Open mike 11/02/2021

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 11th, 2021 - 67 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 …

67 comments on “Open mike 11/02/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Ad 1
    11 February 2021 at 7:46 am

    The Aleph Group of Israel have started manufacturing a cell-grown ribeye steak.

    NZBeef and Lamb should buy a big chunk of their shares now.

    When even Burger King is going vegetarian, its time for our meat farmers to roll out their conversion plans.

    • Incognito 1.1
      11 February 2021 at 7:57 am

      FFS, just because somebody grows a blob in a Petri dish doesn’t mean anything. Climate change, OTOH, is a reason to think about the future of farming. IIRC, some report was released just recently about something to do with the weather.

      • Ad 1.1.1
        11 February 2021 at 9:50 am

        Outrage and more moralistic arm-waving about why people should read a report about 'the weather' is simply a really poor indicator of changing consumer behaviour.

        Actually putting the R&D effort into consumer alternatives is the actual work required.

        • Robert Guyton 1.1.1.1
          11 February 2021 at 9:52 am

          I think Ad's nailed it. The industry can't claim to be blind-sided: their own advisors have been warning them of this for some time now.

        • RedLogix 1.1.1.2
          11 February 2021 at 10:15 am

          Exactly – it may not suit the anti-capitalist left's ideas – but it will be profit-seeking capitalists who wind up doing much of the real world work to mitigate climate change.

          • AB 1.1.1.2.1
            11 February 2021 at 11:28 am

            Capitalism is remarkably resilient – and with state power used to clear the field of any alternatives, it is likely to put huge effort into profiting from climate change amelioration. It will achieve remarkable things no doubt – but exactly who gets to be 'saved' by this effort is yet to be determined. We can be pretty sure though, that it won't be everybody.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 1.1.1.2.2
            11 February 2021 at 11:31 am

            it will be profit-seeking capitalists who wind up doing much of the real world work to mitigate climate change

            That's only fair, don't you think? Hope you're right, and wonder about the targetting of those 'mitigation' measures/gestures.

            Does the number of (capitalist) businesses that file for bankruptcy give you any cause for concern? Might 'pursuit of profit' behaviours be blinding (some) capitalists to the problems of survival? Of course, "profit-seeking capitalists" know that if they fail, they can simply start over – cause for concern, imho.

            Change the Rules of the Global Market

            The global market system is designed to maximize profit while meeting people’s needs. It’s had some success. As economic historian Deirdre McCloskey noted, Western Europe’s embrace of the profit motive was the catalyst for what she dubs the “Great Enrichment” of the last two centuries. In this period, the world experienced unprecedented improvement in living standards and enhanced individual freedoms. But these benefits have come with a heavy and growing price.

            Today, the market is the single-most environmentally destructive force on the planet. It’s the hungry elephant in the Garden of Eden. It profits at the expense of the environment and ultimately society. And by 2050, it will likely be more than twice as big as it was in 2016.

            https://www.wri.org/blog/2021/01/make-market-work-people-and-planet

          • McFlock 1.1.1.2.3
            11 February 2021 at 1:09 pm

            They'd do it quicker if they were penalised for the damage they'd already caused.

        • Incognito 1.1.1.3
          11 February 2021 at 11:04 am

          People looking at falling stars in the night sky standing on a volcano about to erupt lack perspective and sense of reality because of their tunnel vision and narrow focus, literally.

          Who’s doing “moralistic arm-waving” telling others to read the report from the CCC that is open for public consultation until 14 March? It’s bigger than the RMA, but who bloody cares except a few pesky CC Crusaders?

          I’m sure NZ farmers are talking to their Ozzie banks as we speak and quacking in their boots because they’ll have to change their way of living & earning because of the Aleph Group in Israel. Even when (not if) exports drop, it won’t make one iota of difference.

          • Ad 1.1.1.3.1
            11 February 2021 at 11:37 am

            No one gives a damn about submitting to any report. Check out those marches on the streets.

            The world will be won one hamburger at a time.

            • McFlock 1.1.1.3.1.1
              11 February 2021 at 1:46 pm

              I mean, the holy grail would be if someone discovers how to do something like make superstrong concrete with air-harvested CO2 as an ingredient. Building skyscrapers and bridges becomes carbon-negative.

              The best intervention is always something that people already do every day, but with a painless and unnoticed tweak. Fluoride in water, folate in bread, a slightly wider cycle lane.

              • Ad …
                11 February 2021 at 1:58 pm

                I am aware of businesses who are pushing for roading surfaces with 5% toner cartridges, 2% soft plastics, and 5% crumbed tyres in the mix.

                Local government is currently more responsive than NZTA to such innovation. They are particularly conservative due to trying other versions in the last 2 years and they failed.

                The full resurface of Queenstown Airport with this kind of mix was a good signal that it can be done with a pretty high wear and tear level.

                • McFlock …
                  11 February 2021 at 2:48 pm

                  The trick is developing something that's cheaper if it replaced what's currently in use, and then to get it up to those levels of use so that it's cheaper in practise.

                  I recall saying in one of the interminable vegan debates that if something genuinely indistinguishable from (in this case ribeye) steak was available for cheaper than actual moo-flesh, end of problem. This looks pretty close, dunno about the price-point though. But industrially, it should save on land use and most of the slaughterhouse process.

                  fuck. Leather might go up in price. There goes another hobby…

                  • Ad …
                    11 February 2021 at 3:52 pm

                    Along with the McCarthy sausages, I'm more than willing to pay more if the product markets itself as super-premium. For my household, price bracket is one signal of trust. Low price is the kind of commodity I wouldn't touch.

                    • McFlock …
                      11 February 2021 at 3:56 pm

                      To a degree, but $8.50 a kilo vs $9 for stuff I can't tell the difference apart in the pack, I'd give $8.50 a try. And if it works it works.

                      But $9 vs $12 for something that seems to be identical and claims to be as good as the cheaper stalwart? I probably won't try the change.

                • Pat …
                  11 February 2021 at 7:28 pm

                  Great…road resurfacing frequency (and cost) is going to increase again.

            • Incognito 1.1.1.3.1.2
              11 February 2021 at 3:02 pm

              To Hell with the democratic political process; barricades, banners, badges and megaphones will solve all our problems!

              I prefer Frankfurters but sliced Berliner is quite nice on a sandwich.

    • Sanctuary 1.2
      11 February 2021 at 10:29 am

      This is a very interesting recent interview on this topic – the timelines given here are astounding, it is entirely likely that within 15 years all our fast food will be created by cellular agriculture/cultured meat.

    • bwaghorn 1.3
      11 February 2021 at 12:21 pm

      Absolutely it's the only poor people will be able to afford meat as we destock to more sustainable levels, with the added bonus that blob meat and petri dish gloop is how well move to mars and beyond.

    • Eco Maori 1.4
      12 February 2021 at 7:24 pm

      I'm sick of these Wanker Muppet sandflys.

      They spread lies about Eco Maori and my Offspring.

      They break into our whare at will and steal our smokes and food they vandalised our vehicle they interfair in our job they tell our potential employers any the bullshit they can get them to swallow.

      They are on a string that is pulled by trump and the Kiwi dick that worked for him they use marked cop cars to intimadate me. O I can't tell the cops what to do YEA RIGHT.

      These people are making a fool of you.

      Ka kite Ano

  2. Ed1 2
    11 February 2021 at 8:35 am

    The Tie Issue

    My understanding is that rules of the house of representatives are set by a Committee of the House – a Standing Orders Committee? – chaired by the Speaker. The Speakers job is to uphold the Rules, but sometimes they will require interpretation in the light of circumstances of the time – they become Speakers Rulings (does that require ratification from the Committee?), but which certainly apply for that sitting of parliament.

    Dress has occupied the minds of that Committee a number of times in the past – and recently the Speaker raised the issue of ties with the Committee and it seems a wider group of MPs – there was not support for a change. Standing Orders were amended 4 August 2020, with effect from 7 September 2020

    Then we have the recent incident with a Hei Tiki instead of a normal tie – perhaps prompted by the recent informal decision not to change the rules; nobody seems to have asked the MP whether that affected his decision as to what to wear – and the Speaker had no option but to make a ruling to support the current Standing Orders.

    The Committee consisting of Jan Logie (Green), Trevor Mallard (Labour) and Brooke van Velden (ACT) met and agreed to change Standing Orders to effectively leave the decision as to what constitutes "business attire" to individual membrs.

    It is not clear whether the amended rule needs to be ratified by the House, but it was announced by Mallard with immediate effect as a decision of the Committee. Presumably the Committee believe that such a decision will be supported by the House. Certainly National do not appear to have objected.

    NZ Media are now reporting that the decision was made by Mallard, rather than the Standing Orders Committee. This is sloppy, but does not detract from the reality that Mallard has consistently applied the rules as they stand, even when he personally believed that a tie should not be needed.

    There are still uncertainties as to the exact definition of what is allowable; previous speakers have for example ruled against the wearing of hats, but that seemed to have gone. On Waitangi Day there were a lot of people wearing traditional Maori dress – if a Maori Party MP decided that was "business attire", would he be allowed to wear it?

    I suspect the incident will not impress Maori generally – it was a stunt by the MP, possibly on the back of attacks on Mallard by the National Party on a different issue – yet again the media are deliberately twisting the truth to attack an MP – this time Mallard. No MP is perfect; opposition parties at times twist reality to make a point, but we do deserve accurate reporting from our media.

    Mallard has followed the rules he is sworn to uphold.

    In view of the fuss, the Committee met, and decided to change the rule

    • David 2.1
      11 February 2021 at 9:28 am

      I think the bigger issue and the reason this one got so much blowback is Mallards inconsistent interpretation and lack of cultural sensitivity. Neck tie okay. Bow tie okay. Mexican Bola for goodness sake okay. Traditional Maori Hei Tiki and you have to leave the House.

      • Peter 2.1.1
        11 February 2021 at 9:39 am

        Mallard was entitled to his interpretation if that is part of the job.

        The focus on Mallard deciding was partisan, shit stirring and desperation. He gave the opportunity of consulting, went with the majority and was attacked. If he'd simply made a unilateral decision to stay with or get rid of ties he'd have been crucified.

        The relevant big issue is to do with 65-33-10-2. Yes, Labour has 65 seats.

        • David 2.1.1.1
          11 February 2021 at 9:52 am

          Yes, Mallard is entitled to his opinion. That alone does mean he is right or consistent with his previous decisions. I suspect the subsequent ground swell against him confirms this.

          Mallard asked Waititi to put his case in writing before Christmas. Waititi presented this in Parliament. It was a very compelling case. Mallard had complete disregard for the arguments presented then, simply saying “I disagree”. The cultural issues at play required a response from the Speaker appropriate to 2021, not 1921.

          • Ed1 2.1.1.1.1
            11 February 2021 at 12:30 pm

            Yes Mallard is entitled to his opinion, and within the limits of the rules he is entitled to make decisions consistent with those rules. He did not make the original rule. He consulted regarding the rules and found significant views resisting a change. He did not have the power to change the rule himself. The groundswell of opinion was that the rule was wrong – but the Committee have now made a change. See the difference?

            The Speaker will still have to interpret the new rule – should he accept an MP in 'business' swimwear? "Business" singlet and jandals? "Business" jeans and running shoes? "Business" MAGA hat?

            Previous speakers have faced similar challenges, and politics being what it is, doubtless there will be more challenges, but to attack a Speaker for doing his job is not really very fair.

    • Stuart Munro 2.2
      11 February 2021 at 9:55 am

      At the level of casual political interest, the whole tie drama has reassured the public that their interests are served by a pack of clowns so egregious they can't even agree on dress rules. They have brought no mana on the house.

    • Ad 3.1
      11 February 2021 at 10:47 am

      That industry has had dumptrucks of direct subsidy last year through MBIE, and whole landfills full of indirect subsidy through CO2 production and environmental effects.

      Nash has done the right thing.

      At near 5% unemployed – and less than 5% in the south of the South Island – this is the right time to pivot the economy.

      • Sabine 3.1.1
        11 February 2021 at 11:27 am

        at near 5% unemployed……never mind hte women for whom unemployment is over 5% and who are in many cases employed by the tourism industry.

        Unemployment:

        For men, the unemployment rate was 4.5 percent, down from 4.8 percent last quarter. For women, the unemployment rate was 5.4 percent, down from 5.8 percent.

        Underutilisation

        • For men, the underutilisation rate fell to 9.7 percent, down from 10.5 percent.
        • For women, the underutilisation rate fell to 14.3 percent, down from 16.1 percent.

        and lets not even mentioned Northland or Bay of Plenty. But yeah, go feel good about a very meaningless employment statistic from the last quater.

        never mind regional unemployment in the bay of plenty area or Northland and fuck all those that used to find seasonal employment in the tourism industry.

        • Brigid 3.1.1.1
          11 February 2021 at 11:54 am

          "fuck all those that used to find seasonal employment in the tourism industry."

          That's no better reason to subsidise this industry than it is a reason to subsidise Rio Tinto

          The government would be better employed creating new industries, that in the case of tourism don't rely on opening our borders or handouts for only certain sectors of the economy.

          • Sabine 3.1.1.1.1
            11 February 2021 at 12:07 pm

            The government can either subsidize jobs – be that in tourism or health, or education, or building etc, or they can pay unemployment benefits.

            Consider that any unemployment benefits or any other benefit for that matter is so low that people on benefits actually are living below the poverty line in the hardest cases.

            So what shall the government do with the tax money we give it? Should it pay to little to live in form of a benefit with all the resulting stress on the community/society or shall it subsidize jobs.

            What other jobs can we just stop subsidizing? Farming? Infrastructure? Health Care?

            This is a serious question that should be asked. Tourism is just a small part of it. And yes, women have a current unemployment rate of 5.4% (0.9 higher then that national average) and a much higher under utilisation rate (also above the national average), and tourism is one of the businesses in the bay of plenty area and in northland that offers seasonal employment for women, be that front of house, back office, or a room maid in one of the many motels/hotels/b&b etc. Like it or not, these min waged jobs are still miles better then what the government has to offer via its social wellfare office.

            So what should it be? Subsidizing jobs or paying out hardship grants, special needs grants and a few hundred bucks a month unemployment. I take the jobs.

            • Ad 3.1.1.1.1.1
              11 February 2021 at 1:51 pm

              So what should it be?

              All subsidies come to an end. If you are in a low-value tourism job at the moment you have been given the strongest signal possible that you need to get out.

              Women in particular need to re-train and get into construction which is where they are needed. Follow the money, and get the job.

              To assist with this transition, the Government has just put out an extension to the FlexiWage programme.

              https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/covid-19-coronavirus-jacinda-ardern-on-expanding-flexi-wage-scheme/GCLVHAWNVT44P66ZFX2EN2J7GI/

              • Sabine …
                11 February 2021 at 5:07 pm

                yeah, the same businesses that can't exit their leases lest they declare themselves bankrupt, (see comment below) will hire someone because the government is helping to pay not quite two month worth of a full time salary and the rest of the year you are on your own. Lol. Lol. Lol. like, bwhahahahaha lol.

                I can see MacDo take that offer tho and a few others.

                As for re-training, and get into construction. Right, any women who worked in retail, back office, front office, airplance crews, cooks, cleaners, and so on and so forth, please present at the next training session for constructions jobs – and while yer at it, please go pick that pesky fruit. Why did they not think about that themselves the dears. Oh boy.

                Sometimes really i ask myself if you really believe that and would you be capable of doing that exact same thing should the government decide next time that your job ain't worth subsidizing.

                • Ad …
                  12 February 2021 at 10:30 pm

                  If you are aware of the criteria from the tourism transition fund, go right ahead and explain its exclusion of lease payments.

                  Alone of all your sex you feel women can't do construction. Maybe you're from the 1950s. Either way your mind is tired. Our company is from 2021. Move out of the way.

                  Most days the tiresome, chippy, weak, sexist childish fools like yourself can never see how to help themselves, and actively get in the way of others seeking to help.

                  You're no longer capable of helping. Unless you can prove otherwise.

            • Foreign waka 3.1.1.1.1.2
              11 February 2021 at 8:33 pm

              Hi Sabine I do agree that the subsidizing of any business that cannot sustain themselves has to end. At the same time though, a special criteria should be included with the recipients of the unemployment benefit for people who have lost their job in a tourism business. Perhaps something similar like the topped up benefit that ended last October. There also needs assistance available for relocation costs if people find a job elsewhere. So essentially, the employee who lost the job ought to get additional assistance for a period of time, i.e. 6 months (?) not the business.

              You say you take the jobs, they wont be there no matter what as the taxpayer will not pay even more billions for something they suffer through themselves for years to come. Looking at major cities like Wellington – rent is up to over $ 600, people don't even earn that much. The rates are expected to increase by a whooping 17-18%. It becomes utterly unaffordable as it is, without the knowing that we have to pay up for businesses that by its very nature is a risky undertaking. There will be a lot of resistance out there.

              • Descendant Of Smith …
                11 February 2021 at 9:25 pm

                The trouble is with things like travel is that there isn't a lot of sympathy ( as opposed to empathy for the workers) for the industry as a whole. Those that could afford to travel regularly aren't the bulk of people (not to mention it was the more well-off people travelling that initially spread COVID-19.) Locals having to pay tourist prices have put many things beyond the reach of the ordinary person – think something like making people pay in recent years to go to Happy Valley which has always been free, the selling off of holiday camps where the ordinary person went, the rise of peoples spare houses being used for Airbnb, the demise of freedom camping for NZers as high volumes of tourists came in, the exploitation of workers in the industry and the payments under the table, the backhanders paid to get the tourist buses to stop at your attraction/restaurant, and so on.

                The damage done with the Douglas reforms where the well-off got big tax cuts while the working class lost their jobs or were forced into faux-self employment (courier drivers, cleaners, sub-contractors, etc) and got user pays and lower wages and salaries.

                This continues with the wealth accumulation of the well-off and the imposition of high rents as the working class and the unemployed further line the pockets of the well-off so they can hop on a fucking plane and travel.

                I like how the well off like to think they are the "ordinary" person. You know an ordinary person who needs a travel agent or a real estate agent (oh that's right poor people do now cause most real agents are parasitic landlords or rental companies who when a decent landlord gets them to manage their properties immediately put the rent up to "market" rates which like CE salaries are designed to simply enrich the well-off.

                Homeownership is the lowest it has been since the 50's and 56% of young people now rent. I don't remember a lot of sympathy for those who were laid off from the railways and post office in their 50's and never got another job again – not through lack of applying either or who had to commute to Auckland during the week to work away from their families to do so. I don't remember a lot of sympathy for those laid off from the car manufacturing jobs in Porirua and so on.

                I don't see any sympathy right now from landlords who just keep putting rents up and up and up beyond affordability (nor was there any post Christchurch earthquake which set the foundation for profiteering and high rents). I do see obnoxious behaviour like being a rental company owner who is opposing state housing in a local community where there is a major shortage of housing.

                Maybe just maybe when the ordinary person in my communities have a job again, get paid a decent wage, can own their own home or pay reasonable rent only then will travel and tourism be a given – cause lets face it the ordinary person doesn't have a shitshow of mitigating the effects of COVID-19 and supporting that industry.

                You are in the same boat as the horticulture industry which has shat on New Zealanders for the last 30 years – instead of building local community based work forces first used illegal labour and then RSE while at the same time actively telling New Zealanders how useless they are – and continue to still say that now. You are not going to get a local workforce by telling people they are useless. You're supposed to be captains of commerce and industry – how do you not get that?

                There needs to be some rethinking going on by a whole lot of people.

                • Sabine …
                  12 February 2021 at 5:23 am

                  It is funny how people assume that one must be in an industry or another when one argues for 'subsidies'. For the record the only 'subsidy' i received was the initial wage subsidy that my business received for my staff and myself. And that was that. Also, i don't have staff anymore, i work on my own, exactly like i did when i started out. O guess i don't actually have to worry what will happen to Rotorua, after all i am fine, right?

                  Secondly, while I now live in a tourist region, i used to live in AKL up to four years ago. Funnily enough, while i lived in AKL arguing that people deserved houses, i was told to move to the regions cause living was cheaper there, even tho i was not one who was homeless in AKL.

                  So really, one arguing for something does not mean one needs it or wants it.

                  Last but least, i did not argue for subsidies for the 'tourism industry that shat on NZ' via the jobs they provided, via the taxes they paid, and all the other stuff that comes with living and working in NZ for the most part as good as one can.

                  I argue that the government has a choice to make, subsidies for businesses or subsidies for people. I was from the onset against using businesses as a medium to pass benefits on to people. I was not for the wage subsidy, i wanted the government to send 'stimulus', or 'wage replacement' or 'a check' directly to people during the Lockdown period, and then argued for something like, a higher benefit for people who are unemployed, with out less strings and humiliation attached to it. I argued and still do that i would like the government to provide a legal frame work for business stuck in leases to get out of said leases before they have to declare bankruptcy so that these same people may be able to start something up that is better suited to these brave new times. Subsidies do not have to be only monetary.

                  But if anyone here thinks that the collapse of the tourism industry is going to change anything for homeless people in NZ or poor people in NZ should really ask why? IF anything it will make it worse first for the unemployed and the homeless and then for anyone else.

                  Keep in mind that currently in Rotorua houses have crept up to a million +, median rent is 460 NZD per week, and the next summer season begins in December 2021. Its 10 month till then, and like this year it will last 6 weeks – and what ever season it will be then, will depend on the money people will then have to spend.

                  So how much will the government pay for rent assistance, hardship assistance, special needs assistance, unemployment benefits, social welfare etc, and how many more people will end up unhoused/homeless because they can't keep up, and last but least where would you like these homeless, jobless people on a few hundred NZD per week government largess to move too?

                  It has been almost one year now, anyone not wearing blinders would know what is going to happen in 2021 and beyond already when we went into lockdown, and here we are pretending that the people that live in certain parts of NZ had it coming, deserve nothing more, and besides by virtue of living in a certain area they 'shat' on the country. And the tourism industry, the bad players as well as the good players and everyone in between are just the first stone to fall.

                  You are right, there needs to be some rethinking going on by a whole lot of people.

                  • Descendant Of Smith …
                    12 February 2021 at 7:40 am

                    The you was generic rather than specific.

                    "So how much will the government pay for rent assistance, hardship assistance, special needs assistance, unemployment benefits, social welfare etc"

                    Sadly not as much as they pay to assist working people and employers. The two tier welfare system that developed post-COVID clearly delineated deserving and underserving poor like nothing else did in recent times. As long as we treat certain people differently then nothing will be done for the poor will it?

                    Helping out tourism as a special case will continue to reinforce the difference. A generally low paid, full of corruption industry that has seen paying under the table, backhanders, avoiding tax, etc as a normal part of doing business.

            • Incognito 3.1.1.1.1.3
              12 February 2021 at 7:36 am

              Government can borrow money, it (strictly, it is not Government) can print money, it can pay subsidies and it can pay (for) benefits all at the same time. It might go against certain economic orthodoxies and/or against certain political ideologies, but it can be done if the will and courage is there.

          • Incognito 3.1.1.1.2
            12 February 2021 at 7:32 am

            Government does not subsidise Rio Tinto.

    • Jimmy 3.2
      11 February 2021 at 11:01 am

      But the economy is going very well according to Robertson, and there is only 4.9% unemployment and debt is far lower than anticipated so we are coming through this thing very well.

    • tc 3.3
      11 February 2021 at 11:26 am

      Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

      Speaking of naked self interest has anyone with a Granny sub read the hosk's rant about the govt lack of covid vision.

      Oz having a plan and strategy !!!…..look like it's state V federal over there with Victoria's latest budget sticking 2 fingers at scomo by addressing areas of federal responsibility.

    • Graeme 3.4
      11 February 2021 at 1:36 pm

      We’re a small owner operator tourism business, currently we’re trading at about 10% of 2019. According to Paymark we were 65% domestic. Up until Sept it wasn’t too bad, October on has been beyond dead. The domestic recovery has been all over the place with destinations fall in and out if favour really quickly.

      Nash is on the right track. The industry has to adjust to a very different world. While there’s some hope of international travel from 2022 it will take a very long time, if ever, before we see anything like 2019 numbers. A lot of businesses have to go. We could easily be one of them.

      One area government could help this transition is around exit from leases. Most businesses lease premises and are stuck for the duration of the lease. Right now buying your way out of a lease would mean paying every cent due for the rest if the lease because the landlord has no show of getting another tenant. Our landlord’s option was a temporary rent reduction but a much longer term.

      Government needs to be more involved in the hard discussions to enable people to move on, rather than screwed over.

      • Ad 3.4.1
        11 February 2021 at 1:54 pm

        Is bankruptcy the only other alternative out of the lease?

        Even Art and Object have started to figure out how to get online better.

        Just gently inquiring what scope you would have for your kind of art on line.

        • Graeme 3.4.1.1
          11 February 2021 at 2:17 pm

          Personal guarantee. Screwed.

          Currently doing 2 – 3x online what we’re doing over the counter. Lost a good sale yesterday because shipping to USA was $600 for a 6kg item that was only a bit more retail

      • Sabine 3.4.2
        11 February 2021 at 2:31 pm

        Yes, helping tenants to get out of leases would be a big help for those that want to get out now.

        I discussed that very idea with the labor contender here in Vegas, ………but nothing much came of it.

        • Graeme 3.4.3.1
          11 February 2021 at 9:27 pm

          Winston's point about sanctity of contract is still valid. It's pretty draconian for government to come in and over-ride contracts and would be a very bad place to go. Although Little's bluff / threat of subsidised arbitration brought a lot of parties together with the lockdown rent rebates.

          Probably the way to go would be a real program of heavily subsidised, compulsory arbitration, with a set of guidelines / expectations, and maybe a bit of cash, to force agreements between tenants and landlords so people can get out of some pretty shitty situations without having to loose everything. That agreement could be anything from exit through to a re-negotiated lease.

          There's businesses in tourist areas that aren't even close to paying their operating costs (power, insurance telecoms etc) let alone rent. Motels with 10 – 20% occupancy, and having to discount heavily to get even that. Sooner or later that's going to end badly and the business owner isn't the only one getting hurt.

          • Pat 3.4.3.1.1
            11 February 2021 at 10:15 pm

            The question is, if it was important enough to be addressed 7 months ago (but stymied by Winston) why have they made no move post his departure?

            • Sabine 3.4.3.1.1.1
              12 February 2021 at 5:29 am

              Maybe Winston was not the only reason?

            • Graeme 3.4.3.1.1.2
              12 February 2021 at 7:10 am

              That situation was around the lockdown, where most commercial leases had a clause requiring a 'fair' reduction of rent for the closed period. Some leases didn't, and some parties had diverging ideas on what constituted 'fair'. So Government proposed a range of interventions, with some guidelines. Little's proposal of compulsory, pretty much free, arbitration focused a some intransigent minds and agreements happened pdq. Peters played his part and Government got the result without having to interfere in contracts.

              The current situation is where lease arrangements, and property values, relate to business levels that were many times what they are now. Tenants are pretty much stuck there until the lease ends as there's no mechanism in the leases to terminate in these circumstances. Landlords are also in the crap as their rental income will disappear if they loose their tenant, with equally catastrophic consequences in most cases, so are naturally standing by the letter of the lease.

              This could get quite messy, and quite quickly, once places start getting boarded up.

    • mac1 3.5
      11 February 2021 at 3:06 pm

      Chris, I'd appreciate your take on why Minister Nash should do as you ask? What is your beef with Nash?

  4. Jimmy 4
    11 February 2021 at 11:06 am

    Good to see they have captured this bastard who left this lady badly injured. Also good that there is no name suppression for him.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/taita-hit-and-run-accused-appears-in-hutt-valley-district-court/XC4GPAAB47AOPMTBSXQLFCMLOM/

  5. greywarshark 5
    11 February 2021 at 12:33 pm

    Maori wards ensuring representation by the vital group that considers that the planet is vital for humans and animals and vice versa of course, has submissions closing –

    Submissions close TODAY. Before 5 pm this afternoon, Thursday 11 February 2021.

    Let's just get robust and start moving forward instead of being shrinking violets from the progressive decisions. This would be the first for many people at a time when there need to be a lot of thinking followed by timely action, about new ways for the future. Start now, get into practise – make New Zealand vital again!

    This bill seeks to amend the Local Electoral Act 2001 to improve Māori representation in local government. It aims to do this by removing provisions in the Act that allow for the use of binding polls in the decision to establish Māori wards or constituencies. More details about the bill are available on the New Zealand Parliament website.

    Make a submission on the bill by 5.00pm on Thursday 11 February, 2021.

    https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2102/S00082/have-your-say-on-the-local-electoral-maori-wards-and-maori-constituencies-amendment-bill.htm

    Vote for Maori wards and we can capitalise on their energy reserve just waiting to go with new ideas, ready for discussion, argument and reasoned agreement and action. These will turn Maori, pakeha and new tauiwi around to face forwards, while still towing the past with us for reference and useful experience when needed.

  6. joe90 6
    11 February 2021 at 4:13 pm

    Lighter and five to seven times stronger than concrete.

    https://www.thisiscolossal.com/2021/02/nzambi-matee-plastic-bricks/

  7. greywarshark 7
    11 February 2021 at 7:44 pm

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/436232/study-links-climate-change-to-severe-rainfall

    Wow scary stuff. So what did cloud seeding experiments result in? Would activating rain in one needy area change the 'sky rivers' bringing weather dumping? https://climate.ncsu.edu/edu/CloudSeeding

    Cloud seeding first began in the mid 1940s when Dr. Vincent J. Schaefer was studying cloud formation for General Electric. Cloud seeding has been subsequently used to enhance precipitation, dissipate fog, modify hurricanes, and decrease lightning and hail in thunderstorms.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding

    and Australia? – Cloud seeding – New World Encyclopedia http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org › entry › Cloud_seedi…

    Jump to History — History · 1947–1952: CSIRO scientists dropped dry ice into the tops of cumulus clouds. · 1953–1956: CSIRO carried out similar trials in …

    Stepping carefully. NZ Geographic brings some interesting facts to light. https://www.nzgeo.com/stories/the-rainmakers/

    As General Electric held back from cloud-seeding, other commercial enterprises leapt into the breach. New York City’s leaders commissioned one to make rain over their reservoir. They got a flood and 169 lawsuits for damages. They hastily commissioned a survey to show that cloud-seeding did not work, so avoided paying damages, but were placed under a permanent injunction not to try cloud-seeding again.

    India is faced with great need. I wonder if they sell off water for bottling. The commerical imperative often wins over reason and responsibility amongst country leaders.

    https://india.mongabay.com/2019/07/as-cloud-seeding-catches-on-in-times-of-climate-change-more-research-holds-the-key/

  8. Scud 8
    12 February 2021 at 1:18 am

    I’ve heard on the rumour mill, Pacific Aerospace (PAC) which is NZ’s sole remaining Aircraft construction company is being liquidated by its Chinese owners. This Company was allow to be brought by the Chinese under the last National Government under the guise from the NZG & the Foreign Investment Office that the Chinese promise of keeping all Aircraft design & construction it in NZ.

    So much so, for the National wanting to invest NZ STEM Training as they promise during the last general election, when let/ approve this sort’ve crap, closing down Hillside Workshops and forcing AirNZ to off load it’s two of its so-called “Non Core Assets” TAE & Safe Air which btw used to do about 90-95% of AirNZ’s Military Contracts both local & overseas.