistleblower to retract his statements to RNZ about being bullied or face legal action. The demand came just hours after Police Commissioner Mike ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    15 hours ago
  • Member’s Day: End of Life Choice, part 5
    Today is a Member's Day, which should see the final part of the committee stage of David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill. The big question today is the referendum clause: will it be necessary, or can the bill pass without it? While the majorities for his amendments during the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    15 hours ago
  • There is no ‘gendered brain’
    One of the key arguments used by trans ideologists is that some male-bodied people (ie men) are women because they ‘feel’ they are women.  To make this hocus-pocus sound a bit more credible, some will argue that such men have a ‘female brain’.  But this is thoroughly anti-scientific too. . ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    15 hours ago
  • Canada’s electoral system is broken
    Canadians went to the polls today in parliamentary elections, and appear to have re-elected blackface wearer Justin Trudeau. Unfortunately, they use first-past-the-post, and they've provided a perfect demonstration of how unfair this system is:PartySeats% Seats% VoteLiberal15746.4%33.1%Conservative12135.8%34.4%Bloc Québécois329.5%7.7%New Democratic Party247.1%15.9%Green Party30.9%6.5%Other10.3%2.4% [Results from Elections Canada] Yes, the Liberals got fewer votes ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 day ago
  • Measles: the quackery that is homeopathic “vaccination”
    A few days ago, a friend sent me a link to a health-related FB page that had published a post from a homeopathist, offering homeopathic “vaccination”¹ against measles (using something called a “Morbillinum nosode” at a “potency” of 200C, which I’ll explain shortly). I followed the link, left a comment ...
    SciBlogsBy Alison Campbell
    1 day ago
  • Colombia: 20th anniversary of La Gabarra massacre
    by Gearóid Ó Loingsigh This year marks the 20th anniversary of the La Gabarra massacre. The community organised an event to remember the most well-known of the horrendous heart-breaking events that befell the communities of this area of the municipality of Tibú: the massacre carried out on August 21st 1999. ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    1 day ago
  • A prediction
    There was another police chase in Christchurch this morning, resulting in a crash which killed one person and injured five more. Because someone died, the chase is being investigated by the Independent Police Conduct Authority. And based on previous reports by the IPCA, we know how it will go: the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 day ago
  • Climate Change: The Zero Carbon Bill
    Just a month ago we saw the biggest protest in a generation as people marched to demand stronger action on climate change. A core demand of the protesters was to strengthen the Zero Carbon Bill's target to net-zero by 2040. So what is the government's response? Judging by the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • Zombie ants, updated
    Back in 2010, I wrote about the strange tale of the zombie ants, which do the bidding of their fungal overlords. (They’re not an isolated example; a range of parasites change their hosts’ behaviour. See here and here for example – though as you’ll find, the toxoplasmosis story may be ...
    SciBlogsBy Alison Campbell
    2 days ago
  • Paying For Our Pakeha “Guilt” And “Privilege”.
    Shouldn't That Be: "Wrong White Crowd"? Rather than apportion guilt, would it not have been wiser for the makers of Land Of The Long White Cloud to accept that the Pakeha of 2019 are not – and never will be – “Europeans”? Just as contemporary Maori are not – and ...
    2 days ago
  • A Bodyguard of Truths.
    One, Two, Many Truths: With the collapse of “actually existing socialism” in 1991, the universities of the West found themselves saddled with a new mission. With their ideological competitors now soundly defeated they were no longer required to demonstrate the superiority of capitalist values. Their job now was to cement ...
    2 days ago
  • A call to unionists
    by the Council of Disobedient Women   We call on the Council of Trade Unions to show some fortitude and take a stand with your sisters. Unionists know that there is a material world, otherwise workers could simply identify out of poverty. They could declare themselves Well Paid. Why stop ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    2 days ago
  • Sophistry and bullshit
    I spent some time reading the Regulatory Impact Statement and Bill of Rights Act advice for the government's odious control order scheme today. I am not impressed with either of them. Starting with the RIS, it is built on some pretty questionable assumptions. For example:Unless individuals have been convicted of ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • I’m so fly, I’m #NoFly!
    #NoFly: Walking the talk on climate change, by Shaun Hendy. BWB Texts, 2019. Reviewed by Robert McLachlan In June 2018, Swede Maja Rosén founded We stay on the ground with a pledge not to fly in 2019, and a goal of persuading 100,000 other Swedes to join her. In August, ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    2 days ago
  • Punishing the young
    We all know that NZ First is a party of and for old people who hate the young. But they've topped their previous pedophobia with a proposal that all young people be forced to do 100 hours community work:NZ First wants all young people to do 100 hours of community ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • Journalism, clickbait, & ideas of classical beauty – but not science
    A couple days ago the NZ Herald published a story with the headline, “Science says Bella Hadid is world’s most beautiful woman“, and followed up with the ridiculous statement that Supermodel Bella Hadid has been declared as the world’s most beautiful woman following a scientific study into what constitutes as ...
    SciBlogsBy Alison Campbell
    3 days ago
  • Is Simon’s Smile Sustainable?
    A Sustainable Proposition: With as much as 18 percent of the electorate declaring itself “undecided” about who to vote for, there is obviously plenty of space for a party like former Green Party member, Vernon Tava's, about-to-be-launched "Sustainable NZ Party" to move into. The most hospitable political territory for such ...
    3 days ago
  • What the actual Hell?
    Keir Starmer has hinted that Labour might vote in favour of the Johnson government's shoddy deal, with the proviso that a second referendum is attached:Speaking to BBC One’s The Andrew Marr Show, he said: “We will see what that looks like but it makes sense to say that by whatever ...
    3 days ago
  • Hard News: Dealer’s Choice, an oral history from Planet 1994
    In 1994, I was the editor for an issue of Planet magazine focused on cannabis, its culture and the prospects for the end of its prohibition. Part of that issue was an interview with 'Ringo', an experienced cannabis dealer.I recently posted my essay from that issue, and I figured it ...
    4 days ago
  • The invasion of women’s sports by men: some facts
    Dr Helen Waite, sports sociologist and former elite athlete, on the invasion of women’s sport by men and the anti-scientific and misogynist ideology used to rationalise it.   ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    5 days ago
  • Remainers starting to sound like fascists
    As Brexit comes to a grisly conclusion (perhaps) people on all sides are saying intemperate and uwise things.  Some, like the Daly Mail, have been doing it for years.People as normally level headed as Jon Lansman are calling for automatic deselection of MPs who vote against a (likely) Labour three ...
    5 days ago
  • Labour MPs supporting Johnson’s turd-sandwich deal?
    I find this unbelievable:
    I've got one source saying more Labour MPs than expected are mulling whether to vote for the deal - including names who were not on the letter to Juncker and Tusk— Emilio Casalicchio (@e_casalicchio) 17 October 2019 I've compiled a list of possible reasons why Labour ...
    5 days ago
  • Why do we need control orders again?
    On Wednesday, the government was loudly telling us that it needed to legislate to allow it to impose "control orders" - effectively a parole regime, but imposed without charge, prosecution, conviction or real evidence - on suspected terrorists because they couldn't be prosecuted for their supposed crimes. Today, it turns ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    5 days ago
  • Bullshitting the Minister
    On Monday, the Hit and Run inquiry heard from NZDF's former director of special operations, who claimed that the defence Minister knew everything about the Operation Burnham raid. Today, the inquiry heard from that (former) Minister - and it turns out that he didn't know nearly as much as NZDF ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    5 days ago
  • Speaker: Extinction Rebellion is not a cult (but ecstasy for the people)
    Yoga gurus and cult leaders – I’ve seen a few. Two weeks ago, I unknowingly joined an alleged new-age cult at the Kāpiti coast, together with a giant kraken and some neatly dressed pensioners who would make any book club proud.They were among the two hundred people of all ages ...
    6 days ago
  • We need to bring the police under control
    The last decade has seen a trend of increasing weapons availability to police. Assault rifles. Tasers on every hip. Guns in cars. And following the march 15 massacre, pistols on every hip, all over the country. At the same time, its also seen an increase in the abuse of force: ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    6 days ago
  • If you can’t measure it, does it exist?
    In the last couple of weeks, I’ve been busy preparing for our summer paper on Science Communication. Looking for something amusing about ‘risk’ in science, I came across this neat xkcd.com cartoon about why so many people come knocking on my door (or phoning me, or emailing me) desperately wanting ...
    SciBlogsBy Marcus Wilson
    6 days ago
  • Swinson’s swithering
    Jo Swinson is doing even worse at this Being Sensible lark that I'd thought.  I've just become aware of the following utterance
    .@KayBurley presses Lib Dem leader @joswinson on whether she would agree to a #Brexit deal 'no matter how bad a deal it is' as long as it had ...
    6 days ago
  • Women’s rights, trans ideology and Gramsci’s morbid symptoms
    by John Edmundson The International Socialist Organisation (ISO) have recently reposted a February article, by Romany Tasker-Poland, explaining ISO’s position in the “trans rights” debate.  It is available on their website and on their Facebook Page.  The article sets out to explain why “socialists support trans rights”.  It reads more ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    7 days ago
  • We need to take guns off police
    Today's IPCA report of police criminality: a police officer unalwfully tasered a fleeing suspect who posed no threat to anyone:The police watchdog has found an officer unlawfully tasered an Auckland man who broke his ankle jumping off a balcony to escape arrest. [...] To avoid arrest, the man jumped over ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    7 days ago
  • “Bringing kindness back”
    "Auckland City Mission: 10% of Kiwis experiencing food insecurity", RNZ, 16 October 2019:About half a million people are experiencing food insecurity, according to new research from the Auckland City Mission. Food insecurity, or food poverty, is defined as not having enough appropriate food. The City Mission said over the last ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    7 days ago
  • Press Release: “Fake News” from Auckland City Council CCOs Board Chairs re pay and performance b...
    Media Statement for Immediate Release 16th October 2019 “Fake News” from Auckland City Council CCOs Board Chairs re pay and performance bonuses for top managers Despite comments from Auckland City Council CCOs Board Chairs re pay and performance bonuses for top managers—Herald Newspaper Tuesday Oct 15th–there is very little evidence ...
    Closing the GapBy Tracey Sharp
    7 days ago
  • Ever-So-Slightly Bonkers: Simon Bridges Plays To His Base.
    Would You Buy A Used Propaganda Video From This Man? Bridges and the National Party’s strategists have discovered that the ideas and attitudes considered acceptable by today’s editors and journalists are no longer enforceable. The rise and rise of the Internet and the social media platforms it spawned means that ...
    7 days ago
  • Asking for food
    There is plenty of evidence of the way the business mentality has permeated every level of society since the recrudescence of market liberalism 35 years ago. You only need to think of how citizens in need of help from their government, their state, their country, are now routinely described as ...
    Opposable ThumbBy Unknown
    7 days ago
  • Forty years of change in the jobs Kiwi do and the places they call home
    John MacCormick Over the last 40 years, New Zealanders – and people in other countries – have experienced big changes in the jobs they do and where they live and work. These changes include: a decline in manufacturing jobs an increase in jobs in ‘information-intensive’ industries (which are better paid ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    7 days ago
  • Protecting Fresh Waterways in Aotearoa/NZ: The Strong Public Health Case
    Nick Wilson, Leah Grout, Mereana Wilson, Anja Mizdrak, Phil Shoemack, Michael Baker Protecting waterways has the benefits of: (1) protecting water from hazardous microbes; (2) minimising cancer risk and other problems from nitrates in water; (3) avoiding algal blooms that are hazardous to health; (4) protecting mahinga kai uses (cultural ...
    SciBlogsBy Public Health Expert
    7 days ago
  • Massey University triggered to rebrand
    by The Council of Disobedient Women In a press release today Massey University announced it has decided to rebrand and reorientate after struggling to be a University for grown-ups. For some time the University has wanted to be a safe play space for wee-woke-misogynists who have been really badly triggered ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    1 week ago
  • Swinson backing calls for a second referendum (again)
    After a brief dalliance with 'hard Revoke' it looks like the Lib Dems are changing ground on on Brexit, with leader Jo Swinson reverting to calling for a second referendum on Johnson's deal.The party has tabled an amendment to the Queen’s speech requesting that any deal brought back from Brussels ...
    1 week ago
  • An odious bill
    The government has decided that someone has done Something Bad. But despite their belief, there seems to be no evidence that they have actually broken the law. So the government's solution is to pass a retrospective law allowing them to be punished anyway, on a lower standard of proof. If ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • National is now the party of climate arson
    So, Judith Collins has done a Facebook rant about climate change, peddling the same shit National has been shovelling for the past twenty years: the impacts are overstated, there's no need to do anything about it, and its too hard anyway (oh, and its so unfair that people who peddle ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • The environmental footprint of electric versus fossil car
    Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz There is a lot of discussion on the benefits of ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 week ago
  • “Manifest” by Andrew Bird – A Song For The Times.
    I came across this song quite by accident. If it isn't one of Greta Thunberg's favourites - it should be.Video courtesy of YouTube.This post is exclusive to Bowalley Road. ...
    1 week ago
  • Passing the buck
    Last month, NZDF's shoddy coverup of what it knew about civilian casualties in Operation Burnham began to fall apart, with the revelation that a report on the matter, which NZDF claimed not to have, had been sitting in an NZDF safe for the past nine years. Yesterday, the man responsible ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • India a major player in Earth observation satellites
    While many imagine that countries like the USA and Europe dominate space activities, in fact India is now a major player on this stage. It launches satellites for its own purposes and also commercially, and has constellations orbiting our planet and returning data of vital importance to that nation in ...
    SciBlogsBy Duncan Steel
    1 week ago
  • The rot at the top (2).
    Thanks to a report from the Acting Inspector General of Intelligence and Security following a complaint by Nicky Hager, we have come to find out that the SIS illegally spied on Mr. Hager on behalf of the NZDF after publication of Hager’s 2011 book, Other People’s Wars. The NZDF justified ...
    KiwipoliticoBy Pablo
    1 week ago
  • Common misconceptions about “Global Warming”
    COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate. FACT: The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, produced by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, ...
    An average kiwiBy admin@averagekiwi.com
    1 week ago
  • A climate of tyranny
    For the past week, Extinction Rebellion has been peacefully protesting in London to demand action on climate change. The British government's response? Ban their protests:Police have banned Extinction Rebellion protests from continuing anywhere in London, as they moved in almost without warning to clear protesters who remained at the movement’s ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Collins crushes climate
    An essay by Judith Collins MP reported on Carbon News yesterday seems to show an alarming shift in attitude within the National Party. Collins argues against the Zero Carbon Bill, the Paris Agreement, and downplays the magnitude of climate impacts. The Paris Agreement was adopted in December 2015 and ratified ...
    SciBlogsBy Robert McLachlan
    1 week ago
  • More disappointment
    When they were running for election, Labour promised to overhaul the Employment Relations Act and introduce fair pay agreements to set basic pay and conditions on an industry level, preventing bad employers from undercutting good ones. They followed this up by establishing a working group, which reported back in January ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • What do these mother-child studies really say about fluoridation?
    A list of indicators of bad science – many of these are found in articles promoted by anti-fluoride activists. Anti-fluoride activists have been pouring money into a scaremongering campaign warning pregnant women not to drink fluoridated water. They claim fluoride will lower the IQ of their future child. Fluoride ...
    1 week ago
  • Losing Labour’s Mills-Tone.
    Nothing Left To Say: Labour's pollster, Stephen Mills, remains swaddled-up in the comforting myths of the 1980s. As if the experience of Roger Douglas’s genuinely radical post-Muldoon policy agenda was literally a once-in-a-lifetime thing – as much as the party could possibly absorb for at least the next 50 years.MEMO ...
    1 week ago
  • Speaker: Disability and the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Historical Abuse
    The Royal Commission on abuse in care is very significant for the disability community. For many decades last century, thousands of disabled children, and adults who managed to survive, were locked away from families and communities. This was not for anything they had done, but for the perceived threat their ...
    1 week ago
  • Spain is not a democracy
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • UK Conservatives hate democracy
    With an unfair voting system, uneven electorates and an un-elected upper house, the UK's "democracy" is barely worthy of the name. But now the government wants to make it worse:The government has been accused of suppressing voters’ rights with the potential disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of people after plans ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • What is wrong with our building industry?
    Back in the 90's and early 2000's, the building industry was building leaky homes which should never have been granted consent. Now it turns out they've been building dodgy office blocks as well:New imaging technology has revealed hundreds of major buildings nationwide have defective or missing concrete or reinforcing steel. ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Local bodies
    Local body election results were released over the weekend, to joy or despair depending on where you live. In Auckland, Phil Goff trounced John Tamihere, who is muttering darkly about running for Parliament again (but which party would want him?) Wellington is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Weta Workshop, except ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • A future of government
      How could government evolve over the next decades? Reports of democracy’s imminent demise are greatly exaggerated.  However, satisfaction with political systems in many countries is low, so there is much to do for governments of all political stripes to improve relevance and trust. Digital technologies are seen as one ...
    SciBlogsBy Robert Hickson
    2 weeks ago
  • Speaker: Catalonia, interrupted
    Two years have now gone by since the Friday afternoon when my university-student son and I headed out of our Barcelona flat to a nearby primary school, designated as a polling station for the vote that was to be held the following Sunday: the referendum on Catalonia’s independence from Spain ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Sage Decisions Unwisely Over-Ruled.
    Overruled: The joint decision of Finance Minister, Grant Robertson (Labour) and his Associate Minister, David Parker (Labour) arguably the two most powerful ministers in Jacinda Ardern’s government, to grant OceanaGold the consents which Land Information Minister, Eugenie Sage (Greens) had earlier denied them, offers bitter proof of how hard fighting ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Government may ban voting in effort to get more people to do it
    More than double the number of people who will vote in this year’s local body elections have tried marijuana or urinated somewhere they shouldn’t have. As local elections look set for the lowest turnout in decades, with many regions falling well short of 40%, the Government is exploring a number ...
    The CivilianBy admin
    2 weeks ago
  • Woman: Deleted.
    A Statement on Abortion Law Reform by the Council of Disobedient Women   On the eve of bringing an end to antiquated, anti-women abortion laws Green MP Jan Logie intends to write women out of the Bill. With a stroke of the pen, the woke are aiming for total erasure ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    2 weeks ago
  • The Hollowest of Men Ride Again… SURPRISE!
    Musings continue apace about “the experienced businessman!” soon to be taking up a National Party MP position. Or to be more accurate, being parachuted into a seat to shut down their former MP Jamie-Lee Ross, who despite his own shortcomings shed at least some more light on the inner workings ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    2 weeks ago
  • Barbaric
    The Ugandan government wants to murder gay people:Uganda has announced plans to impose the death penalty on homosexuals. The bill, colloquially known as “Kill the Gays” in Uganda, was nullified five years ago on a technicality, but the government said on Thursday it plans to resurrect it within weeks. The ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 weeks ago
  • Is this study legit? 5 questions to ask when reading news stories of medical research
    Hassan Vally, La Trobe University Who doesn’t want to know if drinking that second or third cup of coffee a day will improve your memory, or if sleeping too much increases your risk of a heart attack? We’re invested in staying healthy and many of us are interested in reading ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    2 weeks ago
  • Fighting Monsters.
    Freedom Of Speech? The Säuberung (cleansing by fire) was the work of the German Student Union which, on 10 May 1933, under the watchful eye of the Nazi Reichminister for Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, consigned 25,000 books to the flames in a ritual exorcism of “un-German thought”. According to the logic of the ...
    2 weeks ago
  • The next wave of kaupapa Māori politics: its constitutional, it must be.
      “There can be no such thing as kaupapa Māori political parties or politics in Aotearoa” (Willie Jackson, Labour Party (2017). Māori TV, General/List Election Special) I begin with that claim because at the time, I was confounded at first that it fell out of Willie Jackson’s mouth, and then ...
    EllipsisterBy Ellipsister
    2 weeks ago
  • Night lights of NZ from orbit
    New Zealand has prided itself for decades with regard to its lack of pollution, and all will be aware that the ‘100% Pure New Zealand‘ meme is under threat through land, water and air pollution of various causes. There is another type of contamination that the country also faces: light ...
    SciBlogsBy Duncan Steel
    2 weeks ago
  • Reporters deliver uplifting news to fleeing Japanese residents: they won’t miss any rugby
    New Zealand’s media is doing its part in Japan, reassuring those in the path of the storm that they won’t miss any rugby while away from their flooded homes. New Zealand sports reporters stationed in Japan for the Rugby World Cup have had the rare and heartwarming opportunity to inform ...
    The CivilianBy admin
    2 weeks ago
  • Government in contentious discussions about whether to put surplus on red or black
    Regional Development Minister Shane Jones is the only Cabinet member in favour of putting it all on green. As Finance Minister Grant Robertson finds himself with an enormous $7.5 billion surplus, the Government has begun intense, at times contentious conversations about whether to put the money on red or black at ...
    The CivilianBy admin
    2 weeks ago
  • Jordanian teachers’ successful strike has lessons for here
    by Susanne Kemp At the start of September close to 100,000 school teachers went on strike in Jordan.  They demanded a 50% pay rise.  A pay rise actually agreed to by the regime back in 2014. In early October, however, in the face of government repression and threats, the teachers’ ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    2 weeks ago
  • Why some people still think climate change isn’t real
    Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz Why do people still think climate change isn’t real? David ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    2 weeks ago

  • Minister of Finance and Sport and Recreation to visit Japan and Vietnam
    Finance Minister Grant Robertson departs tomorrow for events and meetings in Japan and Vietnam.  While in Japan, he will discuss economic and fiscal issues including meeting with the Minister of Finance, Taro Aso, and Minister of Economic and Fiscal Policy, Yasutoshi Nishimura. He will meet with the Minister of Education, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    10 hours ago
  • Dashboard tracks housing progress
    The Government’s Housing Dashboard released today confirms record numbers of state houses are under construction and shows the Government build programme is gaining momentum.  “After nine years of inaction, and a hands-off attitude from the previous government we’re starting to see things move in the right direction for housing,” says ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    11 hours ago
  • Ministerial Statement on the International Convention Centre fire
    Mr Speaker, I wish to make a ministerial statement relating to the Auckland fire. The Government is closely monitoring the situation with the fire at the NZ International Convention Centre and is thankful that everyone is now safe. Firefighters are doing an incredible job managing the fire and bringing it ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    13 hours ago
  • Government invests in Te Reo, environmental data research
    The Government is investing in ambitious research that will digitise Te Reo, grow the low-carbon protein efficient aquaculture industry, help interpret environmental trends, and large data sets says Research, Science and Innovation Minister Megan Woods. The four projects range from teaching Siri to speak Te Reo to crunching large environmental ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    17 hours ago
  • Government announces next steps as part of a comprehensive plan to fix skills gap
    A new education-to-employment brokerage service to strengthen connections between local employers and schools. Funding for more trades focused ‘speed-dating’ events to connect schools with employers. Promotional campaign to raise profile of vocational education. The Government is taking action to increase the number of young people taking up vocational education and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    19 hours ago
  • Corrections Amendment Bill passes third reading
    A Bill to improve prison security and ensure the fair, safe, and humane treatment of people in prison while upholding public safety has passed its third reading. Corrections Minister Kelvin Davis says the Corrections Amendment Bill makes a number of changes to ensure the Corrections Act 2004 is fit for ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Ngāi Tahu CEO appointed to NZ-China Council
    Minister for Māori Development, Nanaia Mahuta, has selected Arihia Bennett MNZM, Chief Executive Officer of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu, as the Te Puni Kōkiri appointed representative on the New Zealand-China Council. The New Zealand-China Council (the Council) was established in 2012 as a New Zealand led and funded organisation ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Southern Response claims move to EQC
    Responsibility for processing the small number of Southern Response claims still to be settled will be transferred to EQC by the end of the year. “As claim numbers reduce, it no longer makes sense for the Crown to have two organisations processing the remaining Canterbury claims,” Grant Robertson says. “Since ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Bowel screening starts in Whanganui
    Health Minister David Clark is encouraging Whanganui residents to take up the opportunity for free bowel screening, which can detect cancer early when it’s easier to treat.   Over the next two years 12,000 Whanganui locals, aged 60 to 74 will be invited to participate in the National Bowel Screening ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Pacific Peoples Minister to attend Our Ocean Conference in Norway
    Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio, heads to Oslo today to represent New Zealand at the sixth Our Ocean Conference, which is being hosted by the Norwegian Government from the 23-24 October. “The Our Ocean Conference mobilises real action on issues like marine plastic pollution and the impacts of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Government announces 27 percent increase in Trades Academy places
    Two secondary-school initiatives are being expanded as part of the Government’s plan to see more young New Zealanders take up a trade to help close the skills gap.   This includes the largest single increase in Trades Academy places in recent years. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Education Minister Chris ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Speech to the New Zealand Institute of International Affairs, Pacific Futures Conference: Connection...
    Session 4: Pacific Connectivity – Youth, Media and New Opportunities   Kia ora tatou katoa and Warm Pacific greetings to one and all. Representatives of Tainui, the local people of the land, or manawhenua – the indigenous peoples of this area – have welcomed you this morning in accordance with ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Methane reducing cattle feed one step closer
    The Government today announced its support for a project that could substantially reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions from cattle. The announcement was made as part of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s and Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor’s visit to Nelson’s Cawthron Aquaculture Park. The Cawthron Institute will receive $100,000 from the Government’s ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Bill to refresh superannuation system passes first reading
    Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni has welcomed the first reading of the New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill. “Every New Zealander has a stake in New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension,” says Carmel Sepuloni. “They are our most common form of social assistance – nearly 800,000 New ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Government announces next steps in fight against measles
    Babies in Auckland aged six months and over can receive a free vaccination and children will all have access to vaccines, Associate Minister of Health Julie Anne Genter announced today at Papatoetoe High School.   The move comes as part of Government efforts to step up the fight against measles. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Speech to the New Zealand Institute of International Affairs, Pacific Futures: Connections, Identity...
    ***Check against delivery*** Good morning. It is a pleasure to be here, and to have the honour of opening this important conference on behalf of the New Zealand Institute of International Affairs. Let us take the opportunity to acknowledge all the people who have helped make today possible, including our special ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Police trial new response to high risk events
    Police Minister Stuart Nash says the safety of frontline officers and members of the public will be the focus of a new trial of specialist Police response teams in three of our largest urban centres. Police have this morning released details of an initiative to be trialled in Counties Manukau, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • New awards celebrate fisheries sustainability
    The Minister of Fisheries is calling for entries for a new public award to celebrate innovation in our seafood sector. “I have established the Seafood Sustainability Awards to recognise and celebrate those throughout industry, tangata whenua and communities who demonstrate outstanding dedication and innovation towards the sustainability of New Zealand’s ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • More progress for women and we can do more
    Minister for Women Julie Anne Genter welcomes leaders in the private sector taking action on closing their gender pay gaps to ensure a fairer workplace for all New Zealanders. Ms Genter today launched a new report, Addressing the gender pay gap and driving women’s representation in senior leadership, from the Champions for ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Proposals to curb environmental damage help our coasts and the oceans
    Government Ministers today welcomed the release of a marine environment report highlighting the four key issues affecting our oceans, estuaries and coastlines.  The release underlines the importance of government proposals to combat climate pollution, ensure clean freshwater, protect biodiversity, make land use more sustainable, and reduce waste and plastic.    Environment ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • New mental health facility for Waikato
    The Government has approved funding for a new acute mental health facility for Waikato which will provide better care and support to people with mental health and addiction issues. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Health Minister Dr David Clark announced the $100 million project to replace the aging Henry Rongomau ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • 500 new te reo Māori champions in our classrooms
    The Government is making progress on its goal to integrate te reo Māori into education by 2025, with over 500 teachers and support staff already graduating from Te Ahu o te Reo Māori,  Associate Education Minister Kelvin Davis announced today. Kelvin Davis made the announcement at an awards ceremony in Waikanae today, for ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Minister James Shaw welcomes 2018 Census first release
    Statistics Minister James Shaw has welcomed the first release of 2018 Census data. The first release of data today, 23 September, includes key data on population, regional growth, the number of homes and the size of different ethnic groups in New Zealand. Data from the 2018 Census will support the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Driving transparency, ethics and accountability in government use of algorithms
    Minister for Statistics James Shaw today announced a public consultation on a proposed algorithm charter for government agencies. The charter has been developed by the Government Chief Data Steward in response to growing calls for more transparency in government use of data. Computer algorithms – procedures or formulas for solving ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • New Zealand and the Netherlands working together on climate change
    Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor, Climate Change Minister James Shaw and visiting Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte co-hosted a business roundtable in Auckland this morning focused on working together to address climate change.  “The Netherlands is an important partner for New Zealand. We share a strong agricultural history. Sustainable agribusiness and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Protecting fairness for workers and businesses
    The Government is taking action to build an inclusive economy where more of us receive our fair share at work and businesses can compete on great products and services, not undercutting wages and conditions, Immigration and Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Iain Lees-Galloway says. Two consultations launched today seek feedback ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Indigenous Freshwater Fish Bill Passes
    The future for New Zealand’s threatened indigenous freshwater fish looks brighter with the passing of the Conservation (Indigenous Freshwater Fish) Amendment Bill in Parliament today said Minister of Conservation, Eugenie Sage. “Until now, our freshwater fish legislation has been 20 years out of date. We have lacked effective tools to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Kiwis to take part in world’s biggest earthquake drill
    At 1.30pm tomorrow, hundreds of thousands of Kiwis will join about 65 million people around the globe in ShakeOut, the world’s biggest earthquake drill. The annual drill is to remind people of the right action to take during an earthquake which is to Drop, Cover, Hold, and to practise their ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Rising wages and low inflation supporting Kiwis
    Kiwis are benefiting from higher wage growth and low inflation under the Coalition Government. Stats NZ data out today shows the rise in the cost of living remains low, as annual Consumers Price Index (CPI) inflation fell to 1.5% in September from 1.7% in June. “The low inflation comes as ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • NZ economy strong amid global headwinds
    New Zealand’s economic strength and resilience has been recognised in a major update on the state of the global economy. The IMF’s latest World Economic Outlook released overnight shows a reduced global growth forecast over the next two years as issues like the US-China trade war and Brexit take hold. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Keeping New Zealanders safer with better counter-terrorism laws
    Justice Minister Andrew Little has today introduced a new Bill to prevent terrorism and support the de-radicalisation of New Zealanders returning from overseas. The Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Bill gives the New Zealand Police the ability to apply to the High Court to impose control orders on New Zealanders who ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Improved succession and dispute resolution core of Ture Whenua changes
    A Bill that proposes targeted changes to simplify the processes for Māori land owners when engaging with the Māori Land Court has had its First Reading today. “The approach taken by the Government is to ensure that the protection of Māori land remains a priority as we seek to improve ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Speech to CTU Biennial Conference
    Let me first thank all the new unionists and members in the room. There is nothing more important to improving people’s working lives than people making the decision to care, to get on board and help, to take up the reins and get involved. Congratulations to you. You bring the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Minister ensures continued Whenuapai flight operations
    Minister of Defence Ron Mark has signed a certificate exempting the activity of engine testing at Whenuapai Airbase from the Resource Management Act 1991. The Act gives the Minister of Defence the power to exempt activities for the purposes of national security.  The certificate will mean the recent Environment Court ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • NZ joins Coalition of Finance Ministers for Climate Action
    Finance Minister Grant Robertson has announced New Zealand will join the Coalition of Finance Ministers for Climate Action while attending APEC meetings in Chile. The objective of the 39 member Coalition is to share information and promote action to tackle climate change. It was formed in April this year, in ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Feedback Sought – Section 71 – Lyttelton Parking
    Feedback sought– Lyttelton commercial zone parking  The Associate Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Poto Williams, is seeking feedback on a proposal to remove on-site car parking requirements for new developments in the Lyttelton commercial zone.  The proposal, by Christchurch City Council, asks that powers under section 71 of the Greater ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Feedback Sought – Section 71 – Hagley Oval
    Hon Minister Poto Williams Associate Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration   MEDIA STATEMENT       Tuesday 15 October 2019 Feedback sought – Hagley Oval The Associate Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Poto Williams, is seeking feedback on a proposal about Hagley Oval. The proposal was developed by Regenerate Christchurch ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • CTU speech – DPM
    Ladies and gentlemen, NZCTU President Richard Wagstaff, members of respective unions – thank you for the invitation to speak to you today. This might be preaching to the choir, but the importance of trade unions in New Zealand’s historical arch is difficult to understate. And it is my belief that ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Police Association Annual Conference
    "Let’s start by acknowledging that it has been a huge year. " Police Association Annual Conference James Cook Grand Chancellor Hotel Wellington Nau mai, haere mai. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, ka nui te mihi, ki a koutou katoa. President of the Police Association, Chris Cahill; Members of the Association and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • New Zealand announces a further P-3 deployment in support of UN sanctions
    Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters and Minister of Defence Ron Mark have announced the New Zealand Government’s decision to again deploy a Royal New Zealand Air Force P-3K2 (P-3) maritime patrol aircraft to support the implementation of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions imposing sanctions against North Korea. New ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago