The Australian government has announced a direct pathway to citizenship for New Zealanders, ending a tension between the two countries that has lasted for more than 20 years.
Since 2001, New Zealanders in Australia have been able to reside there on a Special Category Visa. While it has allowed them to remain in Australia indefinitely, getting permanent residency and citizenship has been much more difficult.
It has meant New Zealanders have been unable to access benefits such as student loans, join the Defence Force, or even vote.
In contrast, Australians in New Zealand have had a clear pathway to citizenship after five years.
But from 1 July, New Zealanders who have been on the Special Category Visa and lived in Australia for four years will be able to get citizenship.
They will still need to meet standard criteria (such as pass a character check, a language test, and intend to stay in Australia), and attend a citizenship ceremony.
The pathway is retrospective, meaning those in Australia since 2001, when the SCV came into effect, will be able to apply for citizenshipwithout gaining permanent residence first.
Kiwi children born in Australia will become citizens at birth, rather than waiting until they are 10 years old.
Amazing what progress can be made when governments quietly sit down and talk about issues rather than political posturing and grandstanding through the media, something the centre-right parties of both countries seem unable to do.
Citizenship will allow voting, access to benefits, housing and tertiary education support for children (someone in Oz Labour wants re-election).
And the Oz pension and access to their health system in retirement is appealing to longer term guest workers.
The greater certainty provided will make employment there more attractive to Kiwis as we enter a worker shortage era (something their mandarins would have noted).
The main change for older Oz based kiwis is the right to vote. Younger kiwis who work there and opt for Oz citizenship after 4 years will then have the same rights as Australian citizens already have in NZ. The changes just reverse the mean (but politically targeted) policy brought in by the Howard government in 2001. NZ and Oz have a reciprocal social security arrangement so anyone applying for super in NZ or age pension in Oz and have spent time in both countries get a contribution from both Centrelink (Oz) and MSD (NZ) so that the total is equivalent to the applicable pension in the country the person lives. No change with the new policy.
There are 70,000 Australians resident in NZ, so based on the relative population sizes, equivalent to 350,000 NZers in Oz. That means that there are twice as many kiwis in Oz as Aussies in NZ on a comparable basis.
Again, NZ and Oz citizens get reciprocal health rights in each country, so if you are a NZer in Oz or an Aussie in NZ you get the right to use each other's health system – if you want to get a Medicare card in Oz as a NZer you have to say you want to live there, which is pretty easy. You then may get free doctor's visits if you can access a doc that allows bulk billing. The Oz health system is under similar strains as NZ even if it is in better condition overall. Many GPs now are rejecting bulk billing unless the subsidy they get from the federal government is bumped up (it stayed the same for many years of Coalition government). The centre left Labor government in Oz has the same challenge as NZ – how to pay for better infrastructure or maintain creaking current infrastructure without finding ways of creating a fairer tax system. The easier pathway for NZers to get Aussie citizenship will not affect their access to health care at all (but will make kiwis in Oz feel more secure for the future in a more general way).
The actual total of Kiwis in Oz appears to be quite a bit higher.
This is not the full number of New Zealanders living across the Tasman, estimated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to be around 700,000 – nearly 15% of New Zealand’s population.
That would be right – as I said above, the percentage of Aussies in NZ compared to the NZ population would be equivalent to 350,000 NZers in Oz, so the fact that there are 700,000 kiwis in Oz means that there are twice as many in comparison. Not sure of the numbers but think the percentage of Maori kiwis in Oz is even higher in proportion. However, that is just a reflection of the fact that people move when they think they can get a better deal when they are permitted to do so. No doubt Maori ancestors from what is now Raetea and the French Poly Society Islands thought the same back in the 1300s when they sailed to Aotearoa!
That is a good point – I made much the same rough calculation myself a few years back and came to much the same conclusion. The idea that trans-Tasman migration is all a one-way street is a bit of a myth.
In fact there are scarcely two nations on earth socially and economically more entangled than Aus and NZ. It has only been the political realm that we have drifted apart in recent decades.
This move hopefully signals a reversal of that trend.
"Explaining how the government has got itself into such a muddle requires another column. It will tell us much about deep structural failures in the government."
I hear this repeated a lot. Most recently in a conversation with two friends explaining the pushback against the Three Waters proposal.
While I see that some of the concerns expressed around the co-governance structure come from a place of frustration and/or racism, I think this framing of racism being the main reason for concerns is a form of racism itself.
The time for such co-governance structures was passed a long time ago.
We had many mechanisms for including necessary consultation with local iwi for resource consents, and Māori consultants at other levels of local and regional. councils. While some may have valid criticisms of this process, (which are duplicated by environmentalists who are in the same position) it was an implementation in a democratic society that did not impact on transparency, or duplicate needlessly the levels of administration in any organisation.
Māori are not a hive mind. Any representative selected to hold representative positions in the original proposal, were non-elected and non-accountable.
There was a conversation on here a while ago where I posted the link to the original paper and discussed the lack of clarity over the way it was written:
So, you’re deflecting and not answering my very basic and specific question to you and/or addressing the contradiction in your comment? Instead, you’re luring me into three links, no less. Quelle surprise – discussion with you here is futile!
Incognito, I asked a question of Ngungukai to which I thought he might have the answer since he specifically mentioned Māori co-governance.
Then answered your question with references to what was known before, so those with updated knowledge could clarify.
"Do you believe the representatives are non-accountable or do you assert that?"
How can I know the answer to that without knowing if this part has been updated?
"Instead, you’re luring me into three links, no less. Quelle surprise – discussion with you here is futile!"
I was asking Ngungukai for information.
Your demand for a stated position before it was answered is a peculiar one.
Your practice of making comments berating style and commenters however is becoming a familiar one. There is an element to it that seems to have lost perspective.
I asked you to clarify something that was not a question in your comment to Ngungukai but a statement that representatives “were non-elected and non-accountable”.
This could be taken as an opinion or an assertion and you asked specifically:
Has this changed?
So, was it your opinion or your assertion?
This was not a demand although Mods do sometimes moderate commenters to clarify their assertions and distinguish those from their opinions – they do this through Mod notes, as you know full well. This is nothing new and nothing personal.
Obviously, you cannot know Ngungukai’s answer. But you knew the premise of your final question, which was either your opinion or your assertion.
You see, I can read your comments without losing perspective – nice snide, BTW. There was no berating of your style even though I mentioned that there was a contradiction in that particular part of your comment, which was content-related, not style-related.
I don’t expect you to answer anymore. I don’t want to have to read through copious links and scroll through long copy & pasta from legal documents and Bills because that’s not what I asked for and I’ll never find it in there, and you know it. I was aiming for a simple clarification from you to a simple question of mine.
If you don’t want to give clarifications, don’t want to give answers to straightforward questions, or don’t want to engage in debate, that is perfectly fine unless specifically requested by a Mod – even then you still have a choice to comply or not. Simply say nothing. However, please don’t respond with deflections, twisting of words, or accusations because that’s a likely way of inflaming discourse.
This was not a demand although Mods do sometimes moderate commenters to clarify their assertions and distinguish those from their opinions – they do this through Mod notes, as you know full well. This is nothing new and nothing personal."
It neither an opinion, or an assertion, it was my previous understanding.
Are you feeling adequately fulfilled now with my answer, to leave the offloading of frustration to some other instance? I doubt it, but will live in hope.
"I don’t expect you to answer anymore. I don’t want to have to read through copious links and scroll through long copy & pasta from legal documents and Bills because that’s not what I asked for and I’ll never find it in there, and you know it. I was aiming for a simple clarification from you to a simple question of mine."
Of course, you don't want an answer. It appears instead you want the opportunity to wax lyrical, without any requirement to read someone else's lyrical waxing.
Wax On, Incognito. I may return but I'll wax off for now.
[I asked you not to respond with deflections, accusations, and twisting of words. Yet, your immediate response does exactly that!? This is your warning – Incognito]
Māori are not a hive mind. Any representative selected to hold representative positions in the original proposal, were non-elected and non-accountable.
Has this changed?
and
There is no election of 33 representatives – just apptmts.
I assumed with the review and rebrand it may have changed, do you know if it has?
Yes there was concern about the appointment process. This was despite the appointment process being used in planning work in local authorities where there has been provision for the representation from local iwi etc who were subject to selection from within the iwi then appointment not election.
In the new legislation (bill) there are these provisions
Clause 6 mana whenua, for an identified area, means the iwi or hapū holding and exercising, in accordance with tikanga, authority or other customary rights or interests in that area
1 Clause 33 Method of appointing mana whenua representatives to regional representative group
Mana whenua whose rohe or takiwā is within the service area of a water services entity must appoint mana whenua representatives to the regional representative group of the water services entity in accordance with section 27(2) and (3) and the constitution.
2 Clauses 27(2) & (3)
27 Establishment and membership of regional representative group
(1) This section establishes a regional representative group for each water services entity.
(2) Each regional representative group consists of a number of regional representatives that is provided for in the constitution (see section 91(a)(i)) and is—
(a) 12 regional representatives; or
(b) any greater number of regional representatives.
(3) Each entity’s regional representative group must include an equal number of—
(a) territorial authority representatives; and
(b) mana whenua representatives.
Clause 38 This group (Regional rep) then appoints a Board Appointment Committee
The Board Appointment committee has the functions to
Functions of board appointment committee
The functions of the board appointment committee are—
(a) to appoint and remove members of the board of a water services entity; and
(b) to prepare and maintain an appointment and remuneration policy for the board; and
(c) to perform or exercise any of the regional representative group’s functions and powers that are delegated to the committee in relation to appointing and removing board members.
Ok so having got the regional representatives who appoint the Board appts committee, this committee appoints the board.
57 Membership of board
(1) The board of a water services entity consists of no fewer than 6, and no more than 10, members.
(2) The board appointment committee must appoint board members who, collectively, have knowledge of, and experience and expertise in relation to,—
(a) performance monitoring and governance; and
(b) network infrastructure industries (for example, water services network infrastructure industries); and
(c) the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi; and
(ca) public health; and
(cb) the environment; and
(d) perspectives of mana whenua, mātauranga, tikanga, and te ao Māori; and
(e) perspectives of consumers and communities; and
(f) perspectives of local government.
Clause 63 sets out the
Criteria for appointments by board appointment committee
(1) A board appointment committee must appoint board members under section 62 in accordance with the criteria for board members and the process for appointment under this Act (including the appointment and remuneration policy (if any) approved by the regional representative group under section 40).
(2) The board appointment committee may only appoint a person who, in the committee’s opinion, has the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to assist the water services entity to achieve its objectives and perform its functions.
(3) In making an appointment, the board appointment committee must take into account the desirability of promoting diversity in the membership of the board.
The whole process seems to work by appointment. It seems now to have as many checks and balances as the US Constitution (kidding!)
What it seems to do, whuch seems bit novel compared with the original process is to build up to the appointment of the board (Water Services entity) or (flaxroots up) or in another way, popular in the 'olden days' of Board etc formation was the concept of a Steering Committee/Group having the power to appoint a Board/s that sat below them.and did all the day to day work.
I have not seen the explanations of how the new system works philosophically but to me either way from flaxroots up or from a Steering group having an important role would work in a being able to sell the concept.
ETA I've found this from the press release of 13/4.
Strategic oversight and direction to be provided by local representative groups with every local council in the country, as well as mana whenua, getting a seat at the table
The ability to choose people with skills seems a better fit than perhaps ethnically chosen but run off their feet because the skills may be thin on the ground.
The areas will be much larger than before and the appointment to the important Regional Representative groups (Local Authorities/Maori) that set in train the whole appt process will include different tribal groups.
I think I have got this set up correctly. Having worked with this Board type legislation for most of my working life I can see the imprint/influence of a different statutory drafting hand from what was originally drafted. The concept and clauses seem tighter, And more akin to board statutory legislation of old.
I cannot see any appointment time limits say for 5 years etc or a process to appoint to a vacancy in the mana whenua side should a death or resignation occur. I haven't looked very hard.
Hopefully this is some help.
ETA Sorry for all the quotes from legislation. It is an interesting way of working
I'll see what else has changed. The was reference in the draft I looked at closely to an as yet unwritten (or unavailable) constitution.
I found the details around the mana whenua representatives required a lot of referencing back and forward, and still ended up with a poor understanding of what the bill intended in that respect.
I'd hoped someone who considered any concerns raised as "People are shit scared the mawrees" might have a firm grasp on this aspect, and be able to explain it.
""Yes there was concern about the appointment process. This was despite the appointment process being used in planning work in local authorities where there has been provision for the representation from local iwi etc who were subject to selection from within the iwi then appointment not election.""
Yes, I mentioned that in my response to Ngungukai and still fully support that consulting role for the relevant knowledge as pertains to planning considerations etc. The one flaw that exists (which is true of any authority consultant relationship) is that as the relationship is established, consultants may become more attuned to the expectations of council and unconsciously adapt their contributions accordingly. Also, as those relationships strengthen – other discordant voices from mana whenua are not heard because there is already a representative at the table.
The concerns I had about the initial bill was that there was a requirement for other regional representatives to have experience or knowledge of water treatment systems, but none for the mana whenua representatives.
In that case, why are not retained as consultants, rather than given voting rights? There appeared to be no assessment of the value of knowledge they would bring in terms of the fundamental role of managing necessary infrastructure, before allocating them quite heavy influence on decision making, including that of veto.
But, as I said, I'll have to wade through. Thank you again.
I don't think anyone now could complain about too much Maori representation. It is there where it is most important I feel. The rep group (equal Maori/Local authority numbers) gets to set the Board Appointment Group, which gets to select the Boards.
Overnight I have had a think about terms of appointment and feel that is not as important as having a clear way of appointing replacements on resignation or death.
1. don't copy and paste long tracts. Use your own words, selective quotes, and links. Long tracts are a problem for mobile users, and people end up using them in lieu of making a clear point.
2. when you copy and paste, you have to make it clear what are your words and what is the quote. In the edit box there is a tag (looks like a quotation mark), that will indent the quote. Let me know if you need help on how to use that. Or you can go old school
>>
like this
<<
Or
like this.
and so on.
This matters because mods have to read a lot of material, and I don't want to have to be stopping and figuring out what is what. It also matters so that people reading can be clear about what is being said.
_____
Please add this explanation to your list on commenting, and please let me know you have read and understood and if you have any questions.
I am assuming this is aimed at me. When the numbering has gone some of us have adopted the idea of going
@xys then copying in the time.
Sorry I should have continued to bold the clauses.
Or indent though I had thought that was for quoting from other commenter's posts.
I had thought that another way is to put my comments in italics..
I am not keen on putting in my own words actual clauses of draft legislation that depend on precision. I cannot do better at explaining than the legal draftspeople.
So move from particular (legislation) bolded or indented to opinion italicised.
on a computer, there is a Reply list in the top right of every page. You can see that I have replied to you and then click on name of post/date stamp to take you to my comment. (On a phone, it’s the same in the Desktop version, but in the Mobile version there is no reply list. Switch to the Desktop version at the bottom of every page)
when the thread runs out of Reply buttons, mods can still reply from the back end and thus it will show up as a Reply in the Reply list. I almost always do this when moderating.
please don't bold the copy and pastes. The occasional phrase or word bolded is fine, but it's better for bold to be left for the mods because it 'pops' and gets people's attention.
you can instead use the various methods I gave to make it clear what is a copy and paste. Leave your own words in normal text.
indenting is used for any kind of quote/copy and paste.
it's fine if you don't want to put it into your own words. Just say something like "there's a good explanation of this in clause 6" and let people click through. Or, "clause 6 is the one to read on the issue of accountability". You don't have to reinterpret, you can just point.
That is why I tried to answer/comment/help by referring to the new legislation without needing to delve into semantics. It is complex but people who have been following will know of /recall Molly's concern about accountablility and how that was to be managed when people were appointed.
Balance sheet separation allows cheaper borrowing – this requires amalgamation (at least 3 council areas) to dilute control and the inclusion of alternative form of oversight (Maori and government appointee with expertise).
Anyone aware of WT decisions as to water, and the importance of corporate decision-making as to charging (rather than councillors beholden to an election cycle and the influence of local businesses – National's real connection is here).
The alternative is loading debt onto government and increasing its cost (keeping this low allows the government to provide funding to those of the 10 with a weaker ratepayer base).
You would think that help create a domestic pipeline of nurses would be receive an enthusiastic response and be treated with some urgency, right? Not so, when the Nursing Council of New Zealand is involved.
It shows that definitely not all red-tape comes from (central) Government; many obstacles & hindrances are at local levels such as institution or work-place and are often elevated to pseudo-legal (aka shady) status. Reasons behind are diverse but often involve power & control and patch-protection of fiefdoms – there is no meaningful difference between elected and appointed officials or pseudo-officials with more or less fancy titles.
Getting to be a nurse is difficult i.e a Nursing Degree is required and the reason is obvious, nursing is vastly more complicated than even 20 years ago and the position of Enrolled Nurse is essentially redundant as even the simplest nursing intervention requires a lot of documentation and a very thorough knowledge of maths and other disciplines, including very good communication and language proficiency. If a nurse cannot be understood by a compromised or even elderly person then they are not suitable for the job. The Nursing Council has been steadily upgrading the education of Enrolled nurses for a long time now so that all health staff caring for patients are of a similar standard.
The right-wing love affair with the idea of just recruiting anybody from anywhere who calls themselves a nurse to fill the void is a recipe for disaster.
This is about the one-size-fits-all dogma. Some things currently done by fully qualified nurses could easily be done by others with lower/lesser qualifications perfectly well and thus take a load off the hands of nurses to do what they’re trained to do. An example is the recruiting and training of vaccinators when the need was high and outstripped the capacity because of silly restraints. Similar things happening in ECE where staff need have degrees to get a foot in the door.
It is not about self-ID as nurse, pretend to be one, and then be let loose on unsuspecting patients. Unless one fakes their CV. The Nursing Council seems to have accepted the argument but is simply stalling.
You ‘d be surprised at the number of “ nurses “ who arrive here to do their NZ gualifying course whose certifications are less than acceptable. Just so long as they are working on somebody other than you eh Incognito.
The State-funded RNZ has published an article by a couple of academics that contains more than enough triggers to induce a fit of sorts with some.
The title (not a headline) contains the dreaded h-word. And it is downhill from there all the way to the end.
But embracing an argument built on a tissue of circumstantial evidence is also part of the conspiracy theory playbook: magical thinking enters the grey zone of unanswered questions to create elaborate narratives of false reassurance.
For the purpose of public debate, anecdotal evidence carries as much weight as circumstantial evidence, which is why it is often accompanied by a weak narrative masquerading as compelling argument. Sounds familiar?
The “contagion effect” has been in full display here in NZ more recently. It is as real as the Sun and the Moon. It needs pointing out that it can and does work in more than one direction (aka ‘both ways’, in the usual binary situation).
The simplest and most obvious answer to the origins of Covid are that it jumped (naturally) from an animal to a human. How it might have occurred is the question and one that should be dominating discourse – not some convoluted bedtime story about fairies and pixies mixing a Covid brew then transporting it to the wider public in an effort to create widespread genocide of the human population.
I agree with the authors. The fanciful conspiracies are merely a modern day version of the witches brews and wizardry dating back to before and during the middle ages. The adherents to these conspiracies – like their predecessors – are not very intelligent and live in a state of ignorance and stupidity.
The adherents to these conspiracies – like their predecessors – are not very intelligent and live in a state of ignorance and stupidity.
Intelligence per se doesn’t make one immune against prejudice and bias nor to dogmatic thinking, coupled with a stubborn belief in one’s intellectual & cognitive abilities that often lead to entrenched opinions that are defended with a zeal and a closed-mind for extra protection against the evil forces & influences. Is more common than we like to admit, contagious and never asymptomatic.
The adherents to these conspiracies – like their predecessors – are not very intelligent and live in a state of ignorance and stupidity.
A few adherents to such conspiracies may actually be very intelligent, not ignorant, and will advocate for conspiracy theories that are a good fit to their world view – the triumph of pre-existing biases over case-by-case rationality.
Editorial—The truth is out there: The psychology of conspiracy theories and how to counter them [27 February 2023]
Accordingly, in this special issue we showcase cutting-edge research that aims to move the field forward by focusing on three related yet previously neglected contributions; (1) experimental work on how to reduce belief in conspiracy theories, (2) research which highlights the unique cognitive processes involved in conspiracy belief, and (3) novel methodological approaches to studying conspiratorial thinking. We discuss the special issue’s contribution to each of these areas in turn.
Recognising that no-one is conpletely immune to a well-presented rabbit hole is a helpful component of any self-innoculation, but once you're personally invested in a conspiracy theory it can be difficult to climb out.
The conspiracy rabbit hole: Why do some fall in deep and how do some manage to climb out?
The study will answer three crucial questions: 1) When a person changes their belief about a conspiracy theory, what reasons do they give for this change? 2) To what extent does belief in one conspiracy theory lead to belief in other conspiracy theories? And 3) Do negative experiences such as stress and depression contribute to belief in conspiracy theories?
If we can understand more about why people trip and fall into the rabbit hole in the first place, and determine what it takes for them to choose to climb out, this will ultimately contribute to a more cohesive society; one that includes a healthy dose of scepticism, without the blinding darkness.
Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it. Finally suppose he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence that his belief is wrong. What will happen? The individual will frequently emerge not only unshaken but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed he may even show a new fervor for converting other people to his view. – Brooke Gladstone
The simplest and most obvious answer to the origins of Covid are that it jumped (naturally) from an animal to a human.
That would the obvious and parsimonious explanation – and it has plenty of precedent. But being obvious and natural does not always make an idea correct. Lab leaks also have plenty of precedent. It is also a documented fact the WIV was performing genetic research on coronavirus's, therefore a leak of a novel variant from this lab is a perfectly reasonable hypothesis.
It would also be nice if there was a sound chain of evidence supporting the natural ‘jump’ theory, because in this instance it is conspicuously missing.
On Thursday Professor George Gao, the former head of the Chinese Centre for Disease Control, said that science needed a “rethink” because it now seemed an extra stage was not needed. The virus may have jumped straight from bats to humans.
Prof Gao told a conference in Geneva that scientists were also questioning whether Sars and Mers had jumped directly into humans, without needing the palm civets or camels originally blamed for the spillover.
Why does this matter? It is important because bats are not native to Wuhan, where the virus first emerged. They do not live in the area, and there is no evidence they were being brought from outside for sale in local wet markets.
Yet bats were coming into Wuhan through another route. Scientists from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) were collecting the animals in China and south-east Asia and bringing them to the city for “sequencing, archiving, analysis and manipulation”.
The details of the science can be found in many places – anyone with the slightest amount of curiosity can find it.
But in short an animal virus has to master two tricks in order to cause a human pandemic. One is that it has to learn how to infect a new host, which is relatively rare event. There are literally trillions of virus's, but the appearance of novel ones in humans is not commonplace. The other quite different trick is that it then has to learn how to be highly transmissible between humans.
The odds of both of these happening simultaneously without leaving any genetic chain of evidence of this natural evolutionary process is effectively zero. On the other hand there is plain sight evidence of a lab working on a very similar non-natural process, exactly in the location of the first outbreak.
Some discount the Wuhan lab leak because they note spread from the Wuhan market area.
However one of the labs in Wuhan doing bat coronavirus research (more than one) actually moved its location to 500 metres from the Wuhan market on Dec 2 2019.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and this applies to both hypotheses. Your assertions show that you’ve already made up your mind and formed your opinion on the matter. However, this doesn’t change anything for those of us who’ll remain open-minded and refuse to pick one over the other. In any case, plausibility does not equate compelling let alone convincing.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and this applies to both hypotheses.
Yes there are two possible contending hypothesis and there is an absence of absolute evidence to definitively support either. Yet the reason for the absence is not equivalent for each. The reason why there is no evidence to prove the natural origin hypothesis is that despite a great deal of highly motivated effort to find it – nothing convincing has been uncovered.
The reason why there is an absence of definitive evidence for the lab leak is quite the opposite – the Chinese authorities have made every effort to prevent an open and trusted investigation into this matter.
The tenor of the first four comments on this topic that you have started was sneeringly dismissive of the lab leak hypothesis, linking to an article that offered no science based argument, instead offering an unsupported, spurious comparison with witch burning. It is not difficult to see that you too have made up you mind.
The reason I would suggest has nothing to do with witch burning, or conspiracy minded biases – it is simply a tribally political need to assure us that anything Trump said is forever automagically wrong. And perhaps more importantly to provide cover for the now well established fact of Democrat supported figures like Fauci who spear-headed much of the global response to COVID, was also deeply involved in the funding that enabled the Wuhan coronavirus research in the first place.
The unspoken reality here is that we are not debating science – but politics.
I don’t know what constitutes “absolute evidence” and I strongly suspect that it is a red herring.
The Chinese authorities are not the only ones stifling investigations. Nice try though.
Since you provided no links to those “the first four comments on this topic”, we can only guess what you have in mind.
It is not difficult to see that you too have made up you mind. [sic]
I agree, in fact, it is impossible because it is incorrect – you are seeing imaginary things.
You assume the article linked to @ 4 is part of a larger conspiracy, a false flag operation conducted by black-op academics.
‘kay.
The unspoken reality here is that we are not debating science – but politics.
Right, which would mean that the hypotheses of the origin of the virus are a smokescreen in a larger game of smoke and mirrors. Thus, people such as you take sides based on political arguments not scientific ones.
The title of the RNZ article you initially linked to pretty much told me all that I needed to know – implying as it clearly does that anyone who entertains the idea of a lab leak is indulging in 'medieval' hysteria and blame pointing. It explicitly invokes witch burning as a comparison.
Returning to the quote you selected to highlight:
But embracing an argument built on a tissue of circumstantial evidence is also part of the conspiracy theory playbook: magical thinking enters the grey zone of unanswered questions to create elaborate narratives of false reassurance.
Again chock full of pejoratives, and clearly implies circumstantial evidence can always be hand-waved off as 'magical conspiracy thinking'. Ask any criminal barrister about the key role circumstantial or corroborative evidence plays in criminal trials where there facts of the case are in dispute. Especially when there is no access to the original scene of the crime, or there are no reliable witnesses available.
The reality is that due to the passage of time, and the obduracy of the Chinese authorities, there is almost zero chance we will ever obtain first hand information that confirms the mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to a lab leak. (The only remaining prospect of a breakthrough will be a credible whistle-blower, although given what we know about the CCP regime I consider this extremely unlikely.)
If you are going to demand an unobtainable standard of evidence, then I respectfully submit the debate you are asking for is going to be stillborn.
I see, you assume that if somebody links to an article it must always be about the title, the stuff that jumps out at you, the tip of the iceberg, and nothing else, no double messages, et cetera. It doesn’t seem to cross your mind that it might be because of the implicit take-home message, which might be more general than the topic matter might suggest prima facie – often the topic is merely a hook. This seems to happen with others too who are rather topic-obsessed topic-focussed and they always react to the self-raised red flag in a highly predictable way. I had you pegged as more perceptive and with a more depth.
If you are going to demand an unobtainable standard of evidence, then I respectfully submit the debate you are asking for is going to be stillborn.
I think this is a self-reference, as you mentioned “absolute evidence”, and nobody else has, so far.
I read the article in question – I always do because in so many instances I find it does not actually say what the person referencing it claims it does.
In this instance I found nothing of substance worth commenting on other than clickbaity title.
And in fact , the Wuhan scientists in a grant application proposed inserting a furin cleavage site into a coronavirus that would make the virus far more transmissible to humans .The very furin cleavage site that manifested in Wuhan .Why is a lab leak considered a conspiracy theory.?
It matches the requisites for Occam's razor far better than the leap from bat into humans.
The unspoken reality here is that we are not debating science – but politics.
There remains much 'we' don't know, let alone understand, and debating politics doesn't advance the science – let's remain open-minded while expert scientists debate the science.
Have we found the 'animal origin' of Covid? [25 March 2023]
"We have to get beyond the politics and back to the pure science," said Prof Holmes.
…
"Because this will happen again."
Searching for SARS-CoV-2 origins: confidence versus evidence [20 March 2023; PDF]
The hypotheses debate is reminiscent of the discussions
on the origins of HIV. In the late 1980s and ‘90s a now-
debunked hypothesis that a batch of the oral polio vaccine introduced HIV similarly captured media attention but was eventually refuted following publication of many robust genomic and phylogenetic studies.
…
However, one lesson the HIV/AIDS epidemic offers is that establishing the origin of a pathogen requires many studies over a period of time; then, once a large evidence base is gathered and can be objectively interpreted, a consensus can eventually be reached. It is difficult for such a consensus to be reached for SARS-CoV-2 if empty rhetoric that does not present informative data continues to be relayed to the public.
A Critical Analysis of the Evidence for the SARS-CoV-2 Origin Hypotheses [28 March 2023]
It is important to recognize that interpreting this failure to identify a feral source of SARS-CoV-2 as evidence supporting a laboratory origin constitutes the logical error of using the absence of evidence as evidence for an absence. We note that, as for the 2009 influenza pandemic, it took many years to identify the feral sources of SARS-CoV and HIV after their initial isolation from humans.
…
Nevertheless, it is possible that its origin may never be known with certainty.
The Origin of SARS-CoV-2: Animal Transmission or Lab Leak? [2 April 2023]
We are just at the beginning stages of understanding the complexity of viruses in the natural world, and further study will be critical for health and prosperity. U.S. national security experts may eventually need to become as familiar with the biology of pandemics as they are with the nuclear triad. But this won’t be possible as long as politics and rhetoric take precedence over reason and necessary research.
What New Evidence from the Wuhan Market Tells Us about COVID’s Origins [12 April 2023]
Recently released data from samples of the COVID-causing virus SARS-CoV-2 at the market where many early cases of the disease occurred suggest animals were present but stop short of proving that they were infected and transmitted the virus to humans.
If you were sincerely open-minded about the origin of COVID a man with your evident search engine expertise would have no difficulty finding plenty of references also making the case for a lab-leak.
For instance – here is an overview of the current US Administrations perspective on the matter – after considerable investigation:
The other well understood problem here is that virtually every expert virologist who we might normally rely upon for unbiased viewpoints – are hopelessly conflicted in this matter. For a start there is the well documented problem that anyone who speaks out against the approved narrative is very likely to be denied funding in future. And this is before we consider the wider concern many will reasonably have about the massive global damage to their profession's credibility if this event was ever proven to be due to be man-made.
The other well known challenge is the outright censorship or curation almost all medical journals are imposing on any COVID paper that is not aligned with editorial policy.
Normally I would like to think we could rely on the professional science debate to present both sides of the case in an even-handed fashion, but sadly this is not the case with this pandemic – almost all the regulators, journals and science bodies are deeply conflicted due to their massive reliance on single source, or industry funding, that constrains what they can safely say and still have a job.
If you were sincerely open-minded about the origin of COVID a man with your evident search engine expertise would have no difficulty finding plenty of references also making the case for a lab-leak.
Thanks Red – note that none of the 6 articles I linked to definitively rules out the lab leak hypothesis, which speaks to their credibility, imho. But have a read of them and see what you think.
Given the currently available evidence, the two plausible possibilities for the origin of SARS-CoV-2 are not equally likely. Continuing to frame them as such does us all a disservice, dilutes our efforts, and misdirects resources—only serving to weaken our ability to respond to future pandemics. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mbio.00583-23
We often see what we want to see. The attraction of the lab leak hypothesis is clear, and I admire your unshakable belief in its veracity.
I like to think I'm open-minded, and yes, I could find those pro-lab leak references. But, as I've mentioned on several occasions, in matters scientific I naturally tend to rely primarily on the evolving consensus opinion of expert scientists. In this case, maybe that's the wrong approach, but it's an approach which has served me well and for longer than I care to remember.
There was always one sure fire way to have proven me wrong. An unconstrained, trusted, open book, pockets out investigation at the WIV within days of the original event back in October 2019.
As it stands three years later we are left with either a natural origin hypothesis for which, despite massive effort, there is insufficient definitive evidence to support.
OR a lab leak of some kind for which there is a mountain of corroborating evidence – but for which we are never likely to find the definitive evidence either. But in this case because the guilty parties have determined we must not look for it.
And that anyone who does is to be smeared as a medieval, witch-burning ignoramus.
There was always one sure fire way to have proven me wrong.
I’ve little interest in proving that you are wrong – that’s not what motivates me.
But in this case because the guilty parties have determined we must not look for it.
In this instance, scientists and other 'investigators' who assume there must be "guilty parties" are rather giving their game away – I prefer to remain open-minded, but understand that's not for everyone.
And that anyone who does is to be smeared as a medieval, witch-burning ignoramus.
Such wonderfully colourful hyperbole – more please.
Regardless of whether you personally favor the “spillover” or “lab leak” theory, it’s important to keep an open mind and consider any new evidence that comes to light. This is the very essence of the scientific process. Science is not a set of fixed facts, but an ever-evolving process of testing, questioning, and updating what we know based on new information. Beware of anyone so entrenched in their beliefs that they would never change their mind regardless of new evidence. This is a good indicator that their beliefs are not based on science.
I was paraphrasing that from the article Incognito linked to in the comment which kicked off this thread. I thought it a little over the top too.
At every point I have been scrupulous to note that both the spillover and lab-leak hypothesis are valid choices from a purely scientific perspective. Yet at this point in time I do not believe the evidence we do have to hand supports them equally.
Nor for all the reasons I have already touched on, do I consider them 'equivalent' hypothesis. COVID as just another spillover event happily aligns with the interests of a great many professional people who lead and control our medical and public health systems.
COVID as a lab-leak by contrast holds a much darker prospect for many of these same people. Show me the incentives – and I will show you the outcomes.
it’s important to keep an open mind and consider any new evidence that comes to light. This is the very essence of the scientific process. Science is not a set of fixed facts, but an ever-evolving process of testing, questioning, and updating what we know based on new information.
That would be nice, but frankly when I reflect on the broad public debate I see quite the opposite in play – people locked into positionality and refusing to so much as look at the evidence for the case they are opposed to.
As far as I am concerned the spillover case is perfectly possible but so far despite almost 3yrs of highly motivated effort, definitive and convincing evidence remains elusive.
The lab-leak case by contrast could have been definitively proven or disproven 3yrs ago with a full and transparent investigation. The fact that the relevant authorities have prevented this rather gives their game away – and as far as I am concerned quite fairly speaks to their guilt.
At every point I have been scrupulous to note that both the spillover and lab-leak hypothesis are valid choices from a purely scientific perspective. Yet at this point in time I do not believe the evidence we do have to hand supports them equally.
Agree 100% – mine has always been "a purely scientific perspective". That's the reason I don't much credit the idea that a secret cabal of "a great many professional people who lead and control our medical and public health systems" is actively concealing the truth. Tbh, that idea seems relatively fantastic to me – much less likely than (for example) the idea that a great many professionals are simply mistaken.
I mean, just how big is this group of professionals that might be trying to cover up the truth? Thousands? Tens of thousands? While the lab leak hypothesis remains a possibility, I reckon the idea that a conspiracy of experts is concealing the truth about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 will eventually be consigned to the fringes, much like the idea that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job.
That's the reason I don't give much credence to the idea that a secret cabal
The problem for this argument is that it is no longer much of a secret. In recent months much of how this was done has now become common knowledge, which is why this topic has re-surfaced now.
Medicine, as you likely well know, is a very hierarchal profession and it is not hard for a relatively small handful of elites at the top to impose their agenda. Especially when they control research funding, professional registrations, – most especially when they have a great deal of collective credibility at stake.
A though-provoker is somebody who’s interested in genuine debate. A provocateur is not. I’m interested in genuine debate with people who have an open-mind and when they talk about science they mean science, for example.
Medicine, as you likely well know, is a very hierarchal profession and it is not hard for a relatively small handful of elites at the top to impose their agenda. Especially when they control research funding, professional registrations…
From my point of view, you seem to be slipping further down the 'SARS-CoV-2 lab leak origin' rabbit hole.
You're now suggesting that “a relatively small handful [as opposed to a relatively large handful – care to take a punt at how many?] of elite medics used threats and intimidation to quash alternative narratives.
Well, if that is indeed the case, then, despite all their power, this small handful of controlling elites hasn't done a very good job. Maybe that's because they are a "relatively small handful" – you know, like the famously small hands of (then) President Trump.
At a press conference on April 30, 2020, Trump said the administration had evidence showing Covid-19 came from a lab at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, although he declined to provide specifics. “I can’t tell you that. I’m not allowed to tell you that,” Trump said.
Days later, on May 3, Pompeo told ABC’s “This Week” that there was “enormous evidence” that Covid-19 came from the lab.
"Enormous evidence" – 3 years ago! Why are we still debating this?
Frankly whenever I come across someone using the word 'misinformation' these days I assume they are attempting to force the debate to a predetermined outcome. Disingenuous at best; more commonly a borderline authoritarian censorship tactic. It certainly does not suggest someone interested in investigating the science in an even-handed manner.
And in case you had not noticed, Trump is no longer President. Quoting three year old statements is a tactic that suggests either you are not up to speed with the current developments, or less charitably you are attempting a smear by political association to Donald Trump – a figure with precious little relevance to the debate other than being a handy well-poisoner.
The officials and agencies quoted in my link well above – that I assume you did not bother to read – all work for the Biden Administration. And they too clearly indicate there is sufficient reason to take the lab-leak thesis seriously.
If you choose not to inform yourself with the excuse that it is 'all some conspiracy minded rabbit-hole' – then I feel no obligation to re-type out here the mass of information available to a man with your evident search engine skills.
"Enormous evidence" – 3 years ago! Why are we still debating this?
Well if for the sake of argument we allow that Pompeo is correct, it is clear that he is referring to evidence of a circumstantial or corroborating nature – because as we both understand the Chinese authorities have never permitted a proper, transparent investigation. Nor for that matter certain figures in the US Administration who were indirectly funding coronavirus research at WIV.
And as Director of the CIA we might hazard a guess that Pompeo had a higher security clearance than you or me, and that if he assessed three years ago the information available to him as a "mountain of evidence" – then who are we to quibble? Especially when this claim has been largely confirmed by numerous independent researchers and various US govt agencies subsequently.
I can sympathise with your predicament. If you feel a life-long attachment and respect for the medical and science establishment, claims of their malfeasance will not be welcomed by you. I get it.
But the game you are playing here is obvious; you cannot produce definitive science evidence to support your preferred spillover thesis, instead all of your energy goes into various slippery tactics to discredit the alternative. Frankly I am losing interest in this fast.
I can sympathise with your predicament. If you feel a life-long attachment and respect for the medical and science establishment, claims of their malfeasance will not be welcomed by you. I get it.
I don't think you do, and can only repeat that in matters scientific, I tend to rely on evolving consensus expert opinion. Re alleged "malfeasance", my "predicament" is entirely in your own head.
Btw, is it "a small handful of elites", or the (much broader) "medical and science establishment" that stands accused of "malfeasance"?
But the game you are playing here is obvious; you cannot produce definitive science evidence to support your preferred lab leak thesis, instead all of your energy goes into various slippery tactics to discredit the alternative. Frankly I am losing interest in this fast.
Fwiw, I'm not trying to discredit the lab leak hypothesis any more than you are trying to discredit zoonotic emergence – it's simply that, based on available evidence, I (and many others) simply don't find 'a lab leak', even an accidental leak, as persuasive as zoonotic emergence. I suggest that we agree to disagree on the most likely origins of SARS-CoV-2, and hope that will not prove too difficult for you.
Lastly, it's a bit rich for you to assert that all of my energy "goes into various slippery tactics" – I had hoped you might have grown out of your habit of slurring those who disagree with your convictions, but your comment @6:06 pm put paid to those hopes.
Medicine, as you likely well know, is a very hierarchal profession and it is not hard for a relatively small handful of elites at the top to impose their agenda. Especially when they control research funding, professional registrations…
This is fanciful nonsense that does the lab leak hypothesis no favours – it's effectively piling a conspiracy theory on an (imho) already weak hypothesis, hence my reply (@5:29 pm):
From my point of view, you seem to be slipping further down the 'SARS-CoV-2 lab leak origin' rabbit hole.
I get it – you genuinely believe that the lab leak hypothesis is the best explanation for the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic – that's fine.
But if you can't make a decent case for a lab leak without invoking "malfeasance" on the part of a small global cabal of medical elites, then disinterested readers might wonder about the quality of your evidence.
Make up your mind as to what you are doing here. Otherwise this is just gaslighting.
What I'm doing in this thread is providing links to support my contention that zoonotic emergence is currently the best explanation for the origin of SARS-CoV-2. Not the only explanation, but still the best of the competing explanations, pending further evidence. You have a different opinion, and yet it seems that agreeing to disagree is a step to far for you.
It took me 20 min to find serious problems with all three of those references. For the sake of brevity I will deal with just the second one led by Frutos. In Sec 2.1 the possibility of a lab leak is dismissed with this argument:
This is a simple and straightforward selective and evolutionary process. RmYN02 also carries an indel at the same place as the furin site (PRRA) indel of SARS-CoV-2 with the insertion of a PAA sequence and the deletion of the immediate QTQT upstream sequence (Zhou et al., 2020b). The naturally occurring PAAR sequence displayed by RmYN02 is not active as a furin-cleavage site but is only one mutation away from the active RNNR furin cleavage site. One additional mutation turning the proline (P) into an arginine (R) will generate a RAAR active furin-cleavage site. This suggests that viruses other than SARS-CoV-2 were under similar selective pressure.
The selection of SARS-CoV-2 through successive passages in cell culture was refuted (Andersen et al., 2020). Scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology denied having carried out engineering and gain of function experiments on SARS-CoV-2but only on SARS-CoV in published and openly displayed international collaborations (Cohen, 2020). Altogether, these elements indicate that there is no evidence to support the hypothesis of a man-made origin of SARS-CoV-2.
The critical idea that COVID might have evolved from RmYN02 is cast heavily into doubt in this paper:
RaTG13, MP789 and RmYN02 are among SARS-CoV-2′s closest relatives and therefore of utmost importance as key tools for inferring SARS-CoV-2′s phylogenetic relationships and to identifying SARS-CoV-2′s specific genetic features, with the final aim of uncovering its origin. These sequences have been widely used to support a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 but after a close examination, all of them exhibit issues which should be specifically addressed and clarified.
Not so clear cut after all.
Then there is the second para that somewhat bizarrely relies on Anderson (who was conflicted all to hell and back due to his direct financial involvement at WIV, and whose presence on the WHO 'investigation' highly contributed to it being widely regarded as a farce.)
And then even more bizarrely relies on the word of WIV that they were not conducting 'gain of function' experiments, when just a few years earlier they were publishing papers claiming exactly this.
And just to insult our intelligence it is implied that the WIV public database could be relied upon to be a full and complete record of every virus they worked with. You know – the same database WIV yanked from the public domain on 12 Sept 2019 and has never been made available since.
If a dumbarse non-specialist like me can unearth such elementary logical problems under my own steam with only the smallest amount of effort – I'm not impressed.
This is fanciful nonsense that does the lab leak hypothesis no favours
Ask the nurses, clinicians and practitioners world wide who have found themselves out of a job or had their registration revoked because they held a dissenting view about vaccines. Or the prominent researchers who suddenly found their papers were being rejected by journal editors before even going to peer review.
Or the commonplace experience of seeing anything arbitrarily deemed ‘misinformation’ yanked off social media.
Or the tens of millions of us who were sneered at, mocked, censored or gaslit because our experience did not fall into line with 'safe and effective' for some reason.
'Fanciful' my arse. The establishment went into overdrive covering it’s butt on this one.
Late at night I mixed up Andersen and Daszak. Daszak of course worked for the now notorious EcoHealth Alliance that was used as the cutout middleman to enable NIH to fund WIV to perform GoF style research, explicitly banned by the Obama administration. Initially received as an expert, his credibility crumbled as his hopeless conflicts of interest became more apparent.
Andersen – is neck deep in this is a somewhat different way. It is his often cited "Proximal Origins" paper in March 2020 has gained notoriety because an email chain between him and Fauci, starting late at night on the 31 Jan 2020 has a group of these people all suddenly realising that this new virus really could be a lab leak and that something needs to be done to dampen this speculation down.
The immediate outcome was a paper that has been heavily criticised and has become the subject of Congressional inquiry. This article goes into the detail:
The core problem is that this was always a highly specialised field, with probably fewer than 100 people in the world truly across all the relevant material and with hands-on experience. But as the only experts they are also completely conflicted – which makes depending on anything they say inherently problematic.
Imagine an Inquiry into say the collapse of a major engineering structure such as a bridge. Absolutely the engineers who designed it would be required to give a full and complete accounting of their entire design process – but there would also be no difficulty in finding respected independent engineers to assist and advise the Inquiry. But the same is not quite as true for highly specialised fields like this – especially when there are networks of funding and professional links that entangle almost everyone.
Having said this – there are plenty of highly qualified people with more than enough knowledge of virology who looked at this entire business of genetically manipulating virus's in the lab who have long said the risks far outweighed any potential benefits. This is precisely why the Obama administration had placed a moratorium on this type of research in the first place.
And I think events proved this precaution entirely correct. And those who intentionally side-stepped it should be held to account.
Your bridge analogy is deeply flawed in this context.
Why?
In the aftermath of the ChCh earthquakes there was a proper investigation into the collapse of the ITV building. Any workplace accident will be investigated; medical people who act recklessly resulting in harm or death can be expected to be investigated.
But what does not happen is that we allow the people involved to effectively conduct the investigation into themselves. Nor any related party or with a conflict of interest. The investigators are required to be independent and seen to be so.
Or the commonplace experience of seeing anything arbitrarily deemed ‘misinformation’ yanked off social media.
Or the tens of millions of us who were sneered at, mocked, censored or gaslit because our experience did not fall into line with 'safe and effective' for some reason.
'Fanciful' my arse. The establishment went into overdrive covering it’s butt on this one.
Thanks Red, that helped me understand your PoV. Enjoy your day.
If you are defending a group of scientists who might have been culpable for the deaths of some 20 million people – and 3 yrs later have still managed to evade open, transparent scrutiny, much less be held to any account – then I think you are way too complacent.
Good-oh. Not me though – my PoV inflluences the content of my comments, and indeed whether or not I choose to comment at all.
If you are defending a group of scientists who might have been culpable for the deaths of some 20 million people – and 3 yrs later have still managed to evade open, transparent scrutiny, much less be held to any account – then I think you are way too complacent.
Am I defending a small global confederacy of elite medics/scientists – who are they? 'Might" suggests that you haven't convicted these elites yet, which is encouragingly open-minded, particularly given the paucity of strong evidence – new evidence will likely come to light over time.
20 million is a lot; I recall some Standardistas questioning the accuracy of the COVID-19 death toll, and even the duration of the pandemic in its early months – but PoVs can change with time and new evidence.
COVID-19 as a Mass Death Event[PDF]
There are concerns that the failure of governments to manage the material and affective aspects of the pandemic may accelerate fascist or populist movements; that it may unsettle and expose the neoliberal assumptions of trade-offs in politics and economics; and that it may intensify nationalism, xenophobia, and democratic backsliding. All of these concerns highlight the ways COVID-19 is challenging and transforming our world and worldview(s).
Analysing these changes through the narrow lens of state-centric politics and multifaceted mitigation in the pursuit of an immediate return to something called normal – ignoring the multiplicity of injustices, inequities, and inequalities upon which “normal” life is founded and that COVID-19 magnifies – ultimately limits our collective imaginative ability to consider the transformative moment brought about by the pandemic.
There is no guarantee that the post-COVID-19 world will be necessarily more ethical or laudable than the present one. Thinking clearly and carefully about the specific experience of mass death brought on by COVID-19, however, seems to be a prerequisite to imagining a more ethically desirable future after the pandemic.
As usual you reply with a handful of sentences of your own, then pad out the rest of the comment with a wall of multiple references. References have their place, but all too often I sense you hide behind them, not clearly stating your argument. But to work with what little you have offered:
'Might" suggests that you haven't convicted these elites yet, which is encouragingly open-minded, particularly given the paucity of strong evidence – new evidence will likely come to light over time.
Again returning to the two thesis in play here, spillover or lab-leak. We agree there is no definitive evidence to support either, but very different reasons.
Spillover lacks definitive evidence because despite a highly motivated effort to find it, nothing convincing has been found. Lab-leak lacks definitive evidence because despite a mountain of circumstantial and corroborative evidence – we have not been allowed to look for the smoking gun – by the very people implicated in this research.
The two cases are not equivalent at all. Spillover, given all the 2020's genomic high tech and resources thrown at it, should have been a relatively straightforward matter to establish on purely science grounds. You can hide behind 'maybe it will come to light in time', but as each year passes that prospect dims. How many more years do you propose waiting? Another three, a decade or more? At some point this argument will expire.
By contrast obtaining lab-leak thesis evidence was stifled by ill-intent right from the outset, not just by Chinese authorities, but right from the top in the US and across a network of highly conflicted individuals. None of this is speculation, we now have sufficient documentation to confirm this suspicion.
From a judicial perspective the lab-leak prosecution can present, means, opportunity, and guilty action to cover up the crime. Not to mention that mountain of corroboration.
As usual you reply with a handful of sentences of your own, then pad out the rest of the comment with a wall of multiple references. References have their place, but all too often I sense you hide behind them, not clearly stating your argument.
My 'argument' is that zoonotic emergence is the most likely SARS-CoV-2 origin hypothesis. I sense that many proponents of the lab leak hypothesis are politically motivated and/or conspiracy theorists.
COVID-19 conspiracies soar after latest report on origins
[2 March 2023]
“The vast majority of the evidence continues to support natural origin,” Rasmussen told The Associated Press Wednesday. “I’m a scientist. I need to see the evidence rather than take the FBI director’s word for it.”
Spillover lacks definitive evidence because despite a highly motivated effort to find it, nothing convincing has been found.
The small global confederacy of elite medics and scientists must be doing a tremendous job of motivating their army of (ignorant?) expert minions to look for evidence of zoonotic emergence. Or do you believe that the minions are also aware of the truth, and this "highly motivated effort" is nothing more than a massive orchestrated smokescreen?
Spillover, given all the 2020's genomic high tech and resources thrown at it, should have been a relatively straightforward matter to establish on purely science grounds. You can hide behind 'maybe it will come to light in time', but as each year passes that prospect dims. How many more years do you propose waiting? Another three, a decade or more? At some point this argument will expire.
Really – "a relatively straightforward matter"? OK, you know best. Personally, I'd give it another 5 years of scientific investigation – it's important to get this rigtht. More evidence will come to light, and if consensus expert opinion shifts to favour the lab leak hypothesis, then my opinion will shift, in line with evidence-based open-mindedness.
Re "highly motivated" – never have truer words been written
Do you recall back in Feb 2020 how the CCP tightly locked down all domestic travel inside China, while at the same time demanding that all other nations continue to allow travel internationally? Some of their more noxious spokespeople insisting it would be 'racist' not to do so. And thereby ensuring that any remaining chance of containing the outbreak would be lost.
Do you not recall this act of vile perfidy? And why would any sane person give these people the slightest benefit of the doubt in the light of this?
Do you recall back in Feb 2020 how the CCP tightly locked down all domestic travel inside China, while at the same time demanding that all other nations continue to allow travel internationally?
I recall domestic travel restrictions (in/out of Wuhan) from 23 Jan 2020, but not the "demanding that all other nations continue to allow travel internationally" bit (link?) – funny how one's mind can play tricks.
How did other nations respond to the CCP's demands, do you know?
These countries have imposed China travel restrictions over the coronavirus [7 Feburary 2020]
New Zealand (As of Feb. 7)
Passengers who have transited through or have been in mainland China on or after Feb. 2 won’t be allowed to transit or enter New Zealand. New Zealand nationals, residents and their immediate families will be allowed entry but will be required to self-isolate for a period of 14 days from their arrival.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump and the virus-era China ban that isn’t [19 July 2020]
Few doubt that the heavy death toll from COVID-19 would be even heavier if world travel had not been constricted globally. But Trump has no scientific basis to claim that his action alone saved “millions” or even “hundreds of thousands” of lives, as he has put it.
Some groups, e.g. COVID Plan B, agitated for a relaxation of border controls early on, and such public health measures also inconvenienced many Kiwis temporarily stranded overseas.
So , a lab intends to insert the very mechanism into a virus that makes it super transmissible between humans
The novel virus makes its first ever appearance in the human population close to the lab and proceeds to travel quickly to the point we have a pandemic
That this happened naturally depends on a intermediary host
So, the or a lab did insert the furin cleavage site, according to your belief. Problem is that the scientific evidence is controversial and disputed and hardly constitutes evidence for your preferred hypothesis belief.
Do you want to discuss the pro & con of the scientific arguments or do you want to deal in conspiracy stuff? If the former, I don’t think you have what it takes. If the latter, you’re right at home.
Written with no awareness that conspiracy theory creation is part of psychological warfare operations (CIA …)
The Russians used the psychiatric institution gulag in Siberia and there is a western version – taking people out of the (Kansas) city to the (Missouri) country side cult (a joke about Joseph Smith believing paradise was in Missouri).
It would be interesting to see an informed debate over the relative pros and cons of the undergrad health science degree + 4 year medical degree model proposed by Waikato, against the 'traditional' 6 year medical degree (1 yr health science + 5 years medicine) at Auckland/Otago.
Lane provides figures to show that the proposed Waikato model is at least 25% cheaper per graduate – even though it takes 1 year longer. Is the 'quality' equivalent?
It seems as though it's the cost per student that the government is jibbing at (or at least, I can't think of any other reason) – so a mechanism to reduce the cost seems like a strategic winner.
Until we see a detailed proposal and plan, all we have is rumour, speculation, and talking points. This might be good enough for National but not for real decisions that are evidence-based.
To Incfognito, I thought it was a very good article, balanced and reasonable. It bought to mind the story as to why the post WW1 pandemic was called the Spanish Flu, it was purportedly because only the Spanish newspapers were able to report on it as the combatant countries were under strict wartime censorship. I was also under the impression that the contagion originated somewhere in the Mid-West in an army training camp just before the troops there were deployed to Europe. Hmmm, wouldn't want that knowledge getting out eh.
The Inland Revenue report will, nonetheless, hand Labour a large dilemma: if, as expected, it shows very low tax rates at the top end, the government will either have to do something about it and face a massive political fight, or explicitly say it will do nothing to right the injustice its own research has identified.
Dear Mr Rashbrooke, there is a third option that will guaranteed to be the preferred one by Labour and National alike: seek non-partisan support across the centre (aka across the floor). Since we all know that this is as hard to find as a unicorn winter grazing in a paddock both parties will embrace this ‘solution’ and ‘look good’ – a win-win.
A surprising admission from a former Minister of Finance
She is of the view that increases in incomes derive from inflation, rather than from wage share of profit. Is this based on the idea that profit is (or should be) directed to owners rather than workers?
How can finance ministers be trusted to fight inflation when, thanks to bracket creep, they profit from it?
Her other argument is that none of the proceeds from economic growth (bracket creep) should be shared with the government sector. Given the aging of the population – rising health cost and their (until Cullen – and no National Minister has placed money into the NZS Fund) lack of provision for the rising cost of super is frankly irresponsible.
Richardson is a little disingenuous, as expected. For example, somebody on a minimum wage has to work well over 40 h/week for 52 weeks a year to even touch the $48k threshold. She also failed to mention the role of the independent RBNZ in controlling inflation. True to form, she points to Government spending causing inflation, which is another misleading argument. Honestly, I cannot be bothered even trying to counter Richardson’s spin – you can tell it is Election Year when the old rusty tanks get rolled out, making their creaky & squeaky sounds through well-worn cogs & sprockets and let’s hope the wheels don’t start falling off. The Onion seems to have a finger in many pies.
However, you don't have to be very far above minimum wage ($22.70) to hit the 48,000 for 40/52 weeks – it's $23.08.
Every local restaurant job earns at least this (or they don't get staff), roading workers are way above, as are bus drivers. Apart from McDonalds, or very part-time supermarket shelf-stacking – you're not going to find any jobs in Auckland paying less than $23 (even if they're advertising lower, they just won't get any applicants).
Indexing tax rates to average wage is something that's long overdue – and a failure from both major political parties.
I’d be (pleasantly?) surprised if the Bread & Butter Budget-2023 contained any changes to the lower tax brackets that would take effect in the foreseeable future.
1. a statement in the budget this year of the first threshold change for 1 April 2024. Every worker gets the same $500 cut in income tax next year.
2. then go into the campaign with a policy of threshold adjustments that are income tax neutral.
But add a provision if there was a coalition deal with Greens that included a wealth tax, then the money would allow adjustments reducing income tax in all threshold bands.
The point to show greater responsibility than NACT. And a better deal for the many.
Australia vs NZ tax on income (OZ is green NZ is blue)
0-18,000 at 0% vs 0 to 14,500 at 10.5 % and 14.501 – 18.000 at 17.5%
(NZ taxes the first 18 grand up to 17.5 % higher then OZ which stands at 0 tax, something that would benefit part time workers/casual workers and low income workers even tho high incomes will also benefit)
18.001 – 45.000 at 19% vs 14.500 – 48.000 at 17.5%
(agree this is a similar tax rate and the only one were taxes are higher then in NZ)
45.000 to 120,000 at 32.5% vs45,0001 to 70,000 at 30% and 70.001 – 90.000 at 33% and 90.001 – 120.000 at 35%
(it seems to me that the OZ tax is less complex and overall better for the worker)
120.001-180.000 at 37% vs90.000 – 180.000 at 35%
(now here OZ has more tax income than NZ and in NZ we are charging that higher rate to lower income)
over 180,000 at 45% vs over 180,000 at 39%
(OZ charges the higher incomes a much higher tax rate then NZ)
We are not close at all. We are quite opposite. We have a bloated system that makes no exemption for low income worker but looks well after those on high incomes.
For the record I have been advocating for 0 tax on the first 25 grand earned as that is still the minimum for a rental to pay for a while now – since the John Key years publicly here and have been told that it would be too complicated, only benefit rich people blablabla.
Sadly the current government will not change the tax code to benefit the low income worker.
Our low income earner rebate could be adjusted (it's for those working who have no children and thus cannot get WFF tax credits).
It's currently $10 a week and operates between $24,000 and $48,000. . It could be larger start lower and go higher (to the median wage c$60,000). That's the alternative to a zero free zone (thus none of the amount goes to those on more than $60,000 that more than halves the cost).
stop with the tinkering and go 0 tax on the first 25.000 grand. If OZ can do that, why can't we.
our income tax punished the low income earner and gives a well greased handshake to the well to do, but in saying that, i can totes see why Grant Robertson will no more increase his tax burden then would Chris Luxon or Mr. Seymour. Cause they like their low taxes.
So you want to help those on the lowest income threshhold but only in way that also lines the pockets of those on above median wage incomes. Which more than doubles the cost. Who pays for this – the poor dependent on a run down health system (as they have no medical insurance)?
Oz has higher income tax rates over 18,000 than we do, to afford it. They also have CGT and a land tax and stamp duty.
The difference between you and me is that i don't care about purity. Firstly.
Secondly, yes, taking the taxes on the first 25 grand to 0 will equally benefit the higher income earner as they also would not have to pay taxes on that amount. And here is where OZ has shown us the way, they charge a higher income tax at the higher end,
see here
120.001-180.000 at 37% vs 90.000 – 180.000 at 35% – OZ being 2% higher here
and
over 180,000 at 45% vs over 180,000 at 39% – OZ being 6 % higher here.
In fact we could dump our system and copy the OZ system, full stop. It would benefit the lower income and raise taxes on the rich. Ka-ching, bingo, we have a winner here. And no one has to think it up either, we just copy!
But we will not do such a thing because neither Grant Roberston, nor Chris Luxon, nor Mr. Seymour will change their tax rate to cost them more of their earnings. No siree, why would they.
So yes, go OZ well done, you are charging the rich to give a few more pennies to the poor. Well done, Sadly it can't won't be done in NZ cause we are buys finding excuses as to why not, and because we can't even imagine rich people like our Parliamentarian Critters to pay their fair share. So sad!
The Green Party is calling on the Government to tax the super wealthy as inflation, largely driven by continued increases in the cost of essentials like food and housing, persists.
Mr Rashbrooke notes "The radical becomes respectable" and "bad ideas don’t stand up to scrutiny. But, as a corollary, the good ones eventually win out."
“Inflation hits lower-income families the hardest, who spend the majority of their income covering the essentials like food and rent. Wealth and income inequality in this country is a political choice. The Government needs to act,” says Green Party revenue spokesperson Chlöe Swarbrick.
“The solution is taxing wealth and excess profits and using that money to help people. This makes the most sense in the context of the approximately trillion-dollar wealth transfer to the wealthiest throughout COVID-19.
“Last year the Reserve Bank admitted in response to my questioning that they are engineering a recession to try and rein in inflation.
“We know this will disproportionately impact low income people in Aotearoa. It doesn’t have to be like this. This is only happening because the Government isn't acting.
“Reducing government spending on essential public services would be a mistake at a time when we know our crucial infrastructure across health, housing, education, the environment, and transport desperately needs investment.
“Instead of relying on the Reserve Bank to use blunt monetary policy like raising the OCR, or manufacturing a recession, the Government can tax the super wealthy.
“Instead of allowing trickle-down economic thinking to drive economic policy that perversely pushes people out of work, the Government can tax the rich and build a fairer society,” says Chlöe Swarbrick.
I agree, but I suspect that most Green Party voters are not among the most affected and frankly, I cannot see this changing much before October, if ever.
One hopes a certain red-hued faction seizes the nettle and returns to their roots, if one can forgive the mixed garden metaphors; seems appropriate for advice coming from the Greens.
Amongst the mountains of dross on television, there are little nuggets of gold. I caught the tail end of Studio B: Unscripted on Al Jazeera this morning.
Titled "The deadly word, freedom: Brian Eno and Ha-Joon Chang" (Pt 1), many on this site would find common ground with this very interesting discussion.
Also on YouTube.
As co-founder of EarthPercent, Eno focuses his artistry and years of activism on galvanizing the music industry and beyond to find creative techniques for tackling climate change.
In his best-selling books, including Kicking Away the Ladder and Bad Samaritans, Chang busts one mainstream economic myth after another and in his latest book, Edible Economics, one ingredient at a time. They explore creativity, taste buds, artificial intelligence and climate change, offering successive takedowns of the status quo and paths to a fairer society.
The USA Supreme Court is allowing the continued supply by mail of an abortion pill, overturning a Court of Appeal ruling that required collection visits while a case over the legality of the pills (on the dubious grounds of process to authorise their use, as per safety, when the pills now have a decades long real world safety record) is on-going.
Basically conservative judges, in states set to ban abortions, are being targeted by abortion opponents to ban the pill nationwide. One suspects however (sans SCOTUS finding in their favour) that the real political agenda is to legislate a federal ban on movement of the pill into states with abortion bans (it's a reprise of the underground railroad scenario of the 19thC).
The same people also oppose funding for Family Planning (contraceptive pills, condoms and morning after pills), sex education in schools and fertility treatment.
Headsup that the Mobile version of TS has been turned off for now because it was causing too many problems. We can still use the Desktop version on a mobile device, but some people won't be able to comment from there. Sorry about that, but all posts should be able to be read now.
If you are on a mobile device and can't comment from the Desktop version, can you please reply below with details, cheers.
Edit, I can make a new comment from the Desktop version but I can’t usually reply.
Yes I am using desktop version. Haven't been able to access the mobile version for some time now. And no I wasn't able to comment on some occasions. Click on reply button, but no keyboard 😕
@ Muttonbird, I lifted your ban @ 8:20 pm. I checked and I can’t see why your comments are still ending up in Trash. Apologies for the inconvenience, but this is above my pay-grade.
Yes, you’re right, it does seem that way. So, MB may be good to go, phew! Otherwise, they’ll just have to wait for Lynn – there’s nothing else I can do here.
Russia, a terror state where elderly women are fined twice their monthly pension for saying Zelensky is handsome, single fathers imprisoned and their child returned to her long estranged mother for producing an antiwar drawing and where dissident journalists are sentenced to 25 years in prison for being, of course, dissident journalists.
It's hard times try to make a livingYou wake up every morning in the unforgivingOut there somewhere in the cityThere's people living lives without mercy or pityI feel good, yeah I'm feeling fineI feel better then I have for the longest timeI think these pills have been good for meI ...
In 1974, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Nixon, finding that the President was not a King, but was subject to the law and was required to turn over the evidence of his wrongdoing to the courts. It was a landmark decision for the rule ...
Every day now just seems to bring in more fresh meat for the grinder.In their relentlessly ideological drive to cut back on the “excessive bloat” (as they see it) of the previous Labour-led government, on the mountains of evidence accumulated in such a short period of time do not ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Megan Valére SosouMarket gardening site of the Itchèléré de Itagui agricultural cooperative in Dassa-Zoumè (Image credit: Megan Valère Sossou) For the residents of Dassa-Zoumè, a city in the West African country of Benin, choosing between drinking water and having enough ...
Buzz from the Beehive Melissa Lee – as may be discerned from the screenshot above – has not been demoted for doing something seriously wrong as Minister of ...
Morning in London Mother hugs beloved daughter outside the converted shoe factory in which she is living.Afternoon in London Travelling writer takes himself and his wrist down to A&E, just to be sure. Read more ...
Mike Grimshaw writes – The recent announcement of the University Advisory Group, chaired by Sir Peter Gluckman, makes very clear where the Government’s focus and priorities lie. The remit of the Advisory Group is that Group members will consider challenges and opportunities for improvement in the university sector including: ...
Eric Crampton writes – The Reserve Bank of New Zealand desperately wants to find reasons to have workstreams in climate change. It makes little sense. They’ve run another stress test on the banks looking to see if they could find a prudential regulation case. They couldn’t. They ...
Rob MacCullough writes – Pundits from the left and the right are arguing that National’s Fast Track Bill that is designed to speed up infrastructure decisions could end up becoming mired in a cesspool of corruption. Political commentator ...
Looking at the headlines this morning it’s hard to feel anything other than pessimistic about the future of humanity.Note that I’m not speaking about the future of mankind, but the survival of our humanity. The values that we believe in seem to be ebbing away, by the day.Perhaps every generation ...
Swabbing mixed breed baby chicks to test for avian influenzaUh oh. Bird flu – often deadly to humans – is not only being transmitted from infected birds to dairy cows, but is now travelling between dairy cows. As of last Friday, Bloomberg News reports, there were 32 American dairy herds ...
On February 14, 2023 we announced our Rebuttal Update Project. This included an ask for feedback about the added "At a glance" section in the updated basic rebuttal versions. This weekly blog post series highlights this new section of one of the updated basic rebuttal versions and serves as a ...
What is it with the mining industry? Its not enough for them to pillage the earth - they apparently can't even be bothered getting resource consent to do so: The proponent behind a major mine near the Clutha River had already been undertaking activity in the area without a ...
Photo # 1 I am a huge fan of Singapore’s approach to housing, as described here two years ago by copying and pasting from The ConversationWhat Singapore has that Australia does not is a public housing developer, the Housing Development Board, which puts new dwellings on public and reclaimed land, ...
Buzz from the Beehive Reactions to news of the government’s readiness to make urgent changes to “the resource management system” through a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) suggest a balanced approach is being taken. The Taxpayers’ Union says the proposed changes don’t go far enough. Greenpeace says ...
I’m starting to wonder if Anna Burns-Francis might be the best political interviewer we’ve got. That might sound unlikely to you, it came as a bit of a surprise to me.Jack Tame can be excellent, but has some pretty average days. I like Rebecca Wright on Newshub, she asks good ...
Chris Trotter writes – Willie Jackson is said to be planning a “media summit” to discuss “the state of the media and how to protect Fourth Estate Journalism”. Not only does the Editor of The Daily Blog, Martyn Bradbury, think this is a good idea, but he has also ...
Graeme Edgeler writes – This morning [April 21], the Wellington High Court is hearing a judicial review brought by Hon. Karen Chhour, the Minister for Children, against a decision of the Waitangi Tribunal. This is unusual, judicial reviews are much more likely to brought against ministers, rather than ...
Both of Parliament’s watchdogs have now ripped into the Government’s Fast-track Approvals Bill. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāMy pick of the six newsey things to know from Aotearoa’s political economy and beyond on the morning of Tuesday, April 23 are:The Lead: The Auditor General,John Ryan, has joined the ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Sarah SpengemanPeople wait to board an electric bus in Pune, India. (Image credit: courtesy of ITDP) Public transportation riders in Pune, India, love the city’s new electric buses so much they will actually skip an older diesel bus that ...
The infrastructure industry yesterday issued a “hurry up” message to the Government, telling it to get cracking on developing a pipeline of infrastructure projects.The hiatus around the change of Government has seen some major projects cancelled and others delayed, and there is uncertainty about what will happen with the new ...
Hi,Over the weekend I revisited a podcast I really adore, Dead Eyes. It’s about a guy who got fired from Band of Brothers over two decades ago because Tom Hanks said he had “dead eyes”.If you don’t recall — 2001’s Band of Brothers was part of the emerging trend of ...
Buzz from the Beehive The 180 or so recipients of letters from the Government telling them how to submit infrastructure projects for “fast track” consideration includes some whose project applications previously have been rejected by the courts. News media were quick to feature these in their reports after RMA Reform Minister Chris ...
It would not be a desirable way to start your holiday by breaking your back, your head, or your wrist, but on our first hour in Singapore I gave it a try.We were chatting, last week, before we started a meeting of Hazel’s Enviro Trust, about the things that can ...
Calling all journalists, academics, planners, lawyers, political activists, environmentalists, and other members of the public who believe that the relationships between vested interests and politicians need to be scrutinised. We need to work together to make sure that the new Fast-Track Approvals Bill – currently being pushed through by the ...
Feel worried. Shane Jones and a couple of his Cabinet colleagues are about to be granted the power to override any and all objections to projects like dams, mines, roads etc even if: said projects will harm biodiversity, increase global warming and cause other environmental harms, and even if ...
Bryce Edwards writes- The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. ...
Michael Bassett writes – If you think there is a move afoot by the radical Maori fringe of New Zealand society to create a parallel system of government to the one that we elect at our triennial elections, you aren’t wrong. Over the last few days we have ...
Without a corresponding drop in interest rates, it’s doubtful any changes to the CCCFA will unleash a massive rush of home buyers. Photo: Lynn GrievesonTL;DR: The six things that stood out to me in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, poverty and climate on Monday, April 22 included:The Government making a ...
Sunday was a lazy day. I started watching Jack Tame on Q&A, the interviews are usually good for something to write about. Saying the things that the politicians won’t, but are quite possibly thinking. Things that are true and need to be extracted from between the lines.As you might know ...
In our Weekly Roundup last week we covered news from Auckland Transport that the WX1 Western Express is going to get an upgrade next year with double decker electric buses. As part of the announcement, AT also said “Since we introduced the WX1 Western Express last November we have seen ...
TL;DR: The six key events to watch in Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy in the week to April 29 include:PM Christopher Luxon is scheduled to hold a post-Cabinet news conference at 4 pm today. Stats NZ releases its statutory report on Census 2023 tomorrow.Finance Minister Nicola Willis delivers a pre-Budget speech at ...
A listing of 29 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, April 14, 2024 thru Sat, April 20, 2024. Story of the week Our story of the week hinges on these words from the abstract of a fresh academic ...
The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. The Government says this will ...
This is a column to say thank you. So many of have been in touch since Mum died to say so many kind and thoughtful things. You’re wonderful, all of you. You’ve asked how we’re doing, how Dad’s doing. A little more realisation each day, of the irretrievable finality of ...
Identifying the engine type in your car is crucial for various reasons, including maintenance, repairs, and performance upgrades. Knowing the specific engine model allows you to access detailed technical information, locate compatible parts, and make informed decisions about modifications. This comprehensive guide will provide you with a step-by-step approach to ...
Introduction: The allure of racing is undeniable. The thrill of speed, the roar of engines, and the exhilaration of competition all contribute to the allure of this adrenaline-driven sport. For those who yearn to experience the pinnacle of racing, becoming a race car driver is the ultimate dream. However, the ...
Introduction Automobiles have become ubiquitous in modern society, serving as a primary mode of transportation and a symbol of economic growth and personal mobility. With countless vehicles traversing roads and highways worldwide, it begs the question: how many cars are there in the world? Determining the precise number is a ...
Maintaining a safe and reliable vehicle requires regular inspections. Whether it’s a routine maintenance checkup or a safety inspection, knowing how long the process will take can help you plan your day accordingly. This article delves into the factors that influence the duration of a car inspection and provides an ...
Mazda Motor Corporation, commonly known as Mazda, is a Japanese multinational automaker headquartered in Fuchu, Aki District, Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan. The company was founded in 1920 as the Toyo Cork Kogyo Co., Ltd., and began producing vehicles in 1931. Mazda is primarily known for its production of passenger cars, but ...
Your car battery is an essential component that provides power to start your engine, operate your electrical systems, and store energy. Over time, batteries can weaken and lose their ability to hold a charge, which can lead to starting problems, power failures, and other issues. Replacing your battery before it ...
In most states, you cannot register a car without a valid driver’s license. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule. Exceptions to the RuleIf you are under 18 years old: In some states, you can register a car in your name even if you do not ...
Mazda, a Japanese automotive manufacturer with a rich history of innovation and engineering excellence, has emerged as a formidable player in the global car market. Known for its reputation of producing high-quality, fuel-efficient, and driver-oriented vehicles, Mazda has consistently garnered praise from industry experts and consumers alike. In this article, ...
Struts are an essential part of a car’s suspension system. They are responsible for supporting the weight of the car and damping the oscillations of the springs. Struts are typically made of steel or aluminum and are filled with hydraulic fluid. How Do Struts Work? Struts work by transferring the ...
Car registration is a mandatory process that all vehicle owners must complete annually. This process involves registering your car with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and paying an associated fee. The registration process ensures that your vehicle is properly licensed and insured, and helps law enforcement and other authorities ...
Zoom is a video conferencing service that allows you to share your screen, webcam, and audio with other participants. In addition to sharing your own audio, you can also share the audio from your computer with other participants. This can be useful for playing music, sharing presentations with audio, or ...
Building your own computer can be a rewarding and cost-effective way to get a high-performance machine tailored to your specific needs. However, it also requires careful planning and execution, and one of the most important factors to consider is the time it will take. The exact time it takes to ...
Sleep mode is a power-saving state that allows your computer to quickly resume operation without having to boot up from scratch. This can be useful if you need to step away from your computer for a short period of time but don’t want to shut it down completely. There are ...
Introduction Computer-Assisted Translation (CAT) has revolutionized the field of translation by harnessing the power of technology to assist human translators in their work. This innovative approach combines specialized software with human expertise to improve the efficiency, accuracy, and consistency of translations. In this comprehensive article, we will delve into the ...
In today’s digital age, mobile devices have become an indispensable part of our daily lives. Among the vast array of portable computing options available, iPads and tablet computers stand out as two prominent contenders. While both offer similar functionalities, there are subtle yet significant differences between these two devices. This ...
A computer is an electronic device that can be programmed to carry out a set of instructions. The basic components of a computer are the processor, memory, storage, input devices, and output devices. The Processor The processor, also known as the central processing unit (CPU), is the brain of the ...
Voice Memos is a convenient app on your iPhone that allows you to quickly record and store audio snippets. These recordings can be useful for a variety of purposes, such as taking notes, capturing ideas, or recording interviews. While you can listen to your voice memos on your iPhone, you ...
Laptop screens are essential for interacting with our devices and accessing information. However, when lines appear on the screen, it can be frustrating and disrupt productivity. Understanding the underlying causes of these lines is crucial for finding effective solutions. Types of Screen Lines Horizontal lines: Also known as scan ...
Right-clicking is a common and essential computer operation that allows users to access additional options and settings. While most desktop computers have dedicated right-click buttons on their mice, laptops often do not have these buttons due to space limitations. This article will provide a comprehensive guide on how to right-click ...
Powering up and shutting down your ASUS laptop is an essential task for any laptop user. Locating the power button can sometimes be a hassle, especially if you’re new to ASUS laptops. This article will provide a comprehensive guide on where to find the power button on different ASUS laptop ...
Dell laptops are renowned for their reliability, performance, and versatility. Whether you’re a student, a professional, or just someone who needs a reliable computing device, a Dell laptop can meet your needs. However, if you’re new to Dell laptops, you may be wondering how to get started. In this comprehensive ...
Two-thirds of the country think that “New Zealand’s economy is rigged to advantage the rich and powerful”. They also believe that “New Zealand needs a strong leader to take the country back from the rich and powerful”. These are just two of a handful of stunning new survey results released ...
In today’s digital world, screenshots have become an indispensable tool for communication and documentation. Whether you need to capture an important email, preserve a website page, or share an error message, screenshots allow you to quickly and easily preserve digital information. If you’re an Asus laptop user, there are several ...
A factory reset restores your Gateway laptop to its original factory settings, erasing all data, apps, and personalizations. This can be necessary to resolve software issues, remove viruses, or prepare your laptop for sale or transfer. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to factory reset your Gateway laptop: Method 1: ...
“You talking about me?”The neoliberal denigration of the past was nowhere more unrelenting than in its depiction of the public service. The Post Office and the Railways were held up as being both irremediably inefficient and scandalously over-manned. Playwright Roger Hall’s “Glide Time” caricatures were presented as accurate depictions of ...
Roger Partridge writes – When the Coalition Government took office last October, it inherited a country on a precipice. With persistent inflation, decades of insipid productivity growth and crises in healthcare, education, housing and law and order, it is no exaggeration to suggest New Zealand’s first-world status was ...
Rob MacCulloch writes – In 2022, the Curriculum Centre at the Ministry of Education employed 308 staff, according to an Official Information Request. Earlier this week it was announced 202 of those staff were being cut. When you look up “The New Zealand Curriculum” on the Ministry of ...
Chris Bishop’s bill has stirred up a hornets nest of opposition. Photo: Lynn Grieveson for The KākāTL;DR: The six things that stood out to me in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, poverty and climate from the last day included:A crescendo of opposition to the Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill is ...
Monday left me brokenTuesday, I was through with hopingWednesday, my empty arms were openThursday, waiting for love, waiting for loveThe end of another week that left many of us asking WTF? What on earth has NZ gotten itself into and how on earth could people have voluntarily signed up for ...
Hello! Here comes the Saturday edition of More Than A Feilding, catching you up on the past week’s editions.State of humanity, 20242024, it feels, keeps presenting us with ever more challenges, ever more dismay.Do you give up yet? It seems to ask.No? How about this? Or this?How about this?Full story Share ...
Determining the hardest sport in the world is a subjective matter, as the difficulty level can vary depending on individual abilities, physical attributes, and experience. However, based on various factors including physical demands, technical skills, mental fortitude, and overall accomplishment, here is an exploration of some of the most challenging ...
The allure of sport transcends age, culture, and geographical boundaries. It captivates hearts, ignites passions, and provides unparalleled entertainment. Behind the spectacle, however, lies a fascinating world of financial investment and expenditure. Among the vast array of competitive pursuits, one question looms large: which sport carries the hefty title of ...
Introduction Pickleball, a rapidly growing paddle sport, has captured the hearts and imaginations of millions around the world. Its blend of tennis, badminton, and table tennis elements has made it a favorite among players of all ages and skill levels. As the sport’s popularity continues to surge, the question on ...
Abstract: Soccer, the global phenomenon captivating millions worldwide, has a rich history that spans centuries. Its origins trace back to ancient civilizations, but the modern version we know and love emerged through a complex interplay of cultural influences and innovations. This article delves into the fascinating journey of soccer’s evolution, ...
Our two-tiered system for veterans’ support is out of step with our closest partners, and all parties in Parliament should work together to fix it, Labour veterans’ affairs spokesperson Greg O’Connor said. ...
Stripping two Ministers of their portfolios just six months into the job shows Christopher Luxon’s management style is lacking, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said. ...
It appears Nicola Willis is about to pull the rug out from under the feet of local communities still dealing with the aftermath of last year’s severe weather, and local councils relying on funding to build back from these disasters. ...
The Government is making short-sighted changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) that will take away environmental protection in favour of short-term profits, Labour’s environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said today. ...
Labour welcomes the release of the report into the North Island weather events and looks forward to working with the Government to ensure that New Zealand is as prepared as it can be for the next natural disaster. ...
The Labour Party has called for the New Zealand Government to recognise Palestine, as a material step towards progressing the two-State solution needed to achieve a lasting peace in the region. ...
Some of our country’s most important work, stopping the sexual exploitation of children and violent extremism could go along with staff on the frontline at ports and airports. ...
The Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill will give projects such as new coal mines a ‘get out of jail free’ card to wreak havoc on the environment, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said today. ...
Cuts to frontline hospital staff are not only a broken election promise, it shows the reckless tax cuts have well and truly hit the frontline of the health system, says Labour Health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall. ...
The Green Party has joined the call for public submissions on the fast-track legislation to be extended after the Ombudsman forced the Government to release the list of organisations invited to apply just hours before submissions close. ...
New Zealand’s good work at reducing climate emissions for three years in a row will be undone by the National government’s lack of ambition and scrapping programmes that were making a difference, Labour Party climate spokesperson Megan Woods said today. ...
More essential jobs could be on the chopping block, this time Ministry of Education staff on the school lunches team are set to find out whether they're in line to lose their jobs. ...
The Government is trying to bring in a law that will allow Ministers to cut corners and kill off native species, Labour environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said. ...
Cancelling urgently needed new Cook Strait ferries and hiking the cost of public transport for many Kiwis so that National can announce the prospect of another tunnel for Wellington is not making good choices, Labour Transport Spokesperson Tangi Utikere said. ...
A laundry list of additional costs for Tāmaki Makarau Auckland shows the Minister for the city is not delivering for the people who live there, says Labour Auckland Issues spokesperson Shanan Halbert. ...
The Green Party has today launched a step-by-step guide to help New Zealanders make their voice heard on the Government’s democracy dodging and anti-environment fast track legislation. ...
The National Government’s proposed changes to the Residential Tenancies Act will mean tenants can be turfed from their homes by landlords with little notice, Labour housing spokesperson Kieran McAnulty said. ...
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson is calling on all parties to support a common-sense change that’s great for the planet and great for consumers after her member’s bill was drawn from the ballot today. ...
A significant milestone has been reached in the fight to strike an anti-Pasifika and unfair law from the country’s books after Teanau Tuiono’s members’ bill passed its first reading. ...
New Zealand has today missed the opportunity to uphold the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, says James Shaw after his member’s bill was voted down in its first reading. ...
Today’s advice from the Climate Change Commission paints a sobering reality of the challenge we face in combating climate change, especially in light of recent Government policy announcements. ...
Minister for Disability Issues Penny Simmonds appears to have delayed a report back to Cabinet on the progress New Zealand is making against international obligations for disabled New Zealanders. ...
The Government’s newly announced review of methane emissions reduction targets hints at its desire to delay Aotearoa New Zealand’s urgent transition to a climate safe future, the Green Party said. ...
The Government must commit to the Maitai School building project for students with high and complex needs, to ensure disabled students from the top of the South Island have somewhere to learn. ...
Paul Goldsmith will take on responsibility for the Media and Communications portfolio, while Louise Upston will pick up the Disability Issues portfolio, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced today. “Our Government is relentlessly focused on getting New Zealand back on track. As issues change in prominence, I plan to adjust Ministerial ...
Recreational catch limits will be reduced in areas of Fiordland and the Chatham Islands to help keep those fisheries healthy and sustainable, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. The lower recreational daily catch limits for a range of finfish and shellfish species caught in the Fiordland Marine Area and ...
Energy Minister Simeon Brown has welcomed an important milestone in New Zealand’s hydrogen future, with the opening of the country’s first network of hydrogen refuelling stations in Wiri. “I want to congratulate the team at Hiringa Energy and its partners K one W one (K1W1), Mitsui & Co New Zealand ...
The coalition Government is delivering on its commitment to improve resource management laws and give greater certainty to consent applicants, with a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) expected to be introduced to Parliament next month. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop has today outlined the first RMA Amendment ...
Overseas models for regulating the oil and gas sector, including their decommissioning regimes, are being carefully scrutinised as a potential template for New Zealand’s own sector, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. The Coalition Government is focused on rebuilding investor confidence in New Zealand’s energy sector as it looks to strengthen ...
Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell has today released the Report of the Government Inquiry into the response to the North Island Severe Weather Events. “The report shows that New Zealand’s emergency management system is not fit-for-purpose and there are some significant gaps we need to address,” Mr Mitchell ...
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is today travelling to Europe where he’ll update the United Nations Human Rights Council on the Government’s work to restore law and order. “Attending the Universal Periodic Review in Geneva provides us with an opportunity to present New Zealand’s human rights progress, priorities, and challenges, while ...
Associate Agriculture Minister, Mark Patterson, formally reopened the world’s largest wool processing facility today in Awatoto, Napier, following a $50 million rebuild and refurbishment project. “The reopening of this facility will significantly lift the economic opportunities available to New Zealand’s wool sector, which already accounts for 20 per cent of ...
Hon Andrew Bayly, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing At the Southland Otago Regional Engineering Collective (SOREC) Summit, 18 April, Dunedin Ngā mihi nui, Ko Andrew Bayly aho, Ko Whanganui aho Good Afternoon and thank you for inviting me to open your summit today. I am delighted ...
The Government is delivering on its commitment to bring back the Three Strikes legislation, Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee announced today. “Our Government is committed to restoring law and order and enforcing appropriate consequences on criminals. We are making it clear that repeat serious violent or sexual offending is not ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has today announced four new diplomatic appointments for New Zealand’s overseas missions. “Our diplomats have a vital role in maintaining and protecting New Zealand’s interests around the world,” Mr Peters says. “I am pleased to announce the appointment of these senior diplomats from the ...
New Zealand is contributing NZ$7 million to support communities affected by severe food insecurity and other urgent humanitarian needs in Ethiopia and Somalia, Foreign Minister Rt Hon Winston Peters announced today. “Over 21 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance across Ethiopia, with a further 6.9 million people ...
Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Paul Goldsmith is congratulating Mataaho Collective for winning the Golden Lion for best participant in the main exhibition at the Venice Biennale. "Congratulations to the Mataaho Collective for winning one of the world's most prestigious art prizes at the Venice Biennale. “It is good ...
The Government is reforming financial services to improve access to home loans and other lending, and strengthen customer protections, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly and Housing Minister Chris Bishop announced today. “Our coalition Government is committed to rebuilding the economy and making life simpler by cutting red tape. We are ...
“China remains a strong commercial opportunity for Kiwi exporters as Chinese businesses and consumers continue to value our high-quality safe produce,” Trade and Agriculture Minister Todd McClay says. Mr McClay has returned to New Zealand following visits to Beijing, Harbin and Shanghai where he met ministers, governors and mayors and engaged in trade and agricultural events with the New ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has completed a successful trip to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines, deepening relationships and capitalising on opportunities. Mr Luxon was accompanied by a business delegation and says the choice of countries represents the priority the New Zealand Government places on South East Asia, and our relationships in ...
New Zealand is demonstrating its commitment to reducing global greenhouse emissions, and supporting clean energy transition in South East Asia, through a contribution of NZ$41 million (US$25 million) in climate finance to the Asian Development Bank (ADB)-led Energy Transition Mechanism (ETM). Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Climate Change Minister Simon Watts announced ...
The Government is today releasing a list of organisations who received letters about the Fast-track applications process, says RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop. “Recently Ministers and agencies have received a series of OIA requests for a list of organisations to whom I wrote with information on applying to have a ...
Attorney-General Judith Collins today announced the appointment of Wellington Barrister David Jonathan Boldt as a Judge of the High Court, and the Honourable Justice Matthew Palmer as a Judge of the Court of Appeal. Justice Boldt graduated with an LLB from Victoria University of Wellington in 1990, and also holds ...
Education Minister Erica Stanford will lead the New Zealand delegation at the 2024 International Summit on the Teaching Profession (ISTP) held in Singapore. The delegation includes representatives from the Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) Te Wehengarua and the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI) Te Riu Roa. The summit is co-hosted ...
A stopbank upgrade project in Tairawhiti partly funded by the Government has increased flood resilience for around 7000ha of residential and horticultural land so far, Regional Development Minister Shane Jones says. Mr Jones today attended a dawn service in Gisborne to mark the end of the first stage of the ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters will represent the Government at Anzac Day commemorations on the Gallipoli Peninsula next week and engage with senior representatives of the Turkish government in Istanbul. “The Gallipoli campaign is a defining event in our history. It will be a privilege to share the occasion ...
Science, Innovation and Technology and Defence Minister Judith Collins will next week attend the OECD Science and Technology Ministerial conference in Paris and Anzac Day commemorations in Belgium. “Science, innovation and technology have a major role to play in rebuilding our economy and achieving better health, environmental and social outcomes ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon held a bilateral meeting today with the President of the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The Prime Minister was accompanied by MP Paulo Garcia, the first Filipino to be elected to a legislature outside the Philippines. During today’s meeting, Prime Minister Luxon and President Marcos Jr discussed opportunities to ...
The Government has announced that $20 million in funding will be made available to Westport to fund much needed flood protection around the town. This measure will significantly improve the resilience of the community, says Local Government Minister Simeon Brown. “The Westport community has already been allocated almost $3 million ...
The Government is proud to support the first ever Repco Supercars Championship event in Taupō as up to 70,000 motorsport fans attend the Taupō International Motorsport Park this weekend, says Economic Development Minister Melissa Lee. “Anticipation for the ITM Taupō Super400 is huge, with tickets and accommodation selling out weeks ...
Local Government Minister Simeon Brown has announced an increase to the Rates Rebate Scheme, putting money back into the pockets of low-income homeowners. “The coalition Government is committed to bringing down the cost of living for New Zealanders. That includes targeted support for those Kiwis who are doing things tough, such ...
The Coalition Government is investing in a project to boost survival rates of New Zealand mussels and grow the industry, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones has announced. “This project seeks to increase the resilience of our mussels and significantly boost the sector’s productivity,” Mr Jones says. “The project - ...
Benefit figures released today underscore the importance of the Government’s plan to rebuild the economy and have 50,000 fewer people on Jobseeker Support, Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston says. “Benefit numbers are still significantly higher than when National was last in government, when there was about 70,000 fewer ...
The Government’s commitment to doubling New Zealand’s renewable energy capacity is backed by new data showing that clean energy has helped the country reach its lowest annual gross emissions since 1999, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts says. New Zealand’s latest Greenhouse Gas Inventory (1990-2022) published today, shows gross emissions fell ...
The Government is bringing the earthquake-prone building review forward, with work to start immediately, and extending the deadline for remediations by four years, Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk says. “Our Government is focused on rebuilding the economy. A key part of our plan is to cut red tape that ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and his Thai counterpart, Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, have today agreed that New Zealand and the Kingdom of Thailand will upgrade the bilateral relationship to a Strategic Partnership by 2026. “New Zealand and Thailand have a lot to offer each other. We have a strong mutual desire to build ...
RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Transport Minister Simeon Brown have today announced the Coalition Government’s intention to extend port coastal permits for a further 20 years, providing port operators with certainty to continue their operations. “The introduction of the Resource Management Act in 1991 required ports to obtain coastal ...
Today’s announcement that inflation is down to 4 per cent is encouraging news for Kiwis, but there is more work to be done - underlining the importance of the Government’s plan to get the economy back on track, acting Finance Minister Chris Bishop says. “Inflation is now at 4 per ...
Refreshed health guidance released today will help parents and schools make informed decisions about whether their child needs to be in school, addressing one of the key issues affecting school attendance, says Associate Education Minister David Seymour. In recent years, consistently across all school terms, short-term illness or medical reasons ...
Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones is streamlining high-level oceans management while maintaining a focus on supporting the sector’s role in the export-led recovery of the economy. “I am working to realise the untapped potential of our fishing and aquaculture sector. To achieve that we need to be smarter with ...
Associate Agriculture Minister Mark Patterson is speaking at the International Wool Textile Organisation Congress in Adelaide, promoting New Zealand wool, and outlining the coalition Government’s support for the revitalisation the sector. "New Zealand’s wool exports reached $400 million in the year to 30 June 2023, and the coalition Government ...
The Government is making legislative changes to make it easier for new early learning services to be established, and for existing services to operate, Associate Education Minister David Seymour says. The changes involve repealing the network approval provisions that apply when someone wants to establish a new early learning service, ...
Changes to the Resource Management Act will align consenting for coal mining to other forms of mining to reduce barriers that are holding back economic development, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. “The inconsistent treatment of coal mining compared with other extractive activities is burdensome red tape that fails to acknowledge ...
Trade, Agriculture and Forestry Minister Todd McClay has concluded productive discussions with ministerial counterparts in Beijing today, in support of the New Zealand-China trade and economic relationship. “My meeting with Commerce Minister Wang Wentao reaffirmed the complementary nature of the bilateral trade relationship, with our Free Trade Agreement at its ...
I’m on the wrong side of 40, I never pursued creative work and now my job is killing my soul. Help! Want Hera’s help? Email your problem to helpme@thespinoff.co.nzDear Hera,May I start with the least original conversation opener you’re likely to hear around the motu at the moment, particularly in Wellington: ...
“Never again - No AUKUS” was the message of the wreath laid at this morning’s national ANZAC Day commemorative service at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park this morning by the Stop AUKUS group. ...
Until this month, Auckland swimmer Hazel Ouwehand had never met a qualifying time in an Olympic event for a New Zealand team, even as a junior. Now she’s very likely off to the Paris Olympics after swimming well under the qualifying standard in the 100m butterfly twice – both in ...
While Anzac Day has experienced a resurgence in recent years, our other day of remembrance has slowly faded from view.The Sunday Essay is made possible thanks to the support of Creative New Zealand. Original illustrations by Hope McConnell.First published in 2022.The high school’s head girl and ...
Australian and New Zealand volunteers fought together in the Waikato War, yet still its place in the Anzac tradition is unacknowledged by our defence forces or Returned Services Association.First published in 2018.When I was a boy cub I attended Anzac Day services in the South Auckland suburb of ...
A poem by Wellington writer Tayi Tibble.Hoki Mai She kisses him goodbye with her eyes still wet and alight from their last swim in the Awatere river. At the train station celebration, she leads the Kapa Haka but her voice keeps breaking under and over itself like waves. ...
A poem from Bill Manhire’s 2017 book of verse Some Things to Place in a Coffin.My World War I Poem Inside each trench, the sound of prayer. Inside each prayer, the sound of digging. Image courtesy of Auckland War Memorial Museum. ...
There are three books I have wolfed down in one sitting over the last two years. Colleen Maria Lenihan’s gorgeous and sad debut Kōhine, Noelle McCarthy’s memoir Grand about becoming her mother and then unbecoming her, and now Hine Toa, a staunch yet gentle self-portrait by living legend Ngāhuia te ...
Loading…(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A[quiz],DIV[quiz],A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k<ql.length;k++){ql[k].id='quiz-embed-'+k;ql[k].href="javascript:var i=document.getElementById('quiz-embed-"+k+"');try{qz.startQuiz(i)}catch(e){i.start=1;i.style.cursor='wait';i.style.opacity='0.5'};void(0);"}}};i['QP']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','https://take.quiz-maker.com/3012/CDN/quiz-embed-v1.js','qp'); Got a good quiz question?Send Newsroom your questions. The post Newsroom daily quiz, Thursday 25 April appeared first on Newsroom. ...
Asia Pacific Report Students and activist staff at Australia’s University of Sydney (USyd) have set up a Gaza solidarity encampment in support of Palestinians and similar student-led protests in the United States. The camp was pitched as mass graves, crippled hospitals, thousands of civilian deaths and the near-total destruction of ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James B. Dorey, Lecturer in Biological Sciences, University of Wollongong Australian teddy bear bees are cute and fluffy, but get a look at that massive (unbarbed) stinger! James Dorey Photography Most of us have been stung by a bee and we ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jen Roberts, Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities and Social Inquiry, University of Wollongong Aussie~mobs/FlickrVictor Farr, a private in the 1st Infantry Battalion, was among the first to land at Anzac Cove just before dawn on April 25 1915. Victor Farr ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, The University of Melbourne Gregory Moore I had the good fortune to care for the sugar gum at The University of Melbourne’s Burnley Gardens in Victoria where I worked for ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra BagzhanSadvakassov/Upsplash, CC BY-SA Australia’s inflation rate has fallen for the fifth successive quarter, and it’s now less than half of what it was back in late 2022. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Ong ViforJ, ARC Future Fellow & Professor of Economics, Curtin University Just when we think the price of rentals could not get any worse, this week’s Rental Affordability Snapshot by Anglicare has revealed low-income Australians are facing a housing crisis like ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meighen McCrae, Associate Professor of Strategic & Defence Studies, Australian National University American and Australian stretcher bearers working together near the front line during the Battle of Hamel in 1918.Australian War Memorial While the AUKUS alliance is new, the Australian-American partnership ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tracey Holmes, Professorial Fellow in Sport, University of Canberra When the news broke last weekend that 23 Chinese swimmers had tested positive to a banned drug in early 2021 and were allowed to compete at the Tokyo Olympic Games six months later ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cally Jetta, Senior Lecturer and Academic Lead; College for First Nations, University of Southern Queensland Australian War MemorialAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and images of deceased people, as well as sensitive historical information ...
RNZ News Melissa Lee has been ousted from New Zealand’s coalition cabinet and stripped of the Media portfolio, and Penny Simmonds has lost the Disability Issues portfolio in a reshuffle. Climate Change and Revenue Minister Simon Watts will take Lee’s spot in cabinet. Simmonds was a minister outside of cabinet. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Lindenmayer, Professor, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University laurello/Shutterstock Some reports and popular books, such as Bill Gammage’s Biggest Estate on Earth, have argued that extensive areas of Australia’s forests were kept open through frequent burning by ...
Analysis - Christopher Luxon framing the demotion of two ministers as the portfolios getting "too complex" is a charitable way of saying they weren't up to the job. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra With Jim Chalmers’s third budget on May 14, Australians will be looking for some more cost-of-living relief – beyond the tax cuts – although they have been warned extra measures will be modest. As ...
Analysis: Melissa Lee has lost the media portfolio and her spot in Cabinet after multiple failed attempts to find solutions for a media industry in crisis. On Wednesday, the Prime Minister announced Lee would be losing her spot in Cabinet along with her media and communications ministerial portfolio. The job ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Wilmot, Senior Lecturer, Film, Deakin University Among the many Australian who served during the second world war, there is a small group of people whose stories remain largely untold. These are the Muslim men and women who, while small in number, ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kelly Saunders, PhD Candidate, University of Canberra There has been much analysis and praise of Justice Michael Lee’s recent judgement in Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case against Channel Ten. Many people were openly relieved to read Lee’s “forensic” and “nuanced” application of law ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathy Gibbs, Program Director for the Bachelor of Education, Griffith University zEdward_Indy/Shutterstock Around one in 20 people has attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It’s one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood and often continues into adulthood. ADHD is diagnosed ...
The Fairer Future coalition of anti-poverty groups say Whaikaha must be properly funded going forward, and that to argue that poor financial management of the new Ministry is a red herring by the Prime Minister. ...
The Taxpayers’ Union is today congratulating Hon. Paul Goldsmith on his appointment as Minister for Media and Communications and urges him to rule out state intervention in the private media sector. ...
Asia Pacific Report The West Papuan resistance OPM leader has condemned Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and US President Joe Biden, accusing their countries of “six decades of treachery” over Papuan independence. The open letter was released today by OPM chairman Jeffrey P Bomanak on the eve of ANZAC Day ...
Welcome to The Spinoff Books Confessional, in which we get to know the reading habits and quirks of New Zealanders at large. This week: writer and one of Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people of 2024, Lauren Groff.The book I wish I’d writtenIf I wish I’d written a ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Fechner, Research Fellow, Social Marketing, Griffith University mavo/Shutterstock Imagine having dinner at a restaurant. The menu offers plant-based meat alternatives made mostly from vegetables, mushrooms, legumes and wheat that mimic meat in taste, texture and smell. Despite being given that ...
“Three Strikes is a dead-end policy proposed by a dead-end government. The Three Strikes law ignores the causes of crime, instead just brutalising people already crushed by the cost of living.” ...
By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist An Australian-born judge in Kiribati could well face deportation later this week after a tribunal ruling that he should be removed from his post. The tribunal’s report has just been tabled in the Kiribati Parliament and is due to be debated by MPs ...
With its clear mandate for police use, political nuances, and nuanced public trust, Denmark's insights provide valuable considerations for Australia and New Zealand. ...
Books editor Claire Mabey reviews poet Louise Wallace’s debut novel. A famous poet once said to me that he’s always suspicious when a poet publishes a novel. I never really understood why but maybe it’s something to do with cheating on your first form. Louise Wallace is a poet. She’s ...
For a few months at the turn of the millennium, TrueBliss burned bright as the biggest pop stars in the country. Alex Casey chats to two superfans who still hold the flame. During a humble backyard wedding in Nelson, 1999, one of the cordially invited guests had to excuse themselves ...
How will the recent wave of job cuts impact ethnic diversity in the media? In November last year, I was working a very busy day in the newsroom of a large online news site, interviewing whānau about their concerns over the imminent closure of one of the few puna reo ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ruth Knight, Researcher, Queensland University of Technology Have you ever felt sick at work? Perhaps you had food poisoning or the flu. Your belly hurt, or you felt tired, making it hard to concentrate and be productive. How likely would you be ...
Despite heavy criticism and an ongoing select committee process, the Police Minister says the Government will forge ahead with a ban on gang patches. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Whiting, Lecturer – Creative Industries, University of South Australia Shutterstock Everyone has a favourite band, or a favourite composer, or a favourite song. There is some music which speaks to you, deeply; and other music which might be the current ...
A new survey says ‘outlook not great’ for those charged with building infrastructure, while RMA changes delight farmers and depress environmentalists, writes Anna Rawhiti-Connell in this excerpt from The Bulletin, The Spinoff’s morning news round-up. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here. First RMA changes announced ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Olli Hellmann, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Waikato Getty Images When New Zealanders commemorate Anzac Day on April 25, it’s not only to honour the soldiers who lost their lives in World War I and subsequent conflicts, but also ...
A leaked document shows the Canterbury/Waitaha arm of health agency Te Whatu Ora is scurrying to save $13.3 million by July. The “financial sustainability target”, which was “allocated” to Waitaha, is consistent with what’s happening in other districts, says Sarah Dalton, executive director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists. ...
A look at the state of the previous government’s affordable housing scheme, and what could come next.Remind me: What’s KiwiBuild again?First announced in 2012, KiwiBuild was a flagship policy of the Labour Party heading into both its 2014 and 2017 election campaigns. With Jacinda Ardern as prime minister, ...
Labour in opposition will be shocked to learn which party had six years in power but squandered any chance to make real change. Grant Robertson’s valedictory speech was a predictably entertaining trip down memory lane. The acid-tongued incoming Otago University chancellor administered a sick burn to the coalition government. He ...
Opinion: It has been announced that nine percent of roles at Oranga Tamariki will be disestablished, presumably to help fund the tax cuts promised by the coalition Government. I am reminded of the graphics used to illustrate pandemic events, where five thousand people are standing in a field and then ...
After more than two sleepless days, running through savage terrain, Greig Hamilton didn’t know if he was going to finish one of the most gruelling psychological assaults in sport. He was metres away from the finish line, a yellow gate made famous in a Netflix documentary; a race he’d dreamed ...
Loading…(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A[quiz],DIV[quiz],A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k<ql.length;k++){ql[k].id='quiz-embed-'+k;ql[k].href="javascript:var i=document.getElementById('quiz-embed-"+k+"');try{qz.startQuiz(i)}catch(e){i.start=1;i.style.cursor='wait';i.style.opacity='0.5'};void(0);"}}};i['QP']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','https://take.quiz-maker.com/3012/CDN/quiz-embed-v1.js','qp'); Got a good quiz question?Send Newsroom your questions. The post Newsroom daily quiz, Wednesday 24 April appeared first on Newsroom. ...
The following interview with former Green Party MP Sue Kedgley came about because she features in the new memoir Hine Toa by activist Ngāhuia te Awekōtuku; the two knew each other at the University of Auckland in the early 70s, when they were both took on leadership roles in the ...
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry is seen some as its ‘silicon shield’ against invasion – but how will overseas expansion affect that protection? The post The state of Taiwan’s silicon shield appeared first on Newsroom. ...
There’s relief for building owners bending under the weight of earthquake strengthening rules – and costs – that came into force seven years ago. Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk has announced a scheduled 2027 review of the earthquake-prone building regulations will now start this year. Owners will also get ...
COMMENTARY:By Murray Horton New Zealand needs to get tough with Israel. It’s not as if we haven’t done so before. When NZ authorities busted a Mossad operation in Auckland 20 years ago, the government didn’t say: “Oh well, Israel has the right to defend itself.” No, it arrested, prosecuted, ...
NEWSMAKERS:By Vijay Narayan, news director of FijiVillage Blessed to be part of the University of Fiji (UniFiji) faculty to continue to teach and mentor those who want to join our noble profession, and to stand for truth and justice for the people of the country. I was privileged to ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University Three weeks from now, some of us will be presented with a mountain of budget papers, and just about all of us will get to hear about them on radio, ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dan Lowry, Ice Sheet & Climate Modeller, GNS Science Hugh Chittock/Antarctica New Zealand, CC BY-SA As the climate warms and Antarctica’s glaciers and ice sheets melt, the resulting rise in sea level has the potential to displace hundreds of millions of ...
The best news I have had in quite a while:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/488449/australia-announces-pathway-to-citizenship-for-new-zealanders
Credit where it is due to both govts; finally some common sense prevails.
Amazing what progress can be made when governments quietly sit down and talk about issues rather than political posturing and grandstanding through the media, something the centre-right parties of both countries seem unable to do.
Citizenship will allow voting, access to benefits, housing and tertiary education support for children (someone in Oz Labour wants re-election).
And the Oz pension and access to their health system in retirement is appealing to longer term guest workers.
The greater certainty provided will make employment there more attractive to Kiwis as we enter a worker shortage era (something their mandarins would have noted).
The main change for older Oz based kiwis is the right to vote. Younger kiwis who work there and opt for Oz citizenship after 4 years will then have the same rights as Australian citizens already have in NZ. The changes just reverse the mean (but politically targeted) policy brought in by the Howard government in 2001. NZ and Oz have a reciprocal social security arrangement so anyone applying for super in NZ or age pension in Oz and have spent time in both countries get a contribution from both Centrelink (Oz) and MSD (NZ) so that the total is equivalent to the applicable pension in the country the person lives. No change with the new policy.
There are 70,000 Australians resident in NZ, so based on the relative population sizes, equivalent to 350,000 NZers in Oz. That means that there are twice as many kiwis in Oz as Aussies in NZ on a comparable basis.
OK. I thought they might have got the slightly higher Oz payment. Just the better resourced health system then.
Again, NZ and Oz citizens get reciprocal health rights in each country, so if you are a NZer in Oz or an Aussie in NZ you get the right to use each other's health system – if you want to get a Medicare card in Oz as a NZer you have to say you want to live there, which is pretty easy. You then may get free doctor's visits if you can access a doc that allows bulk billing. The Oz health system is under similar strains as NZ even if it is in better condition overall. Many GPs now are rejecting bulk billing unless the subsidy they get from the federal government is bumped up (it stayed the same for many years of Coalition government). The centre left Labor government in Oz has the same challenge as NZ – how to pay for better infrastructure or maintain creaking current infrastructure without finding ways of creating a fairer tax system. The easier pathway for NZers to get Aussie citizenship will not affect their access to health care at all (but will make kiwis in Oz feel more secure for the future in a more general way).
The actual total of Kiwis in Oz appears to be quite a bit higher.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/131834539/australia-to-let-kiwis-become-citizens-after-four-years-in-major-policy-shift
That would be right – as I said above, the percentage of Aussies in NZ compared to the NZ population would be equivalent to 350,000 NZers in Oz, so the fact that there are 700,000 kiwis in Oz means that there are twice as many in comparison. Not sure of the numbers but think the percentage of Maori kiwis in Oz is even higher in proportion. However, that is just a reflection of the fact that people move when they think they can get a better deal when they are permitted to do so. No doubt Maori ancestors from what is now Raetea and the French Poly Society Islands thought the same back in the 1300s when they sailed to Aotearoa!
That is a good point – I made much the same rough calculation myself a few years back and came to much the same conclusion. The idea that trans-Tasman migration is all a one-way street is a bit of a myth.
In fact there are scarcely two nations on earth socially and economically more entangled than Aus and NZ. It has only been the political realm that we have drifted apart in recent decades.
This move hopefully signals a reversal of that trend.
Brian Easton on the money again…concluding with
"Explaining how the government has got itself into such a muddle requires another column. It will tell us much about deep structural failures in the government."
https://www.pundit.co.nz/content/watering-down-three-waters
Brian Easton has given a clear analysis of the Three Waters debacle. His comments on co-governance (also on Pundit) are well worth reading.
I laughed when the PM said Three Waters had not been accepted by many because the reasons for it had not been communicated well enough.
It's like the Nazis saying their need for lebensraum had not been properly explained to the people of Eastern Europe.
You laughed because it reminded you, somehow, of the Nazis!?
People are shit scared the mawrees are going to get ownership/control of the water resources.
I hear this repeated a lot. Most recently in a conversation with two friends explaining the pushback against the Three Waters proposal.
While I see that some of the concerns expressed around the co-governance structure come from a place of frustration and/or racism, I think this framing of racism being the main reason for concerns is a form of racism itself.
The time for such co-governance structures was passed a long time ago.
We had many mechanisms for including necessary consultation with local iwi for resource consents, and Māori consultants at other levels of local and regional. councils. While some may have valid criticisms of this process, (which are duplicated by environmentalists who are in the same position) it was an implementation in a democratic society that did not impact on transparency, or duplicate needlessly the levels of administration in any organisation.
Māori are not a hive mind. Any representative selected to hold representative positions in the original proposal, were non-elected and non-accountable.
Has this changed?
Do you believe the representatives are non-accountable or do you assert that? Either way, there’s a clear contradiction in your comment.
There was a conversation on here a while ago where I posted the link to the original paper and discussed the lack of clarity over the way it was written:
.https://thestandard.org.nz/co-governance-is-orthodox-policy-for-both-national-and-labour/#comment-1923737
I posted the link to the bill (as it was) here:
.https://thestandard.org.nz/co-governance-is-orthodox-policy-for-both-national-and-labour/#comment-1924053
Here's the link:
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2022/0136/latest/whole.html?search=y_bill%40bill_2022__bc%40bcur_an%40bn%40rn_25_a#LMS538045
Section 32 seems to set a competence standard not replicated in Section 33.
There is no election of 33 representatives – just apptmts.
I assumed with the review and rebrand it may have changed, do you know if it has?
So, you’re deflecting and not answering my very basic and specific question to you and/or addressing the contradiction in your comment? Instead, you’re luring me into three links, no less. Quelle surprise – discussion with you here is futile!
Incognito, I asked a question of Ngungukai to which I thought he might have the answer since he specifically mentioned Māori co-governance.
Then answered your question with references to what was known before, so those with updated knowledge could clarify.
How can I know the answer to that without knowing if this part has been updated?
I was asking Ngungukai for information.
Your demand for a stated position before it was answered is a peculiar one.
Your practice of making comments berating style and commenters however is becoming a familiar one. There is an element to it that seems to have lost perspective.
So much deflection and twisting of my words.
I asked you to clarify something that was not a question in your comment to Ngungukai but a statement that representatives “were non-elected and non-accountable”.
This could be taken as an opinion or an assertion and you asked specifically:
So, was it your opinion or your assertion?
This was not a demand although Mods do sometimes moderate commenters to clarify their assertions and distinguish those from their opinions – they do this through Mod notes, as you know full well. This is nothing new and nothing personal.
Obviously, you cannot know Ngungukai’s answer. But you knew the premise of your final question, which was either your opinion or your assertion.
You see, I can read your comments without losing perspective – nice snide, BTW. There was no berating of your style even though I mentioned that there was a contradiction in that particular part of your comment, which was content-related, not style-related.
I don’t expect you to answer anymore. I don’t want to have to read through copious links and scroll through long copy & pasta from legal documents and Bills because that’s not what I asked for and I’ll never find it in there, and you know it. I was aiming for a simple clarification from you to a simple question of mine.
If you don’t want to give clarifications, don’t want to give answers to straightforward questions, or don’t want to engage in debate, that is perfectly fine unless specifically requested by a Mod – even then you still have a choice to comply or not. Simply say nothing. However, please don’t respond with deflections, twisting of words, or accusations because that’s a likely way of inflaming discourse.
Have a good evening.
It neither an opinion, or an assertion, it was my previous understanding.
Are you feeling adequately fulfilled now with my answer, to leave the offloading of frustration to some other instance? I doubt it, but will live in hope.
Of course, you don't want an answer. It appears instead you want the opportunity to wax lyrical, without any requirement to read someone else's lyrical waxing.
Wax On, Incognito. I may return but I'll wax off for now.
[I asked you not to respond with deflections, accusations, and twisting of words. Yet, your immediate response does exactly that!? This is your warning – Incognito]
Mod note
@Incognito
Question:
“So, was it your opinion or your assertion?”
Answer:
"It neither an opinion, or an assertion, it was my previous understanding."
Is this a brief and clear enough answer to your question?
Incognito, seconded.
and
Yes there was concern about the appointment process. This was despite the appointment process being used in planning work in local authorities where there has been provision for the representation from local iwi etc who were subject to selection from within the iwi then appointment not election.
In the new legislation (bill) there are these provisions
Clause 6 mana whenua, for an identified area, means the iwi or hapū holding and exercising, in accordance with tikanga, authority or other customary rights or interests in that area
1 Clause 33 Method of appointing mana whenua representatives to regional representative group
Mana whenua whose rohe or takiwā is within the service area of a water services entity must appoint mana whenua representatives to the regional representative group of the water services entity in accordance with section 27(2) and (3) and the constitution.
2 Clauses 27(2) & (3)
27 Establishment and membership of regional representative group
(1) This section establishes a regional representative group for each water services entity.
(2) Each regional representative group consists of a number of regional representatives that is provided for in the constitution (see section 91(a)(i)) and is—
(a) 12 regional representatives; or
(b) any greater number of regional representatives.
(3) Each entity’s regional representative group must include an equal number of—
(a) territorial authority representatives; and
(b) mana whenua representatives.
Clause 38 This group (Regional rep) then appoints a Board Appointment Committee
The Board Appointment committee has the functions to
Functions of board appointment committee
The functions of the board appointment committee are—
(a) to appoint and remove members of the board of a water services entity; and
(b) to prepare and maintain an appointment and remuneration policy for the board; and
(c) to perform or exercise any of the regional representative group’s functions and powers that are delegated to the committee in relation to appointing and removing board members.
Ok so having got the regional representatives who appoint the Board appts committee, this committee appoints the board.
57 Membership of board
(1) The board of a water services entity consists of no fewer than 6, and no more than 10, members.
(2) The board appointment committee must appoint board members who, collectively, have knowledge of, and experience and expertise in relation to,—
(a) performance monitoring and governance; and
(b) network infrastructure industries (for example, water services network infrastructure industries); and
(c) the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi; and
(ca) public health; and
(cb) the environment; and
(d) perspectives of mana whenua, mātauranga, tikanga, and te ao Māori; and
(e) perspectives of consumers and communities; and
(f) perspectives of local government.
Clause 63 sets out the
Criteria for appointments by board appointment committee
(1) A board appointment committee must appoint board members under section 62 in accordance with the criteria for board members and the process for appointment under this Act (including the appointment and remuneration policy (if any) approved by the regional representative group under section 40).
(2) The board appointment committee may only appoint a person who, in the committee’s opinion, has the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to assist the water services entity to achieve its objectives and perform its functions.
(3) In making an appointment, the board appointment committee must take into account the desirability of promoting diversity in the membership of the board.
The whole process seems to work by appointment. It seems now to have as many checks and balances as the US Constitution (kidding!)
What it seems to do, whuch seems bit novel compared with the original process is to build up to the appointment of the board (Water Services entity) or (flaxroots up) or in another way, popular in the 'olden days' of Board etc formation was the concept of a Steering Committee/Group having the power to appoint a Board/s that sat below them.and did all the day to day work.
I have not seen the explanations of how the new system works philosophically but to me either way from flaxroots up or from a Steering group having an important role would work in a being able to sell the concept.
ETA I've found this from the press release of 13/4.
The ability to choose people with skills seems a better fit than perhaps ethnically chosen but run off their feet because the skills may be thin on the ground.
The areas will be much larger than before and the appointment to the important Regional Representative groups (Local Authorities/Maori) that set in train the whole appt process will include different tribal groups.
I think I have got this set up correctly. Having worked with this Board type legislation for most of my working life I can see the imprint/influence of a different statutory drafting hand from what was originally drafted. The concept and clauses seem tighter, And more akin to board statutory legislation of old.
I cannot see any appointment time limits say for 5 years etc or a process to appoint to a vacancy in the mana whenua side should a death or resignation occur. I haven't looked very hard.
Hopefully this is some help.
ETA Sorry for all the quotes from legislation. It is an interesting way of working
Thanks, Shanreagh.
I'll see what else has changed. The was reference in the draft I looked at closely to an as yet unwritten (or unavailable) constitution.
I found the details around the mana whenua representatives required a lot of referencing back and forward, and still ended up with a poor understanding of what the bill intended in that respect.
I'd hoped someone who considered any concerns raised as "People are shit scared the mawrees" might have a firm grasp on this aspect, and be able to explain it.
I'll fumble through your link instead.
Yes, I mentioned that in my response to Ngungukai and still fully support that consulting role for the relevant knowledge as pertains to planning considerations etc. The one flaw that exists (which is true of any authority consultant relationship) is that as the relationship is established, consultants may become more attuned to the expectations of council and unconsciously adapt their contributions accordingly. Also, as those relationships strengthen – other discordant voices from mana whenua are not heard because there is already a representative at the table.
The concerns I had about the initial bill was that there was a requirement for other regional representatives to have experience or knowledge of water treatment systems, but none for the mana whenua representatives.
In that case, why are not retained as consultants, rather than given voting rights? There appeared to be no assessment of the value of knowledge they would bring in terms of the fundamental role of managing necessary infrastructure, before allocating them quite heavy influence on decision making, including that of veto.
But, as I said, I'll have to wade through. Thank you again.
It is a complex set up from the legislation.
I don't think anyone now could complain about too much Maori representation. It is there where it is most important I feel. The rep group (equal Maori/Local authority numbers) gets to set the Board Appointment Group, which gets to select the Boards.
Overnight I have had a think about terms of appointment and feel that is not as important as having a clear way of appointing replacements on resignation or death.
mod note:
1. don't copy and paste long tracts. Use your own words, selective quotes, and links. Long tracts are a problem for mobile users, and people end up using them in lieu of making a clear point.
2. when you copy and paste, you have to make it clear what are your words and what is the quote. In the edit box there is a tag (looks like a quotation mark), that will indent the quote. Let me know if you need help on how to use that. Or you can go old school
>>
like this
<<
Or
like this.
and so on.
This matters because mods have to read a lot of material, and I don't want to have to be stopping and figuring out what is what. It also matters so that people reading can be clear about what is being said.
_____
Please add this explanation to your list on commenting, and please let me know you have read and understood and if you have any questions.
I am assuming this is aimed at me. When the numbering has gone some of us have adopted the idea of going
@xys then copying in the time.
Sorry I should have continued to bold the clauses.
Or indent though I had thought that was for quoting from other commenter's posts.
I had thought that another way is to put my comments in italics..
I am not keen on putting in my own words actual clauses of draft legislation that depend on precision. I cannot do better at explaining than the legal draftspeople.
So move from particular (legislation) bolded or indented to opinion italicised.
Plus other helpful advice is noted.
here is an example of using italics for quotes/copypasta.
.https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-12-04-2023/#comment-1945350
here is an example of using the quote tag.
https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-06-04-2023/#comment-1943927
Both Joe90 and arkie use their own consistent style in commenting, you might want to take note when you see their comments.
what's the difference? Both are opinion and we won't know whether it's true or not until someone clarifies with knowledge and evidence.
True.
That is why I tried to answer/comment/help by referring to the new legislation without needing to delve into semantics. It is complex but people who have been following will know of /recall Molly's concern about accountablility and how that was to be managed when people were appointed.
I appreciate the links. Still haven't yet had a look at the details yet.
I can redo it so the clauses and comments are clearly separated as comment of mine does appear in the middle of some of the clauses.
Ok so having got the regional representatives who appoint the Board appts committee, this committee appoints the board.
I'gr0 (message from cat!)
I am sorry I did not do all these helpful formatting ideas in my post.
I am a new twitterer and never DM'd anyone so…….
charliethecat (@charlie12906411)
Sent you a DM.
It will show up as the envelope icon on Twitter.
Excuse me? We have been modding on this distinction for as long as I can remember!?
I'm asking you to explain the difference because I didn't understand your point. Please.
Balance sheet separation allows cheaper borrowing – this requires amalgamation (at least 3 council areas) to dilute control and the inclusion of alternative form of oversight (Maori and government appointee with expertise).
Anyone aware of WT decisions as to water, and the importance of corporate decision-making as to charging (rather than councillors beholden to an election cycle and the influence of local businesses – National's real connection is here).
The alternative is loading debt onto government and increasing its cost (keeping this low allows the government to provide funding to those of the 10 with a weaker ratepayer base).
Excellent article thanks Pat
You would think that help create a domestic pipeline of nurses would be receive an enthusiastic response and be treated with some urgency, right? Not so, when the Nursing Council of New Zealand is involved.
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/up-education-hits-wall-with-nursing-council
It shows that definitely not all red-tape comes from (central) Government; many obstacles & hindrances are at local levels such as institution or work-place and are often elevated to pseudo-legal (aka shady) status. Reasons behind are diverse but often involve power & control and patch-protection of fiefdoms – there is no meaningful difference between elected and appointed officials or pseudo-officials with more or less fancy titles.
Getting to be a nurse is difficult i.e a Nursing Degree is required and the reason is obvious, nursing is vastly more complicated than even 20 years ago and the position of Enrolled Nurse is essentially redundant as even the simplest nursing intervention requires a lot of documentation and a very thorough knowledge of maths and other disciplines, including very good communication and language proficiency. If a nurse cannot be understood by a compromised or even elderly person then they are not suitable for the job. The Nursing Council has been steadily upgrading the education of Enrolled nurses for a long time now so that all health staff caring for patients are of a similar standard.
The right-wing love affair with the idea of just recruiting anybody from anywhere who calls themselves a nurse to fill the void is a recipe for disaster.
This is about the one-size-fits-all dogma. Some things currently done by fully qualified nurses could easily be done by others with lower/lesser qualifications perfectly well and thus take a load off the hands of nurses to do what they’re trained to do. An example is the recruiting and training of vaccinators when the need was high and outstripped the capacity because of silly restraints. Similar things happening in ECE where staff need have degrees to get a foot in the door.
It is not about self-ID as nurse, pretend to be one, and then be let loose on unsuspecting patients. Unless one fakes their CV. The Nursing Council seems to have accepted the argument but is simply stalling.
You ‘d be surprised at the number of “ nurses “ who arrive here to do their NZ gualifying course whose certifications are less than acceptable. Just so long as they are working on somebody other than you eh Incognito.
Never mind.
Have a good night.
The State-funded RNZ has published an article by a couple of academics that contains more than enough triggers to induce a fit of sorts with some.
The title (not a headline) contains the dreaded h-word. And it is downhill from there all the way to the end.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/on-the-inside/488430/how-covid-19-lab-leak-hysteria-could-be-straight-from-the-middle-ages
For the purpose of public debate, anecdotal evidence carries as much weight as circumstantial evidence, which is why it is often accompanied by a weak narrative masquerading as compelling argument. Sounds familiar?
The “contagion effect” has been in full display here in NZ more recently. It is as real as the Sun and the Moon. It needs pointing out that it can and does work in more than one direction (aka ‘both ways’, in the usual binary situation).
The simplest and most obvious answer to the origins of Covid are that it jumped (naturally) from an animal to a human. How it might have occurred is the question and one that should be dominating discourse – not some convoluted bedtime story about fairies and pixies mixing a Covid brew then transporting it to the wider public in an effort to create widespread genocide of the human population.
I agree with the authors. The fanciful conspiracies are merely a modern day version of the witches brews and wizardry dating back to before and during the middle ages. The adherents to these conspiracies – like their predecessors – are not very intelligent and live in a state of ignorance and stupidity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU
Intelligence per se doesn’t make one immune against prejudice and bias nor to dogmatic thinking, coupled with a stubborn belief in one’s intellectual & cognitive abilities that often lead to entrenched opinions that are defended with a zeal and a closed-mind for extra protection against the evil forces & influences. Is more common than we like to admit, contagious and never asymptomatic.
A few adherents to such conspiracies may actually be very intelligent, not ignorant, and will advocate for conspiracy theories that are a good fit to their world view – the triumph of pre-existing biases over case-by-case rationality.
Recognising that no-one is conpletely immune to a well-presented rabbit hole is a helpful component of any self-innoculation, but once you're personally invested in a conspiracy theory it can be difficult to climb out.
There was a tongue in cheek aspect to my response.
That would the obvious and parsimonious explanation – and it has plenty of precedent. But being obvious and natural does not always make an idea correct. Lab leaks also have plenty of precedent. It is also a documented fact the WIV was performing genetic research on coronavirus's, therefore a leak of a novel variant from this lab is a perfectly reasonable hypothesis.
It would also be nice if there was a sound chain of evidence supporting the natural ‘jump’ theory, because in this instance it is conspicuously missing.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/04/20/covid-lab-leak-more-likely-wuhan-analysis/
The details of the science can be found in many places – anyone with the slightest amount of curiosity can find it.
But in short an animal virus has to master two tricks in order to cause a human pandemic. One is that it has to learn how to infect a new host, which is relatively rare event. There are literally trillions of virus's, but the appearance of novel ones in humans is not commonplace. The other quite different trick is that it then has to learn how to be highly transmissible between humans.
The odds of both of these happening simultaneously without leaving any genetic chain of evidence of this natural evolutionary process is effectively zero. On the other hand there is plain sight evidence of a lab working on a very similar non-natural process, exactly in the location of the first outbreak.
Some discount the Wuhan lab leak because they note spread from the Wuhan market area.
However one of the labs in Wuhan doing bat coronavirus research (more than one) actually moved its location to 500 metres from the Wuhan market on Dec 2 2019.
https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-joe-biden-business-health-coronavirus-pandemic-986f0ff0f97af020de3b4eb3d76b23cd
PS Some claim the first reports of cases were at the military games in Wuhan in October.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and this applies to both hypotheses. Your assertions show that you’ve already made up your mind and formed your opinion on the matter. However, this doesn’t change anything for those of us who’ll remain open-minded and refuse to pick one over the other. In any case, plausibility does not equate compelling let alone convincing.
Yes there are two possible contending hypothesis and there is an absence of absolute evidence to definitively support either. Yet the reason for the absence is not equivalent for each. The reason why there is no evidence to prove the natural origin hypothesis is that despite a great deal of highly motivated effort to find it – nothing convincing has been uncovered.
The reason why there is an absence of definitive evidence for the lab leak is quite the opposite – the Chinese authorities have made every effort to prevent an open and trusted investigation into this matter.
The tenor of the first four comments on this topic that you have started was sneeringly dismissive of the lab leak hypothesis, linking to an article that offered no science based argument, instead offering an unsupported, spurious comparison with witch burning. It is not difficult to see that you too have made up you mind.
The reason I would suggest has nothing to do with witch burning, or conspiracy minded biases – it is simply a tribally political need to assure us that anything Trump said is forever automagically wrong. And perhaps more importantly to provide cover for the now well established fact of Democrat supported figures like Fauci who spear-headed much of the global response to COVID, was also deeply involved in the funding that enabled the Wuhan coronavirus research in the first place.
The unspoken reality here is that we are not debating science – but politics.
I don’t know what constitutes “absolute evidence” and I strongly suspect that it is a red herring.
The Chinese authorities are not the only ones stifling investigations. Nice try though.
Since you provided no links to those “the first four comments on this topic”, we can only guess what you have in mind.
I agree, in fact, it is impossible because it is incorrect – you are seeing imaginary things.
You assume the article linked to @ 4 is part of a larger conspiracy, a false flag operation conducted by black-op academics.
‘kay.
Right, which would mean that the hypotheses of the origin of the virus are a smokescreen in a larger game of smoke and mirrors. Thus, people such as you take sides based on political arguments not scientific ones.
The title of the RNZ article you initially linked to pretty much told me all that I needed to know – implying as it clearly does that anyone who entertains the idea of a lab leak is indulging in 'medieval' hysteria and blame pointing. It explicitly invokes witch burning as a comparison.
Returning to the quote you selected to highlight:
Again chock full of pejoratives, and clearly implies circumstantial evidence can always be hand-waved off as 'magical conspiracy thinking'. Ask any criminal barrister about the key role circumstantial or corroborative evidence plays in criminal trials where there facts of the case are in dispute. Especially when there is no access to the original scene of the crime, or there are no reliable witnesses available.
The reality is that due to the passage of time, and the obduracy of the Chinese authorities, there is almost zero chance we will ever obtain first hand information that confirms the mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to a lab leak. (The only remaining prospect of a breakthrough will be a credible whistle-blower, although given what we know about the CCP regime I consider this extremely unlikely.)
If you are going to demand an unobtainable standard of evidence, then I respectfully submit the debate you are asking for is going to be stillborn.
I see, you assume that if somebody links to an article it must always be about the title, the stuff that jumps out at you, the tip of the iceberg, and nothing else, no double messages, et cetera. It doesn’t seem to cross your mind that it might be because of the implicit take-home message, which might be more general than the topic matter might suggest prima facie – often the topic is merely a hook. This seems to happen with others too who are rather
topic-obsessedtopic-focussed and they always react to the self-raised red flag in a highly predictable way. I had you pegged as more perceptive and with a more depth.I think this is a self-reference, as you mentioned “absolute evidence”, and nobody else has, so far.
I read the article in question – I always do because in so many instances I find it does not actually say what the person referencing it claims it does.
In this instance I found nothing of substance worth commenting on other than clickbaity title.
A superficial read doesn’t initiate any understanding. Read it again, with different eyes, this time.
The point is that they are stifling this one – the one that matters to this discussion.
It’s settled then, the Chinese did it. \sarc
End of.
And in fact , the Wuhan scientists in a grant application proposed inserting a furin cleavage site into a coronavirus that would make the virus far more transmissible to humans .The very furin cleavage site that manifested in Wuhan .Why is a lab leak considered a conspiracy theory.?
It matches the requisites for Occam's razor far better than the leap from bat into humans.
https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa/
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022/08/why-the-chair-of-the-lancets-covid-19-commission-thinks-the-us-government-is-preventing-a-real-investigation-into-the-pandemic
Wow! A grant proposal and Occam’s razor, that’s truly compelling stuff!
Do you wish to have a go at scientific arguments? We could start anywhere, for example, here:
SARS-CoV-2 furin cleavage site was not engineered (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2211107119).
For balance I offer the response to the above:
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2215826119
I don’t want balance, I want debate!
Where is the critical analysis of the science, the discussion of the scientific arguments, pro & con?
Oh, I forgot, this is not about the science, it is about the politics. Duh! Silly me! Thinking that furin cleavage sites are anything but politics.
There remains much 'we' don't know, let alone understand, and debating politics doesn't advance the science – let's remain open-minded while expert scientists debate the science.
If you were sincerely open-minded about the origin of COVID a man with your evident search engine expertise would have no difficulty finding plenty of references also making the case for a lab-leak.
For instance – here is an overview of the current US Administrations perspective on the matter – after considerable investigation:
https://oversight.house.gov/release/covid-origins-part-2-hearing-wrap-up-intelligence-community-officials-provide-further-evidence-that-covid-19-originated-in-a-wuhan-lab/
The other well understood problem here is that virtually every expert virologist who we might normally rely upon for unbiased viewpoints – are hopelessly conflicted in this matter. For a start there is the well documented problem that anyone who speaks out against the approved narrative is very likely to be denied funding in future. And this is before we consider the wider concern many will reasonably have about the massive global damage to their profession's credibility if this event was ever proven to be due to be man-made.
The other well known challenge is the outright censorship or curation almost all medical journals are imposing on any COVID paper that is not aligned with editorial policy.
Normally I would like to think we could rely on the professional science debate to present both sides of the case in an even-handed fashion, but sadly this is not the case with this pandemic – almost all the regulators, journals and science bodies are deeply conflicted due to their massive reliance on single source, or industry funding, that constrains what they can safely say and still have a job.
Thanks Red – note that none of the 6 articles I linked to definitively rules out the lab leak hypothesis, which speaks to their credibility, imho. But have a read of them and see what you think.
We often see what we want to see. The attraction of the lab leak hypothesis is clear, and I admire your unshakable belief in its veracity.
I like to think I'm open-minded, and yes, I could find those pro-lab leak references. But, as I've mentioned on several occasions, in matters scientific I naturally tend to rely primarily on the evolving consensus opinion of expert scientists. In this case, maybe that's the wrong approach, but it's an approach which has served me well and for longer than I care to remember.
There was always one sure fire way to have proven me wrong. An unconstrained, trusted, open book, pockets out investigation at the WIV within days of the original event back in October 2019.
As it stands three years later we are left with either a natural origin hypothesis for which, despite massive effort, there is insufficient definitive evidence to support.
OR a lab leak of some kind for which there is a mountain of corroborating evidence – but for which we are never likely to find the definitive evidence either. But in this case because the guilty parties have determined we must not look for it.
And that anyone who does is to be smeared as a medieval, witch-burning ignoramus.
I’ve little interest in proving that you are wrong – that’s not what motivates me.
In this instance, scientists and other 'investigators' who assume there must be "guilty parties" are rather giving their game away – I prefer to remain open-minded, but understand that's not for everyone.
Such wonderfully colourful hyperbole – more please.
I was paraphrasing that from the article Incognito linked to in the comment which kicked off this thread. I thought it a little over the top too.
At every point I have been scrupulous to note that both the spillover and lab-leak hypothesis are valid choices from a purely scientific perspective. Yet at this point in time I do not believe the evidence we do have to hand supports them equally.
Nor for all the reasons I have already touched on, do I consider them 'equivalent' hypothesis. COVID as just another spillover event happily aligns with the interests of a great many professional people who lead and control our medical and public health systems.
COVID as a lab-leak by contrast holds a much darker prospect for many of these same people. Show me the incentives – and I will show you the outcomes.
That would be nice, but frankly when I reflect on the broad public debate I see quite the opposite in play – people locked into positionality and refusing to so much as look at the evidence for the case they are opposed to.
As far as I am concerned the spillover case is perfectly possible but so far despite almost 3yrs of highly motivated effort, definitive and convincing evidence remains elusive.
The lab-leak case by contrast could have been definitively proven or disproven 3yrs ago with a full and transparent investigation. The fact that the relevant authorities have prevented this rather gives their game away – and as far as I am concerned quite fairly speaks to their guilt.
Agree 100% – mine has always been "a purely scientific perspective". That's the reason I don't much credit the idea that a secret cabal of "a great many professional people who lead and control our medical and public health systems" is actively concealing the truth. Tbh, that idea seems relatively fantastic to me – much less likely than (for example) the idea that a great many professionals are simply mistaken.
I mean, just how big is this group of professionals that might be trying to cover up the truth? Thousands? Tens of thousands? While the lab leak hypothesis remains a possibility, I reckon the idea that a conspiracy of experts is concealing the truth about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 will eventually be consigned to the fringes, much like the idea that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories
I'll be keeping an open mind, pending further evidence
The problem for this argument is that it is no longer much of a secret. In recent months much of how this was done has now become common knowledge, which is why this topic has re-surfaced now.
Medicine, as you likely well know, is a very hierarchal profession and it is not hard for a relatively small handful of elites at the top to impose their agenda. Especially when they control research funding, professional registrations, – most especially when they have a great deal of collective credibility at stake.
Medicine and science are two quite different things. MDs are not the ones experimenting with viruses in the lab.
@Incognito
Ah the old 'I'm going to make myself a small target until I can provoke the other person into saying something I can snipe at' gambit.
Nice try – as I recall someone recently saying.
There’s only sniper here and it ain’t me.
A though-provoker is somebody who’s interested in genuine debate. A provocateur is not. I’m interested in genuine debate with people who have an open-mind and when they talk about science they mean science, for example.
Have a good evening.
From my point of view, you seem to be slipping further down the 'SARS-CoV-2 lab leak origin' rabbit hole.
You're now suggesting that “a relatively small handful [as opposed to a relatively large handful – care to take a punt at how many?] of elite medics used threats and intimidation to quash alternative narratives.
Well, if that is indeed the case, then, despite all their power, this small handful of controlling elites hasn't done a very good job. Maybe that's because they are a "relatively small handful" – you know, like the famously small hands of (then) President Trump.
"Enormous evidence" – 3 years ago! Why are we still debating this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigations_into_the_origin_of_COVID-19
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation#Virus_origin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SARS-CoV-2#Reservoir_and_origin
Frankly whenever I come across someone using the word 'misinformation' these days I assume they are attempting to force the debate to a predetermined outcome. Disingenuous at best; more commonly a borderline authoritarian censorship tactic. It certainly does not suggest someone interested in investigating the science in an even-handed manner.
And in case you had not noticed, Trump is no longer President. Quoting three year old statements is a tactic that suggests either you are not up to speed with the current developments, or less charitably you are attempting a smear by political association to Donald Trump – a figure with precious little relevance to the debate other than being a handy well-poisoner.
The officials and agencies quoted in my link well above – that I assume you did not bother to read – all work for the Biden Administration. And they too clearly indicate there is sufficient reason to take the lab-leak thesis seriously.
If you choose not to inform yourself with the excuse that it is 'all some conspiracy minded rabbit-hole' – then I feel no obligation to re-type out here the mass of information available to a man with your evident search engine skills.
"Enormous evidence" – 3 years ago! Why are we still debating this?
Well if for the sake of argument we allow that Pompeo is correct, it is clear that he is referring to evidence of a circumstantial or corroborating nature – because as we both understand the Chinese authorities have never permitted a proper, transparent investigation. Nor for that matter certain figures in the US Administration who were indirectly funding coronavirus research at WIV.
And as Director of the CIA we might hazard a guess that Pompeo had a higher security clearance than you or me, and that if he assessed three years ago the information available to him as a "mountain of evidence" – then who are we to quibble? Especially when this claim has been largely confirmed by numerous independent researchers and various US govt agencies subsequently.
I can sympathise with your predicament. If you feel a life-long attachment and respect for the medical and science establishment, claims of their malfeasance will not be welcomed by you. I get it.
But the game you are playing here is obvious; you cannot produce definitive science evidence to support your preferred spillover thesis, instead all of your energy goes into various slippery tactics to discredit the alternative. Frankly I am losing interest in this fast.
I don't think you do, and can only repeat that in matters scientific, I tend to rely on evolving consensus expert opinion. Re alleged "malfeasance", my "predicament" is entirely in your own head.
Btw, is it "a small handful of elites", or the (much broader) "medical and science establishment" that stands accused of "malfeasance"?
Re playing games, I can 'play' too
Fwiw, I'm not trying to discredit the lab leak hypothesis any more than you are trying to discredit zoonotic emergence – it's simply that, based on available evidence, I (and many others) simply don't find 'a lab leak', even an accidental leak, as persuasive as zoonotic emergence. I suggest that we agree to disagree on the most likely origins of SARS-CoV-2, and hope that will not prove too difficult for you.
Lastly, it's a bit rich for you to assert that all of my energy "goes into various slippery tactics" – I had hoped you might have grown out of your habit of slurring those who disagree with your convictions, but your comment @6:06 pm put paid to those hopes.
First of all you say this:
Then you say this:
Make up your mind as to what you are doing here. Otherwise this is just gaslighting.
Red, please – you wrote (@3:39 pm):
This is fanciful nonsense that does the lab leak hypothesis no favours – it's effectively piling a conspiracy theory on an (imho) already weak hypothesis, hence my reply (@5:29 pm):
I get it – you genuinely believe that the lab leak hypothesis is the best explanation for the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic – that's fine.
But if you can't make a decent case for a lab leak without invoking "malfeasance" on the part of a small global cabal of medical elites, then disinterested readers might wonder about the quality of your evidence.
What I'm doing in this thread is providing links to support my contention that zoonotic emergence is currently the best explanation for the origin of SARS-CoV-2. Not the only explanation, but still the best of the competing explanations, pending further evidence. You have a different opinion, and yet it seems that agreeing to disagree is a step to far for you.
It took me 20 min to find serious problems with all three of those references. For the sake of brevity I will deal with just the second one led by Frutos. In Sec 2.1 the possibility of a lab leak is dismissed with this argument:
The critical idea that COVID might have evolved from RmYN02 is cast heavily into doubt in this paper:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.202100015
Which concludes:
Not so clear cut after all.
Then there is the second para that somewhat bizarrely relies on Anderson (who was conflicted all to hell and back due to his direct financial involvement at WIV, and whose presence on the WHO 'investigation' highly contributed to it being widely regarded as a farce.)
And then even more bizarrely relies on the word of WIV that they were not conducting 'gain of function' experiments, when just a few years earlier they were publishing papers claiming exactly this.
And just to insult our intelligence it is implied that the WIV public database could be relied upon to be a full and complete record of every virus they worked with. You know – the same database WIV yanked from the public domain on 12 Sept 2019 and has never been made available since.
If a dumbarse non-specialist like me can unearth such elementary logical problems under my own steam with only the smallest amount of effort – I'm not impressed.
Ask the nurses, clinicians and practitioners world wide who have found themselves out of a job or had their registration revoked because they held a dissenting view about vaccines. Or the prominent researchers who suddenly found their papers were being rejected by journal editors before even going to peer review.
Or the commonplace experience of seeing anything arbitrarily deemed ‘misinformation’ yanked off social media.
Or the tens of millions of us who were sneered at, mocked, censored or gaslit because our experience did not fall into line with 'safe and effective' for some reason.
'Fanciful' my arse. The establishment went into overdrive covering it’s butt on this one.
Correction:
Late at night I mixed up Andersen and Daszak. Daszak of course worked for the now notorious EcoHealth Alliance that was used as the cutout middleman to enable NIH to fund WIV to perform GoF style research, explicitly banned by the Obama administration. Initially received as an expert, his credibility crumbled as his hopeless conflicts of interest became more apparent.
Andersen – is neck deep in this is a somewhat different way. It is his often cited "Proximal Origins" paper in March 2020 has gained notoriety because an email chain between him and Fauci, starting late at night on the 31 Jan 2020 has a group of these people all suddenly realising that this new virus really could be a lab leak and that something needs to be done to dampen this speculation down.
The immediate outcome was a paper that has been heavily criticised and has become the subject of Congressional inquiry. This article goes into the detail:
https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/
The core problem is that this was always a highly specialised field, with probably fewer than 100 people in the world truly across all the relevant material and with hands-on experience. But as the only experts they are also completely conflicted – which makes depending on anything they say inherently problematic.
Imagine an Inquiry into say the collapse of a major engineering structure such as a bridge. Absolutely the engineers who designed it would be required to give a full and complete accounting of their entire design process – but there would also be no difficulty in finding respected independent engineers to assist and advise the Inquiry. But the same is not quite as true for highly specialised fields like this – especially when there are networks of funding and professional links that entangle almost everyone.
Having said this – there are plenty of highly qualified people with more than enough knowledge of virology who looked at this entire business of genetically manipulating virus's in the lab who have long said the risks far outweighed any potential benefits. This is precisely why the Obama administration had placed a moratorium on this type of research in the first place.
And I think events proved this precaution entirely correct. And those who intentionally side-stepped it should be held to account.
Your bridge analogy is deeply flawed in this context. It does highlight your predetermined mind.
Why?
In the aftermath of the ChCh earthquakes there was a proper investigation into the collapse of the ITV building. Any workplace accident will be investigated; medical people who act recklessly resulting in harm or death can be expected to be investigated.
But what does not happen is that we allow the people involved to effectively conduct the investigation into themselves. Nor any related party or with a conflict of interest. The investigators are required to be independent and seen to be so.
Thanks Red, that helped me understand your PoV. Enjoy your day.
My PoV has nothing to do with it.
If you are defending a group of scientists who might have been culpable for the deaths of some 20 million people – and 3 yrs later have still managed to evade open, transparent scrutiny, much less be held to any account – then I think you are way too complacent.
Good-oh. Not me though – my PoV inflluences the content of my comments, and indeed whether or not I choose to comment at all.
Am I defending a small global confederacy of elite medics/scientists – who are they? 'Might" suggests that you haven't convicted these elites yet, which is encouragingly open-minded, particularly given the paucity of strong evidence – new evidence will likely come to light over time.
20 million is a lot; I recall some Standardistas questioning the accuracy of the COVID-19 death toll, and even the duration of the pandemic in its early months – but PoVs can change with time and new evidence.
As usual you reply with a handful of sentences of your own, then pad out the rest of the comment with a wall of multiple references. References have their place, but all too often I sense you hide behind them, not clearly stating your argument. But to work with what little you have offered:
Again returning to the two thesis in play here, spillover or lab-leak. We agree there is no definitive evidence to support either, but very different reasons.
Spillover lacks definitive evidence because despite a highly motivated effort to find it, nothing convincing has been found. Lab-leak lacks definitive evidence because despite a mountain of circumstantial and corroborative evidence – we have not been allowed to look for the smoking gun – by the very people implicated in this research.
The two cases are not equivalent at all. Spillover, given all the 2020's genomic high tech and resources thrown at it, should have been a relatively straightforward matter to establish on purely science grounds. You can hide behind 'maybe it will come to light in time', but as each year passes that prospect dims. How many more years do you propose waiting? Another three, a decade or more? At some point this argument will expire.
By contrast obtaining lab-leak thesis evidence was stifled by ill-intent right from the outset, not just by Chinese authorities, but right from the top in the US and across a network of highly conflicted individuals. None of this is speculation, we now have sufficient documentation to confirm this suspicion.
From a judicial perspective the lab-leak prosecution can present, means, opportunity, and guilty action to cover up the crime. Not to mention that mountain of corroboration.
My 'argument' is that zoonotic emergence is the most likely SARS-CoV-2 origin hypothesis. I sense that many proponents of the lab leak hypothesis are politically motivated and/or conspiracy theorists.
The small global confederacy of elite medics and scientists must be doing a tremendous job of motivating their army of (ignorant?) expert minions to look for evidence of zoonotic emergence. Or do you believe that the minions are also aware of the truth, and this "highly motivated effort" is nothing more than a massive orchestrated smokescreen?
Really – "a relatively straightforward matter"? OK, you know best. Personally, I'd give it another 5 years of scientific investigation – it's important to get this rigtht. More evidence will come to light, and if consensus expert opinion shifts to favour the lab leak hypothesis, then my opinion will shift, in line with evidence-based open-mindedness.
Re "highly motivated" – never have truer words been written
Do you recall back in Feb 2020 how the CCP tightly locked down all domestic travel inside China, while at the same time demanding that all other nations continue to allow travel internationally? Some of their more noxious spokespeople insisting it would be 'racist' not to do so. And thereby ensuring that any remaining chance of containing the outbreak would be lost.
Do you not recall this act of vile perfidy? And why would any sane person give these people the slightest benefit of the doubt in the light of this?
I recall domestic travel restrictions (in/out of Wuhan) from 23 Jan 2020, but not the "demanding that all other nations continue to allow travel internationally" bit (link?) – funny how one's mind can play tricks.
How did other nations respond to the CCP's demands, do you know?
Some groups, e.g. COVID Plan B, agitated for a relaxation of border controls early on, and such public health measures also inconvenienced many Kiwis temporarily stranded overseas.
So , a lab intends to insert the very mechanism into a virus that makes it super transmissible between humans
The novel virus makes its first ever appearance in the human population close to the lab and proceeds to travel quickly to the point we have a pandemic
That this happened naturally depends on a intermediary host
Have we found that host?
Not as far as I'm aware
So, the or a lab did insert the furin cleavage site, according to your belief. Problem is that the scientific evidence is controversial and disputed and hardly constitutes evidence for your preferred
hypothesisbelief.Do you want to discuss the pro & con of the scientific arguments or do you want to deal in conspiracy stuff? If the former, I don’t think you have what it takes. If the latter, you’re right at home.
What's the conspiracy stuff?
That there's a possibility covid originated from a lab leak ?
That we'll probably never know?
That natural evolution of the virus still hasn't been proved?
Jeez, conspiracy theories just aren't that juicy anymore
But what about the furin cleavage site??
Written with no awareness that conspiracy theory creation is part of psychological warfare operations (CIA …)
The Russians used the psychiatric institution gulag in Siberia and there is a western version – taking people out of the (Kansas) city to the (Missouri) country side cult (a joke about Joseph Smith believing paradise was in Missouri).
https://fox2now.com/news/missouri/where-is-the-garden-of-eden-why-the-lds-owns-over-3000-acres-in-missouri/
Maybe, maybe not. It was not relevant to that article.
I fully expect the National Party to get behind this and the PR team must be writing the tweet as we speak.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/300858769/university-of-waikatos-new-dean-of-health-renews-push-for-third-medical-school
Edit: Dr Shane Reti had already paved the way the day before:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/131806383/nursing-gaps-at-waikato-indicate-health-crisis–national
It would be interesting to see an informed debate over the relative pros and cons of the undergrad health science degree + 4 year medical degree model proposed by Waikato, against the 'traditional' 6 year medical degree (1 yr health science + 5 years medicine) at Auckland/Otago.
Lane provides figures to show that the proposed Waikato model is at least 25% cheaper per graduate – even though it takes 1 year longer. Is the 'quality' equivalent?
It seems as though it's the cost per student that the government is jibbing at (or at least, I can't think of any other reason) – so a mechanism to reduce the cost seems like a strategic winner.
Until we see a detailed proposal and plan, all we have is rumour, speculation, and talking points. This might be good enough for National but not for real decisions that are evidence-based.
To Incfognito, I thought it was a very good article, balanced and reasonable. It bought to mind the story as to why the post WW1 pandemic was called the Spanish Flu, it was purportedly because only the Spanish newspapers were able to report on it as the combatant countries were under strict wartime censorship. I was also under the impression that the contagion originated somewhere in the Mid-West in an army training camp just before the troops there were deployed to Europe. Hmmm, wouldn't want that knowledge getting out eh.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/300859115/max-rashbrooke-whats-really-going-on-behind-the-scenes-of-the-latest-tax-battles
Dear Mr Rashbrooke, there is a third option that will guaranteed to be the preferred one by Labour and National alike: seek non-partisan support across the centre (aka across the floor). Since we all know that this is as hard to find as a unicorn winter grazing in a paddock both parties will embrace this ‘solution’ and ‘look good’ – a win-win.
A surprising admission from a former Minister of Finance
She is of the view that increases in incomes derive from inflation, rather than from wage share of profit. Is this based on the idea that profit is (or should be) directed to owners rather than workers?
Her other argument is that none of the proceeds from economic growth (bracket creep) should be shared with the government sector. Given the aging of the population – rising health cost and their (until Cullen – and no National Minister has placed money into the NZS Fund) lack of provision for the rising cost of super is frankly irresponsible.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/300856794/ruth-richardson-the-taxation-problem-i-should-have-fixed-33-years-ago
Typical ruth richardson answer, flat taxes, to screwing over the poor.
That is one fubar link SPC – richardson is the classic dogmatic ideological puritanical prig. The type of politician this country produces in spades.
No wonder we can't have nice things.
Richardson is a little disingenuous, as expected. For example, somebody on a minimum wage has to work well over 40 h/week for 52 weeks a year to even touch the $48k threshold. She also failed to mention the role of the independent RBNZ in controlling inflation. True to form, she points to Government spending causing inflation, which is another misleading argument. Honestly, I cannot be bothered even trying to counter Richardson’s spin – you can tell it is Election Year when the old rusty tanks get rolled out, making their creaky & squeaky sounds through well-worn cogs & sprockets and let’s hope the wheels don’t start falling off. The Onion seems to have a finger in many pies.
However, you don't have to be very far above minimum wage ($22.70) to hit the 48,000 for 40/52 weeks – it's $23.08.
Every local restaurant job earns at least this (or they don't get staff), roading workers are way above, as are bus drivers. Apart from McDonalds, or very part-time supermarket shelf-stacking – you're not going to find any jobs in Auckland paying less than $23 (even if they're advertising lower, they just won't get any applicants).
Indexing tax rates to average wage is something that's long overdue – and a failure from both major political parties.
The average is below the median. But even so, more workers are below the average than above it.
To make more people better off, one changes the thresholds at the lower levels.
Oz has zero to $18,000.
https://www.superguide.com.au/how-super-works/income-tax-rates-brackets#Australian_income_tax_rates_for_202223_residents
Note how their bands are close to ours
Oz first.
0-18,000 at 0 ************ 0 to 14,500 at 10.5
18-45,000 at 19 14,000 ***** 14,500 to 48,000 at 17.5
45 to 120,000 at 32.5 ****** 48,000 to 70,000 at 30
120,000 to 180,000 at 37 *** 70,000 to 90,000 at 33
over 180,000 at 45 ******** 90,000 to 180,000 at 35 (and over 180,000 at 39)
In the 2023 budget I'd make one change to 10 cents for the first $20,000. And above that as now. That would give all workers $500 pa.
But for an election policy one could go further.
With the concept of income tax revenue neutrality – say 2024-2025.
17.5% to $50,000, 30 cents to $75,000. 33 cents to $100,000. 35 cents to $150,000. 39 cents over $150,000. 45 cents over $200,000.
And if one brought in some sort of Green wealth tax, say from 2025 – one could go further for 2025-2026.
Say have 30 cents to $100,000 and 33 cents to 150,000. 35 cents to $200,000. 39 cents over.
PS A Green wealth tax option first threshold change – say 10 cents to $25,000.
I’d be (pleasantly?) surprised if the Bread & Butter Budget-2023 contained any changes to the lower tax brackets that would take effect in the foreseeable future.
I'd go with
1. a statement in the budget this year of the first threshold change for 1 April 2024. Every worker gets the same $500 cut in income tax next year.
2. then go into the campaign with a policy of threshold adjustments that are income tax neutral.
But add a provision if there was a coalition deal with Greens that included a wealth tax, then the money would allow adjustments reducing income tax in all threshold bands.
The point to show greater responsibility than NACT. And a better deal for the many.
Yes, that sounds good to me, and it would take some wind out of TOP’s sails too.
We’ll find out in a few weeks how far Labour is daring to go to win the Election.
Australia vs NZ tax on income (OZ is green NZ is blue)
0-18,000 at 0% vs 0 to 14,500 at 10.5 % and 14.501 – 18.000 at 17.5%
(NZ taxes the first 18 grand up to 17.5 % higher then OZ which stands at 0 tax, something that would benefit part time workers/casual workers and low income workers even tho high incomes will also benefit)
18.001 – 45.000 at 19% vs 14.500 – 48.000 at 17.5%
(agree this is a similar tax rate and the only one were taxes are higher then in NZ)
45.000 to 120,000 at 32.5% vs 45,0001 to 70,000 at 30% and 70.001 – 90.000 at 33% and 90.001 – 120.000 at 35%
(it seems to me that the OZ tax is less complex and overall better for the worker)
120.001-180.000 at 37% vs 90.000 – 180.000 at 35%
(now here OZ has more tax income than NZ and in NZ we are charging that higher rate to lower income)
over 180,000 at 45% vs over 180,000 at 39%
(OZ charges the higher incomes a much higher tax rate then NZ)
We are not close at all. We are quite opposite. We have a bloated system that makes no exemption for low income worker but looks well after those on high incomes.
For the record I have been advocating for 0 tax on the first 25 grand earned as that is still the minimum for a rental to pay for a while now – since the John Key years publicly here and have been told that it would be too complicated, only benefit rich people blablabla.
Sadly the current government will not change the tax code to benefit the low income worker.
Our low income earner rebate could be adjusted (it's for those working who have no children and thus cannot get WFF tax credits).
It's currently $10 a week and operates between $24,000 and $48,000. . It could be larger start lower and go higher (to the median wage c$60,000). That's the alternative to a zero free zone (thus none of the amount goes to those on more than $60,000 that more than halves the cost).
https://www.ird.govt.nz/income-tax/income-tax-for-individuals/individual-tax-credits/independent-earner-tax-credit-ietc
stop with the tinkering and go 0 tax on the first 25.000 grand. If OZ can do that, why can't we.
our income tax punished the low income earner and gives a well greased handshake to the well to do, but in saying that, i can totes see why Grant Robertson will no more increase his tax burden then would Chris Luxon or Mr. Seymour. Cause they like their low taxes.
So you want to help those on the lowest income threshhold but only in way that also lines the pockets of those on above median wage incomes. Which more than doubles the cost. Who pays for this – the poor dependent on a run down health system (as they have no medical insurance)?
Oz has higher income tax rates over 18,000 than we do, to afford it. They also have CGT and a land tax and stamp duty.
The difference between you and me is that i don't care about purity. Firstly.
Secondly, yes, taking the taxes on the first 25 grand to 0 will equally benefit the higher income earner as they also would not have to pay taxes on that amount. And here is where OZ has shown us the way, they charge a higher income tax at the higher end,
see here
120.001-180.000 at 37% vs 90.000 – 180.000 at 35% – OZ being 2% higher here
and
over 180,000 at 45% vs over 180,000 at 39% – OZ being 6 % higher here.
In fact we could dump our system and copy the OZ system, full stop. It would benefit the lower income and raise taxes on the rich. Ka-ching, bingo, we have a winner here. And no one has to think it up either, we just copy!
But we will not do such a thing because neither Grant Roberston, nor Chris Luxon, nor Mr. Seymour will change their tax rate to cost them more of their earnings. No siree, why would they.
So yes, go OZ well done, you are charging the rich to give a few more pennies to the poor. Well done, Sadly it can't won't be done in NZ cause we are buys finding excuses as to why not, and because we can't even imagine rich people like our Parliamentarian Critters to pay their fair share. So sad!
10 bucks a week, 520 NZD per year.
Good grief that is fuck all.
She really is as thick as pigsh*t imho.
Mr Rashbrooke notes "The radical becomes respectable" and "bad ideas don’t stand up to scrutiny. But, as a corollary, the good ones eventually win out."
https://www.greens.org.nz/persistent_inflation_shows_urgent_need_to_tax_wealth
Given that there are more voters negatively affected by our growing inequity, one would imagine there's an election strategy in there somewhere.
I agree, but I suspect that most Green Party voters are not among the most affected and frankly, I cannot see this changing much before October, if ever.
One hopes a certain red-hued faction seizes the nettle and returns to their roots, if one can forgive the mixed garden metaphors; seems appropriate for advice coming from the Greens.
As you know, I like metaphors. I hope Budget-2023 will give us hope.
That's the answer to their many ill gotten gains.
Amongst the mountains of dross on television, there are little nuggets of gold. I caught the tail end of Studio B: Unscripted on Al Jazeera this morning.
Titled "The deadly word, freedom: Brian Eno and Ha-Joon Chang" (Pt 1), many on this site would find common ground with this very interesting discussion.
Also on YouTube.
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/studio-b-unscripted/2023/4/16/the-deadly-word-freedom-brian-eno-and-ha-joon-chang
With acknowledgement this is not political in any form – is anyone else on TS watching and enjoying Apple TV's – Ted Lasso?
(Currently halfway through the third and final season)
https://youtu.be/3u7EIiohs6U
Queensland is more enlightened than us. Well to be expected with how fubar we are and how beige our last two governments have been.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvfjCU8JIZU
The USA Supreme Court is allowing the continued supply by mail of an abortion pill, overturning a Court of Appeal ruling that required collection visits while a case over the legality of the pills (on the dubious grounds of process to authorise their use, as per safety, when the pills now have a decades long real world safety record) is on-going.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65356390
Basically conservative judges, in states set to ban abortions, are being targeted by abortion opponents to ban the pill nationwide. One suspects however (sans SCOTUS finding in their favour) that the real political agenda is to legislate a federal ban on movement of the pill into states with abortion bans (it's a reprise of the underground railroad scenario of the 19thC).
The same people also oppose funding for Family Planning (contraceptive pills, condoms and morning after pills), sex education in schools and fertility treatment.
https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/in-the-news/democrats-look-to-protect-fertility-treatments-in-post-roe-era
https://www.npr.org/2018/05/23/613777772/under-trump-family-planning-funds-could-go-to-groups-that-don-t-offer-birth-cont
https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/press-release/poll-finds-most-americans-oppose-trump-administrations-changes-to-restrict-title-x-family-planning-funds-from-clinics-that-provide-or-refer-for-abortion/
The Standard Housekeeping
Headsup that the Mobile version of TS has been turned off for now because it was causing too many problems. We can still use the Desktop version on a mobile device, but some people won't be able to comment from there. Sorry about that, but all posts should be able to be read now.
If you are on a mobile device and can't comment from the Desktop version, can you please reply below with details, cheers.
Edit, I can make a new comment from the Desktop version but I can’t usually reply.
I've been having problems commenting from my phone. Interesting I can reply here!
are you using the Desktop version on your phone right now? Were you not able to comment from that before?
If you change the time stamp, it'll go to the top of OM 😉
Yes I am using desktop version. Haven't been able to access the mobile version for some time now. And no I wasn't able to comment on some occasions. Click on reply button, but no keyboard 😕
strange. Most of the time I can't comment, very occassionally I can if I double click in the text editor.
@ Muttonbird, I lifted your ban @ 8:20 pm. I checked and I can’t see why your comments are still ending up in Trash. Apologies for the inconvenience, but this is above my pay-grade.
they trashed that last comment themselves?
Yes, you’re right, it does seem that way. So, MB may be good to go, phew! Otherwise, they’ll just have to wait for Lynn – there’s nothing else I can do here.
@ Muttonbird, have you seen the Housekeeping Note from weka (https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22-04-2023/#comment-1946902)?
Russia, a terror state where elderly women are fined twice their monthly pension for saying Zelensky is handsome, single fathers imprisoned and their child returned to her long estranged mother for producing an antiwar drawing and where dissident journalists are sentenced to 25 years in prison for being, of course, dissident journalists.
https://www.thebulwark.com/putins-reign-of-terror-russia/