web analytics

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

  • Climate Change: The benefits of electrification
    In order to meet our 2050 carbon target and do our bit to avoid making the Earth uninhabitable, New Zealand needs to decarbonise our economy, replacing fossil fuels with electricity in the energy, industrial and transport sectors. The good news is that it will mean cheaper power for all of ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    4 hours ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 8 (sanitised version)
    For those folk who find my other Lock-Down Diary versions too “negative” or otherwise unpalatable… Here’s a photo of a pretty flower, .   . Better? Tomorrow’s Sanitised Version: a cute animal video. . . . =fs= ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    5 hours ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 8
    . . April 2: Day eight of living in lock-down… Today, my work day starts late. Our rosters and clients have been dramatically changed, lessening (theoretically) the number of people in our work “bubble”.  If just one of us catches covid19 the impact could be considerable as Grey Base Hospital ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    5 hours ago
  • A note on apartments and bubbles
    As Aotearoa enters week two of lockdown, it’s clear we’re all still working out what our “bubbles” look like and how to stay in them to stop the spread of Covid-19. New to the government’s Covid-19 website is some good guidance for people living in apartment blocks. Recent decades have ...
    SciBlogsBy Siouxsie Wiles
    7 hours ago
  • Getting in futures shape 
    “There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen.” Lenin Don’t we all know that feeling now.

    Prospect Magazine alerted me to this particularly apt quote. It is a much more evocative quote than Hemingway’s “gradually then suddenly” which is also doing ...

    SciBlogsBy Robert Hickson
    8 hours ago
  • Maybe axing Clark would be unfair. But what about any of this is fair?
    Yesterday was the day the consequences of the lockdown suddenly got very real for many. Firms have been closing and laying people off since the outset of the quarantine but this has mostly been happening out of the public eye. The mass closure of a number of iconic New Zealand ...
    PunditBy Liam Hehir
    8 hours ago
  • Might a ‘Coasean’ social contract mitigate overall societal harm from COVID-19?
    Brian Williamson1, Prof Nick Wilson2 (1Economic consultant, UK; 2University of Otago Wellington) In this blog, we outline how a win-win social contract could be forged to address the major dimensions of response to the COVID-19 pandemic when using a mitigation strategy: the particular need to protect older people from high ...
    SciBlogsBy Public Health Expert
    9 hours ago
  • Returning To “Normalcy”.
    Resuming Normal Service: The Republican Party's nominee for in 1920, Warren Harding, promised the American people: “not heroics, but healing; not nostrums, but normalcy; not revolution, but restoration”. If she wishes to remain our prime minister, then Jacinda Ardern will offer New Zealanders the same.HOW EDUCATED AMERICA snickered when the ...
    10 hours ago
  • New Zealand’s Government Must Save New Zealand’s Media.
    No Free Society Without A Free And Functioning News Media: If we are to surrender our civil rights to the broader cause of defeating Covid-19, then foreign corporations must, likewise, surrender their right to inflict immense economic and cultural harm on New Zealanders simply because it improves their bottom line.I’M ...
    10 hours ago
  • Corona fevers and the madness of models
    by Daphna Whitmore A third of the world is under lockdown and a clear assessment of this measure to curb the spread of COVID-19 is urgently needed.  With any high-stakes decisions it has to be asked what are we dealing with here? Are the measures warranted? Will they achieve their ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    16 hours ago
  • Lockdown day 8
    I haven’t done a huge amount in the last few days. I’m reading The Poppy War and I’ve sort of poked at a couple of games – I started SOMA but I’m a wimp and I quit while in the first room after the brain scan. I might try it ...
    The little pakehaBy chrismiller
    20 hours ago
  • Backstage and Theatre
    The swan politicians may be gliding on the water, occasionally snapping at one another. Meanwhile, as the Covid19 crisis illustrates, the officials are desperately paddling below providing the real locomotion. One of the most fatuous recent grandstanding comments (of about a week ago), adding to the public’s anxieties, was ...
    PunditBy Brian Easton
    22 hours ago
  • Legal Beagle: Waiver, the singular Crown and the conduct of Crown legal business
    Much has been written about the importance of discretion in an emergency situation, and the concerns raised by the potential for it to be exercised arbitrarily. Given the quality of the discussion, there seemed little point in adding to it at any length. In particular, I point to the evidence ...
    22 hours ago
  • Highlights from Bauer Media’s science-related reporting
    Today has felt surreal. I was all set to touch base online with my science communication students when a colleague shared the news that Bauer Media would be shutting down its publications immediately. The first link I saw implied it was Woman’s Weekly affected, and even that shocked me. But ...
    SciBlogsBy Sarah-Jane O'Connor
    23 hours ago
  • Outsiders.
    Bogeymen, Real And Imagined: Is the number of psychopathic and sociopathic individuals in any given society truly as vanishingly small as we like to tell ourselves? Isn’t it more likely that the mass-shooters and serial-killers filling the headlines represent only the tip of a much, much larger iceberg of frightfulness? ...
    1 day ago
  • We have a right to know the rules we are expected to obey
    Outgoing Police Commissioner Mike Bush appeared before the Epidemic Response Committee today, who asked him for the rules police are using to enforce the lockdown. He refused:Police Commissioner Mike Bush has admitted the advice given to Kiwis about what they're able to do during the lockdown hasn't been clear enough. ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 day ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 7 (sanitised version)
    For those folk who find my other Lock-Down Diary versions too “negative” or otherwise unpalatable… Here’s a photo of my cat, . . Better? Tomorrow’s Sanitised Version: a pretty flower. . . . =fs= ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    1 day ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 7
    . . April 1: Day seven of living in lock-down… This morning I had a brief chat with one of my neighbours, “D” (social distance between us, a good three or four metres). I learned he had resigned from his previous job and had been hired by another company – ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    1 day ago
  • RIP The Listener, New Zealand’s pioneering voice
    Funnily enough, my thought as I start this post is whether it will be well written enough. Or should that be well enough written? Because so much of what I know about good writing came from my two stints at The Listener, which this morning was shut down due to ...
    PunditBy Tim Watkin
    1 day ago
  • OK, Britney: stop sniping at National for doing its job
    With normal democratic procedures in abeyance, there were two ways to go. First, it was open for the government to dissolve itself and invite the National Party to join a ministry of national salvation. That would have lessened the democratic deficit of the times by having a team of rivals without ...
    PunditBy Liam Hehir
    1 day ago
  • Helpful tips for parents during lockdown
    Dr Kirsty Ross Children and young people can respond differently in times of distress. This also varies by age and developmental stage, with younger children having more magical and imaginative thinking, and older children having more awareness and knowledge of the issues our communities are facing (which brings up ...
    SciBlogsBy Guest Author
    1 day ago
  • Skeptical Science New Research for Week #13, 2020
    2 days ago
  • Hungary is now a dictatorship
    Hungary has been a virtual dictatorship for a decade now, as Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has gradually eroded its democracy. But now, its official, with the passage of an indefinite emergency law allowing rule by decree:Hungary’s parliament has passed a new set of coronavirus measures that includes jail terms for ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • A new Ministry of Works
    While the economy is on pause under lockdown, the government is beginning to plan how to cope with the post-lockdown, post-tourism, post-export education world we will eventually find ourselves in. They're planning a lot of infrastructure spending as economic stimulus, and have asked for proposals which can start the moment ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    2 days ago
  • Capture: Well spaced out
    It's my distraction,  setting up tiny scenes to photograph.  I've got stuck on the Babushka dolls for now.  Something about their bubble shape.  Something about their never changing, smiling features, suggesting persistent equanimity.  Can we get through everything that is being thrown at us and keep at least a tiny ...
    2 days ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 6
    . . March 31: Day six of living in lock-down… This time I managed to sleep a little longer and the alarm woke me at the pre-set time: 6.55am. Then remembered I was working a later shift and could’ve slept in. Oh well, there are things to do at home. ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    2 days ago
  • March ’20 – NZ blogs sitemeter ranking
    Image credit: Diamond Harbour School Blogs I notice a few regulars no longer allow public access to the site counters. This may happen accidentally when the blog format is altered. If your blog is unexpectedly missing or ...
    2 days ago
  • Hard News: Poll Pot and the partisans
    Yesterday's Horizon poll showing support for a "Yes" vote in this year's cannabis referendum sliding into the majority for the first time in a year looked like good news for reformers – and it probably is. But the result warrants some scrutiny.The poll is the fifth in a series commissioned ...
    2 days ago
  • Why those bubbles are so important
    For almost a week now, every one of us who isn’t an essential worker has been confined to their bubble. We are allowed to go shopping for groceries, to visit the doctor, and to get a bit of exercise if we stay local. The reason we are doing this is ...
    SciBlogsBy Siouxsie Wiles
    2 days ago
  • A Government System That Works
    The Covid-19 saga will no doubt produce many twists and turns for us before it is finally brought to an end. But one thing it has shown us – and what comfort it should bring us – is that our country’s government is in good hands. I am not thinking ...
    Bryan GouldBy Bryan Gould
    2 days ago
  • Smashing down the barriers: Where are we at with COVID vaccines?
    In the absence of a vaccine or a cure for a deadly disease, staying home in your bubble is what you do, the concept is not new.  To the best of my knowledge last time we did this in NZ was for polio, in the years before a vaccine came ...
    SciBlogsBy Helen Petousis Harris
    3 days ago
  • National Network on Cuba (USA): “Cuban medical solidarity is a pillar of its society and is founde...
    The following statement was released on March 28 by the National Network on Cuba, a coalition of 40 groups, based in the United States. In recent weeks, Cuba has deployed hundreds of medical providers to over a dozen countries in Europe, Asia, as well as to their neighbors in Latin ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    3 days ago
  • Alarming decrease in calves increases fears for endangered Hector’s dolphin
    This has been a terrible summer for Hector’s dolphins. The first indication was very low numbers of dolphin sightings during late spring and early summer. The Otago University Marine Mammal Research Team has carried out routine dolphin surveys at Banks Peninsula for more than 30 years. In all that time, ...
    SciBlogsBy Otago Marine Science
    3 days ago
  • Time for Grant Robertson to reveal package #2?
    On March 17, Finance Minister Grant Robertson was quick out of the blocks with an economic rescue package to help businesses through the inevitable recession resulting from the coronavirus pandemic. Robertson had pulled together a scheme in short order that so far seems to have saved many jobs. In his ...
    PunditBy Tim Watkin
    3 days ago
  • Saving lives
    The purpose of the lockdown is to save lives, by reducing the spread of covid-19. We won't know if its really working for another week, but given the devastation that will result if it doesn't - 14,000 dead is the optimistic scenario - its definitely worth trying. But pausing the ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    3 days ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 5
    . . March 30: Day five of living in lock-down… Woke up still in darkness. Alarm hadn’t gone off. Turn to radio clock; it’s a few minutes after 6am… I lie there in the dark, waiting to drift off to sleep… but it ain’t happening. Clock ticks over to 6.55 ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    3 days ago
  • Speaker: Les Gray: the man who told the truth
    The story of Les Gray, the public sector psychologist who told the truth about his use of cannabis and set off a storm, has a special place in the lore of cannabis reform in New Zealand.When Paul Shannon interviewed Gray for the 'Dope and Hope' issue of Planet magazine in ...
    3 days ago
  • Why now? Historical specificity and the perfect storm that has created trans identity politics
    by Phil Duncan For Marxists, a key concern about social trends is their context – not just their causes, but why they happen when they do.  Events and phenomena have causes, but they also are time or period-specific. While much of the left have capitulated recently to postmodernism, most notably ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    4 days ago
  • Time for a living wage for supermarket workers
    Since the lockdown began, we've all suddenly been reminded who the actually essential workers in our society are: not the people at the top who pay themselves the big bucks and rort the perks, but the people at the bottom they screw over and squeeze: cleaners, warehouse staff, truck drivers ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    4 days ago
  • Hard News: MUSIC: Lockdown Grooves
    Kia ora! As I've watched nearly all my remaining work vanish over the past couple of days, it has occured to me that one good way to keep me away from arguing with fools on Twitter all the time (in the knowledge that all we're really doing is processing our ...
    4 days ago
  • A place of greater safety?
    Aotearoa New Zealand has committed to trying to extirpate the virus that causes COVID-19 from its shores. To do that, as a society we’ve moved to “Level 4”. That means adapting to unprecedented restrictions on our personal freedoms, particularly to our rights to move freely and associate with friends and ...
    PunditBy Andrew Geddis
    4 days ago
  • The police and public trust
    When the Prime Minister declared a state of emergency last week, she handed the police powers to enforce it. And almost immediately, we started hearing about heavy-handed, arbitrary "enforcement" by police who (at best) cared more about order than law, or (more likely) had no idea what the rules were ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    4 days ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 4
    . . Lock Down: Day 4 – A photo essay with observations . March 29: Usual wake up routine as RNZ snaps on my radio-clock. Jim Mora’s voice slowly enters my conciousness; there’s talk of a second wave of covid19 taking hold in South Korea; the week in Parliament – ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    4 days ago
  • COVID-19 vs New Zealand
    Yesterday, New Zealand recorded its first Covid-19 related death on the West Coast. Unfortunately this is unlikely to be the only fatality, with the virus now being found in every region of the country.However despite the significant danger, people are still unfortunately breaching lockdown rules.There’s really only one main very ...
    4 days ago
  • 2020 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming Digest #13
    Story of the Week... Toon of the Week... Coming Soon on SkS... Climate Feedback Claim Review... SkS Week in Review... Poster of the Week... Story of the Week... ‘Misinformation kills’: The link between coronavirus conspiracies and climate denial   Grist / Rob Kim / Stringer / CSA Images  Scientific ...
    4 days ago
  • Rāhui day 4
    The kids did surprisingly well today – meltdown count was about 3, and mostly fairly short ones. (And a fourth while I was writing.) Game-wise I had a go at Fell Seal: Arbiter’s Mark. It’s a fairly standard RPG with turn-based combat and what they call a “mature storyline” (it ...
    The little pakehaBy chrismiller
    5 days ago
  • Letter to a friend
    by Don Franks Hi David, Nice hearing from you, I’m glad to hear you’re getting by okay in these grim times. You asked how’s it going for us back here in New Zealand. You would have heard that the whole country is locked down and with breaks for exercise and ...
    RedlineBy Daphna
    5 days ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 3
    . . Lock Down: Day 3 – A photo essay with observations . March 28: First day of the first weekend in Lock Down. It feels like it’s been weeks since only Level 3 was declared last Tuesday, only four days ago. Woke up this morning to RNZ; coffee; toast, ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    5 days ago
  • 2020 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #13
    A chronological listing of news articles linked to on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week, i.e., Sun, Mar 22, 2020 through Sat, Mar 28, 2020 Articles Linked to on Facebook Sun, Mar 22, 2020 In Just 10 Years, Warming Has Increased the Odds of Disasters by Chelsea Harvey, ...
    6 days ago
  • Rāhui day 3
    I’m here in lockdown with my flatmate and her two girls (6 and 2) and it. is. a time. They’re usually really active so to start with the only boardgame in the house is the copy of Guess Who that the 6 year old got for her birthday. Flatmate commented ...
    The little pakehaBy chrismiller
    6 days ago
  • A test of civil society.
    The CV-19 (COVID) pandemic has seen the imposition of a government ordered national quarantine and the promulgation of a series of measures designed to spread the burden of pain and soften the economic blow on the most strategically important and most vulnerable sectors of society. The national narrative is framed ...
    KiwipoliticoBy Pablo
    6 days ago
  • Life in Lock Down: Day 2
    . . Lock Down: Day 2 – A photo essay with observations . March 27 – Day 2 of our Strange New World. The Park and Ride near my suburb, usually filled with hundreds of vehicles, had just… four; . . Another drive into Wellington City on a highway nearly ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    6 days ago
  • How Do You Feel? What Do You Think?
    Fortune's Children: Under extraordinary pressure, the leader of the Government and the leader of the Opposition will each show us what they are made of. Have they been blessed with intelligence, grace, wit, poise, toughness, empathy and humour – and in what measure? More importantly, to what extent have they ...
    6 days ago
  • Landlords are NOT an essential service
    If you’ve ever had the misfortune of having to rent a property on the open market in New Zealand, which is one of the most expensive in the entire world, you’ll likely be keenly aware of just how arrogant and entitled landlords and their real estate agents can be.Unfortunately for ...
    6 days ago
  • A “new Society” post-COVID19 will definitely emerge. The question is: on what path?
    Society-wise, aside from the specific morbidity shall we say of the medically-oriented aspects of this COVID-19 crisis, what is unfolding before the world is in more than one way an instructive study of humanity and reactions to a high intensity, high stress environment in real time. Friends, we are at ...
    exhALANtBy exhalantblog
    7 days ago
  • Raise the Bar: Everything you need to know about the wage subsidy
    Right now low waged and insecure workers are feeling the economic brunt of the looming #Covid19 Recession. In response legal advocate Toby Cooper* and hospitality and worker’s rights advocate Chloe Ann-King, are putting together a series of legal blogs about your employment rights: In this legal blog we outline some ...
    PosseBy chloeanneking
    7 days ago
  • The massacre of prisoners in Modelo jail, Bogota, March 21
    by Equipo Jurídico Pueblos and Gearóid Ó Loingsigh (25/03/2020) An escape plan in question On the night of March 21st and the early morning of the 22nd, the forces of the Colombian state stormed into the Modelo prison in Bogotá, murdering 23 prisoners and injuring 83, in response to the ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    7 days ago
  • We are not America
    When the government banned semi-automatic weapons in response to a terrorist atrocity, gun-nuts were outraged. Mired in toxic American gun culture, they thought owning weapons whose sole purpose was killing people was some sort of "constitutional right", a necessity for "defending themselves" against the government. Now, the Court of Appeal ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • When will we know the lockdown is working?
    Just before midnight on Wednesday March 25, Aotearoa New Zealand entered a countrywide alert level four lockdown. For at least the next four weeks, everyone who isn’t an essential worker is confined to their bubble. We are doing this to stop the explosive growth in people contracting and dying from ...
    SciBlogsBy Siouxsie Wiles
    1 week ago
  • Lock Down: Day 1
    . . Lock Down: Day 1 – A photo essay with observations . Day one of the Level 4 nationwide lock-down (or, DefCon 4 as I sometimes cheekily call it) started at 11.59PM on 25 March. For a moment, most of the nation held it’s collective breath. In that brief ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    1 week ago
  • A Compelling Recollection.
    Broad, Sunlit Uplands: How those words fired my young imagination! Or, perhaps, it is more accurate to say: how those words fused, in my young mind, with the image printed on every packet of Fielder’s Cornflour. Always fascinated by history, especially modern history, I cannot hear Churchill’s wonderfully evocative words, even ...
    1 week ago
  • The Warehouse – where everyone gets a virus
    . . 24 March 2020 9.46AM Number of covid19 cases in Aotearoa New Zealand: 102 . As of 11.59 on Thursday, most of New Zealand will go into “lock down”. People will be expected not to travel to work; not to socialise; and to stay home. I will not be ...
    Frankly SpeakingBy Frank Macskasy
    1 week ago
  • Aggressive action to address climate change could save the world $145 trillion
    This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections A respected research group, Project Drawdown, finds that deploying solutions consistent with meeting the Paris climate targets would cost tens of trillions of dollars globally. But crucially, those outlays would also yield long-term savings many times larger than the up-front costs. The new 2020 Drawdown ...
    1 week ago
  • After the Pandemic
    It will pass. What happens next? Not immediately, but longer term. There are many opinions, fewer certainties. Will it “change everything!” as many confidently, and contradictorily predict? In this post I look at how foresight can help bound some of the uncertainties so you can more objectively consider the future. ...
    SciBlogsBy Robert Hickson
    1 week ago
  • Coronavirus – Cuba shows the way
    We’ve been meaning t write something on Cuba and the coronavirus but have just discovered a very good article on the subject in the US left publication Jacobin.  The article looks at how Cuba, a poor country but one where capitalism has been done away with, is leading the way ...
    RedlineBy Admin
    1 week ago
  • Using privacy law to prevent the death penalty
    In 2018, El Shafee Elsheikh and Alexanda Kotey - two British citizens who had purportedly been stripped of their citizenship by the British government - were captured while fighting for Isis in Syria. The British government then conspired to hand them over to the US, and agreed to provide evidence ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • It’s Time For Disaster Socialism.
    Transformers: The disaster of the Great Depression was transformed into a new and fairer society by the democratic socialism of the First Labour Government. The disaster of the Covid-19 Pandemic offers a similar transformative possibility to the Labour-NZ First-Green Government. Seize the time, Jacinda! You will never have a better ...
    1 week ago
  • Skeptical Science New Research for Week #12, 2020
    Tamper with The System? Well, we already are. But there's a difference between accidentally trickling sand into a precision gearbox versus formulating a plan to alter it on the fly with improvements in mind. One action is more or less innocently unscrupulous, the other amenable to earning an easy ...
    1 week ago
  • Avoidable hospitalisations: Helping our health system get through COVID-19
    Associate Prof George Thomson, Louise Delany, Prof Nick Wilson While it is possible that New Zealand can use intense public health controls to eradicate COVID-19 from the country – we must also plan for other scenarios where thousands of New Zealanders are sick – including many urgently hospitalised.1 Better resilience ...
    SciBlogsBy Public Health Expert
    1 week ago
  • Raise the Bar: 10 questions to ask your employer proposing redundancy
    Kia ora my name is Chloe Ann-King* and I am the founder of Raise the Bar, a campaign and non-profit that gives free legal aid, advocacy and tautoko to hospitality workers in Aotearoa. Right now all over our country hospo workers are being fired at will, having shifts cut or being ...
    PosseBy chloeanneking
    1 week ago
  • An equitable way to support business
    The Herald reports that the government is planning to lend billions of dollars to large businesses to keep them operating during the pandemic. As with mortgage relief, this is necessary: we need companies to stay in business, to reduce the economic damage and help things get restarted again when this ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago
  • Hard News: Together Alone
    We're about to do something unprecedented as a nation. We hope that by taking this extraordinary action before a single life in New Zealand has been lost to the deadly novel virus we will save tens of thousands of lives. Our  lives. We'll do it together, in households, in isolation ...
    1 week ago
  • Why timing is everything: ‘A time to refrain from embracing’ starts today
    “There is a time for everything,    and a season for every activity under the heavens.”So writes the author of Ecclesiastes, a book in the Old Testament that’s counted as a ‘wisdom’ book and written as if by an unnamed king of Jerusalem. But who would have thought there would be a time ...
    PunditBy Tim Watkin
    1 week ago
  • Dealing with the Covid-19 Tsunami.
    I was surprised when the prime minister described the Economic Response to Covid-19 package as the ‘largest peacetime government spend in New Zealand's history’. Reflecting – checking through history – I realised that the term ‘spend’ was crucial and the package had no income tax cuts. Even so, it has ...
    PunditBy Brian Easton
    1 week ago
  • What about renters?
    The government today announced the latest part of its pandemic relief package: a six-month mortgage holiday for people whose incomes have been affected by the pandemic. Which is great, because these people are going to need help, and that's what the government should be doing. At the same time, it ...
    No Right TurnBy Idiot/Savant
    1 week ago

  • Further measures to support businesses
    The Government will be introducing legislation to make changes to the Companies Act to help companies facing insolvency due to COVID-19 to remain viable and keep New Zealanders in jobs. The temporary changes include: Giving directors of companies facing significant liquidity problems because of COVID-19 a ‘safe harbour’ from insolvency ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 hour ago
  • Govt’s COVID plan, economic strength recognised
    The Government’s plan to cushion the blow of COVID-19 by supporting incomes, jobs and businesses, and position the economy to recover has been backed by another international report. International credit rating agency Moody’s today reaffirmed its highest Aaa credit rating on New Zealand, saying the economy is expected to remain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 hours ago
  • Funding certainty for sports through COVID-19
    National sports organisations have been given certainty of funding to ensure they can remain viable through the COVID-19 pandemic, Sport and Recreation Minister Grant Robertson announced today. “The global spread of COVID-19 has had a significant impact on sport and recreation in New Zealand, including the cancellation or postponement of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    12 hours ago
  • Butchers now allowed to process pork
    Changes have been made to allow butchers to process pork, only for supply to supermarkets or other processors or retailers that are open, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor has announced. “We carefully weighed the risk of allowing butchers to open their shops for retail customers, but the risk of spreading COVID-19 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    23 hours ago
  • Essential workers leave scheme established
    Essential workers who take leave from work to comply with public health guidance are being supported with a leave scheme to ensure they will continue to receive income, say the Minister of Workplace Relations and Safety Iain Lees-Galloway and Minister for Social Development, Carmel Sepuloni. A number of essential businesses ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Govt WhatsApp helps share COVID-19 information
    A Government WhatsApp channel has been launched to help make information more easily accessible and shareable in the fight against COVID-19. Govt.NZ, which is free to use on any mobile device, will carry information and news for the public, businesses, healthcare providers, not for profits and local government. It can ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Managed departure plan for stranded foreign nationals enables safe, orderly exit
    The Government has announced a plan to enable the safe, orderly exit of tens of thousands of stranded foreign nationals from New Zealand during the current COVID-19 Alert Level 4 restrictions, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Winston Peters has said. “When we moved into lockdown a week ago, the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Government delivers COVID-19 support to GPs and Pharmacies
    Health Minister Dr David Clark says the Government is delivering on its commitment to support general practice doctors and nurses, and pharmacies on the front-line of our fight against COVID-19. "For us to overcome COVID-19, we need community health services such as general practice and community pharmacy to step up ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Susan Thomas the new Chief High Court Judge
    Justice Susan Thomas has been appointed Chief High Court Judge, Attorney-General David Parker announced today.  She replaces Justice Geoffrey Venning who has resigned from the position.   David Parker paid tribute to Justice Venning, who he said had stewarded the High Court very capably over the last five years.   “On behalf ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Business Finance Guarantee – applications open
    Businesses can start applying to their banks for loans under the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme set up to support the New Zealand economy during the COVID-19 pandemic. “We’re moving quickly to protect New Zealand businesses, jobs and the economy during this unprecedented global economic shock,” Finance Minister Grant Robertson said. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Work starts on ways to fast-track consents to boost recovery from Covid-19 downturn
    Work is underway looking at measures to speed up consents for development and infrastructure projects during the recovery from COVID 19, to provide jobs and stimulate our economy.  Environment Minister David Parker said the COVID-19 pandemic is a serious global crisis that will have a wide ranging and lasting impact ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Advance payments to support contractors
    Advance payments will be made to transport construction industry contractors to retain the workforce and ensure it is ready to quickly gear up to build projects which will be vital to New Zealand’s COVID-19 economic recovery, Transport Minister Phil Twyford announced today. He said keeping the workforce required to build ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Government seeks infrastructure projects
    The Government has tasked a group of industry leaders to seek out infrastructure projects that are ready to start as soon as the construction industry returns to normal to reduce the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, Economic Development Minister Phil Twyford and Infrastructure Minister Shane Jones say. The Infrastructure ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Health system scaled up to prepare for COVID-19
    Work to scale up the health system in preparation for COVID-19 was today outlined by Health Minister David Clark, as he reported back to the new Epidemic Response Committee. “We are well placed to contain the spread of COVID-19. We have taken early and decisive action at our borders, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Essential media COVID-19 guidelines refined
    The Government is refining its COVID-19 essential business guidance to include the distribution of news publications for communities which are hard to reach. The Minister of Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media, Kris Faafoi, said the move was in recognition of the importance for New Zealanders who might be harder to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Supermarkets able to open on Easter Sunday
    The Government is ensuring supermarkets can open on Easter Sunday so we can buy groceries, but stay closed on Good Friday allowing workers to take a break. This provides a balanced approach and ensures we avoid large queues that two days closure may cause. “Supermarkets will be able to open ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • New Zealand defence personnel conclude mission at Taji
    Following the successful conclusion of the Building Partner Capacity (BPC) mission at Taji, New Zealand defence personnel are returning to New Zealand from Iraq, in accordance with the Cabinet decision made in June 2019, Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Defence Minister Ron Mark announced today. “New Zealand is very ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • State of National Emergency extended
    The State of National Emergency to help stop the spread of COVID-19 has been extended for a further seven days, Minister of Civil Defence Peeni Henare said. The initial declaration on March 25 lasted seven days and can be extended as many times as necessary. “Since we went into isolation ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Strong Govt books support ‘go hard, go early’ response
    New Zealand’s ability to go hard and go early in the fight against COVID-19 has been underpinned by strong Government finances and the growing economy heading into this global pandemic, Finance Minister Grant Robertson says. The Treasury today released the Crown financial statements for the eight months to the end ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Christchurch Hospital Hagley ICU to open to support COVID-19 response
    Health Minister Dr David Clark says 36 new intensive care beds at Christchurch Hospital’s new Hagley building are being fast tracked so they are available for treatment of COVID-19 patients.   The Ministry of Health is working with contractor CPB and Canterbury DHB to enable access to the hospital’s ICU, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Government supports Air NZ freight flights
    The Government has fast-tracked up to $1 million to help Air New Zealand move urgent freight to and from New Zealand, with the first flight to Shanghai leaving tonight, Transport Minister Phil Twyford announced today. Phil Twyford says it’s crucial that trade in vital goods such as medical supplies and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Tariff concessions on COVID-19 related products
    New Zealand will temporarily remove tariffs on all medical and hygiene imports needed for the COVID-19 response. Trade and Export Growth Minister David Parker and Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Kris Faafoi said today that the New Zealand Customs Service will apply tariff concessions to all diagnostic reagents and testing ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Clarification of modification to wage subsidy scheme
    Minister of Finance Grant Robertson has clarified that the changes to the wage subsidy scheme announced yesterday mean that employers should be passing on the full subsidy to workers, except in the case where the person’s normal income is less than the level of the subsidy. “We still want employers ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Face masks flowing to DHBs
    Medical face masks from the national reserve supply are now being distributed to District Health Boards, while at the same time local production is being ramped up. Yesterday more than 640,000 masks were sent to DHBS – that is an immediate two week supply, with more to follow in coming ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • COVID-19: Further steps to protect New Zealanders’ jobs
    The Government has made modifications to the wage subsidy scheme to ensure people don’t lose their jobs during the national lockdown. These changes will soften the impact of COVID-19 on workers, families and businesses, and position them to exit the lockdown and look to recovery, Finance Minister Grant Robertson says. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Tax relief for Mycoplasma Bovis farmers
    Farmers whose herds were culled in response to the outbreak of Mycoplasma bovis will be able to minimise the tax treatment of their income in some circumstances. Revenue Minister Stuart Nash says Cabinet has agreed to change the law. It means farmers may be eligible to spread their income over ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • $27 million for NGOs and community groups to continue providing essential services
    A $27 million dollar package, effective immediately, is being provided to social sector services and community groups to ensure they can continue to provide essential support to communities as we stay at home as a nation to stop the spread of COVID-19, Minister for Social Development Carmel Sepuloni announced. “At ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Statement on guilty plea of March 15 terrorist
    “The guilty plea today will provide some relief to the many people whose lives were shattered by what happened on March 15,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said. “These guilty pleas and conviction bring accountability for what happened and also save the families who lost loved ones, those who were injured, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • COVID-19 updates
    The Prime Minister is holding daily press conferences to update New Zealanders on the Government's response to COVID-19. Links to videos and transcripts of these updates below. These transcripts also include All of Government press conferences led by Director Ministry of Health's Director-General of Health Dr Ashley Bloomfield. 25 March: Live update from the Prime ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Police numbers break through 10,000 mark
    Frontline Police numbers have broken through the 10,000 mark for the first time in history as officers step forward to keep the community safe during the COVID19 lockdown. “Two Police graduations in Auckland and Wellington in the past week have been conducted in unprecedented circumstances,” Police Minister Stuart Nash said. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Urgent tax measures for economic recovery
    Urgent legislation has been passed to support the package of economic and social measures needed to recover from the impact of the coronavirus outbreak. “The COVID-19 Response (Taxation and Social Assistance Urgent Measures) Bill will cushion New Zealanders from the worst economic impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak,” said Revenue Minister ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Further support for farmers and growers as drought persists
    From tomorrow, Government support for farmers and growers affected by drought will be expanded and extended across the country, with access to Rural Assistance Payments (RAPS) available throughout the North Island, parts of the South Island and the Chatham Islands, Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni announced. “These challenging conditions have ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • COVID-19: Temporary changes to Education Act
    Parliament has passed amendments to legislation that give the Secretary of Education stronger powers to act in the fight to limit the spread of COVID-19, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said today. “They are part of a suite of changes passed under the COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Legislation Bill,” Chris ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Canada, Australia, Chile, Brunei and Myanmar join NZ and Singapore in committing to keeping supply a...
    Canada, Australia, Chile, Brunei and Myanmar have joined forces with New Zealand and Singapore by committing to keep supply chains open and remove any existing trade restrictive measures on essential goods, especially medical supplies, in the face of the Covid-19 crisis.  Trade and Export Growth Minister David Parker today welcomed ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • COVID-19: Rent increase freeze and more protection for tenants
    Immediate freeze on rent increases Tenancies will not be terminated during the lock-down period, unless the parties agree, or in limited circumstances Tenants who had previously given notice can stay in their if they need to stay in the tenancy during the lock-down period Tenants will still be able to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Working together to protect businesses and workers
    As New Zealand unites to lock-down in the fight against COVID-19, the Finance Minister is urging all businesses and workers to stay connected over the next four weeks. “We understand the extreme pressure many businesses are under right now. I know most business owners think of their workers as family ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • State of National Emergency declared to fight COVID-19
    A State of National Emergency has been declared across the country as the Government pulls out all the stops to curtail the spread of COVID-19. “Today we put in place our country’s second ever State of National Emergency as we fight a global pandemic, save New Zealanders’ lives and prevent ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Prime Minister’s statement on State of National Emergency and Epidemic Notice
    Mr Speaker I wish to make a Ministerial Statement under Standing Order 347 in relation to the recent declaration of a State of National Emergency. Having considered the advice of the Director Civil Defence Emergency Management, the Minister of Civil Defence declared a State of National Emergency for the whole of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Deadline for domestic travel extended
    People needing to travel on domestic flights, trains and Cook Strait ferries to get home before the country moves into level 4 lock-down tomorrow night will be able to continue using the passenger services until midnight on Friday, Transport Minister Phil Twyford said today. Domestic passenger services, particularly ferries, have ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Mortgage holiday and business finance support schemes to cushion COVID impacts
    The Government, retail banks and the Reserve Bank are today announcing a major financial support package for home owners and businesses affected by the economic impacts of COVID-19. The package will include a six month principal and interest payment holiday for mortgage holders and SME customers whose incomes have been ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago