Open mike 17/05/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, May 17th, 2023 - 75 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 …

75 comments on “Open mike 17/05/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Sanctuary 1
    17 May 2023 at 7:57 am

    I know we've been speculating a bit on Luxon's future as leader of the Nats, but surely his disasterous performance this past few days has added extra piquancy to proceedings. The whole taxpayer receipt thing as a marquee policy is just wild. You've had the right leaning journos bending over backwards to make excuses for the guy, which is a terrible sign. Then yesterday and his ridiculous, insincere, and thoughtless Americanesque "Thoughts and prayers" comment on the Wellington hostel fire… I mean FFS. Unforced errors day after day.

    • Bearded Git 1.1
      17 May 2023 at 10:07 am

      Take it easy on Luxon please Sanc. We don't want him replaced before the electionsmiley.

    • AB 1.2
      17 May 2023 at 11:39 am

      I thought it was terrible judgment for him to turn up at the scene of the fire. What is this fire about, other than a failure of regulation and a failure of a housing market inflated by speculation? And Luxon and the Nats oppose regulation as a cost to business – and are dead keen to re-inflate the housing market (and therefore increase their personal wealth) by scrapping the brightline test, getting foreign buyers back, etc.

      Having Luxon standing in front of a scene of the tragic incineration of poor people was just a reminder that he and his cronies will make all such problems worse. Then he compounds it with meaningless, repetitive, dull and unoriginal babbling. Perhaps he got bad advice suggesting that putting in an appearance would show his human side and help people "get to know" him? God forbid – I already know him too much.

    • alwyn 1.3
      17 May 2023 at 11:44 am

      Meanwhile, when considering the polls on preferred PM at five months out from an election the current incumbent has the lowest ratings of any PM since MMP was introduced.

      Luxon is behind 2 of the Opposition leaders but ahead of the other 5 in the 8 elections for which numbers are available.

      However keep up with your dreams of how popular Chippie is and how everybody hates Luxon.

    • Corey 1.4
      17 May 2023 at 12:10 pm

      Luxon is the only thing the left have going for it, why on earth would you actually be hoping he gets rolled?

      The incumbent prime minister is polling at low 20s and has the charisma of a telemarketer.

      God forbid they roll Luxon, if they roll Luxon, you're looking at Nicola Willis or god forbid, Erica Stanford

      Regardless of whether the left sees it or not, both of those women would be extremely popular as leaders and drain middle class female votes from Labour.

      It's neck and neck in party polls because of Luxons unrelatability, if you put Stanford or Willis up against Hipkins and we're looking at a 2008 or 2011 result for National.

      The people who liked Key but then voted for Ardern in 2017 and 2020 will rush back to the National party with open arms for Nationals.

      Stanford imo is Nationals next pm.

  2. Janice 2
    17 May 2023 at 8:41 am

    Luxon is probably quite safe at the moment, his caucus are too busy writing their acceptance speeches and trying to quietly cut the throats of their fellow tory MPs to pay much attention to what he is doing.

  3. tsmithfield 3
    17 May 2023 at 8:50 am

    I think Labour has just lost the Christchurch vote.

    Christchurch voters will be pissed off with Labour every time they take a drink of disgusting chlorinated water.

    All National has to do is to promise to restore unchlorinated water to Christchurch and there will be a landslide to National.

    • Mac1 3.1
      17 May 2023 at 9:40 am

      All Christchurch had to do in 2016 was to spend some $40 million to secure the water supply against contamination. There are 400,000 residents there- it would cost only 20 flat whites per person to remedy! https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/313670/christchurch-city-council-to-vote-on-chlorinating-water

      • tsmithfield 3.1.1
        17 May 2023 at 9:44 am

        The council has spent millions on upgrading our water supply in order to meet government requirements. But, the goal posts keep shifting.

        https://www.chrislynchmedia.com/news-items/government-forces-chlorine-in-christchurchs-drinking-water-sparking-outrage-from-the-mayor

        Our water is fantastically managed here, and we have never had an outbreak of sickness due to water quality that I am aware of.

        • Liberty Belle 3.1.1.1
          17 May 2023 at 10:01 am

          My understanding is Chlorine has been used intermittently in the Chch water supply? Back in 2018(??) Chch were talking about using UV and ozone treatments to avoid the use of Chlorine. What happened to that?

          • tsmithfield 3.1.1.1.1
            17 May 2023 at 10:09 am

            Yes it has, if required. But only as long as necessary.

            The council has spent a fortune upgrading our infrastructure to meet what they understood to be the standard for an exemption. But, they have now found the goal-posts have moved.

            People in Christchurch will be hopping mad over this. I don't think the government realises how bigger deal this is for Christchurch.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 3.1.1.1.2
            17 May 2023 at 11:05 am

            Contaminated drinking water was the source of the campylobacteriosis outbreak in Havelock North in August 2016, with sheep faeces the likely source of the campylobacter. It is highly likely that the heavy rain that inundated paddocks neighbouring Brookvale Road caused contaminated water to flow into a pond about 90 metres from Brookvale Road bore 1.

            Heavy rain eh – "Chance in a million!"

            As far as tsmithfield (@3.1.1) is aware, ChCh has "never had an outbreak of sickness due to water quality". Was that also the case in HN, prior to 2016?

            https://www.hastingsdc.govt.nz/services/water/drinking-water/havelock-north-supply/article/276/havelock-north-water-contamination

            The Havelock North drinking water inquiry: A wake-up call to rebuild public health in New Zealand [19 December 2017]
            The second report of the Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry describes a long list of failings that contributed to the outbreak. In this blog we argue that the failings are much broader than the safety of drinking water supplies and represent a serious erosion and fragmentation of NZ’s national public health institutions. What is needed now is a major stocktake and rebuilding of our country’s national public health capacity.

            Alas, many Kiwis remain wilfully deaf to some 'inconvenient' wake-up calls.

            The impact of Havelock North's drinking water contamination

            In 2016, the water supply in Havelock North was contaminated with campylobacter. Four people died and around 5000 people fell ill.

            Following this incident, the Government carried out an inquiry and established the Three Waters Review to look at how to improve the regulation and delivery of drinking water, wastewater and stormwater – the three waters.

            We responded to the review by evaluating the condition of our below-ground well heads (the source of contamination in Havelock North) and began an extensive improvement programme.

            An independent assessment found the well heads did not meet standards and the Drinking Water Assessor advised the Christchurch water supply was no longer provisionally secure.

            The resulting loss of the secure status for our water supply, forced us to make the decision in early 2018 to temporarily chlorinate our water supplies.

            If we had not made that decision, the Medical Officer of Health would have required us to chlorinate. Temporary chlorination of much of the city’s water supply began in March 2018.

            The Government continued work to review and make changes to three waters across New Zealand and in late 2021 new legislation – the Water Services Act 2021 – was passed. This established Taumata Arowai – the new water regulator.

            Progress to date

            Since 2018 we have upgraded most of our well heads, installed ultra-violet disinfection at six wells, decommissioned a number of shallow wells and drilled ten new ones, but there is still further work being done.

            One of the biggest ongoing risks to our water supply relates to the condition of some of the reservoirs and suction tanks used to store drinking water. There are risks such as cracks in the roofs or in below-ground walls of the reservoirs which could allow contaminated water to get in.
            …
            Inspecting and repairing reservoirs can only take place during the winter months when a small number of reservoirs can be taken out of service as they aren’t needed to supply water. The inspections inform the scope of repair work so it is difficult to know exactly when the work will be complete, but we estimate the programme will take about five years to complete.

            • Liberty Belle 3.1.1.1.2.1
              17 May 2023 at 11:17 am

              Thanks Drowsy. I personally am in favour of local solutions. In this case it sems the regulator is being a bit heavy handed?

              • Stan …
                17 May 2023 at 11:42 am

                Good points.

                And people don't realise if you take a bacterium like Campylobacter, some get no illness, some mild, minority will be hospitalised and even die from the complications.

                Put those proportions into a city of 400,000 and you get significant number of serious illness and death for a slip up like Havelock North.

              • Descendant Of Smith …
                17 May 2023 at 11:46 am

                Can't see how you draw that conclusion.

                The council got their own assessment done and established that things were below standard and it will take about 5 years to fix.

                How is that not local?

              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                17 May 2023 at 11:56 am

                In this case it sems the regulator is being a bit heavy handed?

                Regulators are often viewed as "being a bit heavy handed" prior to a failure.

                Regulatory Failure – Examples

                Of greater ‘concern’ (to me, being somewhat risk-averse) are 'regulators' that don't learn from past failures:

                Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
                – Santayana

                Maybe the manifold problems we currently face locally and globally are crowding out lessons from the past?

                https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/nick-smith-defends-water-quality-targets.html

                • Liberty Belle …
                  17 May 2023 at 2:01 pm

                  What 'past failures' in Christchurch are you referring to?

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    17 May 2023 at 3:41 pm

                    What 'past failures' in Christchurch are you referring to?

                    Was noting the common perception that regulators/regulations are "a bit heavy handed" at times – see "optimism followed by disappointment".

                    Best Practice Regulation: Setting Targets and Detecting Vulnerabilities [August 2011; PDF]
                    Regulatory regimes as experiments
                    We often have an idealised or optimistic view of regulation based on what we believe it will deliver by way of outcomes, be they economic, social or both. It is generally articulated, at least by the proponents of a particular regulatory approach, at the time that approach is being developed and implemented.

                    However, the reality can fall short of the ideal, so much so on some occasions that the regulatory approach is considered to have failed and a new ideal is articulated. This pattern of optimism followed by disappointment followed by optimism can be observed over time and across different regulatory areas. It can also be observed in pendulum swings between different regulatory approaches, which often take the form of slogans – such as ‘light-handed’ versus ‘heavy-handed’, ‘prescriptive’ versus ‘principles’ or ‘more’ versus ‘less’ government.

                    Re ChCh and regulatory failures, leaky buildings 'spring' to mind.

                    In February 2010, New Zealand's Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson, National, warned that the size of the issue, at least $11 billion, was so gianormous [sic] that even a government with budget surpluses would struggle. He noted that: "…a Government who's [sic] running deficits – and has a forecast track of deficits for many years out – has to just sit there with its head in its hands, saying, 'Well, I just don't how to do this'."

                    He also warned that it was necessary to come up with a solution so money could be spent on fixing houses, rather than paying lawyers, and that there was a risk of significant rates rises in the major centres like Auckland, Tauranga, Wellington and Christchurch, of a scale that would "make eyes water".
                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaky_homes_crisis#Financial_liabilities

                    I'm sure you can think of examples if you put your mind to it – regulatory failures can occur for a number of reasons.

                    ECan moves over ‘explicit and continuous breaches’
                    [1 May 2023]
                    Water-take rules are being enforced after concerns were raised in a hidden scientific report

                    The CTV building collapse may have been due in part to inadequate regulations – the ChCh (and later Kaikōura) earthquakes prompted a regulatory rethink about what is considered acceptable earthquake risk in Aotearoa NZ – and some might say 'not before time'.

                    Moves to regulate engineers, change Building Code for hollow-core floors [24 May 2022]
                    Meanwhile, Cabinet has agreed to a new regulatory regime for engineers, meaning they will have to be registered and subject to a code of conduct.

                    "The collapse of the CTV Building in the 2011 Christchurch earthquake highlighted the risks of inexperienced engineers working in high-risk engineering fields and the difficulty in holding substandard or unprofessional engineers to account," a Cabinet paper from earlier this year said.

                    Both the Kaikōura and Christchurch earthquakes have led to a seismic shift in how engineers understand building performance, the regulatory effects of which are still emerging.

                    https://ccc.govt.nz/consents-and-licences

                    https://www.building.govt.nz/building-code-compliance/canterbury-rebuild/

                    Hopefully, regulatory organisations all over NZ are currently re-evaluating the risks associated with flooding, and revising their recommendations, regulations and standards accordingly.

                    And then there's water fluoridation – there's always fluoridation! wink

                    Water fluoridation: Christchurch council tries to avoid 'expensive' process [25 August 2022]
                    Te Whatu Ora Waitaha dental public health specialist Martin Lee said the council has shrugged off water fluoridation for at least 20 years.

                    "The Christchurch City Council has been very difficult to engage with. We have never, for example, managed to engage with the mayor over the past two decades," he said.

                    • Liberty Belle …
                      17 May 2023 at 4:27 pm

                      These aren't examples of "Regulators are often viewed as "being a bit heavy handed" prior to a failure." Quite the opposite.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    18 May 2023 at 12:43 am

                    Nearly 7 years after the tragic consequences of Campylobacter contamination in Havelock North's water supply, it seems odd (to me) that some (many?) Cantabrians are so vehemently opposed to the chlorination of Christchurch's water supply. What's the story?

                    Water expert sacked from city council contract after raising concerns over public health [4 May 2018]
                    Iain Rabbitts​ was employed as an external consultant to carry out health and safety assessments while council engineers roll out temporary treatment ahead of repairs to fix substandard wells across the city.

                    But his contract was terminated after he publicly gave his view that fixing the faulty well heads is unlikely to prevent the city's water supply having to be chlorinated permanently.

                    He also suggested that while 103 vulnerable bores are being fixed in Christchurch, about 1850 other unmonitored bores could potentially pollute supplies.

                    Authorities want the city's famously pure water to be regarded as a "special case", but Rabbitts said he believes there is much more work needed for it to be exempt from any mandatory permanent chlorination.

                    Following the story's publication, Rabbitts – a water specialist with engineering consultancy Harrison Grierson who was an expert adviser to the Havelock North inquiry – and his employer were told by the council his contract was being terminated.

                    Sometimes, giving pesky experts the brush-off is for the best.

                    He's [Joy's] one academic and, like lawyers, I could provide you others who would give a counter view, he [Key] said.

                    Noting the common perception that regulators/regulations (in general, not only in ChCh) can be "a bit heavy handed" at times, and particularly when you're on the receiving end…

                    DMK to LB @3:41 pm

                    1. Leaky buildings…
                    2. ECan to move over 'explicit and continuous breaches'
                    3. The CTV building collapse…
                    4. Water fluoridation…

                    LB to DMK @4:27 pm

                    These aren't examples of "Regulators are often viewed as "being a bit heavy handed" prior to a failure." Quite the opposite.

                    Sorry LB, I missed out a step. Do you recall examples of 'interested parties', feeling constrained by ‘heavy-handed’ regulation, lobbying successfully for light-handed regulation prior to a failure and/or other negative outcomes?

                    1. For many affected homeowners – who blamed their plight on a doctrinaire shift to light-handed government regulation in the early 1990s – the costs were considerably more than financial. [Word file download]
                    In 1979, the president of the New Zealand Master Builders’ Federation condemned the “ever-increasing burden of new standards and regulations” imposed on his members.

                    2. The Central Plains Water enhancement scheme has had a small but influential group of supporters… the advancement of the scheme appears to have coincided with career moves and business interests of some of these supporters.
                    In March 2010, following an investigation and report by Wyatt Creech, the National Government sacked the Environment Canterbury councillors and replaced them with commissioners.
                    In June 2010, Environment Canterbury issue a press release stating that the hearing panel had granted 31 consents and the notice of requirement for the revised scheme without the storage dam.

                    Risk Maps of Nitrate in Canterbury Groundwater 2022 [PDF]

                    3. The commission's findings were released on 10 December 2012. The report found the [CTV] building's design was deficient and should not have been approved.

                    Section 9: Summary of conclusions and recommendations (.docx) 125KB [Word document]

                    No obvious prior lobbying for less restrictive regulations in that case – 'just' multiple failures to meet the building design, permitting and construction standards/regulations of the day.

                    4. The costs and benefits of water fluoridation in NZ
                    [28 November 2017]
                    Over 20 years, the net discounted saving from adding fluoride to reticulated water supplies supplying populations over 500 would be NZ$1401 million, a nine times pay-off. Between 8800 and 13,700 quality-adjusted life years would be gained.

                    Won't someone please think of the children!

                    Canterbury children record high levels of tooth decay
                    [17 July 2020]

                    But children aren't ratepayers, and dentistry is 'free' for under 18s.

                    Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill — First Reading [25 Hōngo 2006]
                    Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty): This bill, the Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill, is a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It is a heavy-handed, overkill approach to address concerns about water quality in New Zealand. … And what about the cost?

                    Ryall was a member of the Health select committee at the time. Same ol' National – delay repeal delay – unless it's tax cuts for the rich, and flogging off public assets.

                    • Liberty Belle …
                      18 May 2023 at 10:21 am

                      "Nearly 7 years after the tragic consequences of Campylobacter contamination in Havelock North's water supply, it seems odd (to me) that some (many?) Cantabrians are so vehemently opposed to the chlorination of Christchurch's water supply. What's the story?"

                      Just FTR, chlorination has no effect on campylobacter until concentrations reach over 5ppm. ((PDF) Effect of Drinking Water Chlorination on Campylobacter spp. Colonization of Broilers (researchgate.net))

                      I'm not sure why Chch are so opposed, and why they have resisted Fluoridation in the past. Both seem a no brainer to me.

                      "In 1979, the president of the New Zealand Master Builders’ Federation condemned the “ever-increasing burden of new standards and regulations” imposed on his members."

                      I'm not sure I understand that one. Houses built in NZ prior to that statement were solid and sound. The CCTV building was built in 1986, long after the 1979 statement. What is your point? That harsher regulations made buildings less safe?

                      "This bill, the Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill, is a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It is a heavy-handed, overkill approach to address concerns about water quality in New Zealand. … And what about the cost?"

                      Without reading through the link, what was the purpose of that bill? NZ has been fluoridating water since the 1960's.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    18 May 2023 at 3:07 pm

                    Just FTR, chlorination has no effect on campylobacter until concentrations reach over 5 ppm.

                    Are you sure about that? You seem to be comparing broiler chickens to municipal water networks – apples and oranges?

                    From what I've read, the generally accepted expert consensus is that free chlorine concentrations around 0.6 – 1 ppm at point of treatment, to maintain a chlorine concentration of least 0.1 ppm (and up to 0.5 ppm) throughout a water distribution network (water treatment station to tap), is effective for controlling Campylobacter in public water supplies.

                    Inactivation of Campylobacter jejuni by chlorine and monochloramine [February 1986; PDF]
                    Under virtually every condition tested, each of the three C. jejuni strains was more susceptible than the E. coli control strain, with greater than 99% inactivation after 15 min of contact with 1.0 mg of monochloramine per liter or 5 min of contact with 0.1 mg of free chlorine per liter.
                    …
                    These results suggest that disinfection procedures commonly used for treatment of drinking water to remove coliform bacteria are adequate to eliminate C. jejuni and further correlate with the absence of outbreaks associated with properly treated water.

                    Safe drinking water and waterborne outbreaks [2017]

                    What's in your [Wellington] water
                    For supplies from unsecure water sources, Taumata Arowai’s Drinking Water Quality Assurance Rules require that there be a minimum of 0.2 milligrams of chlorine per litre of water available everywhere within a distribution system, to provide effective disinfection. One milligram per litre is one part per million parts of water.

                    Chlorine breaks down when it comes into contact with the organic matter that it neutralises, so the level of free available chlorine at any point within a distribution system isn't constant over time. Our dosing levels are based on maintaining a minimum chlorine residual (free available chlorine) of around 0.4 mg/L throughout the distribution network.

                    We typically add 0.6 to 0.8 mg/L of chlorine at our treatment plants to achieve the necessary chlorine residual in the distribution system.

                    How much chlorine will be used [to treat the Queenstown water supply]?
                    As little as possible to keep your water safe. Typically we will use a dose of 0.8 mg of chlorine for every litre of water. This will give a residual dose of 0.5 mg per litre in what comes through your taps.

                    What is your point? That harsher regulations made buildings less safe?

                    The point is that regulatory regimes can swing from perceived heavy-handedness ("harsh" and burdensome, or appropriately cautious – depending on your PoV) to (more relaxed and/or less safe) light-handed approaches (due to lobbying by interested parties, e.g. builders, farmers, and (potentially unwarranted) optimism), and back again (due to 'disappointment'.) The leaky homes debacle, and unsafe levels of nitrate in drinking water, are examples of the disappointment phase.

                    Ideally, regulations should be formulated according to expert evidence-based assessments of risk and opportunity – the appropriate balance of (pre)caution and optimism. In the cases of leaky homes, and the expansion of dairy farming on the Canterbury plains, perhaps the regulators were 'encouraged' to err a little too much on the side of optimism? C'est la vie.

                    However, the reality can fall short of the ideal, so much so on some occasions that the regulatory approach is considered to have failed and a new ideal is articulated. This pattern of optimism followed by disappointment followed by optimism can be observed over time and across different regulatory areas. It can also be observed in pendulum swings between different regulatory approaches, which often take the form of slogans – such as ‘light-handed’ versus ‘heavy-handed’, ‘prescriptive’ versus ‘principles’ or ‘more’ versus ‘less’ government.

                    • Liberty Belle …
                      18 May 2023 at 5:29 pm

                      "Are you sure about that? "

                      No, it was a completely weird comparison. Covid brain, for my sins.

                      "The point is that regulatory regimes can swing from perceived heavy-handedness ("harsh" and burdensome, or appropriately cautious – depending on your PoV) to (more relaxed and/or less safe) light-handed approaches (due to lobbying by interested parties, e.g. builders, farmers, and (potentially unwarranted) optimism), and back again (due to 'disappointment'.) "

                      Yep, totally agree. So it's about finding a balance. I'm not opposed to chemical water treatment, but I am pro local solutions. I'm doing some more reading on why Chch is so opposed to chlorination. According to this article, opposition to chlorination at a council level is such that they had a "target for completely removing chlorine from Christchurch's drinking water", and have spent millions on water safety plans to achieve that.

        • Mac1 3.1.1.2
          17 May 2023 at 11:02 am

          https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99591173/state-of-new-zealands-drinking-water-slammed

          You say quite rightly that ChCh values its water purity. I'm an old ChCh boy and remember its artesian water. Where I live now is the same.

          But the goal posts have shifted. The posts are now in a park that was once a rubbish dump, next to a dairy farm and with century old sewage and waste water pipes running alongside.

          It shouldn't be a political issue. Water is common to us all, but as the article cited above states- "earthquake damage, climate change, disused landfill sites – as many as 1000 – and deteriorating infrastructure", "inept", "negligent" and 'complacency"- all mean the goal posts have shifted into a different ball park.

          The MoH wore some severe criticism, perhaps why the overview of water quality now sits in the vision of a different and more critical set of eyes.

    • Patricia Bremner 3.2
      17 May 2023 at 9:48 am

      Don't you think getting rid of a few more cows would help less bugs in your water?

      To have it chlorinated is a safety measure, because dairy farming above the aquifer has caused this.

      So health concerns are real… and politics over this is ill directed.

      • tsmithfield 3.2.1
        17 May 2023 at 9:59 am

        Our water is constantly monitored. If there is any sign of water quality deteriorating, then the specific areas of concern are chlorinated.

        I challenge anyone here to produce any documented case of sickness in Christchurch due to water quality.

        I don't think you realise how precious our beautiful water is to us here in Christchurch. This will be an election issue.

    • Corey 3.3
      17 May 2023 at 12:21 pm

      Despite the hate it gets from elitist and idpol "lefty's" Christchurch is about as safe Labour as it gets the only times it hasn't been has been the two post earthquake elections of 2011 and 2014.

      It's not called the peoples socialist republic of chch for nothing

      Ilam is the only safe National party electorate in the city and even that electorate isn't the safest anymore.

      Chch has been down this road time and time again with chlorine and chch voters blame this stuff on council and environment Canterbury.

      Chch and Dunedin are safe for labour. They'll do about what they did in 2017 in those cities.

      The city labour is going to struggle in, is Auckland and it's going to be a blood bath there.

      • Phillip ure 3.3.1
        17 May 2023 at 1:38 pm

        So it would be relatively painless for national to do an act-in-epsom deal for the top leader in Christchurch..?

        Ok

        • weka 3.3.1.1
          17 May 2023 at 2:24 pm

          TOP wouldn't take such a deal because they'd lose their left wing and progressive voters.

          • Phillip ure 3.3.1.1.1
            17 May 2023 at 5:33 pm

            But they would gain a lot of national voters who are scared of the raving loons in act…
            And any left/green people thinking of voting for top need to think on..
            They could be helping vote in a right-wing govt
            .

            • Phillip ure 3.3.1.1.1.1
              17 May 2023 at 5:38 pm

              And a coincidence the electorate the top leader is standing in is the only national one in Christchurch…illam…?

    • adam 3.4
      17 May 2023 at 2:17 pm

      Who has ever died from chlorine in the water?

      And if your really upset about it, they have these really cool things called water filters.

      So vote TMP or Greens or labour for better wages and a health system OR the mixed Tory boiler slag and get lower wages mixed with hard user pays – your choice.

      • weka 3.4.1
        17 May 2023 at 2:25 pm

        when we chlorinate water unnecessarily, we open the door for the source water to be more easily polluted.

    • mikesh 3.5
      17 May 2023 at 2:30 pm

      All National has to do is to promise to restore unchlorinated water to Christchurch and there will be a landslide to National.

      Or they could vote for TOP, and Ilam for Raf Manji.

      • pat 3.6.1
        17 May 2023 at 7:27 pm

        Am assuming that comment is highlighting the fact that chlorine has no impact on nitrate levels….and that the current NZ nitrate level (limit?) is magnitudes above international best practice.

        • Muttonbird 3.6.1.1
          17 May 2023 at 7:54 pm

          There's a lot wrong with Canterbury water by the looks of it (bacteria + nitrates) because of the powerful dairy industry.

          As always with the profit/growth first political right, health/safety take a back seat.

          • pat 3.6.1.1.1
            17 May 2023 at 7:56 pm

            There is indeed much wrong with nitrate levels…however the Christchurch water supply is as yet unimpacted …not so other catchments.

  4. tWiggle 4
    17 May 2023 at 9:29 am

    Like the Covid health response antivax shriekers, those people changing their vote would be confusing a Public Health directive with a political one.

      • Muttonbird 4.1.1
        18 May 2023 at 9:39 pm

        Chlorination and Fluoridation are not the same thing.

          • Muttonbird 4.1.1.1.1
            19 May 2023 at 1:10 pm

            I skim read that but could not find any mention of fluoridation or chlorination.

            But does say this:

            Taumata Arowai was established following the inquiry into a 2016 outbreak of waterborne disease in Havelock North’s drinking water supply. It is the first key pou, or pillar, of the Government’s Three Waters Reform Programme.

            “The Government’s Havelock North Inquiry and subsequent Three Waters Reform Programme has turned the spotlight on the quality and delivery of drinking water, stormwater, and wastewater services. The sector has asked for the creation of a three waters regulator, and it has come in the form of Taumata Arowai,” said Dame Karen.

            Consumption of contaminated drinking water in Havelock North resulted in up to 8,320 campylobacteriosis illnesses. Of these, 953 cases were physician-reported, 42 were hospitalised, three people developed Guillain-Barrè syndrome, and four people died.

            “Our tamariki, elderly, pregnant women, and people with chronic illness are particularly vulnerable.”

            So you can see the establishment of Taumata Arowai was in response to a Public Health imperative, is says so at the top of this quote from your link.

            The health directive enabled the political directive.

            • The Chairman 4.1.1.1.1.1
              19 May 2023 at 2:13 pm

              It's still political.

              The chlorination directive came from the Taumata Arowai, which was established by the Government.

              Moreover, it was a pillar of the Government’s Three Waters Reform Programme.

              • Muttonbird …
                19 May 2023 at 2:29 pm

                It's driven by a health necessity where local councils have failed to protect the public because they are easily lobbied by, and in some cases actively collude with, cranks and farmers. Dairy interests and anti-fluoride groups have too much influence which has resulted in the delivery of poor and sometimes dangerous quality drinking water (bacteria+nitrates) and water which does uphold maximum health benefits (un-fluoridated).

                This is why the Fluoridation bill and Three Waters exist, but they are political directives which didn't come out of nowhere. They are required for Public Health.

                • The Chairman …
                  20 May 2023 at 12:37 pm

                  While Public Health is a necessity, the decision on how that is overseen and administered is political.

  5. Reality 5
    17 May 2023 at 9:31 am

    Something I am picking up with Chris Luxon's media appearances – apart from grinning, he shows no feeling or emotion or expression – robotic in other words. His visit to the tragic fire site yesterday a case in point. Jacinda and Chris Hipkins on the other hand always visibly show they are affected by a particular situation.

    • Sanctuary 5.1
      17 May 2023 at 9:42 am

      That is because he really doesn't care and worse (for a politician) he is a bad actor.

  6. Adrian 6
    17 May 2023 at 10:16 am

    Diesel here in the upper south around $1.70 a litre today, with discounts. So if "transport costs "i.e price of diesel was blamed for the large component of price rises since Covid/Ukraine, when are the money grabbing bastards who used that as a reason to raise prices far in excess of the real input, going to lower their prices to reflect the lowest actual cost of transport fuels in years ? Don't hold your breath.

    • Corey 6.1
      17 May 2023 at 12:23 pm

      Wait till the govt takes the discounts off in the middle of winter on an election year. while the RB keeps going nuclear every quarter. Eeek.

      Shits gonna hit the fan.

  7. The Chairman 7
    17 May 2023 at 10:22 am

    Last year, after the breakdown of a giant fire fighting ladder truck, FENZ assistant national commander and Wellington region manager Bruce Stubbs told RNZ: "There are no concerns for public safety.”

    When asked by Morning Report today if having this second truck at Loafers Lodge would have helped the rescue, Stubbs said: "I don't know."

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/490052/newtown-hostel-fire-firefighters-pretty-cut-up-they-couldn-t-rescue-more-people-as-second-ladder-truck-unavailable

  8. adam 8
    17 May 2023 at 12:01 pm

    Well done Martyn, sure as hell a better response than some commentators here.

    https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2023/05/17/admit-it-we-are-all-responsible-for-loafers-lodge-tragedy/

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 8.1
      17 May 2023 at 1:09 pm

      Agree, I think he is bang on the money.

    • gsays 8.2
      17 May 2023 at 2:00 pm

      Thanks for the tip.

      While on the site, I watched The Working Group. The bit of gossip I picked up is that Taine Randell is going to be standing in East Coast Bays for Labour.

      • alwyn 8.2.1
        17 May 2023 at 6:41 pm

        Well, I'm told that all the world loves an optimist.

        If Erica Stanford can get 20,466 votes and a majority of 8,764 over a Labour Party candidate who got 11,702 in the 2020 election I wouldn't think he has a snowball's chance in Hell in 2023. Stanford would look like going back to a more typical majority of 15,000 or so.

        Have they offered Randell a list place in the top dozen or so and is he running in the way that Finlayson used to pretend to run in Rongatai?

        • gsays 8.2.1.1
          17 May 2023 at 10:08 pm

          My political analysis ends with Randell's name recognition,

          • alwyn 8.2.1.1.1
            18 May 2023 at 9:53 am

            True. An ex-All Black captain is always going to have name recognition.

            New Zealand must be the only country in the world where there will be obituaries in every paper in the country for someone who played, even if only in a single game and 50 years ago, for the All Blacks. To go onto the field wearing that black jersey is to become instantly immortal.

            I think Taine is still a non-starter though. Now, if they could get Richie McCaw as a candidate they might have a chance.

            • gsays 8.2.1.1.1.1
              19 May 2023 at 11:42 am

              True about that black jersey and the silver fern. (… the Addidas and Altrad logo, but that is another story.)

              Without wanting to defame him, or jeopardise this site, my recollection is that McCaw would bat for the 'other side'. No evidence or anything, just a hunch.

  9. UncookedSelachimorpha 9
    17 May 2023 at 1:16 pm

    Astonishing to hear Luxon offer "Thoughts and Prayers" to the Loafers Lodge victims. Obviously doesn't realise that those worthless sentiments (trotted out by right-wing US politicians after every mass shooting) are social media code for "I couldn't give a damn". Or maybe he does realise.

    I doubt he does give a damn in this case – his concern is for the landlord class and not the likes of Loafers Lodge residents.

  10. arkie 10
    17 May 2023 at 3:08 pm

    Chlöe Swarbrick's pre-budget piece highlights the bold moves that are needed and the decisions that keep us in the 'middle-of-the-road':

    This Thursday, the Government could end poverty. It could boost teachers and nurses and midwives and emergency service workers’ wages and conditions to rival Australia. It could knuckle down and commit to the scientifically necessary actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture, transport and manufacturing. It could put more conservation rangers in our native forests, restore wetlands and daylight streams across our cities.

    It could pay for these things like the First Labour Government did, with taxes on those who profited handsomely during an extremely difficult period of time for everyone else.

    …

    Covid-19 exposed that the things we’ve been told are impossible are simply a matter of political willpower. Direct payments to people who need it, flexible working arrangements and rent freezes were issued at lightning speed. The needs of everyday people were prioritised.

    Government Budgets, like laws, aren’t passed down from the gods. They aren’t written in scripture. They are the product of decisions. Those decisions reflect the values and priorities of decision-makers.

    …

    He and the Minister of Finance have spent the past few weeks tempering any expectation of real change, let alone transformation, in Thursday’s Budget. They’re talking down spending, talking up trade-offs and trademarking “bread and butter”.

    These are their decisions. Tinker or transform. Choose an admittedly unfair status quo or choose the change empowered by a historical majority.

    We’re already on the middle road. It’s flooding.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/chloe-swarbrick-new-zealand-needs-govts-bread-and-butter-budget-to-be-bold-not-beige/3JMGVV6MBZASJFAIIOQKKY3HBU/

    • pat 10.1
      17 May 2023 at 6:44 pm

      The problem is (always) how those who finance our persistent deficit view such….and you never find out until its too late.

      The greater our reliance on offshore supply of necessities the greater our need to consider such…and we are almost totally dependent on offshore supply.

  11. Mike the Lefty 11
    18 May 2023 at 7:00 am

    Wouldn't water filtering kits remove most of the chlorine?