Open mike 18/06/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, June 18th, 2024 - 48 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 …

48 comments on “Open mike 18/06/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tony Veitch 1
    18 June 2024 at 6:17 am

    The real disappointment in the fuse saga with "NZ Airforce One" has been Luxon's lack of press coverage.

    Unlike in Port Moresby, where his travelling journalists were unloaded first so they could capture the moment he danced and strutted down the steps like an antiquated drummer from a long defunct pop band, his entry into Japan went largely unnoticed by media, and probably also by his fellow Kiwi traveller's, to whom he was just an insignificant little man in a crumpled suit and several hours growth between shaves of his bald head.

    Of course, all politicians crave publicity, but Luxon more so. He's so subterranean in the prefPM stakes he needs every gram of photo ops he can get.

    And he didn't get much. That's the real tragedy.

    • PsyclingLeft.Always 2.1
      18 June 2024 at 7:56 am

      He said new builds coming to fruition may be driving the increase in rental stock.

      "The peak of that [consent] boom was roughly in 2022, and if you think about it it takes about one to two years for a consent to be converted into a finished dwelling, then comes to the market.

      "So in places like Auckland, Lower Hutt and that Canterbury region, I suspect we're seeing the benefits of that construction boom flowing through," he said.

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/519788/rental-listings-up-40-percent-across-country-in-three-months-to-may

      "Construction Boom" . That'll be Labour then : )…..

      • bwaghorn 2.1.1
        18 June 2024 at 9:30 am

        People getting out of the short term rental game helps two

      • Mike the Lefty 2.1.2
        18 June 2024 at 10:17 am

        National are changing the requirements for building "granny " flats so they can boast about how many more houses than Labour they have built.

        • bwaghorn 2.1.2.1
          18 June 2024 at 11:45 am

          "Granny Flar" more likely dodgy shacks rented out for profit

        • Visubversa 2.1.2.2
          18 June 2024 at 12:12 pm

          Most of the Plans I dealt with had the ability to build a minor unit of up to 60m2 as a permitted activity in most Zones as long as the basic bulk and location requirements were met.

          Subsequently, other Plans have also made this easier.

          I don't think that this is the big "win" they make it out to be. The servicing for water, wastewater etc will also have to be interesting.

          • Bearded Git 2.1.2.2.1
            18 June 2024 at 12:50 pm

            In order to gain resource consent for houses within Outstanding Natural Landscape in the Queenstown Lakes District, the houses have to comply with pretty strict provisions in the local District Plan in terms of size, colour, design, access roads and especially location in order to protect public views of the landscape.

            This idiotic decision (number 703) by the government will mean that such houses will now be able to slam in an additional 60m2 building on their property wherever they want in the landscape, for instance on top of ridges, or right beside tracks or lakes or rivers, so adversely effecting landscape values.

            Proof that this is a terrible decision is that Nelson Mayor Nick Smith just said it was a good idea on Radio NZ.

        • James Simpson 2.1.2.3
          18 June 2024 at 1:46 pm

          I find it odd how either Party can boast about how many houses they built or will build.

          Fletchers, GJ Gardner, Urban Homes, Signature Homes, Bob the builder and the hundreds of other building companies around the country would strongly disagree with Bishop and Woods about who has built the houses.

    • tWig 2.2
      18 June 2024 at 3:27 pm

      Chances are, many are unloading their investment properties with change in brightline test. Saying that, there are 4 homes, no rentals, for sale within 3 blocks of me that I have been cycling past for weeks. Turnover has dropped majorly, and maybe also people are selling their homes with a bit of capital gains from past 4-5 years, because they don't want to renenge on a now unaffordable mortgage.

      Plus Massey has been cutting staff with gusto, to shift to buying and teaching online courses from overseas. Genuinely can't understand why Massey would fritter away and USP?

  3. PsyclingLeft.Always 3
    18 June 2024 at 8:06 am

    I don't think I have really felt "trust" in DOC….for a long time. Cave Creek such a terrible tragedy, and other things such as the prime super drive for the Tourist dollar and etc…

    Anyway nothing on the Guys n Gals who actually do the Conservation work …but yeah I dont feel I trust the DOC organisation as such.

    On 8 March, Forest and Bird requested a copy of advice provided by the department to ministers regarding the Fast-track Approvals Bill, which the department refused.

    Forest and Bird spokesperson Geoff Keey said it was very disappointing this information was not released prior to submissions closing.

    "It would have made sense if it was released in time for people to read the stuff before they put in their submissions."

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/519802/fast-track-legislation-doc-s-oia-refusal-was-unlawful-ombudsman

    • Hunter Thompson II 3.1
      18 June 2024 at 9:02 am

      DoC has some good scientists, as I can confirm from personal experience, but I think they have been starved of funds for so long that commercialisation of the conservation estate has crept in.

      The department has also fallen short on managing our natural resources, eg Tongariro Crossing. Their people should have been pushing hard years ago for fees to be charged for tourists to use our national parks. (I understand that is currently barred by law.)

      • Ad 3.1.1
        18 June 2024 at 9:21 am

        DoC are more than doubling fees for tourists on all Great Walks.

        For 33% of the landmass I think they're under-commercialised. No, I don't mean logging and mixning.

      • Belladonna 3.1.2
        18 June 2024 at 9:24 am

        Their people should have been pushing hard years ago for fees to be charged for tourists to use our national parks. (I understand that is currently barred by law.)

        Aside from the fees already charged for the Great Walks.

        I think that the issue has always been that there is little desire to charge NZ tourists to visit our national parks (they've already paid for them in their taxes). And, if we want only to charge international tourists, how do you identify them? And does the admin cost of assessing this outweigh the benefit gained?

        The easy solution is to add/increase the tourism/conservation levy – paid by all people visiting NZ without a NZ passport. And I understand that there is currently a proposal to more than double this.

        I'd certainly support this approach. The admin is already in place to assess and levy this fee. I believe that it should be ring-fenced for conservation and tourist support infrastructure (e.g. toilets adjacent to National Parks). And I don't think that a charge of $100 (the current proposal) would deter people from visiting NZ.

        • weka 3.1.2.1
          18 June 2024 at 9:51 am

          I think that the issue has always been that there is little desire to charge NZ tourists to visit our national parks (they've already paid for them in their taxes). And, if we want only to charge international tourists, how do you identify them? And does the admin cost of assessing this outweigh the benefit gained?

          I don't think increasing commercialisation is the way to go. We need to be lessening tourist numbers and user pays creates an incentive to increase numbers. The issue is the growth economy and NZ’s inability to get to grips with sustainability and the climate crisis. We’re still stuck in the neoliberal mindset.

          But, I agree that it's international not NZ tourists that should be charged. When booking, everyone can just book and pay the fee. NZers who want the local's discount can produce proof of citizenship or residency. Doesn't have to be complicated. Passport or NZ drivers licence?

          • Belladonna 3.1.2.1.1
            18 June 2024 at 10:56 am

            Mmm. Requiring everyone in the party to have ID? Because otherwise it's very easy for the NZ host to just book for their overseas visitors. And of course, not all Kiwis have ID – and privacy campaigners have been firmly against requiring some form of universal ID card.

            I think that the already-charged levy, applicable to all visitors (who, after all, have to have a passport to get here) – is less costly to apply, is 'fairer' and less liable to be rorted.

            • James Thrace 3.1.2.1.1.1
              18 June 2024 at 3:10 pm

              Just use RealMe.

              open booking to kiwis first and then internationals a week later

              gives time for the kiwi groups to get it sorted and cancel their duplicate bookings (a group of 4 will often all book the same time)

              once that is worked through, a week later let internationals mop up the rest of the bookings

          • Hunter Thompson II 3.1.2.1.2
            19 June 2024 at 8:31 am

            It seems the great walks are hugely popular and it's fastest finger first when the track bookings go on sale.

            Why not use a lottery system to allocate tickets? The US applies this method for Green Card immigration. Let the great god Fortune decide.

            Maybe have a fixed percentage allocated for overseas tourists to keep the industry happy.

            Either way, cap the numbers to reinforce the message that our natural resources are finite and over-crowding will destroy them.

        • alwyn 3.1.2.2
          18 June 2024 at 10:38 am

          " And I don't think that a charge of $100 (the current proposal) would deter people from visiting NZ".

          Why should a businessman from Australia, visiting Auckland for 48 hours while visiting businesses he is considering buying products from, be levied $100 to pay for parks he is never going near?

          Why should New Zealand residents like me, who have never skied and have no intention of doing so be forced, through my taxes, to maintain the ski fields at Ruapehu for people who do want to do so?

          I think that we should follow the pattern used in at least some of the Australian States for charging for the use of their State Parks. In Western Australia for example you require a pass. You can get one that is for a day, 5, 14 or 28 days or for the whole year. From memory the price for a single day is about $17. For a year it is about $130. If you are a local the annual one is obviously a bargain.

          You can also get, if you reside there an annual local pass that cover the parks in the vicinity of where you live. That is about $30/year. Being WA of course your local area will be about the size of the North Island.

          Locals do pay for park entry, but obviously at a much lower figure per visit than do tourists. If you are a local or tourist who never uses the parks you don't have to pay for them. What could be fairer than that and why don't we adopt the system?

          • Kay 3.1.2.2.1
            18 June 2024 at 10:50 am

            Why should a businessman from Australia, visiting Auckland for 48 hours while visiting businesses he is considering buying products from, be levied $100 to pay for parks he is never going near?

            "If you are a permanent resident of Australia you must hold an NZeTA before you travel, but you do not need to pay the International Visitor Levy (IVL).

            Australian citizens do not need to hold an NZeTA or pay the IVL."

            https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/visas/visa/australian-resident-visa#:~:text=If%20you%20are%20a%20permanent,International%20Visitor%20Levy%20(IVL).&text=Australian%20citizens%20do%20not%20need,NZeTA%20or%20pay%20the%20IVL.

            • Belladonna 3.1.2.2.1.1
              18 June 2024 at 11:00 am

              And, as such, I think this is absolutely wrong. Given that the visiting Aussies aren't contributing taxes for the upkeep of the conservation estate, they should contribute on arrival.

              The same should apply to Kiwis visiting Australia.

              • Kay …
                18 June 2024 at 11:30 am

                Are we currently paying visitors levies to Oz?

                If so, I agree it should be reciprocal. But isn't there some sort of deal via CER or whatever it's called? The same deal that let Aussies continue purchasing property in NZ (along with Singapore) despite the foreign buyer's ban?

                • Belladonna …
                  18 June 2024 at 12:21 pm

                  I think there is (or should be) a difference between CER – which allows reciprocal rights – to live and work in the other country, or visa free access, or to houses; and visitor levies which charge for the additional infrastructure tourists require, as well as for the costs of maintaining things like national parks – which are a lot of the reason that tourists come here.

                  Note: I'm not saying that's what the law currently provides for – but what I think should happen.

          • Belladonna 3.1.2.2.2
            18 June 2024 at 10:58 am

            Why should a businessman from Australia, visiting Auckland for 48 hours while visiting businesses he is considering buying products from, be levied $100 to pay for parks he is never going near?

            It's a cost of doing business in NZ. Part of the clean-green image that that businessman is leveraging off. And, for the businessman will be entirely tax-deductible – so isn't even a 'real' charge.

          • Belladonna 3.1.2.2.3
            18 June 2024 at 11:02 am

            What could be fairer than that and why don't we adopt the system?

            User-pays is always an attractive option – until you start calculating the cost of applying it. Requiring ticketed access to every NZ national park, is going to cost a lot in admin.

          • Belladonna 3.1.2.2.4
            18 June 2024 at 11:10 am

            Why should New Zealand residents like me, who have never skied and have no intention of doing so be forced, through my taxes, to maintain the ski fields at Ruapehu for people who do want to do so?

            As far as I can see, that is a false equivalence. Skiers are charged for the provision of the infrastructure (chairlifts, snow machines, etc.). And always have been. [The current financial support for Whakapapa appears to have more to do with government support for the local businesses, which are dependent on the tourism, than for skiers. And is firmly time-limited.]

            If your argument is that you, as a New Zealander, shouldn't pay taxes for the upkeep and maintenance (predator management, weed control, etc.) – for any national parks- and this should all be paid for by user levies – then you should clearly state your position.

            I don't think that this viewpoint will find much support from any political party – but YMMV.

      • PsyclingLeft.Always 3.1.3
        18 June 2024 at 9:28 am

        I agree on the Scientists .I did say those who work..and would add for our NZ Conservation.

        There was the Al..Morrison era and others….: (

        This came up when I was looking back. History, aye ? Al Morrison DOC and Nick Smith

        https://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/opinion-spin-docs-restructuring-draws-rather-long-bow

    • Binders full of women 3.2
      18 June 2024 at 5:29 pm

      I used to have a soft spot for DoC and still have korero with local office about trapping…buuut I will forever hate the fuckers at the top who were complicit in the arson of 21 huts in Urewera. They folded to Kruger's mafia.

  4. joe90 4
    18 June 2024 at 10:17 am

    Not fit to govern scuttlebutt – funding applications by community groups delivering services will be directed to a forensic accounting team. Groups not receiving confirmation within xxxx time can assume they've missed out. Funding grants will be on a month-by-month basis.

  5. bwaghorn 5
    18 June 2024 at 12:03 pm

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350313263/what-gun-owners-want-governments-firearms-reform

    As a licensed gun owner I'd suggest anybody that is and gun registration is not a fit person to own a fire arm , and as for mandatory gun club membership, Wtf?? I couldn't stand being surrounded by gun stroking sad little geezers.

      • bwaghorn 5.1.1
        18 June 2024 at 12:28 pm

        Thats against gun registration!! Btw

        An act mp thinking!!! Hope it's contagious

    • PsyclingLeft.Always 5.2
      18 June 2024 at 12:32 pm

      Yea you could well be right. And there was this gun club…

      Vice-president of the Bruce Rifle Club, Scott Williams, told Newhsub that Brenton Tarrant has been a member of the Milton club since 2018.

      He said they are currently assisting police with their inquiries.

      Williams said that to club members who had any association with Williams, he seemed like "a normal person".

      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2019/03/christchurch-terror-attack-details-emerge-of-suspect-s-involvement-brenton-tarrant-in-rifle-club.html

      To some members he might well have seemed normal….

      People at the club were "ranting and raving" about how the military would be deployed on Dunedin streets because of Muslim terrorist attacks, and that too many Muslims were coming here.

      "[There were] very strong attitudes towards immigration, Muslims being a very very bad thing for New Zealand."

      He says he saw members with the confederate flag. A person has contacted him in the aftermath and said he had visited a club member's house and saw "German SS uniforms".

      "Brenton just presented as a regular guy. We scrutinise our members obviously, but in relation to the basic rules of the arms code and how they handle firearms and follow the rules," Williams told Newsroom.

      "We do not scrutinise them to assess if they are white supremacist nationalists because as far as we knew, we didn't have those types in NZ."

      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2019/03/christchurch-terror-attack-rifle-club-was-perfect-breeding-place-for-murder.html

      Confederate flag !? ss uniforms !? These types……

      • tWig 5.2.1
        18 June 2024 at 3:31 pm

        Newshub news are trying their hardest to hassle the government on their way out. Points to them. That infor about the gunclub members is chilling. Police vetting would have squashed that. On the otherhand, Chch has had that subculture in spades since boot boys mobbed the streets in the 80s.

      • Maurice 5.2.2
        19 June 2024 at 12:51 am

        There is much more to it than that article. Try reading this where it is covered far more fully in the Royal Commission enquiry:

        https://christchurchattack.royalcommission.nz/the-report/part-6-what-public-sector-agencies-knew-about-the-terrorist/bruce-rifle-club-allegations/

        The former Dunedin District Arms Officer had dealt with Peter Breidahl on two earlier occasions. On 27 June 2017, the former District Arms Officer and a sworn police officer met with Peter Breidahl. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss whether Peter Breidahl’s firearms licence should be revoked, after New Zealand Police had received evidence that he had stored a firearm in the boot of his car secured by a cable. In a statement to New Zealand Police and in evidence to us, the former District Arms Officer recalled Peter Breidahl being “agitated” and “swearing repeatedly” to the point where the sworn police officer told him to calm down.

        It is understood that it was he whom was asked to not return to the Bruce Rifle. Club and that the Club was subsequently found to have acted completely lawfully.

        • PsyclingLeft.Always 5.2.2.1
          19 June 2024 at 9:59 am

          It is understood that it was he whom was asked to not return to the Bruce Rifle. Club and that the Club was subsequently found to have acted completely lawfully.

          Completely lawfully…..

          Anyway….there was this. If you were defending the gun club and or Police? Try reading this…

          48

          This is not to say, however, that the individual’s behaviour at the Bruce Rifle Club after he joined it was unremarkable. The individual shot while standing up, he went through a large amount of ammunition and his primary interest appeared to be firing and changing magazines quickly (see Part 4, chapter 5). As well, some members at least were aware of his firearms injury and were involved in discussion with the individual about large capacity magazines.

          https://christchurchattack.royalcommission.nz/the-report/part-6-what-public-sector-agencies-knew-about-the-terrorist/bruce-rifle-club-allegations/

          And hey, you better remember, this is after the Aramoana massacre. Which should surely make any thinking person..think! Gun club, Police, Police Arms Officer, et al…..

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

          • Maurice 5.2.2.1.1
            19 June 2024 at 11:59 am

            shot while standing up, he went through a large amount of ammunition and his primary interest appeared to be firing and changing magazines quickly

            All unremarkable behaviour at a Service Rifle competition club and indeed many other ranges and clubs. Three position (standing/siting/prone) all being standard shooting positions. Many competition shooters use "large" amounts of ammunition – several hundred to a thousand or two a year – practicing their sport. Changing magazines quickly is mandatory in ten shot, time constrained serials as at the time magazine capacity was restricted – by law – to seven rounds thus forcing magazine changes. Those with special endorsements could use "large capacity" magazines – so it was not unusual for those constrained to seven round magazines discussing larger magazines.

            All unremarkable and not red flags of any sort at the time. Intensive Police investigation found no unlawful activity there at the time or since.

  6. Ad 6
    18 June 2024 at 12:58 pm

    ANyone got any details about what this "Field" initiative with Jacinda Ardern is all about?

  7. joe90 7
    18 June 2024 at 3:03 pm

    Perhaps book burning isn't such a bad thing.

    /

  8. tWig 8
    18 June 2024 at 3:49 pm

    Big Hairy News covers media addiction in teenagers, in relation to Act's interest in controlling access to social media by young people. For parents, Pat and Chewie have a good chat about managing strategies for social media use by children. From 14 min onwards.

  9. tWig 9
    18 June 2024 at 4:01 pm

    Once again, it's not penises in bathrooms, but penises in churches that are the real problem in the US. A megachurch pastor on Trump's 2016 advisory panel abused a 12 year old for 4 years, when he was in his 20s.

    But it's Ok, he was saved. 'Other churches where Morris has ministered, such as Shady Grove church in Grand Prairie, were allegedly aware of his abusive history, but Morris told the Christian Post he received counseling and had since “walked in purity and accountability in this area”.'

    No wonder the US religious right (and, closer to home, Brian Tamaki) make such a fuss about drag queens and storytelling: deflect, deflect, deflect.

  10. ianmac 10
    18 June 2024 at 4:08 pm

    Luxon just gave a "Speak to the Media" in Japan. Interesting that he was questioned about his implied criticism that previous Administration did a slack job of such visits.

    "You can't just make friendly visits. You have to come up with concrete results." (paraphrased)

    Reporters did ask him to explain himself.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/pm-shrugs-off-plane-problems-pushes-ahead-with-japan-trade-trip/5FVVUYC4IFF2JL2WC3PXILCBRY/

  11. Joe90 11
    18 June 2024 at 5:39 pm

    Big-noting knob end says stupid shit, again.

    @benmackey

    NZ PM Luxon calls business leaders on Labour-led delegations as “tagalongs” and “C-List”. Scoop from @Jasonwalls92

    https://x.com/benmackey/status/1802888424841785606