web analytics

Open mike 07/06/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, June 7th, 2025 - 29 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 …

29 comments on “Open mike 07/06/2025 ”

  2. ianmac 2
    7 June 2025 at 10:20 am

    Just listening to:Geoff Bertram: What the Regulatory Standards Bill Reveals About the Future of Government

    I thought RSB was bad but now the detail shows it would decimate our understanding of the whole fabric of our New Zealand way of being.

    One detail is that should a Government act to reduce the profit of say Supermarkets or Electricity, the losses of will have to be paid for guess by whom- the customers of course. This cancels any action on almost every action which aims to protect the people or our environment.

    Listen to the first 5minutes or so and be terrified.

    Reply
    • Bearded Git 2.1
      7 June 2025 at 10:46 am

      That bill should be the first thing repealed after the next election.

      Reply
      • PsyclingLeft.Always 2.1.1
        7 June 2025 at 11:37 am

        ianmac and BG. Those of us who are aware..are extremely worried. I am still waiting..and hoping for Our Left to nail the colours to the mast, and set in granite those good things that NZ could, and still can be…

        My urgency is heightened when I read something like this…

        Facial recognition: Supermarket trial 'a great starting point'

        Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says the option of having a centralised system of facial recognition is something he expects officials to consider.

        https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/563076/facial-recognition-supermarket-trial-a-great-starting-point

        Riiight. Its getting more Reality than Dystopian every day….

        Goldsmith not someone I would trust…ever. (Of course goes without saying that would also include all of NAct1)

        Reply
      • AB 2.1.2
        7 June 2025 at 1:27 pm

        It's a Bill that fetishises private property rights and elevates them to become the over-riding consideration in Government policy decisions. It is completely contrary to the existing assumption in democracies that property rights are always limited – usually by some notion of the common good. It's therefore straight from the fevered brains of the most regressive parts of the economic ultra-right. It should be thrown out in toto. Labour may of course attempt to look moderate by finding some virtues in various parts of it – which is likely to be a political mistake.

        Reply
        • Bearded Git 2.1.2.1
          7 June 2025 at 1:48 pm

          Agree with all of that AB.

          My particular worry, having spent many thousands of hours fighting against unsightly and unnecessary rural subdivisions for the last 30 years, is that Councils will no longer have the legislative tools to prevent such developments because of this bill and its idiotic total surrender to private property rights.

          This completely ignores (as you say) the wider common good.

          I have posted previously saying that the Bill would permit a landholder to build a monstrosity that adversely affects anyone who can see it including immediate neighbours. So, while the fool will have his monstrosity because the Seymour Bill allows nobody to object to it, the landscape suffers and the value of the properties abutting the monstrosity site will fall.

          It follows that the Bill will actually reduce property rights.

          Seymour doesn't understand that planning rules have been developed over many generations for good reasons.

          Reply
      • ianmac 2.1.3
        7 June 2025 at 4:40 pm

        From what was said by Geoff Bertam, I don't believe that the RS Bill can be repealed nor debated in the Court. That is one of the elements that Seymour wants block the bright of appeal.
        Nor can I find in the Jackal column where he says the Bill can be repealed.

        Reply
        • Obtrectator 2.1.3.1
          7 June 2025 at 5:22 pm

          Whence comes this daft notion that the Bill – if passed into law – can't be repealed? Parliament is sovereign – it can make or unmake any law, and that's that.

          Reply
    • Bearded Git 2.2
      7 June 2025 at 11:58 am

      According to The Jackal (see side panel) the Regulatory Standards Bill is non-binding:

      "Seymour maintained that what mattered was not the opposition but the quality of the legislative framework, which is non-binding in its nature, thus not enforceable – despite the bill's $20 million price-tag."

      Reply
      • Incognito 2.2.1
        7 June 2025 at 12:26 pm

        The Jackal (https://thejackalman.blogspot.com/2025/06/david-seymours-bill-tramples-democratic.html) cited from an article on RNZ and the next two paragraphs are illuminating:

        Seymour argued the Regulatory Standards Bill was about transparency, not enforcement. He compared it to the Public Finance Act and the Reserve Bank Act – also non-binding in nature, but important for government accountability.

        "There's nothing to stop a minister of finance writing to the governor of the Reserve Bank before an election saying, 'Run the presses, prime the pumps,'" Seymour said.

        https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/563095/we-have-massive-problems-with-regulation-seymour-defends-regulatory-standards-bill

        I think this is another misleading assertion from Seymour because AFAIK the RBNZ has complete independence to set monetary policy in and of NZ – a finance minister can never instruct or direct the RBNZ (Governor) to start a pork-barrelling campaign on behalf of government parties to sway the electorate before a general election. Forked tongue-Seymour is continuously and repeatedly gaslighting the public.

        Reply
        • Nic the NZer 2.2.1.1
          7 June 2025 at 5:13 pm

          The finance minister sets out the goals of the Reserve Bank every year in letter form and can wholy override its independence for 6 months without intervention from parliament. On top of that its usually unnecessary as the Reserve Bank usually knows how to comply with govt requirements (see QE in 2020).

          Reply
          • Incognito 2.2.1.1.1
            7 June 2025 at 5:23 pm

            I stand corrected, thanks, and it seems that Seymour was correct in this instance, if I interpret you correctly.

            Reply
            • Nic the NZer 2.2.1.1.1.1
              7 June 2025 at 7:15 pm

              Essentially, yes, RBNZ policy is not really that independent from the govt. If they are doing something undesirable that should be ultimately the responsibility of the finance minister for allowing them to do that.

              Of course, what Rimmer described is not exactly going to happen, firstly because there would be a letter to the RBNZ with the finance ministers' instructions (linking this to the election). Secondly because what Rimmer is expecting to be the result (a boost in inflation) would be unpopular leading into an election.

              I also don't doubt that in front of the right audience Rimmer would (quite wrongly) describe the 2020 QE policy as an unnecessary inflationary disaster, under the instructions of Grant Robertson.

              We should also understand he's very likely plainly wrong about how monetary policy works. Such a QE policy would be pretty similar to the RBNZ lowering the official cash rate to 0% (because it can no longer control the 90-day bills rate when the banks have surplus cash to lend to each other, a surplus which they can't get rid of unless the government offers to trade it for a sufficient quantity of bonds). There may well be some inflationary impact of businesses with the power to increase prices doing so in anticipation of inflation, but nobody has more income as a result of the banks lower interest rates, it still needs to be borrowed. At most the housing market might pick up a bit. It's actually surprising Nicola Willis isn't crafting such a letter right now as the housing market picking up a bit is something she is actively budgeting on.

              Reply
              • Incognito …
                8 June 2025 at 8:25 pm

                Thanks for the great explanation, which begs the question why Seymour selected this supposedly illustrative comparison & example to sell the Regulatory Standards Bill. Based on your comments, he opened a can of worms of wicked complexity that only adds to the public’s confusion, i.e., it was deliberate gaslighting.

                Reply
      • Incognito 2.2.2
        7 June 2025 at 1:51 pm

        I happened to come across this piece by Gordon Campbell that is consistent with my view that Seymour is gaslighting the public:

        Currently, that’s the main muddled message being conveyed by the Regulatory Standards Bill. If it is enforceable, the Bill poses a serious threat to democracy. If it isn’t, and is mere virtue signalling by the ACT Party to its corporate masters, then it is an expensive and redundant waste of taxpayer time and money. What sort of beast is it?

        https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2506/S00007/on-why-the-regulatory-standards-bill-should-be-dumped.htm

        Reply
    • James Thrace 2.3
      7 June 2025 at 12:13 pm

      It’s worse than that. It’s not just actual losses that the RSB seeks to make the govt pay for, but “potential losses” as well.

      So if a mining company says “well there’s potentially $1bn of gold in them thar hills”, starts digging an open cast mine, and a future govt shuts them down, the “potential losses” are over $1bn – being the potential, and unquantified, gold revenue, and also the losses incurred in digging said mine before it was shuttered.

      Reply
      • tc 2.3.1
        7 June 2025 at 4:20 pm

        ACT's wet dream in a nutshell.

        Wake up NZ. Luxon and Peters are stooges in this performative process from Seymour, something they agreed to.

        Reply
      • KJT 2.3.2
        7 June 2025 at 6:25 pm

        Extending the corporate rights, in way to many of our trade agreements.

        Reply
  3. joe90 3
    7 June 2025 at 12:30 pm

    No colonialism without kūpapa.

    /

    https://xcancel.com/muhammadshehad2/status/1930603829071904840

    https://xcancel.com/bentreyf/status/1930720597174026543

    Israel has been arming a criminal gang in the Gaza Strip as part of an effort to strengthen opposition to Hamas in the enclave, defense sources confirmed on Thursday following remarks on the matter by former defense minister Avigdor Liberman.

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later confirmed the report, saying the move helped save Israeli soldiers’ lives.

    Liberman, who heads the opposition Yisrael Beytenu party, told the Kan public broadcaster on Thursday morning that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had unilaterally approved the transfer of weapons to the Abu Shabab clan, an armed gang or militia that is opposed to Hamas’s rule in the Gaza Strip.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-providing-guns-to-gaza-jihadist-gang-to-bolster-opposition-to-hamas/

    Reply
    • Psycho Milt 3.1
      7 June 2025 at 4:18 pm

      There hasn't been colonialism in that area since the Arabs colonised it in the 7th Century. Neither the Turks nor the British settled anyone there, and the Jews aren't a colony of any country or people.

      Reply
  4. Dennis Frank 4
    7 June 2025 at 3:07 pm

    The response here to Albo's landslide victory may have been muted due to the count stretching out for so long, but this here analysis has a nifty graph showing how unusual the result is: https://antonygreen.com.au/fed2025-four-graphs-on-labors-landslide-victory/

    the best result since Malcolm Fraser’s post-Whitlam dismissal victory in 1975. The Albanese government recorded a higher two-party preferred vote than at Fraser’s landslide re-election in 1977, Bob Hawke’s victory in 1983, John Howard’s in 1996, Kevin Rudd’s in 2007 and Tony Abbott’s in 2013.

    Albo's genial laid-back style may be an x factor, but there's another…

    The Liberal Party, the Coalition's senior party, suffered its worst federal result in terms of vote share and seats since its formation in 1944… The Coalition campaigned on building seven nuclear power plants over 20 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Australian_federal_election

    A typical Oz punter: "Mate, somehow I feel so uninspired. Another beer?" Labour masterminds know what to do, and it ain't coal:

    The re-elected government’s first big decision is to extend the life of Woodside Energy’s North West Shelf gas processing plant on the Burrup peninsula in Western Australia for a further 40 years from 2030. https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/06/in-one-awful-decision-albanese-has-revealed-his-do-nothing-plan/

    Reply
  5. newsense 5
    7 June 2025 at 9:40 pm

    No Right Turn is a policy nerd imo.
    http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/06/a-parliamentary-lynching.html

    But he gets it right- the use of committee to exclude Te Pati Maori is an act of violence against our democracy. And a racist one at that.

    I could talk about a dark day for our democracy, and so on, but fuck that. This is nothing less than a parliamentary lynching. The silencing of Māori MPs for being Māori violates the fundamentals of our democracy, stripping 210,000 people of their representation, precisely because it was too effective for the government's taste. Our government has now become a shitty Putinist tyranny, and it should be treated as such.

    Add to that Seymour’s response to 20 thousand people and groups writing in opposition to his bill- the were bots and would not be read by people. Except it’s clear now they weren’t.

    If elected members can just be excluded by the ruling coalition without just cause, and a haka certainly is not cause for unprecedented punishment, and we do nothing and wait for these foreign (and local for that matter) billionaires to become more controlling of editorial lines, well, we deserve to go to shit. There’s nothing particularly special about NZ, but it had been neglected by the internationalist far right to a degree. Not any more.

    Reply
  6. aj 6
    7 June 2025 at 9:52 pm

    Up the wahs. Complete performance.

    Reply

Leave a Comment