Open mike 11/06/2025

48 comments on “Open mike 11/06/2025 ”

• Comment on post

1. Todays Posts 1

   11 June 2025 at 6:00 am

   Today's Posts (updated through the day):

   Reply
2. Chris Clark 2

   11 June 2025 at 8:43 am

   This guy speaks a lot of sense. Here is an article in the ODT about how the South Island and other regions need their own regional committee to get a fair slice of the cake from parliament:

   The South Island merits a committee all of its own | Otago Daily Times Online News

   What do you think?

   Reply
   • Ad 2.1

     11 June 2025 at 9:49 am

     In Australia they have the thing called the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting.

     It would be so easy for the government to bring together all the heads of regional councils and unitary councils into a single annual meeting to discuss upcoming relevant legislation.

     At the moment the only time than local government gets together is the annual Local Government Conference which is rarely treated by government with any respect, and is on the whole a large collection of Cossie Club rural grunts.

     A regionalised meeting with central government would be a simple innovation that respects that regions are at least as important as they used to be when they abolished Provincial government over a century ago.

     Reply
   • bwaghorn 2.2

     11 June 2025 at 11:52 am

     What are electorate mps for then, ?

     shit they've already got there own special minister now days ,

     I can't imagine all them nact voters down south wanting special treatment anyway.

     Reply
   • Res Publica 2.3

     11 June 2025 at 12:06 pm

     What do you mean by “fair”? The South Island gets a fixed number of electorates regardless of how much population and economic activity continues to shift north. That’s already generous.

     You could charitably argue that much of our social and economic policy still caters to their (mostly rural) interests: not Auckland’s housing crisis, not urban transport, not immigration or the tech economy.

     This isn’t about fairness. It’s special pleading, dressed up as regionalism. A nostalgic pitch for the days when a handful of sheep barons ran the country like a private fiefdom and the rest of us were expected to doff our caps.

     Reply
3. Stephen D 3

   11 June 2025 at 10:09 am

   https://tinyurl.com/mscz4tpv

   "The re-emergence of a binary ideological choice might even suggest New Zealand – lacking the constitutional guardrails common in other democracies – needs to look beyond MMP for other ways to limit the power of its governments."

   What the framers of MMP did not take into account was the possible hijacking of a coalition parliament. The weakness, or desperation to hold on to power of the dominant party leader is what has got us into this mess.

   Reply
   • Ad 3.1

     11 June 2025 at 10:17 am

     The worst one was Greens+Labour seeking to embed a supermajority into the sale of water assets last term.

     It was a great policy idea in theory. But they did it late at night without a practice run and got caught and scorched.

     If the left ever, ever, ever get a Parliamentary majority that big again, they should amend our Constitution with asset supermajorities.

     Reply
     • Macro 3.1.1

       11 June 2025 at 10:52 am

       So now we have Water Done Worse. 🙁

       Reply
       • Ad 3.1.1.1

         11 June 2025 at 11:01 am

         Agree it was a simply massive regulatory peak that we failed collectively to scale.

         These days we just have Federated Farmers and DCANZ actively gloating about their $10 milk solid payout … and always forgetting to tell us is takes 1,000 litres of water to make 1 litre of milk. ie almost 1,000 litrees of water becomes waste to treat or just chuck down the river.

         Reply
   • Res Publica 3.2

     11 June 2025 at 12:01 pm

     Yes, because obviously Jacinda Ardern and Chris Hipkins are solely responsible for the last 20 years of New Zealand politics. And for the current coalition’s policy choices. /s

     What we’re seeing isn’t the product of one election or one leader. It’s the result of a long-term trend of political polarisation, mirroring shifts across much of the Western world. The collapse of our once-centrist parties; United Future into irrelevance, and NZ First into populist reaction, has hollowed out the middle, leaving a vacuum filled by more ideologically rigid blocs.

     It might be easy to heap scorn on Labour for 2023 (and they absolutely should be held accountable for their campaign and governance choices). But the fact remains: MMP has largely succeeded in holding the line against extremism. As long as the two major parties remain tethered (however loosely) to reality and the Overton window, I think we’ll find it will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

     This government is the aberration, not Labour from 2020 to 2023. MMP is designed to moderate politics: to force consensus, negotiation, and representation. And pointedly not to prevent majorities from ever forming. Sometimes majorities will happen. Sometimes coalitions will stretch wider than is comfortable.

     That’s not a bug: it's a feature. And it’s far better than a system where governments can bulldoze over half the country unchecked.

     Reply
     • Ad 3.2.1

       11 June 2025 at 1:10 pm

       I would hate to see what the extreme version of policy looks like with the old FPP system if MMP was supposed to moderate policy.

       I really can't remember anything Key ever did, but this Luxon government is going to leave deep scars in our Parliamentary processes, and our geographical landscape, and is already generating scars in our social landscape.

       Reply
       • Res Publica 3.2.1.1

         11 June 2025 at 1:17 pm

         Totally hear you, but I don’t think this is MMP’s fault.

         The reality is that a majority of voters chose this government knowing full well what it promised to do. That would have likely played out the same way under any electoral system, FPP included.

         So, the real issue isn’t the voting system. It’s the lack of strong constitutional guardrails to protect long-term social and environmental outcomes from short-term political swings.

         We need to focus on building durable checks and balances, not blame MMP or wring our hands over Labour’s failings. Because if the last eight years have taught us anything, it’s that institutions matter. And in a democracy, they can be fragile things.

         Reply
         • Bearded Git 3.2.1.1.1

           11 June 2025 at 2:27 pm

           MMP is still far far better than FPP or Preferential Voting (PV).

           For instance under FPP Starmer's Labour got 411 seats and a massive majority with just 33.7% of the vote in 2024. Under MMP they would have got around 219 seats.

           The Australian Greens got 12% and no seats at all in the recent Oz election using PV. Under MMP they would have got at least 18 seats.

           Reply
         • Stephen D 3.2.1.1.2

           11 June 2025 at 2:48 pm

           We seem to be having the same problem as the USA.

           As voters we got what we were promised. We just didn't think it would turn out this way. The Face Eating Leopard Party does what it says on the tin. (please excuse the mixed metaphors)

           Reply
         • Ad 3.2.1.1.3

           11 June 2025 at 3:07 pm

           Our voting system is our strongest constitutional guardrail.

           The constitutional guardrail we could do better is local and regional government.

           The regional representative question is I think the right one and honestly the easiest to answer.

           Reply
           • Incognito 3.2.1.1.3.1

             11 June 2025 at 3:33 pm

             Our voting system is our strongest constitutional guardrail.

             It’s a tiny piece of rope that cuts into your hands on a one-rope swing-bridge.

             The Coalition is about to abolish one pillar of NZ’s semi-constitutional framework and it doesn’t even need a super-majority in the House and there’s nothing to stop them.

             Reply
             • Ad …

               11 June 2025 at 3:48 pm

               18 months to go and you'll see it's more effective than you think.

               Also, local elections are less than 4 months away.

               Find and fight for your candidate and change the system and the budget.

               Reply
           • Res Publica 3.2.1.1.3.2

             11 June 2025 at 3:48 pm

             That’s where I think you’re mistaken. MMP isn’t designed to be a constitutional guardrail: just a mechanism for allocating power constraining it.

             It makes our democracy fairer, but it doesn’t stop governments from pushing the limits of that power.

             Our true constitutional protections run deeper: the Treaty of Waitangi. The independence of the public service. The powers of judicial review. The accountability of MPs to the people. These are the structures that define and limit how power is used: not just who gets to use it.

             Yes, this coalition is doing its best to erode those foundations. But that makes it even more important to distinguish between the signal of constitutional design and the noise of partisan politics. MMP reflects the public will—it doesn’t defend democracy by itself.

             That responsibility lies with our institutions. And with us.

             And make no mistake: the battle for our constitution is already underway. But it’s not being fought in the House.

             It’s being waged by the tens of thousands of New Zealanders who submitted on the Treaty Principles Bill; and those now taking a stand against the Regulatory Standards Bill. It’s being hashed out at family dinners, around office morning teas, and in supermarket queues up and down the country.

             Every conversation a firefight. Every step toward consensus a victory.

             Reply
             • Ad …

               11 June 2025 at 6:26 pm

               A "mechanism for constraining power" is precisely a constitutional guardrail. Your vote is waaaay more powerful than anything the Treaty of Waitangi will ever do for you

               The Governor General enables government to form based on this alone. Not whether the public service are neutral – that's a convention nreither party have encouraged in a decade.

               I'd love to believe Acemoglu and Robertson were correct that institutional strength always enables the primrose path to prosperity. It's a very Labour/Fabian thing.

               In reality that was 30 years ago. I'd argue the reverse: our institutions aren't changing and many are so strong and immobile that they are bulwarks resisting dissent from all corners more effectively than ever: ACC, MBIE, IRD, Treasury, DPMC, Police, MAF, NZTA, MSD, Commerce Commission, Transpower, NZSuper Guardians…

               … dissent against any of them and prepare to be ruined.

               Reply
     • AB 3.2.2

       11 June 2025 at 1:25 pm

       “As long as the two major parties remain tethered (however loosely) to reality and the Overton window, I think we’ll find [MMP] will continue to [hold the line against extremism]"

       Yes, that seems right. But to complicate things – is it possible that MMP actually influences the Overton window, not merely reflects it? So that MMP may have anchored the Overton window in the historical moment of MMP's inception in 1996, a period which some people would argue was already dominated by radical right-wing economic ideas. If so, MMP may have acted to preserve a radical status quo, rather than militate against extremism. I'm not sure if that makes sense – but the thought has occurred

       Reply
       • Res Publica 3.2.2.1

         11 June 2025 at 3:25 pm

         I'd argue that any electoral system tends to reflect the prevailing political consensus more than it shapes it: at least in the medium term.

         MMP didn’t invent consensus politics in New Zealand; it codified an emerging discomfort with the adversarial nature of FPP and the volatility of policy “swings” from one government to the next.

         That consensus in the early '90s was forged in reaction to the radicalism of Rogernomics and Ruthanasia, not necessarily in support of them.

         So while it’s true that MMP may have “frozen” aspects of the political landscape post-1996, I’d say it locked in a corrective impulse more than a radical status quo.

         And crucially, broad-church political parties still have to go where the voters are. If neoliberalism continued to dominate after MMP, that says more about the ideological terrain of the electorate than it does about the mechanics of the voting system.

         In that sense, MMP may limit the rate of radical change, but it doesn’t block it. It moderates rather than dictates. If the public wants transformation, whether left, right, or otherwise, parties will have to adapt or die.

         But they'll have to bring others along with them. That’s the trade-off MMP makes: progress by consensus rather than imposition.

         Reply
         • Dennis Frank 3.2.2.1.1

           11 June 2025 at 6:40 pm

           There's a pivot between inertia and change, a tipping point where the balance shifts from time to time. An economy adrift sideways is a likely sign of imminent shift, but folks can be relied on to cling to their favourite delusion as long as they possibly can. A flatline always seems a blip to optimists driven by animal spirits. Alternatively, growth may re-emerge, to then pull National back up to the upper-thirties, with a reflexive dip for coalition partners.

           Reply
         • lprent 3.2.2.1.2

           12 June 2025 at 8:17 am

           I agree. The problem is that we are caught by a cleft problem. The parliamentary term is too short at 3 years.

           However we also can’t trust our single house parliament to do due diligence on the legislation that they pass if we give them a 4 or 5 year term.

           3 years is too short because government MPs are trying to bypass consensus by pushing legislation through before the end of the second year so it beds in. They tend to ignore warnings, skip select committees, regulatory impact statements, and push through under urgency.

           The house, including the select committees are way too political. Too many personal ambitions in a hurry.

           So they don’t get a longer term – then the public can boot them before they cause real damage. But they also spend all their damn time campaigning apart from maybe 12 months mid-term.

           What we need is a upper house that concentrates on legislative process and only process. Their tool is to kick legislation that they think hasn’t had due process, back to the house, with a time limit of something like 9 months before it can be presented to them again for a rubber stamp. Essentially what the court of appeal does to high court cases. They don’t make law, they judge how the high court judges ran the court and its processes on a case.

           Old long-serving speakers of the house? Previous long-serving PMs. Ex-supreme court and appeal court judges? Ex-governor-generals… Maybe old unionists, and retired business leaders. Ancient cynics who have seen the screwups previously. Make it like a jury. Can only get kicked back if at least 10 of 12 (or a similar ratio) agree that the legislative process looked dodgy.

           Reply
4. Anne 4

   11 June 2025 at 11:07 am

   Why do the media let this kind of appalling trash stand without highlighting the lying and deceit by immediately issuing corrections following the falsehoods. It is the only way to counter disinformation.

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360716337/national-guard-troops-arrive-los-angeles-trumps-orders-quell-immigration-protests

   I'm talking about the media everywhere including in NZ. They stand there day after day with their microphones repeating disinformation. They know they are falsehoods yet they rarely make an attempt to dispel them. Its almost as if they are too lily livered to tell the truth.

   It is even more concerning when there is a maniacal US president hellbent on following the Nazi rule book and dragging all of us towards war and mayhem.

   Reply
   • Ad 4.1

     11 June 2025 at 3:50 pm

     Such a political gift to Governor Newsom.

     A bouncy 2028 trampoline.

     Reply
   • tc 4.2

     11 June 2025 at 3:58 pm

     Why did they quote seymour having a go at Maori again after losing the oxford debate recently ?

     Gotta keep those memes alive and well.

     RIP journalism.

     Reply
5. Sanctuary 5

   11 June 2025 at 11:49 am

   The Royal United Services Institute is a key pillar of the British establishment. When they say Israel is conducting a genocide you know something has changed in Western elites.

   https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/understanding-gazas-starvation-within-israels-campaign

   Reply
6. bwaghorn 6

   11 June 2025 at 11:59 am

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360719591/adrian-orr-resigned-over-funding-disagreement

   So Orr didn't leave because of 7 years of personal attacks ,he left because the government has chosen to underfund the reserve bank, from Orrs' perspective

   Reply
7. Muttonbird 7

   11 June 2025 at 12:24 pm

   Nut jobs gonna nut job. Covid sceptic David Cohen is writing a book about Jacinda Ardern, financed by (NZME’s new owner) Jim Grenon's RW aggregator, The Centrist. Cohen has interviewed a broad range of journalists such as Mike Hoskins and Heather Duplicity-Allen.

   This is a response to JA's huge global reach which NZ's impotent political right are furious about.

   https://archive.is/y8v1u

   Reply
   • Anne 7.1

     11 June 2025 at 3:13 pm

     So blatant and obvious. How dare she write a book about her time in office. Their mantra? Hatred over kindness. We want people to hate on her because she's dangerous to our cause.

     Reply
   • KJT 7.2

     11 June 2025 at 3:27 pm

     They, are incandescent with rage that people, wellbeing and the future of everyone was prioritised over short term profit for a few. And the majority saw it worked. They are determined that it can never happen again! Then there are the ones who objected to taking adult consequences, for the logical conclusions of their actions that put others at risk.

     Reply
   • Ad 7.3

     11 June 2025 at 3:29 pm

     Hopefully Ardern makes the move from NZ's Megan Merkel to a new US East Coast Oprah.

     As a platform without content, she needs a serious job before it's too late for a second career.

     Reply
   • Rodel 7.4

     12 June 2025 at 12:26 am

     Love this….'. Cohen has interviewed a broad range of journalists (sic) such as Mike Hoskins and Heather Duplicity-Allen.'..

     ''

     Reply
8. Phillip ure 8

   11 June 2025 at 1:44 pm

   Reply to ad 11.01..

   So..reason number 53 to eschew (see what I did there?) the animal stuff ..

   ..and go vegan…

   ..eh..?

   (Heads-up re almond milk: don't go there…it has a shocking environmental footprint..)

   Note to moderator: still unable to reply..absent cursor..using android cellie..

   Reply
   • Incognito 8.1

     11 June 2025 at 1:59 pm

     Google AI suggests these as possible temporary workarounds.

     • Workarounds:
       • Toggle Zoom: Users have reported that toggling zoom in and zoom out will temporarily restore the cursor's visibility according to GitHub.
       • Re-tap: Sometimes, simply tapping within the text area again can bring the cursor back.
       • Refresh: Refreshing the page may also solve the issue.

     Reply
     • weka 8.1.1

       11 June 2025 at 2:43 pm

       nice, that seemed to work, kind of. Manage to test below, logged out, but don't really know how I got it to work other than zooming in and out multiple times and stabbing at the screen.

       Reply
   • weka 8.2

     11 June 2025 at 2:36 pm

     it's an ongoing issue for some mobile users. You should be able to switch from desktop to mobile version on your phone and then you will be able to reply. No Replies list on the mobile version though.

     Reply
     • Weka test 8.2.1

       11 June 2025 at 2:42 pm

       Test

       Reply
     • Phillip ure 8.2.2

       11 June 2025 at 3:26 pm

       Ok…thanks for that…

       Had to be something simple..

       Reply
9. weka 9

   11 June 2025 at 2:36 pm

   who has the best places to follow what is happening in LA? Bsky is quite good, but would like to get a better updating feed.

   Reply
   • Stephen D 9.1

     11 June 2025 at 2:51 pm

     The Guardian seems pretty up to date.

     Reply
     • weka 9.1.1

       11 June 2025 at 3:57 pm

       👍

       Reply
10. Drowsy M. Kram 10

    11 June 2025 at 2:51 pm

    New Zealand government sued over ‘dangerously inadequate’ emissions reduction plan [The Guardian, amended 11 June 2025]
    The government’s plan was “fundamentally unambitious” and a “dangerous regression” for the country, Jessica Palairet, the executive director of Lawyers for Climate Action NZ told the Guardian.

    "Dangerously unadequate"? "Dangerous regression"!??
    No no-no, CoC – as Luxon said: "It's a case of slower to go faster."

    Since taking office, the government has promised to restart offshore oil and has set aside $200m of its budget to invest in gas exploration. It plans to boost mineral exports to $3bn by 2035, at the same time it has slashed funding to conservation and climate initiatives. The controversial new fast-track law that is pushing through major infrastructure projects, including mining, has been described as “egregiously damaging” for the environment and risks a path towards a greener future.

    

    Reply
    • Drowsy M. Kram 10.1

      11 June 2025 at 3:09 pm

      Aotearoa New Zealand is on a NActF fast track to a slow burn.

      Climate scientists decry govt's approach to methane [3 June 2025]
      The prime minister has dismissed international climate scientists as "worthies" for criticising the government's approach to methane.

      

      Reply
    • Ad 10.2

      11 June 2025 at 3:36 pm

      Arguing against $10 per kilo of milk solids – and our strongest earner by a long way – will remain very very hard.

      Check out all our exceptionally confident agribusiness and horticultural business at Mystery Creek this week.

      Ain't nothing for the left there unless it's exceptional tech.

      Reply
      • Drowsy M. Kram 10.2.1

        11 June 2025 at 4:26 pm

        Check out all our exceptionally confident agribusiness and horticultural business at Mystery Creek this week.

        Agribusiness confidence is fickle like the weather, which looks fine at Mystery Creek.

        Alas, not every cloud has a silver lining – we don't know how lucky we are, and were.
        Still, fingers crossed.

        Five-year forecast paints a troubling picture of extreme weather and deadly heat [29 May 2025]
        “We have just experienced the ten warmest years on record. Unfortunately, this WMO report provides no sign of respite over the coming years, and this means that there will be a growing negative impact on our economies, our daily lives, our ecosystems and our planet,” World Meteorological Organization Deputy Secretary-General Ko Barrett said in a statement.

        

        Reply
        • Ad 10.2.1.1

          11 June 2025 at 5:52 pm

          A warming and higher rainfall New Zealand means even more dairy conversions, more horticulture, less extensive pastoral.

          Don't forget, New Zealand runs by mining rain.

          Reply
          • Drowsy M. Kram 10.2.1.1.1

            11 June 2025 at 8:31 pm

            A warming and higher rainfall New Zealand means even more dairy conversions…

            Hooray? https://maps.greenpeace.org/maps/aotearoa/know-your-nitrate/

            Luxon’s War on the Climate – a deliberate effort to increase emissions [3 June 2025]
            I’ve gone through every week of the 18 months of the Luxon Government to pull out their climate policies and laid them out below. And, spoiler alert, it is a comprehensive plan to increase climate pollution, and the claims that they take the Paris Climate targets seriously are just greenwashing deception.

            https://www.dairynz.co.nz/tools/bull-search/

            NZ’s dairy industry faces an uncertain future – its fate now lies in its ability to adapt [19 Dec 2024]
            Debates about how to account for these emissions have gone on for many years in New Zealand. But last month, the coalition government passed legislation to keep agriculture out of the Emissions Trading Scheme.

            This means livestock farmers, agricultural processors, fertiliser importers and manufacturers won’t have to pay for on-farm emissions. Instead, the government intends to implement a pricing system outside the Emissions Trading Scheme by 2030. To meet emissions targets, it relies on the development of technologies such as methane inhibitors.

            Ruminant farmers and methane inhibitors eh – our future goose is cooked

            https://whatsoninvers.nz/farmers-strongly-reject-methane-inhibitor-use/

            
            9 June 2014 [!]: Cartoon depicts a mother and son at the field days looking at a dairy farmer sitting in a large glass fish bowl. It has a sign 'Do not feed'. Commentary from the cartoonist reads "KPMG has a report coming that has a section called 'Farming in a Fishbowl' – which talks about how farmers are under a lot of scrutiny from the general public regarding their sustainability credentials."

            Reply

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS