Open Mike 03/09/2017

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, September 3rd, 2017 - 233 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 …

233 comments on “Open Mike 03/09/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Xanthe 1
    3 September 2017 at 7:07 am

    Have a read of this.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brodifacoum#Toxicology

    Good to spread about for pest control?

    • Ad 1.1
      3 September 2017 at 7:27 am

      Definitely.
      Will always be necessary in the hard-to-reach ranges and mountains.
      Looking forward to Labour and Greens committing budget to pedt-free New Zealand in their next budget.

      • Xanthe 1.1.1
        3 September 2017 at 7:28 am

        You read the link? !

      • Keepcalmcarryon 1.1.2
        3 September 2017 at 8:42 am

        Um no ad
        Reflexively you have assumed aerial poison perhaps means 1080? Brodifacoum is a cumulative poison that concentrates up the food chain. brodifacoum has a role in local eradication but has a very high incidence of secondary poisoning limiting its safety.
        No poison is nice aerial poison is indiscriminate. mindless cheerleading is what the nats want for their battle of the birds, we need to be putting lots more money in the pot and using ground control much more.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1.2.1
          3 September 2017 at 8:51 am

          Do you dispute DOC’s statement that “The benefits of using brodifacoum to eradicate rats from offshore islands are now well documented in terms of species recovery.”?

          • Keepcalmcarryon 1.1.2.1.1
            3 September 2017 at 8:59 am

            Me? No. Has been used for local eradication under strict conditions.
            Not the toxin for “hard to reach places” without concurrent control.

    • AsleepWhileWalking 1.2
      3 September 2017 at 7:34 am

      Good Lord. No wonder holes are being drilled.

      It’s as bad as corexit.

    • Psycho Milt 1.3
      3 September 2017 at 7:40 am

      Good to spread about for pest control?

      A question that you’d need contributions from people with various types of expertise to be able to answer, something which a government dept like DoC is well placed to arrange. I take it from your question that DoC has arrived at the answer “Yes?”

      • One Anonymous Bloke 1.3.1
        3 September 2017 at 8:12 am

        DOC factsheet (pdf)

        [with some noted caveats] The benefits of using brodifacoum to eradicate rats from offshore islands are now well documented in terms of species recovery. In most cases, any short term losses of individuals of native species are offset by the longer term benefits of removing the rats.

      • xanthe 1.3.2
        3 September 2017 at 8:19 am

        psycho…. you have read the link? ??

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.3.2.1
          3 September 2017 at 8:21 am

          I read it, and your point is? That you know more than DOC because you have a Wikipedia article?

          What?

          • AsleepWhileWalking 1.3.2.1.1
            3 September 2017 at 8:35 am

            There are plenty of government agencies I disagree with : D

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.3.2.1.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 8:40 am

              Sure. So I’ll rock up to DOC and demand they stop using brodifacoum because Wikipedia and see how far that gets me.

          • xanthe 1.3.2.1.2
            3 September 2017 at 8:44 am

            Pyscho.. I want to know what you think based on the toxicology , not DOC’s assessment of “best bang for buck”. Do you perhaps think our opinion should be discounted?. Read the link and let us know if YOU think chucking this stuff out of a chopper is a good idea.

        • Robert Guyton 1.3.2.2
          3 September 2017 at 8:27 am

          If great care is taken not to drop huge loads of it into pristine lakes. Even when great care is taken, huge loads of it will be dropped into pristine lakes…

          • Robert Guyton 1.3.2.2.1
            3 September 2017 at 8:30 am

            ” About 700kg of bait being ferried by helicopter to Indian Island in Dusky Sound for a rat eradication programme was lost over Anchor Island.

            Anchor Island is pest free and home to the endangered kakapo, saddleback and mohua. As a precaution, two kakapo had been moved to Chalky Island.

            “A full review of the safety procedures and practices is under way to ensure such an incident does not occur again,” Conservation Minister Kate Wilkinson said yesterday.

            The 700kg of brodifacoum cereal bait pellets, about 15% of the total necessary for the operation, was being transported beneath a helicopter from Anchor Island, where they were stored, on Thursday when the load detached in flight.”

            • garibaldi 1.3.2.2.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 9:20 am

              Good grief, just what scale of disaster with this stuff is going to inevitably happen ? Thanks for that info RG.

            • Psycho Milt 1.3.2.2.1.2
              3 September 2017 at 9:34 am

              “A full review of the safety procedures and practices is under way to ensure such an incident does not occur again,”

              Maybe it could consider not storing huge quantities of pesticide on a pest-free island being used for restoring native wildlife? There’s a reason why the military doesn’t put ammo and fuel storage in the middle of a camp, perhaps DoC could learn something from that.

              • Robert Guyton …
                3 September 2017 at 9:37 am

                A truck carrying brodifacoum tipped into the sea near Kaikoura, emptying it’s load into the ocean.

                • Keepcalmcarryon …
                  3 September 2017 at 10:04 am

                  Yes the truck tipped over at the punch bowl. Anticoagulant was detectable in paua for months (for as long as they were checking im pretty sure), indefinite shellfish ban for that area at the time.
                  Some slightly more technical info here: http://www.issg.org/pdf/publications/Island_Invasives/pdfHQprint/3FisherP.pdf
                  With pest control it’s best to read the scientific data and sift the wheat from he chaff- even some of the studies are of dubious worth. DOC press releases are pure PR.
                  Bottom line is they are badly underfunded and politicized. If you are buying in to the cheap and nasty rotational aerial poisoning swaying and waving of hands in the air, you are selling us short.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    3 September 2017 at 10:09 am

                    keep calm, I don’t understand your final sentence. Agree re. DoC.

                    • Keepcalmcarryon …
                      3 September 2017 at 10:25 am

                      Sorry last bit not aimed at you RG, im saying don’t accept widespread aerial poison as a given, it’s the low cost low outcome option. Not a solution or even a decent stop gap.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 September 2017 at 10:35 am

                      keepcalm, I agree with you there. The rodent situation is, in my view, “unsolvable”, on the “mainland” at least, given the resilience of the animals, our relationship with them and other factors (climate change, economic projections, political changes etc.) The balance of the flora and fauna changed significantly sometime back and now we are in the “New Wild” phase, where conventional, ‘destroy that pest’ thinking is redundant and wasteful of resources. There is a place for protection of species, but it’s not the broad-scale, extermination-based thinking we are now “enjoying” in this country. That culture leads to collapse, imo. There is however, another way… 🙂

        • Robert Guyton 1.3.2.3
          3 September 2017 at 9:11 am

          xanthe – are you going to suggest an environmental issue that The Greens could champion, as you alluded recently? I’m very keen to know which single environmental issue you believe would have the appeal to get The Green Party into Government.

          • xanthe 1.3.2.3.1
            3 September 2017 at 9:26 am

            Robert: I am shocked that the Greens support aerial broadcast poisoning and that they do not challenge the lie that it is “eradication” when it clearly is ongoing control. I would not have a clue what the total number of votes the Greens shed over this but this is clearly an issue which is highly polarizing and Greens are continuing to hemorrhage (ironically) over this

            • Robert Guyton 1.3.2.3.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 9:29 am

              Do The Greens support aerial broadcast of brodifacoum?
              And do the other parties?

              • weka …
                3 September 2017 at 11:12 am

                Actual Green Party policy,

                “Support replacing poisons with humane and safe biological and physical animal pest controls wherever practical.”

                https://www.greens.org.nz/page/conservation-policy

                Long version,

                B. Use of Poisons in Animal Pest Control

                Currently animal pest control in Aotearoa New Zealand involves the extensive use of poisons in ground and aerial operations because they are generally cost e ective means of controlling animal pest species. Modern technology allows more precise distribution of aerial poison such as 1080 than in the past, and the amount of poison per hectare has been reduced while still maintaining e ectiveness.

                However, the use of poisons on a large scale, particularly near people’s homes, poses ecological risks and raises community concerns. The Green Party Environment policy aims to minimise the use of all persistent, environmentally damaging, or non- sustainably produced poisons, especially when using aerial distribution, and we strongly support research and promotion of other pest control methods. 1080 poison is widely used to control pest species as it degrades relatively rapidly and is not bio- accumulative. Nonetheless it is acutely toxic to a number of non-target animals including dogs and native wildlife, is considered inhumane by many, and there may be as yet undiscovered long-term toxicological e ects arising from its widespread use.

                The Green Party aspires to see indigenous biodiversity and farm animal health maintained and enhanced, and eradication and control of pest animals achieved with minimal use of poisons, and without the use of genetically modi ed organisms. We recognise that currently it is not feasible to stop all use of poisons for animal pest control without unacceptable adverse impacts on biodiversity and forest health. However, we believe that current and developing integrated ground control methods o er opportunities, and that increased research and development will extend alternatives to aerial 1080 over time that are both affordable and effective.

                The Green Party will:
                1. In general, and wherever practical, support replacing poisons with humane and safe biological and physical controls.

                2. Continue to support a ban on the release or eld trial of genetically engineered organisms into the environment (see our Agriculture and Rural A airs policy for further details).

                3. Promote, support and fund ground-based methods of pest control by a properly trained workforce in preference to aerial poisoning wherever they could reasonably achieve the desired conservation outcomes, especially in areas of lowland forest, around farms, near people’s homes (i.e. closer than 200 m) and near waterways that supply human and stock drinking water.

                4. Establish and fund comprehensive ground control training schemes for people willing and able to do this physically demanding work.

                5. Signi cantly increase funding for both research and implementation of innovative, safe and humane methods of ground based pest control.

                6. Where possible, eliminate the uncontrolled use of bio-accumulative and persistent poisons for animal pest control.

                7. Support greater involvement of local communities in maintaining and enhancing local biodiversity, and promote and fund a multi-agency approach to integrated animal pest control. Such an approach will include educating the community on biodiversity values, threats and pest control methods, and engaging the public in community-led ground based control programmes.

                8. Coordinate and fund agencies to develop pest control schemes in collaboration with industries harvesting pest animals (e.g. the fur and textiles industry), in areas where pest animal harvesting and conservation outcomes can both be achieved.

                9. Support poison-free integrated animal pest control in partnership with the local community, whānau, hapū and iwi. These areas will be regularly monitored to transparently assess the e ectiveness of control methods to ensure that desired biodiversity outcomes are being met and control methods improved.

                10.Investigate a strategy to progressively increase the proportion of ground control and progressively decrease the proportion of aerial control with the purpose of ensuring increased pest control coverage and e ectiveness, and increased use of alternatives to aerial poison. The strategy will be regularly reviewed to ensure conservation outcomes were clearly being improved.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  3 September 2017 at 11:21 am

                  Thanks, weka. I feel xanthe’s exploiting the opportunity for reasoned debate here on TS, choosing instead to rig the discussions for her own end, whatever that might be. Of course, xanthe’s as welcome to do that as anyone else, but should expect derision when it becomes apparent that he/she is not sincere. I recall your challenging her about a seeming anti-Green stance and I don’t think that was misplaced.

                  • xanthe …
                    3 September 2017 at 12:17 pm

                    Nope i did not raise the greens , you did robert.
                    As for their policy (thanks weka) i continue very much underwhelmed. but thats a side issue that i did not start here.

                    I certainly did not set about “exploiting the opportunity for reasoned debate here on TS, choosing instead to rig the discussions for her own end” thats just ad holmium bullshit (sorry robert) IMHO.

                    My purpose has been clear and consistent to prompt readers to understand the toxicology of brodifacoum and make their OWN view of it’s suitability for chucking out of a chopper.

                    • weka …
                      3 September 2017 at 12:39 pm

                      Putting up a link and asking for opinions and then when you get them, telling people to read the link is likely to just piss people off.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 September 2017 at 10:09 pm

                      Sneaky, xanthe. I mentioned The Greens regarding another issue altogether:
                      I think you are behaving subversively here and your comments “smell” wrong 🙂

            • weka 1.3.2.3.1.2
              3 September 2017 at 11:16 am

              you seem to be getting somewhat close to telling lies about GP policy. I’ve posted the GP policy above so people can make up their own minds, but please take care not to misrepresent their stance and what they intend.

          • Sanctuary 1.3.2.3.2
            3 September 2017 at 3:02 pm

            I agree that under current conditions predator free mainland NZ is a pipe dream. BUT.

            Back in 1988 the first big pest eradication was titled “The Battle for Breaksea island”. And indeed, if we want to be predator free we need to be on a war footing.

            So if you got every 18 year old in the land and conscripted them in a conservation army for 18 months and waged war on rats, mice, stoats, rabbits, ferrel cats and wild dogs, then it could be done. Campbell Island tells us we can clear an area of 120sq/km in a single go quite easily. With 60-80,000 “troops” who knows how much we could clear!

            With unlimited manpower to build fences, setup trap lines and generally fight the good fight, it could be done.

            And actually, I think it would be an amazing thing to bequeath to the future, a country over run with birdlife.

        • Psycho Milt 1.3.2.4
          3 September 2017 at 9:18 am

          psycho…. you have read the link? ??

          I have read the link. It says this stuff is highly toxic, which strikes me as something one would actually look for in a pesticide. Do you have some argument for why that wouldn’t be a desirable feature of a pesticide?

          • Robert Guyton 1.3.2.4.1
            3 September 2017 at 9:30 am

            Rodenticide/mammalicide

            • Psycho Milt 1.3.2.4.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 9:40 am

              Apologies for the careless terminology. What constitutes a pest is indeed in the eye of the beholder, and a matter of indifference to the toxic substance.

              • xanthe …
                3 September 2017 at 9:43 am

                “What constitutes a pest is indeed in the eye of the beholder, and a matter of indifference to the toxic substance”

                Eeeeeeeeekkkk !

                • Robert Guyton …
                  3 September 2017 at 9:48 am

                  xanthe – you seem over-wrought. Can you confirm for me that The Greens support aerial broadcast of brodifacoum, as you’ve implied at 9:26 am.

                  • xanthe …
                    3 September 2017 at 10:00 am

                    re-read my comment 9.26 thanks robert

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 September 2017 at 10:14 am

                      I have and can’t see the answer to my question. Perhaps you could just explain clearly. Also, you haven’t answered other direct questions I’ve put to you, and I’d appreciate that you do, for the sake of not appearing evasive – “hit and run” and “spray and walk away” are not admirable tags to acquire.

          • xanthe 1.3.2.4.2
            3 September 2017 at 9:33 am

            psycho .. “I have read the link. It says this stuff is highly toxic”

            I dont actually believe you have!… IMHO

            • Psycho Milt 1.3.2.4.2.1
              3 September 2017 at 9:37 am

              It is your opinion yes. And the thing about opinions is that they’re of value only to the person who holds them. What actually counts for something is what you can argue for. So far, I haven’t seen you make any argument whatsoever, hence my attempts to find out exactly what point you’re trying to make.

              • Robert Guyton …
                3 September 2017 at 9:49 am

                Me too.

              • xanthe …
                3 September 2017 at 10:10 am

                I am not trying to “make a point” I want to know what people think about “spreading about” brodifacoum having reviewed the toxicology.

                I actually feel that citizens should access neutral quality information
                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brodifacoum#Toxicology
                And have an opinion outside of supporting one faction or another. So far there has been very little (apart from Robert, thanks!) evidence of grappling with the toxicology. there seems to be a feeling that we should just trust DOC cause they know better.

                forget point scoring. What (having read the link) do you think about spreading brodifacoum about.

                • Psycho Milt …
                  3 September 2017 at 11:35 am

                  I think it would be very foolish to “spread brodifacoum about.” It’s highly toxic to mammals, cumulative in the animals that consume it (and that consume them) and slow to break down in the soil. However, it also sounds like it’s a very effective means of getting rid of mice, rats and possums from a defined area, so it’s unsurprising DoC would use it for that purpose. As long as they’re taking steps to avoid “spreading it about” beyond that defined area (which they are), I have no problem with it at all.

      • Keepcalmcarryon 1.3.3
        3 September 2017 at 8:51 am

        Pscho: brodifacoum is not a poison to “spread about” its use should be ( usually is) within fairly strict limits due to cumulative poisoning up the food chain.
        The pixie dust to sprinkle everywhere to salve your middle class conscience would be 1080.

        • Psycho Milt 1.3.3.1
          3 September 2017 at 9:26 am

          Yes. Hopefully an incoming Labour/Green govt will give a massive boost to 1080 coverage as part of the [introduced]-predator-free programme.

          • xanthe 1.3.3.1.1
            3 September 2017 at 9:30 am

            Hopefully the incoming Labour govt will toss the whole stinking mess of psudo-science and PR spin out and put our people to work on actually doing the job!

          • Keepcalmcarryon 1.3.3.1.2
            3 September 2017 at 9:34 am

            Be sure to let us know as soon as you have saved the birds psycho. In the meantime pats on the back alround and a good nights sleep.

            • Psycho Milt 1.3.3.1.2.1
              3 September 2017 at 9:56 am

              Sneer all you like. The country puts a lot of money and expertise into figuring out the best way of trying to keep native species from going extinct, and according to that assembled and often-reviewed expertise, this is it. You could argue the experts are wrong, in which case you’re likely to lose the argument, or you could argue that trying to preserve native species is pointless, in which case you’re likely to be in a small minority. Either way, yes I do enjoy a good night’s sleep thanks.

              • Keepcalmcarryon …
                3 September 2017 at 10:18 am

                So someone else’s argument is likely to be better than mine so I better watch out?
                Convincing corner you are arguing there.
                Declaring war on nebulous concepts is a way of making shallow thinkers feel good about themselves.
                Has the war on terror eradicated terrorism?

              • weka …
                3 September 2017 at 10:47 am

                “Sneer all you like. The country puts a lot of money and expertise into figuring out the best way of trying to keep native species from going extinct, and according to that assembled and often-reviewed expertise, this is it. You could argue the experts are wrong, in which case you’re likely to lose the argument, or you could argue that trying to preserve native species is pointless, in which case you’re likely to be in a small minority. Either way, yes I do enjoy a good night’s sleep thanks.”

                I think you will find that a big reason 1080, Brodifacoum etc are used in the way that they are is because of cost. There are other effective, less problematic methods that also get used (e.g. trapping) but cost more. It’s a misrepresentation of what is going on in NZ to claim that poison is the best, when neoliberal obsession with business models and cuts to DOC are also a factor.

                So it’s not so much that the experts are wrong, but that they have their own contexts to work in and their own belief systems about what should be done. Presenting that as ‘the experts are always right’ is sloppy debate.

                • Keepcalmcarryon …
                  3 September 2017 at 11:04 am

                  Absolutely agree weka

                • xanthe …
                  3 September 2017 at 11:26 am

                  agree weka

                  • gsays …
                    3 September 2017 at 1:07 pm

                    Great conversation xanthe, weka,PM, Robert g.
                    Weka hits the nail with the money context thing.
                    Doc and others are always in a financial context.

                    For me, poisoning by 1080 is a painful, prolonged and unnecessarily cruel way for any critter to die.

                    As for the good/bad, native/introduced, rodent/bird argument, I have watched a morepork devour a nest of fantail fledglings.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 September 2017 at 8:16 pm

                      ” I have watched a morepork devour a nest of fantail fledglings.”
                      …and you didn’t intervene?
                      🙂

                • Psycho Milt …
                  3 September 2017 at 11:30 am

                  There are other effective, less problematic methods that also get used (e.g. trapping) but cost more.

                  Those other methods tend not just to cost more, but also to have very poor scalability. I expect the next government will fund DoC better, and that may well allow more trapping and less use of poisons in some areas, but it will remain a minor part of the programme.

                  …‘the experts are always right’ is sloppy debate.

                  It would be, yes. The experts aren’t always right, eg we both disagree with the experts on certain matters of nutrition. In that case, people have made compelling arguments for how the experts have got it wrong. In this case, I’m not seeing any arguments for why we shouldn’t just assume the expertise DoC has called on has given it the best advice available.

                  • weka …
                    3 September 2017 at 12:12 pm

                    Scalability is just as easy with trapping as other methods, except for cost. If you know how to set up, run and maintain a trap line in one forested valley, you can pretty much do that in every similar landscape in NZ.

                    One argument about DOC (which I just made) is that they’re operating in a specific context and culture. The context is that they’re short on money. The culture is one that sees all non-natives as inherently bad.

                    The short on money thing is fixable, and there are plenty of pro-conservation people in NZ that would choose non-poison methods were that supported. Many already do and if you look closely you’ll find that all over the place there are people doing trap lines off their own bat. It beggars belief that DOC are so slow to work proactively with those groups. Some of that is cultural e.g. DOC see themselves as the owners of the conservation estate (am generalising here), and they take a kind of siloed approach.

                    It’s also blatantly obvious now that DOC are hugely compromised by government in terms of being a fundamentally conservation organisation hence their support for projects like the Ruataniwha Dam or the Queenstown/Milford tunnel. It’s demonstrable that DOC, as an organisation, have very distinct cultural frameworks, and it’s not solely about the science or evidence.

                    As for the non-native thing, here’s a good example. For decades DOC took the position that gorse and broom were evil and to be eradicated no matter what. Not that DOC are the only ones like that, councils are similar. Meanwhile, regenag people started working in different ways with landscapes including using gorse as a nursery crop to restore native forest. You can look at Hugh Wilson’s work on this at the Hinewai Reserve on the Banks Peninsula, but there are multiple examples now to the extent that DOC itself now offers this as advice on one way landscapes can be restored to native.

                    So we know that DOC have a very specific culture and world view around conservation that isn’t always supported by the evidence. Had DOC not had that world view they would have been doing experiments alongside the hippies 30 or 40 years ago and we’d be vastly ahead on reforestation than we are now. Even now, spray the fuck out of it is still the default in most places. That will change but it’s the attitudinal stuff that is getting in the way, not best practice or unbiased science.

                    • Psycho Milt …
                      3 September 2017 at 12:40 pm

                      Scalability is just as easy with trapping as other methods, except for cost.

                      That’s true of most things that are poorly scalable. It would be possible to do pest control in hundreds of thousands of hectares of poorly-accessible bush using people with traps, just like it’s possible to dig railway cuttings using people with shovels. But we don’t, because it would be a needlessly expensive way of doing them. Cost-effectiveness isn’t something invented by neo-liberals.

                    • weka …
                      3 September 2017 at 1:16 pm

                      that’s not the situation though. Sure we can use 1080 drops in select places that are hard to reach, but that’s not what’s happening. Instead we are now using 1080 on easy to access farmland and conservation estate.

                      The comparison with building roads with shovels is inaccurate because trap lines are effective, that’s why many people still use them. Lots of conservation estate could be managed using trap lines. It would also create jobs and give people who want it access to living in some pretty amazing places.

                      For instance, at the moment possums are controlled by 1080, other baits, and trapping. Of those only trapping gives usable fur (there’s some animal rights issues to be sorted there). Afaik currently trappers are plucking which means the carcasses get left in the bush providing an excellent food source for rats and stoats. Non-1080 baits do the same I think. Or councils and private land owners are paying teams to bait and/or trap to control numbers and again the bodies are being left in place. This is not that smart.

                      What we could be doing instead is setting up a fur, pelt and meat industry that also controls possum numbers, provides jobs, uses the resource instead of treating it like garbage, and get people into the bush. That’s much more of a sustainable process than what we are doing now.

                      Eradication of possums in NZ can’t be done by poison btw, nor the rest of the pest-free aims. It’s well known that the only way we will become pest-free is if multiple biological methods are developed across a number of species. Personally I think that’s science fiction and instead of basing policy and conservation on that, we should be doing best practice at control with the aim of preservation of local ecosystems. This means that you design for each catchment. What works in the Dunedin hills is going to be different than Milford Sound which is different than West Coast river valleys.

                      I’m not averse to 1080 in selected situations, because I know it works, but this wholesale and increasing use is ideologically driven. At best it can be argued that DOC are doing what they can under neoliberal govt, but it’s not even close to best practice.

                    • Keepcalmcarryon []
                      3 September 2017 at 1:54 pm

                      + heaps. I think that’s a very balanced viewpoint weka.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      3 September 2017 at 1:32 pm

                      The comparison with building roads with shovels is inaccurate because trap lines are effective, that’s why many people still use them. Lots of conservation estate could be managed using trap lines. It would also create jobs and give people who want it access to living in some pretty amazing places.

                      Trap lines work – they just cost a hell of a lot more as you point out in your last line.

                      Now, are they actually as effective as poison drops? I haven’t seen anything to indicate that they are.

                      What we could be doing instead is setting up a fur, pelt and meat industry that also controls possum numbers, provides jobs, uses the resource instead of treating it like garbage, and get people into the bush. That’s much more of a sustainable process than what we are doing now.

                      It’s only sustainable if you want to keep the possums and, well, we don’t. Of course, unless the research on making all of the possums sterile pans out, we’ll probably be keeping them.

                      And then there’s the health issue of using possum meat as food as it can be seriously unhealthy.

                      but this wholesale and increasing use is ideologically driven.

                      [citation needed]

                    • Psycho Milt …
                      3 September 2017 at 2:31 pm

                      Those are all good points and I don’t have any problem with the government putting up money to have more trapping in easily-accessible areas (if, the big if that Draco points out, it is actually more effective than poison drops – how useful is it for reducing rat populations, for instance?). That still leaves us with huge swathes of conservation land that’s not easily accessible but would require large numbers of people to manage via trapping. Use of 1080 in those areas has to be large-scale because the problem is large-scale and we don’t have credible alternatives.

                    • Ad …
                      3 September 2017 at 2:39 pm

                      The Waitakere Ranges Ark in the Park is a really large scale operation, using poisons. They don’t sound keen on the gas-fired traps as a replacement system until they see really good successful precedents. Helluva lot of fundraising effort otherwise.

                      Lots of different groups manage different lines – thousands of volunteers.

                      Result is lots of super-rare birds reintroduced. Many from Tiritiri.
                      Even the potential for Kiwi!

                      Right next door to the city with 1/3 of NZ’s population, and dead rats and possums by the tonne.

                    • weka …
                      3 September 2017 at 3:01 pm

                      “Trap lines work – they just cost a hell of a lot more as you point out in your last line.”

                      Depends on how you measure it, but I’m not saying that they cost a hell of a lot more. I think you would be surprised at the value of trapping cf to poison.

                      “Now, are they actually as effective as poison drops? I haven’t seen anything to indicate that they are.”

                      Again, it depends on what you are measuring. Yes, trapping can be very effective. So is napalm. Using hyperbole to make a point, which is that there are a range of issues here not just this number counting. So in any given catchment you need to look at a range of things that are disrupting ecosystems and causing species extinction. I think NZ has a serious problem with habitat destruction, and 1080 is a kind of sop to that, it says we’re not going to protect nature properly so we’ll do some ambulance at the bottom of the cliff stuff until the silver bullet arrives (biological).

                      “It’s only sustainable if you want to keep the possums and, well, we don’t. Of course, unless the research on making all of the possums sterile pans out, we’ll probably be keeping them.”

                      Yes, so let’s find long term solutions for control that aren’t coming from a slash and burn attitude.

                      “And then there’s the health issue of using possum meat as food as it can be seriously unhealthy.”

                      Unhealthy how? I was thinking petfood though.

                      “but this wholesale and increasing use is ideologically driven.

                      [citation needed]”

                      Not sure what you mean there. I just spent a number of comments outlining the attitudinal issues in conservation in NZ. They’re pretty well known. Am happy to talk about them if you want to debate the points.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      3 September 2017 at 4:29 pm

                      Depends on how you measure it, but I’m not saying that they cost a hell of a lot more. I think you would be surprised at the value of trapping cf to poison.

                      More jobs = costs more.

                      And need a citation as to the comparability between poison use and trapping.

                      Again, it depends on what you are measuring.

                      Deaths of pests per dollar spent.

                      I think NZ has a serious problem with habitat destruction, and 1080 is a kind of sop to that, it says we’re not going to protect nature properly so we’ll do some ambulance at the bottom of the cliff stuff until the silver bullet arrives (biological).

                      Possums would eat our forests dead within a very few short years without the 1080 drops.

                      Not sure what you mean there.

                      I mean that I want proof that it’s driven by ideology and what that ideology is. You made statements of your belief that it was all driven by costs.

                      Yes, costs are an issue because there’s only limited resources available but that doesn’t appear to be the ideology driving it.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 September 2017 at 8:26 pm

                      Let’s introduce a possum predator.

                • Macro …
                  3 September 2017 at 12:14 pm

                  Totally agree. Under National DOC has been run into the ground, and now needs to maintain its income BY LEASING OUT CONSERVATION LAND FOR MINING*
                  sorry for shouting so loudly – but NZ needs to wake up to the this ecological vandalism. Vandalism that is being perpetuated by a barbaric government, supervised by the “watchful” eye of a compliant department, that is supposed to be acting to protect our forests and native fauna; not destroy it.
                  Here is an ex-DOC worker being arrested for trying to protect the land she had worked to conserve for 15 years.
                  https://twitter.com/hashtag/protectkarangahake?src=hash

                  * see the link to the Application Guide for permits to mine on conservation land issued by DOC.

    • Barfly 1.4
      3 September 2017 at 2:47 pm

      About 40 years ago I was a possum trapper – the devastation that I saw Possums cause to native bush was absolutely staggering – unless there is absolutely convincing evidence that 1080 is very very bad I don’t see an alternative .

    • eco Maori/kiwi 1.5
      3 September 2017 at 5:21 pm

      My view on 1080 is that some people were told that Radiated tooth paste and skin care products were good for ones health in the 1950 s until peoples teeth started falling out and they were dying of cancer its a poison there are many examples like this in our past .
      Its is not wise to try to eradicate something it is better to control it them.
      A tax free bounty on these pest would provide income for the youth and the poor we would be killing 2 birds with one stone as the saying goes.
      All the remote areas we put hired workers in there still 2 birds with one stone.
      The helicopter companys will still get there income flying these workers in to the remote areas. But the big powerful chemical company’s will lose out ie foreign interest whom only care about there profits. I refrained from swearing in this post

  3. lprent 3
    3 September 2017 at 8:09 am

    I have succumbed to Jane Kelsey’d blandishments again* and put up what is arguably an unpaid election advertisement (see the It’s Our Future logo on the right) on the party positions about the TPPA.

    So I have also activated the authorisation statement at the bottom of the site that directs all enquiries related to electoral law to me.

    I will of course treat all such enquiries with a balance between discretion and transparency, and between action and education. Which means that if I think that something oversteps the bounds you only have to point it out and it will be handled rapidly.

    But if I think that someone is just taking the piss then I am quite likely to educate on the principle in public and at a personal level, but subject to those irritating privacy restraints that someone fettered me with.

    * How does Jane do that? Probably because she asks and provides the two things required – a decent image and a link to something worth reading..

  4. The Chairman 4
    3 September 2017 at 8:09 am

    Invercargill Mayor Tim Shadbolt challenges Jacinda

    “Obviously, unlike other institutions, we won’t require support for Zero Fees, as we’ve already achieved that objective. This letter is a request to Central Government to support our extensive construction program so that we can offer students free accommodation. That will help us maintain our student numbers and take a little pressure off the housing crisis in our larger cities.” 

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/96396553

    • Robert Guyton 4.1
      3 September 2017 at 8:15 am

      He’s getting his polite request in because he’s confident Jacinda’s Labour will win.

    • Ad 4.2
      3 September 2017 at 8:18 am

      If Shadbolt’s polytech’s only competitive advantage is price, then it will rightly lose out on quality and effectiveness.

      Shadbolt is barking up the wrong tree.

      • The Chairman 4.2.1
        3 September 2017 at 8:34 am

        I don’t know if it’s their only competitive advantage, but it’s definitely been a vital marketing tool.

        Why destroy, allowing them to “rightly lose out” as you put it, when we can work with to improve?

        • Ad 4.2.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 2:52 pm

          Agree. But the onus is on them. The Polytech market is rightly competitive, and should be on the quality of the graduates.

          • KJT 4.2.1.1.1
            3 September 2017 at 4:21 pm

            Competition. For “bums on seats” has degraded NZ Tertiary education almost beyound salvation.

            An aim for excellence in all educational institutions, has changed to who can fool the most students, into enrolling.

            Not to mention the waste of money going to “Managers” who add nothing but bureaucracy and cost.

    • Muttonbird 4.3
      3 September 2017 at 8:31 am

      They’ll be getting support for zero fees which frees up the $7.5m the community has raised previously for use in their free accomodation policy.

      SIT and Invergargill still has a point of difference and an even greater range of people get to study.

      • The Chairman 4.3.1
        3 September 2017 at 8:48 am

        It seems they require more as he is seeking more.

        And free accommodation along with free study is a good incentive to move people south and out of Auckland. Therefore, it could be worth paying that little more?

  5. Robert Guyton 5
    3 September 2017 at 8:21 am

    Was the no-nonsense, Action Woman hairstyle worn by Jacinda on Debate night a message to viewers: “this ponytail’s not for pulling”?

    • The decrypter 5.1
      3 September 2017 at 8:49 am

      Streamline effect to enable the Jacindaroller to roll even faster and miss nothing in its path. Even her body guard is described as Hipster.-shaven head. Built for speed and– ,I could -and can go on-

    • Craig H 5.2
      3 September 2017 at 9:58 am

      I think it was her sending a message that serious Jacinda is PM Jacinda.

    • Incognito 5.3
      3 September 2017 at 12:17 pm

      You didn’t expect pigtails, did you?

  6. Cinny 6
    3 September 2017 at 9:05 am

    Watching Q+A two debates this morning, Education – nicky kaye and Chris Hipkins. Then Health, coleman and Clark.

    Wonder how many times coleman says 50,000 operations today.

    • Ffloyd 6.1
      3 September 2017 at 10:27 am

      If Coleman was in the Mafia his gang name would be ‘Numbers’. As soom as he opens his mouth I just stop listening. Too many numbers all at once sends me into numerical overdrive. Do his numbers ever actually stack up or does he just pluck them out of the bubble floating ar’ Q/A ably mediated by Corrin, lol!, when he said after “the break we will be back with Michelle and Josie” So I didn’t see what happened at the end of that particular debacle. I have to remove all sharp objects within reach whenever I even catch a glimpse of our prehistoric Boag.

      • AB 6.1.1
        3 September 2017 at 11:47 am

        Same – had to turn off once I saw Boag and heard the shrill ranting of threatened privilege

        • DSpare 6.1.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 1:05 pm

          https://www.tvnz.co.nz/shows/q-and-a

          Coleman seemed to do better than yesterday – his voice not so croaky and a bit more comfortable anyway. [At 6:06] “I get dozens of letters from people who are uh absolutely pleased with the care they are getting”, is less impressive than Coleman seems to think it is; given the thousands who attempt to access that health system every year. His main goal seems to be to interject; “that’s not true” into any statement that Clark makes.

  7. AsleepWhileWalking 7
    3 September 2017 at 9:05 am

    An 11yo gave his much to a home less guy (get tissues ready. .people are so good.. sniff…)

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11916024

  8. Pete 8
    3 September 2017 at 9:31 am

    David Seymour thinks people are poorly paid because of unions.

    • Incognito 8.1
      3 September 2017 at 12:19 pm

      No, he doesn’t think that as he knows better; he wants other people to think that. Big difference!

    • Craig H 8.2
      3 September 2017 at 1:08 pm

      He’s absolutely right – people aren’t paid enough because union membership isn’t high enough.

      That’s what he meant, right?

  9. alwyn 9
    3 September 2017 at 9:31 am

    There is one policy that most parties seem to favour, albeit with different time frames.
    It is, in my opinion, the worst idea that any of them has. It is also the one policy that should be dropped by everybody. There would be no better way to waste billions on something that is obsolete before it has even started than light rail.
    Read this and then vote for any party that will refuse to put 19th century technology into a 21st century world. Light rail is an antiquated and pointless idea.
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/96306106/pattrick-smellie-are-we-planning-for-a-transport-future-that-wont-exist

    • Pete 9.1
      3 September 2017 at 9:54 am

      We need more roads in the middle of Auckland and we need more carparks in the middle of Auckland and we need more carparks at the bus stations on the outskirts of Auckland so people can park their cars and ride on buses to the centre of Auckland. And we need more high rise apartment blocks in the middle of Auckland.

      And when that’s all done there will be no point in getting in cars to come to the middle of Auckland because the only thing there will be roads, carparking buildings and apartment blocks.

      • alwyn 9.1.1
        3 September 2017 at 2:10 pm

        I don’t think you have thought through what autonomous vehicles really mean.
        People, at least those living in a city won’t need to own a private vehicle. You will simply summon an autonomous vehicle when you want to go somewhere.
        That vehicle will take you from wherever you are to wherever you want to go.
        At the moment people take their private vehicle from their home to a parking area. It then stays there, unused, until they need it again. I have seen claims that the average private car sits idle for 96% of the time.
        There will be no need for large parking areas at bus stations. In fact there won’t be any bus stations.
        Neither will there need to be carparks in the centre of Auckland for people at work. After all, they won’t have taken their own car to work. They will have taken an anonymous AV which is available for someone else to use as soon as they exit it.
        There will still need to be some parking space. This will be for AVs which are waiting for a call and/or recharging their batteries. The space required will be only a tiny fraction of the space currently consumed by private vehicles which must all be parked in such a manner that a particular vehicle can be retrieved rather than the one that is nearest the outside.
        At the moment I would guess, and it is only a guess on my part, that for each parking place in a car park for a vehicle that is 2m * 4.5m you need, allowing space for the vehicle, and space on each side of it for people to get in and out and the lanes used by vehicles to get around the parking area not the 9m2 the car requires but probably about 30-35m2.
        Why bother driving yourself? Why bother having to park the thing? Why bother having to maintain it? Call a car when you want one.

        • Ad 9.1.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 2:44 pm

          We’ve been hearing of autonomous vehicles for a decade.

          We’ve been waiting for electric vehicles for 20 years plus.

          I’m still waiting for my jetpack.

          • alwyn 9.1.1.1.1
            3 September 2017 at 3:06 pm

            Can I help it if you dream you are Buck Rogers and want a jetpack?
            I’ll bet you were one of those people who said the smart phone would never catch on.
            In the meantime electric cars are now here. The battery technology is now making them at a similar price to internal combustion vehicles.

            As for how autonomous cards are going have a look at this story
            https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/17/self-driving-cars-california-regulation-google-uber-tesla

            I don’t think it will be Google who actually produces the vehicles when they become common. Have you noticed, perchance, the previous position of the man who has just taken over as CEO of Ford?
            https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/22/ford-sack-ceo-senior-bosses-push-build-self-driving-cars
            He was previously the head of the autonomous car unit.

            • Ad 9.1.1.1.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 4:27 pm

              Light rail works now, for hundreds of millions of trips.
              And the poorest can afford it.

              And light rail is often already fully autonomous.

              You might get a little autonomous intercity freight, maybe even Uber for drunks.

              Otherwise, I’ll get one when you get one.

              • alwyn …
                3 September 2017 at 6:17 pm

                To give a brief answer to your comment.
                Works now.
                Sure it does, and if you already have sunk all the investment in it you will probably keep it going. It is getting a new system, at a cost of billions when the technology is obsolete that is foolish.
                Poorest affording it.
                Yes, but there are enormous subsidies to hold the fares down, and the system is heavily subsidised by the people who drive on the roads. I often visit Paris, and I travel on the Metro. It is cheap and frequent. However the subsidies are enormous and I believe that the subsidies are more than 4 billion euros/year.
                I see no reason why AVs need cost anymore than the unsubsidised cost of a bus or light rail fare.
                I’ll get one.
                But I don’t want to get one. I shall be only too happy to get rid of my privately owned cars. I don’t want to own one. I just want to get convenient, comfortable transport when I need it. AVs and a smart phone will be all I will need.

            • KJT 9.1.1.1.1.2
              3 September 2017 at 4:39 pm

              Alwyn. You are out of date.

              Those autonomous vehicles will be joining together on light rail for longer trips. As that is the most efficient way to get them from A to B. Except for the last mile. A motorway, even for AV’s, is a costly waste of space.

              http://81.47.175.201/livingrail/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=686:addressing-the-last-mile-combined-rail-and-car-sharing-tickets&catid=30:rail-oriented-policies&Itemid=104

              Already being done. In the form of electric road vehicles that attach to a light rail train at a station.

              Not to mention rail and bicycle, and probably electric golf cart type vehicles like Copenhagen.
              http://www.copenhagenize.com/2014/06/bike-train-bike-connecting-bicycles-and.html

              The days of a private car are numbered. It wont be long before the only ICE cars are hired, to go on holiday.

              • Muttonbird …
                3 September 2017 at 6:21 pm

                I can’t see how he thinks people are going to want to car pool en masse every single day to work and not want larger, safer, cheaper, more regular, more efficient, and smoother forms of rapid public transport.

                • alwyn …
                  3 September 2017 at 9:02 pm

                  “larger, safer, cheaper, more regular, more efficient, and smoother forms of rapid public transport”
                  They will be larger.
                  There is no reason at all that they would be safer.
                  There is equally no reason why they should be cheaper.
                  AVs don’t have a schedule, regular or otherwise. They will travel exactly when you want them, not when some bureaucrat says they should run.
                  They will not be more efficient. A small vehicle carrying one person is better than a very large one carrying 5.
                  The will not be smoother. My car is certainly a smoother ride than one of the Wellington units.
                  They will not be faster. An AV will go from where I am to where I want to go. They won’t ramble around picking up all and sundry along the way.
                  My God!. You talk like a Green MP.

              • alwyn …
                3 September 2017 at 6:37 pm

                From a scan of these articles I would suggest that you are talking about a totally different technology than I am.
                These vehicles they are talking about are basically rental cars such as we have today. They require the hirer to drive them. I am talking about AVs that drive themselves.
                There is absolutely no need to connect them up into a train. I want to go from point A to point B now, not when a group of people want to travel the same route.
                You should also bear in mind that AVs will be able to travel much closer together than current cars with a driver. They will not have to follow the 2 second rule as the technology will enable them to communicate with other vehicles in their vicinity.

                You are out of date.
                No I’m afraid it is the technology listed by you that is out of date. It still expects that the cars concerned will have human drivers around a town.

                “days of a private car”.
                Of course they are. That is what I want to see. I don’t want to own a car. I just want a cheap option that will carry me where I want to get when I want to go there. That is what the AV will provide.

                “only ICE cars are “. I don’t think there will be any ICE cars in 20 years time. There won’t need to be any private ones either.
                And the roads will be much, much safer.

    • Muttonbird 9.2
      3 September 2017 at 10:55 am

      There’d have to be enough driverless cars to cope with the peak times because there’ll be no PT in your world.

      Then they sit around unused for most of the day which is hardly a model of efficiency.

      • alwyn 9.2.1
        3 September 2017 at 2:22 pm

        Autonomous vehicles will be the public transport. Much more convenient and likely to be much cheaper as well.
        What do you think happens to most of the buses outside of the peak hours? The either sit around unused or they carry half a dozen people in a vehicle built for 40. AVs certainly won’t be any less efficient will they?

        AVs should be able to carry, individually, more people on a trip at peak time than at less busy times. If more people want to travel they could stop and pick up another passenger along their route. The way they are called would let the system know where every vehicle is and where it is going.
        The customer could be allowed the option of sharing if they want to. Give them a cheaper fare if they are willing to share the AV.
        AVs will be much cheaper than a taxi. They don’t need a very expensive driver do they?
        Private cars are very little used. As I noted just above a standing time of 96% has been reported. They are very inefficient and one of the reasons why people will be willing to give up their private car.

        • Ad 9.2.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 2:46 pm

          This works where? Rainbowponyland?

          Check out Melbourne. Gold Coast. Munich.

        • DSpare 9.2.1.2
          3 September 2017 at 2:48 pm

          alwyn
          “Private cars are very little used”? Except, of course, for those reduced to living out of their vehicle – the current housing crisis would be much worse if that wasn’t an option. Also, even standing still; they do act as additional storage space for those with small homes (especially for families – do you know how much room a pram takes up even when it’s folded away?).

          • alwyn 9.2.1.2.1
            3 September 2017 at 3:11 pm

            Quite what this has to do with the topic I am talking about is unclear.
            On the other hand anyone who has a garage will have a lot of extra space to use.
            I’m sure you will get rid of your car, convert the garage and offer it free to someone living in their car. There, everyone will be better off.

            • gsays 9.2.1.2.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 8:20 pm

              Be honest now, how many people have a car in their garage.
              Most folk I know use a garage for storage.

              • alwyn …
                3 September 2017 at 9:06 pm

                You are, unfortunately, probably correct.
                The curse of too many possessions. I regret to say that I am as guilty as most people.
                Your comment gets the prize for the most realistic comment.

  10. The Chairman 10
    3 September 2017 at 10:07 am

    Better together?
    Metiria Turei seeks new mandate to stay as MP
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/338474/greens-turei-i-want-to-be-back-with-a-mandate

    • alwyn 10.1
      3 September 2017 at 2:39 pm

      Her chances look awfully slim.
      The only electorate poll I have seen, by Maori TV, had her in third place, just behind the Maori Party candidate and at only about a third of the vote for the sitting Labour MP.
      I think her theme song might as well be. “So long, its been good to know you but I’ve got to be drifting along.”

  11. The Chairman 11
    3 September 2017 at 10:20 am

    Turei will not be silenced on poverty
    https://youtu.be/1EtflV5nIhs?t=17m15s

  12. Muttonbird 12
    3 September 2017 at 10:36 am

    Duplicity-Allen parrots her husband and gets it wrong again in this moronic summing up of the week.

    When National promised 22 weeks paid parental leave, Labour upped the offer to 26 weeks.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11915339

    Where was she last year when Sue Moroney was working on her 26 week paid parental leave bill which English vetoed because there was too much support for it. Oh, I remember, she was too busy illegally buying guns online and getting fired from her job…

    • red-blooded 13.1
      3 September 2017 at 11:39 am

      Note the comment seems to have been that the first priority would be to clean up waterways and that it would only be if there was money left over that the local council could use it for other things.

      • bwaghorn 13.1.1
        3 September 2017 at 3:10 pm

        if the water is cleaned up i would expect the water tax to be stopped in that area. if it really is about water which i now doubt .

        • alwyn 13.1.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 6:40 pm

          You have given me the best laugh I have had all day.
          You expect a local Government organisation to give up a source of income just because the excuse given for imposing a tax has vanished?

    • joe90 13.2
      3 September 2017 at 1:09 pm

      So rate payers should continue coughing up to fix roads jiggered by heavy traffic servicing the farming sector?.

      • bwaghorn 13.2.1
        3 September 2017 at 3:08 pm

        so labour has just been playing wedge politics on water and are lying shits. trucks par ruc s for the road use if its not enough raise that don’t fucking lie to sneak a tax in

        • joe90 13.2.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 3:30 pm

          trucks par ruc s for the road use

          Which would be all well and good, if local councils received some of that money for road maintenance. But they don’t and here in the Whanganui district a $2 million a year black hole in the rural road maintenance budget is directly attributed to the increasing numbers of heavy vehicles servicing the rural sector.

          • bwaghorn 13.2.1.1.1
            3 September 2017 at 3:37 pm

            that’s the governments fault not farmers , the rucs paid in our area must be subsidising city folk if its not being spent locally.

            • joe90 13.2.1.1.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 3:43 pm

              The RUC finances state highways and ratepayers cough for local roads but hey, externalising costs is in the rural DNA.

              • KJT …
                3 September 2017 at 4:43 pm

                RUC’s don’t even cover trucks use of State highways.
                They are subsidised by private motorists. Which is why rail and sea struggle to compete.

                Let alone paying for rural and urban roads, which are covered by ratepayers.

                “User pays” is only for some, it seems.

    • mac1 13.3
      3 September 2017 at 4:21 pm

      According to the Timaru Herald article, when contacted on Friday, Parker, the Labour spokesperson on water, said revenue would primarily need to be distributed to regional councils to clean up waterways.

      However, money left over could be given to local councils, which would “decide what to do with it”, he said.

      “He was happy to discuss possibilities for leftover revenue after the election, he said.

      This was immediately misconstrued.

      Following the revelation at the meeting, visibly surprised National candidate Andrew Falloon said it was the first time he’d heard a Labour politician say “the money might not be spent on cleaning up waterways”.

      “Because it’s sort of the entire point of it, I thought.”

      Whether Falloon was “visibly surprised”, or aurally challenged, or cognitively so, up to the reader. We couldn’t believe he deliberately misinterpreted Labour’s Parker, could we?

    • Foreign Waka 13.4
      3 September 2017 at 7:48 pm

      bwaghorn – Beware of news and articles in papers, too many vested interests.
      But I gather you are a farmer, for them Labor is not an option anyway as social policies will never sit well with farmers. For them the world stops at the gate and to hell with everybody else. As long as the dosh is good who cares about the rest.

      • bwaghorn 13.4.1
        4 September 2017 at 11:29 am

        yeah just like all unemployed are lazy good for nothings who smoke and drink all their money a?

  14. Muttonbird 14
    3 September 2017 at 11:15 am

    Pretty weak tinkering here from Labour. They’re going to have to do a lot better than this in order to convince me they’re committed to stable communities where people don’t live in fear of a letter from the landlord. For Labour to not move on the default lease term (afaik currently there isn’t one at all!) is very disappointing.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96440380/labour-strengthens-renters-rights-with-limits-on-rent-rises-90-day-notices

    The Greens are much better on this and Opportunities quite bold and strong in recognising the current problem.

    Set a default of three years for fixed-term tenancies on the standard tenancy form, while maintaining the provision for both parties to opt out and set the term of their choice

    https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/fairer-society/residential-tenancies-safe-and-secure-rentals-amendment-bill

    I could party vote Green on this policy alone…

    • red-blooded 14.1
      3 September 2017 at 12:46 pm

      So actually, Labour and the Greens agree on dumping the 42 days notice option, abolishing leasing fees, limiting rent increases to a maximum of one per year, and requiring the formula for any increases to be specified in the lease agreement. The “default” position of a 3 year fixed term tenancy seems pretty meaningless if there’s a provision for both parties to opt out and set their own term. And allowing tenants the right to renewal of lease agreements sounds good, but again doesn’t offer any more protection than Labour, because both parties are saying there should be a minimum 90 days notice period if a lease agreement is being terminated. Labour specifies that there has to be a genuine reason (which is not required in law at present) and it also gives an avenue for leasers to make small alterations to a property, so long as its returned to the original state when they leave and has a healthy homes policy to support landlords providing insulation and heating.

      • Muttonbird 14.1.1
        3 September 2017 at 1:15 pm

        The three year default would be a significant change which would help reset the behaviour of landlords from one of amateur speculator to professional service provider.

        When a tenant with a family goes to an agent now all they get put in from of them is a shitty one year lease at best and sometimes not even that, just a casual agreement. And that’s it, if they ask for a longer lease they immediately be seen to be trouble for the landlord who wants all the flexibility. In a tight market people are forced to take these because you might not get another place close to you child’s school etc and the competition is high you having to have battled just to get that short lease put in front of you.

        How is a family supposed to make planning decisions around jobs, schools, and their own savings plan toward more security in home ownership on one year revolving leases?

        If a lease length was default at 3 years it would become accepted behaviour creating more stability in high rental communities and the onus would be on the landlord to have to move away from that length.

        • red-blooded 14.1.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 6:39 pm

          Except if a default 3 year lease is:
          a) only “default” if the parties don’t agree to another lease term (ie, if the landlord chooses to offer a 3 year term), and
          b) even then, not guaranteed because of the right to 90 days’ notice with a specified reason,
          then I don’t see that it actually means much.

          • Muttonbird 14.1.1.1.1
            3 September 2017 at 6:52 pm

            a) The point is that currently there’s no official default and if there is an unofficial one it’s either casual or one year. This is not acceptable to families who require much more certainty. What the ‘landlord’ offers right now isn’t enough and negotiations to get a longer lease and more certainty for your kids is met with silence. A 3 year default would then give the tenant with a family that certainty from the start of the discussion which the landlord would then have to negotiate down from in order to keep the flexibility they so crave at the expense of young families and community security.

            b) If a landlord wants to break a lease with 90 days notice then they’ll have to pay the tenant out of that lease which would be a lot longer than it is currently.

            It’s a really, really, really big deal for tenants with young families to have to shift in this environment and there are an increasing number of tenants and communities which require more stability than is currently the case.

      • Kay 14.1.2
        3 September 2017 at 1:37 pm

        Right now I would kill for a 3 year fixed term tenancy. At least that would mean living only in a constant state of mild anxiety vs severe anxiety over if I’m going to be homeless come January.

        And from reading the (almost predictable) comments from landlords in the Stuff article- having no clue about being a landlord, can someone please explain to me how Labours/Greens proposed tenancy laws could possibly necessitate a major sell of private rentals and/or major increase in rents? The usual scaremongering or what? Are property managers panicking over the plan to ban letting fees perhaps?

        • Muttonbird 14.1.2.1
          3 September 2017 at 6:57 pm

          Exactly Kay. With a fixed three year term you can begin to plan for your future without worrying that your immediate future might involve costly and stressful house hunting scenarios.

          This would help tens of thousands of families and single people plan forward rather than worrying about the present.

      • David Mac 14.1.3
        3 September 2017 at 8:07 pm

        Most tenants are given 90 days notice to depart, it is the law. The only time 42 days notice can be applied is if the owner or their direct family are moving into the property or if the property has sold and the purchaser requires vacant possession. Most tenants that need to move because the property has sold receive way more than 42 days notice simply because the change of owner/sales procedure takes longer than that.

        The current tenancy duration term is as long as both parties agree to, 10 years if they wish. Landlords steer clear of fixed term agreements and tend towards periodical agreements (casual) because regardless of circumstances a landlord is legally stuck with the duration of the term, 1, 5 or 10 years if both parties agreed. The tenant is not, after 6 months into a 10 year term they need only claim they can’t afford it or they’ve had a job offer down country and there is not an adjudicator in the country that won’t break the lease for them.

        In most Real estate agencies the property management division is close to a break even dept. A nuisance in boom sales times and keep the doors open godsends when nothing is selling. The average of about 8% on the rent income is usually split around 50/50 between the property manager and the agency. To make the job viable in regional areas (average rent 275 pw) a manager needs to look after about 80+ properties. It’s at about that level that 40 hours a week won’t equate to the manager doing a good job for the tenant or owners. I think it’s a broken model and personally support across the board licensed private property managers that don’t share the revenue 50/50.

        It is for this reason that we have seen the rise of letting fees and more frequent property inspections. Sideline income generators for revenue strapped Property Management departments.

        I think annual rent rises rather than the current potential for 6 monthly will just double the ask for those that currently do it 6 monthly….. I think very few landlords jack rents up every 6 months. Who gets a rent rise letter every 6 months? I don’t know of anyone.

        The Tenancy Tribunal is a forum for both landlords and tenants to have their case heard. It could be easily argued that adjudicator delivered orders favour the tenants’ argument. eg:
        Tenant: “I’d like to end this fixed term tenancy”
        Adjudicator: “No worries, give 21 days notice.”
        Landlord: “I’d like to end this fixed term tenancy”
        Adjudicator: “No way buddy.”
        That said, while considering this landlord/tenant situation I think it’s worth bearing in mind that 95% of hearings are instigated by landlords and 5% by tenants. The huge majority of hearings are due to unpaid rent and damaged properties.

    • Graeme 14.2
      3 September 2017 at 3:43 pm

      What all three parties seem to be looking at is replicating the commercial lease structure, ie the ADLS lease structure which is the NZ default commercial lease, into the residential context.

      This structure gives tenants and landlords a lot of certainty and generally keeps commercial rent returns (so either lower rental or capital value) below residential. Hence the wide boys tend to gravitate to residential ownership, or the higher risk side of commercial. Getting commercial discipline into the residential market and giving the cowboys the flick, is a very good idea.

      The ADLS model is good for commercial, but would need some major changes to make it work in residential. For instance it’s really difficult for a tenant to get out of a lease in term, it’s the tenant’s responsibility to find another tenant suitable to the landlord, can be difficult and expensive. It’s also quite hard for a landlord to get rid of a tenant. This works ok in commercial because everyone wants stability.

      While residential tenants want the same stability, sometimes tenants will want to be able to get out of a lease pretty quickly when personal circumstances change, like with jobs or relationships. The ADLS model will require some very careful adjustment to maintain a workable balance of aspirations, rights and responsibilities between landlord and tenant.

      When I look at the residential rental environment around Queenstown, with it’s sudden economic and social changes, I can see real pros and cons of longterm residential leases.

      • Sabine 14.2.1
        3 September 2017 at 9:02 pm

        The ADLS model is good for commercial, but would need some major changes to make it work in residential. For instance it’s really difficult for a tenant to get out of a lease in term, it’s the tenant’s responsibility to find another tenant suitable to the landlord, can be difficult and expensive. It’s also quite hard for a landlord to get rid of a tenant. This works ok in commercial because everyone wants stability.

        this is standard procedure in Germany where a standard notice period is usually 3 month at a minimum. I have on several occasions found tenants for a flat i was leaving early usually for reasons of work. You can organise this in a way of x amount of potential future tenants presented and the Landlord needs to accept one of these. Essentially, don’t be an unreasonable fuckwit. IF i present you with three potential tenants that are good, in work, can pay the bond, accept one. Full stop.
        As for landlords in commercial properties giving you a hard time, don’t ever get an Indian landlord. No phone, no email, realtor not happy to be contacted, lease runs out, can’t get a new lease, landlords lawyer suddenly not his lawyer anymore, accountant suddenly not his accountant anymore and landlord is in India, till when? oh who knows. Then suddenly during the busiest time in your year landlord waltzes in, shoves 10.000$+ invoices in your hand of ‘stuff i have forgotten to invoice you over the last two years – all of these invoices on paper, handwritten, no GST number nothing”, btw he did that to all the businesses, and if you don’t want to pay that you move. what you do? go tot he tenancy tribunal? Btw, that busy little fringe, now its dead, cause we and some of the others ‘moved’.

        So, here we are currently looking at new premises as i really hate to be blackmailed. I pay my dues and that is that. Would i rent a premise that is also listed for sale? No.

        NZ needs to pull its head out of the sand and understand that its crap laws in regards to tenancy – residential and commercial – are costing it money. Its losing businesses, its stopping businesses from forming, and its just bullshit.

        as much as i like this country, renting anything is literally just torture and a waste of money, its effectively cheaper to stay at home and do fuck all. And for some reason or another the country is ok with it. Go figure.

  15. Draco T Bastard 15
    3 September 2017 at 11:27 am

    Three radical ideas to transform the post-crisis economy

    A latter-day Roosevelt must, like the original, look at monetary reform. Now as then, the problem is how to avoid too much liquidity in the boom and too little in the bust. But this may be impossible so long as money creation — and destruction — remains in the hands of private, profitmaking banks. Only a tiny fraction of the money supply consists of physical cash minted by central banks. The bulk is bank deposits, claims on private financial institutions created when those institutions issue loans.

    So in exuberant times, the money supply expands too fast, causing resource misallocation and impossible expectations about future incomes. When the mood changes, banks create too little money to keep activity buoyant, credit issued in the boom goes bad, and debt deflation sets in.

    So even the Financial Times is starting to question our banking system and how it works – or, rather, doesn’t.

  16. red-blooded 16
    3 September 2017 at 11:43 am

    Michelle Boag was certainly very jittery on Q+A this morning. She kept (ridiculously) trying to equate Labour with Trump(!) and must have said “haven’t done their homework” a dozen times. The last time she said this on the show was when she so obviously hadn’t done her homework and tried to insist that Labour’s water policy would lead to cabbages costing $18.

    Nice to see Ms Smug and Dismissive looking so rattled.

    • Ed 16.1
      3 September 2017 at 11:57 am

      It’s an own goal by the Nats every time they invite her on.

    • ianmac 16.2
      3 September 2017 at 2:02 pm

      Boag is not a very attractive woman to be attempt a glowing English supporter. Not attractive in speech or delivery. Reckon she would be a shoe-in fox Wicked Witch of the West in Wizard of OZ. She knows she is on a lost cause.

      • DSpare 16.2.1
        3 September 2017 at 2:37 pm

        I saw that it was Boag and Pagani and just couldn’t be bothered watching that video; Right and Righter. She really compared Ardern to Trump? Wow. If we’re doing Trump comparisons, then Key is a much better fit; disregard for truth, excessive wealth (though Trump’s was largely inherited), hair fixation, strangely charasmatic (to many), sociopathic tendencies, non-political politicians. Both with a penchant for dismissing employees; “You’re Fired” vs “The Smiling Assassin”.

        The debate segments themselves were good, though the online version glitches a bit around the adbreaks, but I doubt I missed much.

        https://www.tvnz.co.nz/shows/q-and-a

        • red-blooded 16.2.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 6:43 pm

          She was careful not to name Ardern, but repeatedly said Labour were being Trumplike (her view is that they’re “big on the what but not the how”, “haven’t done their homework” and are making big promises that they will have to back away from once elected). It’s a pretty desperate ploy… She actually admitted at the end that she didn’t know who was going to win the election.

  17. DSpare 17
    3 September 2017 at 12:38 pm

    There is video, but I couldn’t stomach watching it. Also a longer summary, but I thought this from Henry Cooke (at 11:22am) was pithier

    That was a phenomenal press conference. Paula Bennett said drug dealers have “fewer” human rights than others and the Prime Minister said it was good that NZ did not have a written constitution.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96405356/live-on-the-campaign-trail-for-sunday

    You have to wonder if those drug dealers also include; alcohol and tobacco sellers, such as supermarkets and bottlestores. Of course they won’t, even though they too are; “creating a string of victims behind them”.

    • Incognito 17.1
      3 September 2017 at 12:45 pm

      You have to wonder if those drug dealers also include; alcohol and tobacco sellers, such as supermarkets and bottlestores.

      Wonder not! Cui bono? And remember who pay taxes and who don’t.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 17.2
      3 September 2017 at 3:40 pm

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/election-2017/338588/serious-criminals-have-fewer-human-rights-national

      Appalling stuff from National – shouting out to the lowest common denominator and showing a total lack of concern, respect or understanding of human rights.

      You don’t need to abuse human rights to tackle crime – quite the opposite in fact.

      • Incognito 17.2.1
        3 September 2017 at 3:55 pm

        It fits very well with National’s way of thinking such as “social investment”. Identify ‘the prima facie culprits’ and target them hard with all the force of the law. If this means violating their human rights or invoking National Security, for example, so be it. There are a few obvious issues with this approach but none of these will concern National voters – prisoners are barred from voting [bad pun]. The allegedly-apparent political interference in (some) police matters is another reason to be extremely wary about this erosion of citizens’ rights in New Zealand.

    • Incognito 17.3
      3 September 2017 at 7:34 pm

      National’s proposed police powers buying into the doctrine of Donald Trump, lawyer says

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/96447979/is-national-buying-into-the-doctrine-of-donald-trump

    • Foreign Waka 17.4
      3 September 2017 at 8:07 pm

      Perhaps some private prisons need more profit. In any case, this women is just about as bad as it gets.
      I would challenge her on the notion that a group (even if despised) can have basics rights taken away. If it looks and feels fascist, perhaps it is.

  18. greywarshark 18
    3 September 2017 at 1:41 pm

    Keep an eye out for the film American Made. It has been reviewed this morning by Simon Morris and sounds an absolute gas. Its background is the reality of the USA’s outrageous, no-holds-barred meddling in everything around Regan’s time and Clinton’s. Lots of ironic laughter and the absence of concern about principles left home in a quiet, dark cupboard will be the right approach. Has Tom Cruise. In theatres September 29.

    And another one about India and Britain interaction. Sounds amazing. At age 68 Queen Victoria who apparently was not the stuffy moralistic person broadcast to the public, decides to learn Urdu and the finer points of curry dinners.
    Victoria and Abdul (Queen Victoria by Judi Dench) from September 14

  19. joe90 19
    3 September 2017 at 2:19 pm

    The Anthropocene says hi.

    It is estimated that the 47.4 inches of rainfall in 4 days on Clear Creek equates to a 40,000 year event #houwx #hounews #txwx— Jeff Lindner (@JeffLindner1) September 1, 2017

  20. RedBaronCV 20
    3 September 2017 at 2:46 pm

    Now I know this has nothing to directly do with the election but there has been from 1 Sept a further insidious removal of government services from street level & the provinces

    The IRD in Napier has been closed until further notice.
    The IRD has closed all after hours drop boxes – so cheques, returns & the like cannot be dropped in after hours which is really unhelpful to all those people who do drop them in after hours.
    The reason given for Dunedin & no doubt all the others is:

    “For safety reasons the after-hours Drop Box at our Dunedin office will be closed permanently and no longer available from 1 September 2017.”

    Despite the above the drop boxes have been in use forever without apparently any problems.
    The IRD has also removed the GST form from their website so it cannot be downloaded and filled out manually. (and possibly other forms). I’m not even sure that is legal.

    Their agenda is clear : they want everyone forced to register with the Mylogin services so that they and the wider government have the ability to track our email addresses and us electronically. And some how unaccountable call centres will do the rest.
    The IRD have acknowledged in the past that there is a significant group of taxpayers who actively do not wish to deal with the IRD electronically but of course this is not acceptable to our right wing governments who do not want anyone to have any personal privacy.

    And while I’m on the subject of Napier ( happy to hear from a local re this) quite a significant population area now has no IRD street access and a main police station that is only open until 7.00 pm every day.
    Nact doesn’t support the provinces!!

    • greywarshark 20.1
      3 September 2017 at 10:17 pm

      Safety seems to be the buzzword for withdrawing services by government and their mercenaries while enforcing expensive and time consuming nitpicking actions on the public.

      Somewhere along the line the government is going to feel so unsafe that they will close down everything. Are we going to put up with that I ask?

  21. joe90 21
    3 September 2017 at 3:14 pm

    A speculation bubble inevitably collapses.

    who woulda thunk it
    /

    The grim tale of America’s “subprime mortgage crisis” delivers one of those stinging moral slaps that Americans seem to favor in their histories. Poor people were reckless and stupid, banks got greedy. Layer in some Wall Street dark arts, and there you have it: a global financial crisis.

    Dark arts notwithstanding, that’s not what really happened, though.

    Mounting evidence suggests that the notion that the 2007 crash happened because people with shoddy credit borrowed to buy houses they couldn’t afford is just plain wrong. The latest comes in a new NBER working paper arguing that it was wealthy or middle-class house-flipping speculators who blew up the bubble to cataclysmic proportions, and then wrecked local housing markets when they defaulted en masse.

    https://qz.com/1064061/house-flippers-triggered-the-us-housing-market-crash-not-poor-subprime-borrowers-a-new-study-shows/

    • eco Maori/kiwi 21.1
      3 September 2017 at 7:15 pm

      joe90 There a good article in that link u gave on the subprime reality on the alt right attack on googles principles and values

  22. eco Maori/kiwi 22
    3 September 2017 at 4:30 pm

    Wow must have upset someone high up the food chain in the government with my humane and Intelligent ideas to help reduce our prison population they must think I’m making a personal attack on there intelligent well no I’M not.
    But my viewers can make up there own minds on whats intelligent and whats not.
    Is it intelligent to carry on fulling our jails is it intelligent to copy or be coned to implement other larger Societies failing policy’s. Or is it intelligent to be original and make our own policy’s that suit our unique society.
    They poured on the intimidation today but I’M use to it. Miss Paula Bennett just confirmed my statements made in my other post on how some people in the justice department view our Human rights and privacy rights national just keep digging that hole deeper and deeper.
    Now there is someone in that outfit whom is really crafty or fucken stupid.
    This is why I have said that the real people that run the government are public servants
    and all these ideological dick heads that will fight the changes need to fix our Society need to get kicked out or our Society’s systems will not change fast enough to fight climate change and poverty in our Great Country.
    Some of my fellow bloggers on this site that have been involved in politics for 30 years or more are skeptical of some of the public servants in the Bee hive so people take note of what they say. SO TO SAVE OUR ENVIRONMENTS and SOCIETY. PARTY VOTE GREEN

  23. Ed 23
    3 September 2017 at 4:54 pm

    This film by John Pilger should be seen – especially given the ongoing events on the Korean Peninsula

  24. joe90 24
    3 September 2017 at 5:10 pm

    Look who had their stickys all over the Kenyan the, since overturned [result], presidential election.

    A firm that worked for Donald Trump and which once claimed ties to a pro-Brexit campaign group is now reportedly working for Kenya’s incumbent president.

    Cambridge Analytica’s mission statement is simple. On its website, the firm says it “uses data to change audience behaviour.” Most notably, the company was hired by Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and has been given some credit for Trump’s electoral success.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-40792078

    Kenya’s Supreme Court on Friday overturned last month’s presidential election, citing voting irregularities, and ordered a new election within 60 days. It declared President Uhuru Kenyatta’s re-election null and void.

    It is the first time a presidential election in East Africa’s economic hub has been nullified. Supporters of opposition candidate Raila Odinga, 72, danced and cheered in the streets, and said they felt vindicated because he had contended that he lost because the electronic tally had been hacked.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/09/01/kenyas-supreme-court-declares-presidential-election-result-null/624115001/

    • eco Maori/kiwi 24.1
      3 September 2017 at 5:49 pm

      +100joe90 they haved figured out that voters can be influenced by big data company’s and that undermines democracy YESS

  25. Bearded Git 25
    3 September 2017 at 5:16 pm

    Rod Oram destroys the arguments against Labour’s policy for a royalty on commercial water users here.

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/09/02/45811/rod-oram-a-trickle-of-problems-for-a-big-problem

    • Ad 25.1
      3 September 2017 at 5:45 pm

      Outstanding article with rich links to the OECD paper that went into NZ pollution and water regulation in depth.
      Thankyou BG.

    • ianmac 25.2
      3 September 2017 at 5:49 pm

      Gee thanks Bearded one. That is a pretty concise compelling argument in favour of paying for water with the intention of reducing pollution.
      One graph alone should disturb doubters. And the ECan commissioners have a lot to answer for.
      Wonder if they will finally be removed by a Labour/Green Government?

    • eco Maori/kiwi 25.3
      3 September 2017 at 6:02 pm

      +100 B G

    • Eco maori 25.4
      3 September 2017 at 10:33 pm

      Yes that’s the reason I back water charges it changes the perception of water frown worthless to something we will treasurer as water should be treasured as a life giving force it is

      • Eco maori 25.4.1
        4 September 2017 at 12:36 am

        FWe have to plan these water policies so no one can manipulate them so the few will benefit at the cost of the many water should benefit all people the same .I have seen the fishery turn into a big mess and people were given practical big checks to accept what the systems the government wanted to put in place and what we got was not ideally suited to preserve our fisheries

  26. joe90 26
    3 September 2017 at 5:28 pm

    Rattling his sabre….

    RT @AJENews: 10km-deep tremor of 5.6 magnitude strikes in North Korea, says @USGS. More soon on https://t.co/OCIH7J4Zwl pic.twitter.com/Y1me8g4ZIx— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) September 3, 2017

    Japan says that tremors detected in North Korea were a nuclear explosion https://t.co/iGJTT9SO0U pic.twitter.com/HENbxoXJ3E— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) September 3, 2017

    0 depth, on the half hour and at the test site. That looks like a nuclear test. Kim-6. pic.twitter.com/YxYm1HT2x5— Jeffrey Lewis (@ArmsControlWonk) September 3, 2017

    https://twitter.com/ArmsControlWonk

  27. Penny Bright 27
    3 September 2017 at 5:54 pm

    WHISTLE-BLOWER ALERT!!

    The influence, IMO, of paid PR shills at the highest levels of Radio NZ.

    See for yourselves the National Party connections…..

    Subject: Radio New Zealand : Board of Governors

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/about/board-profile

    Chair of the Radio NZ Board.

    “Mr Griffin is a director of the public relations consultancy, Fraser, Griffin, Wood.”

    https://www.national.org.nz/news/2016-06-03-appointments-to-radio-new-zealand-board

    “Richard Griffin of Nelson is a highly experienced former journalist.

    He served as Chief Press Secretary and Senior Media Advisor to Rt Hon Jim Bolger and was RNZ’s longest serving political editor.

    He has been instrumental in the strategic planning of organisations in New Zealand’s primary production and tourism sectors and the pharmaceutical and banking industries.”

    http://solidbusinessnz.com/company/1944292/fraser-griffin-wood-limited

    Company Info
    Fraser Griffin Wood Limited was formed on May 18th 2007, so this company age is now ten years and three months and eighteen days.

    It is listed in the register as a NZ Limited Company.

    Fraser Griffin Wood Limited registered office is located at 34 Talavera Terrace, Kelburn, Wellington , New Zealand.

    Current Fraser Griffin Wood Limited directors are:

    Ian Geoffrey FRASER (appointed at May 18th 2007),

    Richard Andrew GRIFFIN (appointed at May 18th 2007),

    Susanne Mary WOOD (appointed at May 18th 2007).

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Fraser_(broadcaster)

    “Born in Dunedin, Fraser became well known in New Zealand as a television interviewer, working on current affairs shows from 1974-1984.

    He then moved to public relations, becoming the chairman of Consultus and fronting a series of advertisements for the Bank of New Zealand.

    After heading projects for New Zealand Expo in Brisbane and Seville, Fraser became chief executive of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra.

    He moved to TVNZ in April 2002.

    His wife, Suzanne Snively, is an economist and managing director of strategic and economic advice company, MoreMedia Enterprises.”

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sue_Wood

    “Suzanne Mary (Sue) Wood, born in Onehunga in 1948, served as the president of the New Zealand National Party from 1982 to 1986, the first woman to hold the post.

    She had been a teacher, journalist and swimming coach.

    Her term as president included the latter years of the Third National Governmentof Robert Muldoon, the 1984 general election, and the associated constitutional crisis.

    Wood stood as the party candidate for Onehunga in the 1980 by-election and in the 1981 general election; she was then teaching at Onehunga High School.

    In 2002 she stood in the seat of Mana, being defeated by Labour MP Luamanuvao Winnie Laban.

    Although she held a relatively high party-list ranking of 19, National’s poor overall result in the 2002 election meant that she failed to enter Parliament.

    She was the campaign manager for Auckland Future in 2016.[1]”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11224018

    (Matthew Hooton)

    “His wife, Cathy Wood, is the daughter of former National party president Sue Wood.”

    _____________________

    Penny Bright

    2017 Independent candidate for Tamaki.

    Exposing the $1.6 BILLION Tamaki GENTRIFICATION $CAM.

  28. Penny Bright 28
    3 September 2017 at 7:15 pm

    IMO – these FACTS arguably help explain why National broadcaster Radio NZ present paid PR shill$ like Matthew Hooton to present as ‘political commentators’?

    IMO – particularly during an election, it’s a ‘conflict of interest’, particularly if paid PR shill$ have particular political parties as clients.

    I think it STINKS.

    Penny Bright

  29. Craig H 29
    3 September 2017 at 7:43 pm

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/election/2017/09/newshub-poll-national-and-labour-in-one-on-one-fight-for-power.html

    New Newshub Reid Research poll:

    National – 43.3
    Labour – 39.4
    NZ First – 6.6
    Green – 6.1
    TOP – 1.9
    MP – 1
    ACT – 0.6

    Preferred PM

    Bill English – 30.1
    Jacinda Ardern – 29.9
    Winston Peters – 6.9

    L/G now well ahead of National in both recent polls, and genuinely could get across the line alone (here’s hoping!).

    • chris73 29.1
      3 September 2017 at 8:58 pm

      Its getting really exciting now, being that its so close will both English and Ardern try to minimize mistakes or instead go for it?

      Winston Peters may not be the king maker after all, there goes his ego so what will he do?

      This is really fun 🙂

    • swordfish 29.2
      3 September 2017 at 10:08 pm

      Newshub Reid Research (Last 4 Polls)

      Early June 2017 … Late July 2017 … Early Aug 2017 …… Late Aug 2017

      Nat ….… 47 ……………………… 45 ………………….. 44 ………………….. 43
      Lab ….… 26 ……………………… 24 ………………….. 33 ………………….. 39
      NZF ….… 9 ………………….….… 13 …………………….9 ……………….…… 7
      Green …13 ………………………. 13 ……………….….. 8 …………….….….. 6

      .

      NRR Preferred PM

      Early June 2017 …… Late July 2017 …… Early Aug 2017 … Late Aug 2017
      English 26 ……………………….. 26 ……………………. 28 ……………………. 30

      Little .… 7…………………….………7

      Ardern 7 ………………….……….. 9 ……………….……. 26 ……………………. 30

      Peters 10 ……………………..….. 12 ………………….….10 …………….….……. 7

      .

      .

      Colmar Brunton (Last 4 Polls)

      Early July 2017 … Late July 2017 …… Mid Aug 2017 …… Late Aug 2017

      Nat ….47 ………………………. 47 ……………..…. 44….……….….…. 41

      Lab ….27 ……………….…..…. 24…………………. 37…….…..……… 43

      NZF .. 11 ……………….…….… 11 …………….……10.…….….……..… 8

      Green 11 …………………….… 15 ………….…….….4.…….….…..……. 5

      .

      Colmar Brunton Preferred PM

      Early July 2017 …… Late July 2017 …… Mid Aug 2017 ……. Late Aug 2017

      English 26 ………………………… 28 ……………………. 30 ……………….……. 33

      Little …. 5………………………..…. 6

      Ardern ..6 ………………….….…… 6 ……………….……. 30 ………………….…. 34

      Peters .11 …………………….….. 10 …………….….….…. 7 ………………..….…. 4

      • swordfish 29.2.1
        3 September 2017 at 11:00 pm

        Comparisons (2008-17)

        Newshub Reid Research (3-4 Weeks out)

        CB Aug 2017 …….……. Aug 2014 ……………. Nov 2011 …….…… Oct 2008

        Nat .. 43 …………………..…. 45 (- 2) ……….….…..… 53 (- 10)….…….…. 45 (- 2)

        Lab .. 39 …………………..…. 26 (+ 13)…………….…. 30 (+ 9)…..….…..… 39 ( = )

        NZF … 7 ……………….…….… 6 (+ 1) …………….………2 (+ 5).…….….….… 3 (+ 4)

        Green 6 ………….……….……14 (- 8) ………….…….….10 (- 4).…….….……. 7 (- 1)

        .

        Colmar Brunton Comparisons ..…

        https://thestandard.org.nz/the-first-debate/#comment-1377067

        • DSpare 29.2.1.1
          4 September 2017 at 9:04 am

          Thanks for the analysis as always swordfish. It is a shame it was posted at eleven on a Sunday night, so might be missed by many – hopefully you can cut and paste it in a dedicated poll thread later. I found this interactive graph while looking about for the Reid Research results (doesn’t seem to be updated on their site yet), that gives the ability to see each polling companies results separately, which I like:

          https://www.andrewchen.nz/polls

  30. Ad 30
    3 September 2017 at 8:02 pm

    Silver Ferns just thrashed Australia.
    Top work!

  31. AsleepWhileWalking 31
    3 September 2017 at 8:20 pm

    Dangerous National policy (?) on gangs called out by Dr Gilbert.

    Also wants Bennett to resign.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11916458

    • Pat 31.1
      3 September 2017 at 8:54 pm

      is it a coincidence that those who lived through the last wave of Fascism are now dead?

      • Incognito 31.1.1
        3 September 2017 at 9:55 pm

        Sir/Miss, what is Fascism?

        A: use Google.

        • Pat 31.1.1.1
          3 September 2017 at 10:10 pm

          lol….I don’t think there is much debate about when the last period of fascism was even if you wish split hairs on definitions.

        • Pat 31.1.1.2
          3 September 2017 at 10:22 pm

          http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/history-document/
          “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1948, was the result of the experience of the Second World War. With the end of that war, and the creation of the United Nations, the international community vowed never again to allow atrocities like those of that conflict happen again. World leaders decided to complement the UN Charter with a road map to guarantee the rights of every individual everywhere. The document they considered, and which would later become the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, was taken up at the first session of the General Assembly in 1946. “

          • Incognito 31.1.1.2.1
            3 September 2017 at 10:32 pm

            Well, even Winston Peters was a wee toddler back then but somebody should send this to Paula Bennett and their National MPs with a take-home message like those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it or something rather.

            • Pat 31.1.1.2.1.1
              3 September 2017 at 10:40 pm

              the best message that could be given is at the ballot box…they will take no notice of any other kind

              • Incognito …
                3 September 2017 at 10:45 pm

                Despite 9 long years of National in Government I still believe in helping to educate people 😉

                • Pat …
                  3 September 2017 at 10:54 pm

                  does education overcome a base lust for power?

                  • Incognito …
                    4 September 2017 at 7:35 am

                    Good education might even increase the quest for power but at the same time we may be better prepared to deal with such when we are better educated. Basically, good education can lift us all and hopefully (!) get us in better shape and a better place overall.

                  • Incognito …
                    4 September 2017 at 10:26 pm

                    It depends on the individual, the education this person receives and a zillion other factors. I think it is a generally unanswerable question TBH.

                  • Incognito …
                    4 September 2017 at 10:58 pm

                    A little easier …

                    One is never too old to learn and it is never too late to change but only if one is open to learn & change …

                    They say a leopard doesn’t change his spots and Paula Bennett has a penchant for leopard prints …

                    Bill English is an old-school conservative …

                    I don’t write off people easily though; it goes against my nature …

    • Psycho Milt 31.2
      3 September 2017 at 9:59 pm

      If you want a good laugh, here’s John Key announcing National’s crackdown on methamphetamine and the gangs that supply it back in 2009. How’s that war on drugs going, National?