Open mike 01/03/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, March 1st, 2024 - 65 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

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

Step up to the mike …

65 comments on “Open mike 01/03/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. bwaghorn 1
    1 March 2024 at 6:24 am

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350196925/acc-mulls-job-cuts-after-very-clear-expectation-save-65

    Is acc fully self funded by the revenue it collects ?

    If it is does this government intend to steel employers acc contributions to fund tax cuts ?

    • Graeme 1.1
      1 March 2024 at 7:55 am

      There's partial funding by government for people who don't earn wages or pay levies, so children, retired (and beneficiaries other unwaged I presume)

      ACC is funded from multiple sources, including business, petrol revenues and wages. Funds from each source are spent on injuries relevant to where they happened.

      Examples of funds paying for different injuries:

      • If you're injured in a motor vehicle accident, your ACC claim is paid for by funds sourced from motorists, such as vehicle registration and petrol levies
      • If you fall off your bicycle, the cost of your treatment is paid from a levy on your wages.
      • Accidents in the workplace are covered by levies paid by businesses
      • Government funds treatment for children and retirees.

      These are just a few examples of the ways ACC levies from multiple sources are used to support people who are injured.

      it's a nebulous, shapeshifting beast is ACC, at all levels

      The 6.5% expenditure reduction over Government can be looked at as the amount revenue is going to contract as National tanks the economy to create ‘opportunity’ for their vulture mates. I’m expecting the tax cuts to quietly slip back because of ‘economic conditions’.

      • Tiger Mountain 1.1.1
        1 March 2024 at 8:06 am

        “it's a nebulous, shapeshifting beast is ACC, at all levels…”

        It sure is, I did print layout for a Union Publication on ACC–basically how to negotiate the maze, and it can involve engaging specialist lawyers–and was quite taken aback by how much you need to become aware of to receive your entitlements and not get done over by case managers that make WINZ/MSD look good.

        When I was an industrial worker pre 90s, ACC was a matter of seeing a doctor (as opposed to multiple doctors of ACC’s choice), a little form filling, and the employer just paid you every week…no longer it seems. But sure, self employment and precarious work has ballooned in the 00s which complicates things.

        • Graeme 1.1.1.1
          1 March 2024 at 9:28 am

          self employment and precarious work has ballooned in the 00s which complicates things

          Fark yes, try claiming earnings compo when you're self employed. Standard tax accounting practices effectively deny you compensation as you're paid on net earnings, you then have to have income insurance on top of ACC levies to take care of your fixed costs while your are unable to work.

    • KJT 1.2
      1 March 2024 at 8:15 am

      ACC is more than adequately funded by PAYGO levies.

      As proven by the fact that it accumulates "reserves" like private insurance. Reserves which have basically been stolen from claimants who pay the levies.. Where cover has been refused or underpaid for all sorts of specious reasons.

      ACC has no need for accumulating reserves as it is fully funded by levies. Rates of claims are fully predictable, and levies are set accordingly. Unlike earthquake or fire insurance, where exceptional events require reserve funding to cover them.

      The only reason for "reserves" and forward funding current claimants, (Levying enough and paying out less to have a surplus to invest) is to make it attractive for sale to private insurance. It also makes the overall Government books look better than they are. Helps when trying to justify borrowing for tax cuts, for millionaires.

      An anology would be NZTA putting aside a billion a year in the US stock market, while the roads are collapsing from lack of repairs!

      • alwyn 1.2.1
        1 March 2024 at 9:25 am

        A better analogy would be the "Cullen" fund. The New Zealand Superannuation Fund if you prefer its formal name. I assume you are in favour of scrapping it as New Zealand Superannuation is fully funded on a pay as you go basis.

        Why do we have the Super fund? The only real reason is that Cullen, faced with excessive tax receipts back in 2000, was too mean to let people keep their own income so he invented this way of keeping it in Government hands.

        It is totally unnecessary and should be scrapped. I assume, given you views on the necessity for ACC to have reserves for future payments that you agree with me?

        • mikesh 1.2.1.1
          1 March 2024 at 9:46 am

          I suspect there were sound fiscal reasons for not letting people "keep their own income" – something to do with avoiding inflation; and there has always been a suspicion that the country would not be able to afford national super once the boomers started to retire, and that therefore a fund built up in advance might be of assistance.

        • Subliminal 1.2.1.2
          1 March 2024 at 9:59 am

          I think you'll find that ACC is the only health insurance in the world that is fully funded for all future claims. The accumulation of reserves on top of being fully funded represents theft from the present where it could be used rather than attempting to tie down the definition of injury more tightly than is intended by prescriptive descriptions of what an illness or injury from the workplace is.

          • bwaghorn 1.2.1.2.1
            1 March 2024 at 5:19 pm

            I'm starting to creak and grown after 37 years of manual labour started pushing a milk cart at 14,

            I expect I'll be classed as wear and tear illness as opposed to work related injuries when the time comes

            • joe90 1.2.1.2.1.1
              1 March 2024 at 6:04 pm

              At 14 I was swinging a hammer for the old man, a full time manual worker until got off the tools in my late fifties and pulled the pin at 66. Elbows, knees, neck, you name it. Properly fucked.

        • Bearded Git 1.2.1.3
          1 March 2024 at 12:20 pm

          That is complete rubbish Alwyn. With the ageing population there is a big future superannuation deficit which means the Cullen fund is more needed than ever and Key was stupid to stop paying into it in order to give tax cuts.

        • KJT 1.2.1.4
          1 March 2024 at 2:44 pm

          The myth of “Retirement Savings” « The Standard

          Retirement income, real income as opposed to monetary income, as does schooling healthcare, infrastructure supply and food, always comes from current production. If I do not eat my dinner today, it does not mean there is someone who can give me my dinner in my eighties. The best investment for my old age then, is not giving my money away for financial wizards to lose, but to pay taxes, (and spend my income) to make sure that the next generation are happy, healthy, educated, employed and comfortable

      • SPC 1.2.2
        1 March 2024 at 10:28 am

        The reserves are required when an aging population is more vulnerable to injury.

        In that sense one of the few ways we provide for the aging of the population (as per health costs).

        Those with assets have lower borrowing costs, that includes government.

        Spare capacity also allows for the possibility of moving to include sickness.

        ACC should be flourishing (and government budgets) when there is full employment that allows it and government to cope with the cost of higher unemployment – lower level of levies (and tax revenue) inflow.

    • SPC 1.3
      1 March 2024 at 10:22 am

      No NACT is downsizing ACC so

      1. it can lower contribution requirements from employers

      2. reduce the amount of assets on the government books to create a sense of debt crisis

      It merely reflects the NACT wreckers anti-government capability policy.

  2. joe90 2
    1 March 2024 at 8:31 am

    The $30 million pig has his snout in the taxpayer trough. Despicable.

    https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/03/01/luxon-claims-52k-accommodation-payment-to-live-in-own-apartment/

    • Anne 2.1
      1 March 2024 at 10:01 am

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/510560/christopher-luxon-claims-52k-accommodation-payment-to-live-in-own-apartment

      The difference between those MPs etc. mentioned in your link and Luxon is that most of them probably have mortgages to sustain and don't have a string of mortgage-free homes dotted around the place.

      I bet Luxon didn't even think about how it would look to the voters because he is such a self entitled prick. He has neither a conscience or a moral bone in his body.

      • Tiger Mountain 2.1.1
        1 March 2024 at 10:30 am

        C’mon Luxury Luxon only has 7 pads including the Wgtn. freehold and a Hawaii vacation spread, the $52 grand is in the rules…ok surely…except that it is not!

        Even Dipton double dipper Bill English was finally embarrassed with his ripping us taxpayers via accomodation. Not so sure with Baldrick though, he is tone deaf.

      • alwyn 2.1.2
        1 March 2024 at 12:13 pm

        Luxon is an electorate MP whose electorate is in Auckland. He needs to live, as almost all electorate MPs do, in or close to his electorate.

        He also needs somewhere to live in Wellington. If Premier House isn't suitable he can live somewhere else. Why should he be treated any differently to any other electorate MP? Why should he be expected to pay his expenses out of his own pocket just because he is richer than most people? Let's face it. All MPs are better off than the bulk of the populace.

        If you really want to complain about bludging MPs you should look at the List MPs, who choose to live outside of Wellington but expect the tax-payer to fund their living costs in Wellington.

        List MPs should not be eligible for any accommodation allowance in the Capital. They should be told that the job for a List MP is in Wellington and a moving allowance will be paid so they can move there. That's it. From then on their address is Wellington and no accommodation perks will be provided to them.

        If the MSM want something to talk about they should be asking why Luxon's home is considered to be a target for Palestinian terrorist supporters. Leave his family alone.

        • Phillip ure 2.1.2.1
          1 March 2024 at 12:22 pm

          Lux-on owns the property he is claiming for..

          ..freehold…

          He is also the richest mp…

          You know how it goes:

          Do as I say – not as I do..

        • AB 2.1.2.3
          1 March 2024 at 1:18 pm

          Why should he be expected to pay his expenses out of his own pocket just because he is richer than most people

          Have you ever heard of means testing the entitlements paid out by the state? Or the process of abatement if you earn some temporary or part-time income while on a benefit? These tools are seemingly regarded as necessary to protect the public purse and police the morals of the poor, or even of just the not-rich. Why should MPs not be subject to something similar?

          • Kay 2.1.2.3.1
            1 March 2024 at 1:35 pm

            Politicians are payed for by taxpayer and they should 100% be subject to means testing like the rest of us plebs.

            https://www.moneyhub.co.nz/accommodation-supplement.html#:~:text=Someone%20not%20receiving%20a%20main,union%20or%20de%20facto%20couple

          • alwyn 2.1.2.3.2
            1 March 2024 at 2:39 pm

            You certainly have a fascinating idea of what is a "benefit"

            • Kay 2.1.2.3.2.1
              1 March 2024 at 3:47 pm

              Not fascinating at all Alwyn, not in this scenario. Please explain to us mere mortals why, in the age of allegedly necessary austerity, a multi-millionaire freeholder homeowner who is paid by the taxpayer doesn't deserve to be means tested for an allowance?

              Really, means testing needs to be expanded even more, given how broke the country apparently is. I propose that MPs with over a certain amount of cash assets and income received alongside their MP salaries have to use that up first before being allowed any 'perks' like accommodation and meal allowances, even travel. They can afford those taxi fares from the airport. Don't worry, we won't make them sell off all their assets before being allowed to get paid anything.

              Rich MPs who are there because they want to make a difference, not because they want power, won't have an argument with this.

              • alwyn …
                1 March 2024 at 4:56 pm

                It isn't a benefit. It is a salary and allowances package they get for doing a job. Now I might think they are overpaid and that we should reduce all public service salaries down to where the maximum that anyone can be paid is limited to $100,000 but I suspect we aren't going to have any doctors in our hospitals are we?

                I can remember when MPs were paid a great deal less than they are now. The used to get about the same as a experienced teacher in a school. Lets go back to that and pay ordinary MPs about $80,000 shall we?

                The MPs I worry about aren't the, possibly rich, ones who were successful at something else before they become MPs. The ones I don't want around are the ones who are so useless that they couldn't make anything like their current income in the world outside Parliament. They are the no-hoper, generally list, MPs who inhabit the back benches of the house and whose claim to fame is that they were a barista or such like.

                • AB …
                  1 March 2024 at 7:08 pm

                  It's an allowance to enable you to do a job, not a salary for doing the job. It's a benefit that is generously dished out only to our imagined and disproportionately rewarded elites. It's perfectly valid and moral to means test it.

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  1 March 2024 at 7:26 pm

                  The MPs I worry about aren't the, possibly rich, ones who were successful at something else before they become MPs.

                  Quite right alwyn, the rich and/or successful can look after themselves.

                  …whose claim to fame is that they were a barista…

                  I worked a number of minimum wage jobs as a teenager and while completing Uni degrees; waitress, barista, in retail, in a call centre, as a projectionist at a cinema, at a campus library, and as maintenance manager at my housing cooperative.

                  https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/14-03-2023/what-jobs-did-our-mps-do-before-they-were-in-parliament

                  Low paid workers are being restrained from changing jobs Parliament told [12 Dec 2023]
                  Labour MP Helen White’s Employment Relations (Restraint of Trade) Amendment Bill continues through the Parliamentary process, under the new Government.

                  However, its future is uncertain as National showed little support for it while in opposition, and is in the process of dismantling some of the last government’s employment laws, claiming they limited “flexibility, choice and agility in workplaces”.

                  Otoh, motivated Filipino temps are very flexible – things are looking up!

                  When the bill was first debated in Parliament, baristas were cited as one of the groups of lowly-paid workers who sometimes had restraint of trade clauses in their contracts.

                • Kokako …
                  2 March 2024 at 6:08 am

                  Wealth is not a biological trait. Your logic is that the wealthy should not be subject to scrutiny simply because they are wealthy? This is eugenics territory and an unsustainable proposition for a functional society. What has transpired with this Luxon situation would be labeled benefit fraud for most of the rank and file and the hypocrisy is frankly offensive. An inability to recognise this is a hallmark of talentless privilege, which is not a skill that benefits society but a burden upon it. How many more decades of this social intelligent design fantasy are we to be compelled to accommodate? I'm so sick and tired of being sick and tired.

                  • alwyn …
                    2 March 2024 at 11:38 am

                    You should read more carefully. My view is that they should have shown that they can do something well. They might have become rich while doing so. If so they shouldn't be excluded from becoming an MP.

                    • SPC …
                      2 March 2024 at 11:54 am

                      The ones I don't want around are the ones who are so useless that they couldn't make anything like their current income in the world outside Parliament.

                      You did seem to be equating that those on lower salaries, like 90% of the people, should not be MP's.

                • KJT …
                  2 March 2024 at 9:03 am

                  Actually. Whose to say an MP is more useful than a Teacher? Or deserves more money.

                  Though we need to pay at a level that normal people, not just the idle rich can afford to do it. We see with councils how that works.

                  And. Expense allowances, in most jobs, cover actual expenses, not to add to already generous pay.

                  ones who were successful at something else before they become MPs.

                  That they were successful is debatable. Brown nosing your way through secure positions in a corporate, appears to be some of the worst training for a Parliamentary position. Being sheltered from life in a University is another red flag.

                  People with a varied and in touch with reality, life experience have been our most original and effective politicians.

                • SPC …
                  2 March 2024 at 11:52 am

                  So you do not think the working class should be represented by one of their own in parliament?

                  • alwyn …
                    2 March 2024 at 12:03 pm

                    I cannot see how you can possibly come to that conclusion from anything I have said. It is something that can quite fairly be said about the Labour Party hierarchy though as that party has been largely overrun by mediocre academics.

                    What happened to the working class that used to be represented by people like Norman Kirk, or Gordon Christie?

                    • SPC …
                      2 March 2024 at 12:07 pm

                      Most people who read this would conclude the same.

                      The ones I don't want around are the ones who are so useless that they couldn't make anything like their current income in the world outside Parliament.

        • SPC 2.1.2.4
          1 March 2024 at 1:23 pm

          Before I cry for Luxon, not being able to rent out one of his 7 properties he owns mortgage free to someone else, while he resides there … first this

          He used to claim $90,000 a year. Others doing so last year.

          National Party MPs: Christopher Luxon, Andrew Bayly; Gerry Brownlee; Judith Collins; Jacqui Dean; Barbara Kuriger; Melissa Lee; Ian McKelvie; Mark Mitchell; Simon O’Connor; Stuart Smith; Louise Upston and Michael Woodhouse.

          Labour Party MPs: Willie Jackson, Sarah Pallet, Deborah Russell, Jenny Salesa, Jamie Strange, Jan Tinetti, Duncan Webb, Arena Williams.

          The wealthier they are the more likely they are to do it, never enough …

          For mine the housing goes for rent or mortgage payment costs – if there are no such costs, no claim to make.

          Local MP's get nothing for the house they live in – they pay rent and mortgage out of their salary.

          https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2310/S00020/the-mps-using-the-taxpayer-to-own-wellington-property.htm

          • alwyn 2.1.2.4.1
            2 March 2024 at 11:41 am

            "He used to claim $90,000 a year.".

            That is a lie. You have no evidence at all for your fanciful claim.

            • SPC 2.1.2.4.1.1
              2 March 2024 at 11:49 am

              Is it?

              Don't read links?

              Included in this number is National Leader Christopher Luxon who since the start of 2021 has claimed around $90,000 to live in his own house in Wellington.

              https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2310/S00020/the-mps-using-the-taxpayer-to-own-wellington-property.htm

              Retract and walk away or be hunted.

              • alwyn …
                2 March 2024 at 12:29 pm

                You still can't read, can you?

                That story was dated 12 October 2023.

                From the start of 2021 until that date is two and three quarter years. It covers all of 2021, all of 2022 and most of 2023. You are somehow claiming it was in a single year!

                I suggest it is you who should be retracting.

                • SPC …
                  2 March 2024 at 12:39 pm

                  Ok then. He had not claimed $90,000 per annum, but $90,000 total while living in a house he owned before becoming PM.

                  He has since refunded the $13,000 he has claimed since becoming PM – but none of the earlier $90,000.

                  In reference to those others doing the same, some would still be paying off the mortgage on the property. That being an on-going cost to them of living in Wellington.

                  The Remuneration Authority should look at whether those with no Wellington housing cost should receive any allowance.

                  • alwyn …
                    2 March 2024 at 1:00 pm

                    A rather grudging admission perhaps but at least you are admitting you were quite wrong. I wish some of our MPs could do even that.

                    Even if you think it is fair to treat the MPs who own their homes in Wellington, as well as one in or near their electorate, and I don't, he is still going to have costs here. Rates, power, insurance, Body Corporate charges, etc, etc.

                    The Remuneration Authority should instead look at the people who are List MPs and have no reason at all to live anywhere at all except Wellington. They should be expected to move to Wellington. They should get no allowance at all for their Wellington Housing or for their own, and their families travel to Wellington.

                    Why not?

                    • SPC …
                      2 March 2024 at 1:20 pm

                      At the moment (not any in 2023), it appears none of the MP's of the Greens or TPM is claiming any allowance for a house they own in Wellington.

                      None of the Wellington based MP's is allowed to claim any housing support.

                      An out of town electorate MP gets the support because they are as much in their electorate as in Wellington (parliament breaks, electorate work and weekends and campaigns).

                      List MP's serve their parties nationwide (selected onto the list by party members and are accountable to them nationwide, not just in Wellington). This is more so for parties with a high list profile proportion. And in those cases they have spokesperson roles that also requiring nationwide connection to sector groups outside the party.

                      It is simpler to just give them a housing allowance than to have them claim expenses for work related trips.

                      List figures otherwise are higher ups in the major parties with "workloads" – which is why their families often remain based in the electorates they once were members for. If, over the years they have managed to use their housing allowance to own an apartment without a mortgage, they do not need an allowance.

                      he is still going to have costs here. Rates, power, insurance, Body Corporate charges, etc, etc.

                      Given we are the only nation in the OECD without a CGT, or estate tax – you think that is an arguement?

                    • alwyn …
                      2 March 2024 at 2:31 pm

                      Regarding the "Housing Allowance".

                      Suppose all the List MPs were to move to Wellington and live here. They would not get a Housing Allowance. After all Wellington will be their home.

                      This would have no effect on their Parliament related travel outside Wellington. They can still do that, and have it paid for. They do that now don't they. Nothing is going to change in that respect.

                      Any person who takes a job in Wellington is expected to move her. Why should list MPs be any different. If you want the job move to the location of the job.

                      I cannot understand what you mean by the last sentence. What has a CGT, or Estate tax, have to do with the rates you have to pay, or the Insurance on a property, or any of the other costs have to do with it?

                      I lived in Australia. They had a CGT system in place. I still had to pay rates and insurance you know.

                    • SPC …
                      2 March 2024 at 2:50 pm

                      List MP's are nationwide electorate party MP's. That is unrelated to parliamentary/government business.

                      Electorate MP's living in a property in Wellington they own without a mortgage, do not need financial help at the level of $36,400 as MP's or $52,000 to as Ministers to pay rates, insurance, power and broadband.

                      The properties they own are rising in value each year with the CG untaxed. Nor is there any estate tax paid on that inherited wealth.

                      They should only be able to claim such costs (and any maintenance) when they pay tax on gains from ownership.

                    • alwyn …
                      2 March 2024 at 3:30 pm

                      If you are a true believer in the last Government we had until last year then you wouldn't see any difference between a property without a mortgage and one that did have one.

                      After all the the Labour Government changed the law to prevent anyone claiming the interest paid on borrowing to buy a property. Why should anyone be entitled to a housing allowance just because they have borrowed to buy it, would surely have to be your opinion.

                    • SPC …
                      2 March 2024 at 3:47 pm

                      Why?

                      MP's are allowed to receive an allowance for their Wellington housing costs, rent and mortgage are such costs.

                      The Remuneration Authority sets those rules, and in my opinion should tighten up access to provide it only to those paying rent or mortgage.

                      PS The former governments policy design was to incentivise landlords moving from existing to new build property ownership – that latter qualified for mortgage deduction as a cost against rent income. We want investment money into extra housing not bidding up the price of current housing.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 2.2
      1 March 2024 at 10:02 am

      Let's get welfarism for Luxon back on track – oh, that all Kiwis were this 'productive'.

      Opportunities Ahead: Key Government Changes Affecting Property Investors and Tenants in 2024 [19 Feb 2024]
      Bright line test reduction
      Return of Mortgage Interest Deductibility
      Reinstating the 90-day ‘no-cause eviction’

      Coalition Government lifts minimum wage to $23.15 which the Council of Trade Unions says is a cut in real terms [1 Feb 2024]
      "The rental market doesn't actually need coddling of landlords and speculators to exist, as it predated such welfarism."

  3. AB 3
    1 March 2024 at 9:11 am

    The unparalleled genius of our 'wealth-creators' must be constantly rewarded or else they will abandon us.

  4. ianmac 4
    1 March 2024 at 10:14 am

    Destiny Church bikers will continue to wear their Tu Tangata leather vests because “they are korowai, not gang patches”, says church matriarch Hannah Tamaki.

    New legislation on Monday outlawed the wearing of gang patches in public, and offenders who break that ban could be fined up to $5000 or jailed for six months. The gang patch ban extends to funerals and tangi.

    Tamaki told the Herald the 90 bikers who ride under Destiny Church’s Tu Tangata Iwi Tapu patch would continue in the church colours.

    That will be interesting as they are defiant and Tamaki even issues a warning to Mark Mitchell.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/kahu/bishop-brians-bikers-will-wear-their-leather-vests-with-pride-because-they-are-korowai-not-gang-patches/U7DRA3TR6FBHNJAFAMQHEYYCTY/

  5. Subliminal 5
    1 March 2024 at 10:14 am

    Israel has now fully demonstrated why UNRWA must be maintained and strengthened. The horror of non UN aid trucks being used in North Gaza as bait to bring out desperately starving Palestinians from their hiding places in order to massacre more than 100, run over their bodies with tanks, and injure more than 700 in an environment with zero first aid, is apalling.

    There is no way that aid trucks can reach Gaza without express knowledge of the Israeli's.

    "The majority of victims suffered gunshots and shrapnel in the head and upper parts of the body. They were hit by direct artillery shelling, drone missiles and gun firing"…

    Ambulances were unable to reach the scene of the massacre.

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/29/dozens-killed-injured-by-israeli-fire-in-gaza-while-collecting-food-aid

    • Bearded Git 5.1
      1 March 2024 at 12:24 pm

      I thought the Israeli actions couldnt possibly get any worse….but they have managed it.

      • Tiger Mountain 5.1.1
        1 March 2024 at 3:17 pm

        Feel the same Git, low bastards. There have been a couple of airdrops into Gaza, by a UK group with assistance via Jordan, but fully expect the next one to be shot down…

        There needs to be an international aid brigade that just goes in…there are reports of a Turkey led flotilla leaving soon including NZ Kia Ora Gaza reps. Back in 2011 the Turkish flotilla was attacked by Israel in international waters and a number of people killed. One of my colleagues Mike Treen went one year, was tasered and beaten, lucky to escape with his life, similarly Green MP Marama Davidson went in 2016 I think and was lucky to get out alive too.

        Israel is not coming back from this butchery for much of the worlds people, even if Govt.s seem happy enough to look the other way.

  6. Res Publica 6
    1 March 2024 at 10:26 am

    Interesting that the coalition isn't supporting Cushla Tangaere-Manuel's Local Government Amendment Bill to allow councilors to attend meetings remotely for what can be loosely described as "reasons" – but only if you're feeling extremely generous:

    They seem to range from still being salty about COVID lockdowns (Simon Court -ACT):

    I want to make it clear why the ACT Party won't be supporting this bill. While there are occasions, whether it's following a sever weather event, where local government – elected members may not be able to travel to hold meetings, it is possible that by exception, in the future, there may be occasions where there's a need for remote participation. This should not become a matter of course. This Parliament, which facilitated remote participation when the COVID-19 controls were in place so that members like myself, who were relegated to be the second-class citizens of New Zealand, stuck in Auckland, could participate—that is no longer the case. This Parliament has adapted to the return of the normal situation, and so has local government. Therefore, we won't be supporting this bill and we do not believe it should proceed. Thank you.

    To something, something, something gummint overreach (Tim Costley – National)

    We believe in local solutions to local problems. We absolutely believe that they should have the freedom of choice, but we don't believe in this age-old, from-the-left "Wellington knows best. We'll tell you how to do it. We've got all the answers. What we decide in Wellington is the way to do it." We heard it from them not just with this; we heard it from three waters, "Give us all your ratepayer assets, we'll take control of them, and we'll decide what you're going to do with them." We heard it with Te Pūkenga: "We'll centralise everything. Wellington knows best. We've got the answers." We saw it with health. Nothing gets better

    • Anne 6.1
      1 March 2024 at 11:14 am

      Don't know exactly what is in the bill, but what has either excuse above got to do with the assumed intent… that is, allow someone who wants to attend a meeting but is unable to because say… an air-port closure due to fog.

      It seems to me that the right wing brain can only reach a certain level of comprehension before a brain-fog sets in which sends them down rabbit holes and flights of irrelevant fancy.

      • Res Publica 6.1.1
        1 March 2024 at 11:46 am

        The bill itself is pretty simple and just amends the LGA to specifically make remote participation at council meetings a legal right, rather than something a Council can decide to allow via standing orders.

        But yeah, crazy NACT is trying itself into knots trying to oppose it.

        God only knows what will happens when the abolition of the ratepayer roll gets drawn.

        • Incognito 6.1.1.1
          1 March 2024 at 2:12 pm

          Why don’t you provide a link to the source from which you copied & pasted those long quotes @ 6. A link to the Bill document may be helpful too.

  7. Robert Guyton 7
    1 March 2024 at 11:35 am

    "He knew what we all eventually realize, if we are awake and courageous enough: that the best way — and the only effective way — to complain about the way things are is to make new and better things, untested and unexampled things, things that spring from the gravity of creative conviction and drag the status quo like a tide toward some new horizon."

    https://www.themarginalian.org/2022/06/18/william-blake-vs-the-world/

  8. joe90 8
    1 March 2024 at 12:16 pm

    Congrats Israel, you've done it.

    If we're not careful, we become that which we most fear.

    Dean Ornish

    /

    @alon_mizrahi

    This footag is designed to make Palestinians look like insects and ants, not like people. The IDF has the most advanced image capturing equipment on the planet. They film and send this out to make you hate Palestinians and be indifferent to their deaths, or even be happy about it. This is meant to visually dehumanize. This is the lowest of the lowest of the low. This is it, right here. This actually makes me sick

    @i24NEWS_EN

    IDF released aerial footage showing how a Palestinian crowd in northern #Gaza attacked the trucks bringing humanitarian aid and as a result, dozens died from overcrowding, and trampling

    https://twitter.com/i24NEWS_EN/status/1763178369674342822

    https://twitter.com/alon_mizrahi/status/1763280047316558168

  9. joe90 9
    1 March 2024 at 3:21 pm

    Rather than bite the bullet and carry on with the contract for a modern, fit for purpose piece of vital transport infrastructure that'll deliver intergenerational benefits the idiots chose to piss the thick end of half a billion dollars up against the wall.

    /

    KiwiRail has written off $382 million in costs associated with the cancelled Interislander replacement project and provisioned a further $60m for winding it down, BusinessDesk reports.

    The $442m in costs, detailed in the 2024 half-year results released on Thursday, doesn’t include the cost of exiting the shipbuilding contract with South Korean shipyard Hyundai Mipo Dockyard, which was contracted to build two new ferries for $551m.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/kiwirail-slumps-to-407m-loss-on-interislander-write-offs/XJKXIBEISRAPRENQAPM5ANUNZY/

  10. weston 10
    1 March 2024 at 9:56 pm

    A bomb has just gone off in uk politics in the form of George Galloway winning the Rochdale by election , the first thing he said in his acceptance speech was " this is for Gaza " and he wont be mincing his words on the subject when he gets to parliament !!

    Good news !! Keir will be shitting himself .cant wait .