Open mike 22/05/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, May 22nd, 2024 - 66 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

66 comments on “Open mike 22/05/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. observer 1
    22 May 2024 at 8:12 am

    So this happened at the weekend in Wellington.

    You can draw your own conclusions. Speaking only for myself, I would never want to be associated with most of these people. But it's important to know who they are, and what they really believe, in their own words.

    Apparently civil unions and gay marriage are to blame, who knew?

    Fear, hate and a putrid stench: Inside the Unsilenced anti-trans event | The Spinoff

    • gsays 1.1
      22 May 2024 at 12:22 pm

      Ironically and perhaps prophetically the putrid stench was attributed to the protestors outside the venue.

      • Visubversa 1.1.1
        22 May 2024 at 12:35 pm

        You mean the ones who threw the shit on the steps of the venue?

        • Traveller 1.1.1.1
          22 May 2024 at 2:03 pm

          Spoiled children unhappy at not getting their own way.

          • tc 1.1.1.1.1
            22 May 2024 at 3:39 pm

            Yeah those children and their occupation of Parliament, blocking motorways, supporting vandals and other provocative moves the police get involved with but hey free country and all that…..for now.

        • gsays 1.1.1.2
          22 May 2024 at 6:41 pm

          Yes.

          The article felt like a scattergun hit piece against some high profile people rather than address the issues they and others are concerned about. Kinda the norm for reportage from that side of the fence.

    • David 1.2
      22 May 2024 at 12:49 pm

      The part of the story that interests me is the young woman who had a double mastectomy. This happened, presumably because the medical professionals are either incompetent, or most likely, concerned about their professional reputation and just went through the motions.
      Any good journalist should have jumped on this story as a case of medical malpractice. Obviously this is not a concern with the news organisation he works for.

      • Traveller 1.2.1
        22 May 2024 at 12:56 pm

        It's far easier to sit in a room for 5 hours and write snide remarks about people you don't like than do any actual investigative journalism.

        • observer 1.2.1.1
          22 May 2024 at 1:19 pm

          And far easier to make snide remarks on a blog than follow the links provided for you by that journalist.

          • Traveller 1.2.1.1.1
            22 May 2024 at 1:58 pm

            I read the article. It was dripping with bias. I agree with David, there was a deeper story here, but clearly it flew straight over the journo's head.

            • Drowsy M. Kram 1.2.1.1.1.1
              22 May 2024 at 3:41 pm

              Dripping with biases (even “spoiled children” 'ave 'em smiley ), and links (~14).

              I try to keep an open mind, and am perhaps luckier than most to have two gender-nonconforming niblings. To my shame, there was a time when I didn’t consider it 'lucky', but over the years my biases and concerns have ebbed.

              … there was a deeper story here …

              Maybe more than one, but who will have the courage to tell them.

              Ellie and Nele: From she to he – and back to she again
              The stories of these two young people are complex.

              They may not be typical of people who have transitioned to another gender. And they are not a judgement on the decisions of other trans people, be they trans men, trans women or non-binary.

              Both of these young people are conscious of how stories of detransition have been used by transphobic organisations and commentators to invalidate the experience of trans and non-binary people, and attack their hard-fought access to health care. Neither Ellie nor Nele deny the rights of trans people. They do, however, question whether transition is always the right solution.

              Transgender regret? Research challenges narratives about gender-affirming surgeries [23 Jan 2024]
              You’ll often hear lawmakers, activists and pundits argue that many transgender people regret their decision to have gender-affirming surgeries – a belief that’s been fueling a wave of legislation that restricts access to gender-affirming health care.

              But in an article we recently published in JAMA Surgery, we challenge the notion that transgender people often regret gender-affirming surgeries.

              Evidence suggests that less than 1% of transgender people who undergo gender-affirming surgery report regret. That proportion is even more striking when compared to the fact that 14.4% of the broader population reports regret after similar surgeries.

              Effects of transgender identity labels on perceptions of gender minorities [16 Aug 2023]

              Forms of Psychological Bias Against Transgender Women and Men and People with Nonbinary Gender Identities [15 May 2023]

              • Visubversa …
                22 May 2024 at 3:54 pm

                It is not "gender affirming care". It affects the primary and secondary SEX characteristics by means of chemical castration with "off brand" medications, followed by sterilization and mutilation by the removal of healthy organs. Add in a lifetime dependency on artificial sex hormones.

                And then they bleat and say that "gender is not sex".

                • Traveller …
                  22 May 2024 at 4:00 pm

                  yes

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  22 May 2024 at 4:07 pm

                  And then they bleat and say that "gender is not sex".

                  I tried to remonstrate with my niblings, Visubversa, I really did, but went about it wrong and did much more harm than good to the relationships.

                  Fortunately they are both thriving, and the damage done by my clumsy approach has been repaired somewhat (a joint effort) – family is family.

              • Traveller …
                22 May 2024 at 4:08 pm

                Transgender youth: Here’s what the data says about regret rates. (slate.com)

                This article looks at studies that show regret rates ranging from 1% to 30%.

                They say this:

                The issue here is that neither of these extremes are reliable estimates of regret. The 30 percent figure obviously does not map onto regret. Many people stop using their parent or partner’s health care for reasons completely unrelated to transition regret (i.e., divorce). And the studies of surgery in the review are mostly surgeons following up with their own patients, with quite high dropout rates. It’s not surprising that only 1 percent of people report to a surgeon who did an operation that they regret it!

                …and…

                Perhaps the most useful way to examine regret is to look at the proportion of people who cease their transition and go back to the gender they were originally. A large national study found that 13.1 percent of transgender people participating in the U.S. Transgender Survey reported detransitioning at some point in their lives. I think that’s a fairly reasonable estimate of the rate of people experiencing some measure of regret around their transition experience.

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  22 May 2024 at 4:17 pm

                  Ultimately, the question of what proportion of kids or adults regret their transition is only important to a select group: the people who want to transition, and their clinicians. At worst, the rate of regret is still better than other treatments which don’t require national debates over their use, which really begs the question of why anyone who isn’t directly involved with the treatment of transgender people is even weighing in on the topic at all.

                  Yep, it really begs the question. I received my answer(s) quiet and clear.

                  • Visubversa …
                    22 May 2024 at 4:30 pm

                    You might want to look again at the Cass Review report. It details very well why there is no good evidence base for the efficacy of "gender affirming care" for young people. Part of the reason is that any attempt to do good research about rates of regret – or the "complications" rate of the surgeries, is met with the usual resistance and abuse.

                  • Traveller …
                    22 May 2024 at 4:34 pm

                    This is life changing, irreversible surgery (some would say mutilation) on young, vulnerable people. It absolutely has to be widely debated.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      22 May 2024 at 7:15 pm

                      Fair enough, although I broadly agree with the concluding opinions expressed by the author (Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz) of the (imho balanced and well-researched) article you linked to and quoted from @4:08 pm – so thanks for that.

                      Ultimately, the question of what proportion of kids or adults regret their transition is only important to a select group: the people who want to transition, and their clinicians.

                      It absolutely has to be widely debated.

                      Of course; anyone can weigh in on the topic, but Meyerowitz-Katz makes an interesting point about to how much weight should be given to individual opinions. I had opinions about the wisdom of some of the choices my niblings have made over the last 3 or so years, and only some of those opinions have changed.

                      But I don't get to impose my sensibilities on my niblings, and I won't cut them off (perhaps an unfortunate phrase in context) for their choices, and hope that they won't cut me off, in spite of my 'I know what's best for you' attitude – which (fwiw) I still struggle with.

                    • Traveller …
                      22 May 2024 at 10:18 pm

                      …Meyerowitz-Katz makes an interesting point about to how much weight should be given to individual opinions.

                      Actually their point is absurd.

                      Should the opinions of the wider medical fraternity be given weight? Should, for example, medical professionals be able to provide other treatment beside gender affirming treatment (GAT), or should providing any treatment other than GAT be illegal, as it is now in Canada? (Reckless Consent: Issues with Gender-Affirming Treatment | C2C Journal)

                      Should the opinions of parents of transitioning children be given weight? Or should the only approach offered by GAT practitioners in many Western jurisdictions be unconditional acceptance of the patient’s feelings? (Reckless Consent: Issues with Gender-Affirming Treatment | C2C Journal).

                      Weka presents other examples below.

                      When we are discussing irreversible medical procedures being performed on highly vulnerable young people, the mere notion that only that young person and their medical practitioner should have a say is, IMHO, dangerous.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      22 May 2024 at 11:00 pm

                      Actually their point is absurd.

                      And again, I thank you for providing a link to Meyerowitz-Katz's article, and quoting from it to support your views.

                      Transgender youth: Here’s what the data says about regret rates.
                      https://slate.com/technology/2024/02/transgender-youth-health-care-regret-pamela-paul-nyt-data.html

                      Imho, an article that an individual can selectively quote from in support of their views, while also stating that a point the author makes "is absurd", can't be all bad.

                      Believe it or not, I used to think very much like you on this topic, but personal experience is an excellent teacher, and so while my natural inclination still leans towards a conservative view (which is pretty unusual for me), I must (now) also acknowledge that not all young people who undergo gender-affirming treatments view these as harmful, let alone "mutilation".

                      And, tbh, the more this topic gets discussed on TS (and imho it gets discussed a lot), the more I learn and regret my earlier ham-fisted efforts to set my niblings on a path that would still be easier for me – with the benefit of hindsight those efforts did more harm than good.

                      Of course, I also recognise that not transitioning in the first place would have been a better decision for some young people, hence the link to Ellie's and Nele's stories @1.2.1.1.1.1.

                    • Traveller …
                      23 May 2024 at 10:28 am

                      @ Drowsy

                      "I must (now) also acknowledge that not all young people who undergo gender-affirming treatments view these as harmful, let alone "mutilation"."

                      Perhaps because a very great number are already vulnerable. Perhaps because they are too close to be objective? Which is a valid reason wider input and discussion is required.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      23 May 2024 at 2:09 pm

                      Transgender youth: Here’s what the data says about regret rates.
                      https://slate.com/technology/2024/02/transgender-youth-health-care-regret-pamela-paul-nyt-data.html

                      Which is a valid reason wider input and discussion is required.

                      Yep, and that well-researched article you provided a link to, and quoted from to support your views, has faciliated discussion here.

                      Perhaps because a very great number are already vulnerable. Perhaps because they are too close to be objective?

                      Perhaps, perhaps – and perhaps because, for some, these treatments are beneficial? My initial judgements about the vulnerability of my niblings, and them being too close to be objective, were (I like to think) well-intentioned, but, with the benefit of hindsight, I made bad calls in my attempt to persuade them to make what I truly believed would be better choices for all concerned.

                      I (still) don't fully understand why my niblings made the choices they did, but they seem happy, and I'm trying to be content with that, even though some of the consequences still rankle.

                      And I'm still of the opinion that "on balance, it’s better to delay/withhold most/all irreversible [gender-affirming] interventions for as long as possible", but if I could do it all again then I wouldn't go in all guns blazing. Who knows what might have been.

                  • weka …
                    22 May 2024 at 6:44 pm

                    which really begs the question of why anyone who isn’t directly involved with the treatment of transgender people is even weighing in on the topic at all.

                    I didn't read the article, but this is very, very weird.

                    1. women's sex based rights are at risk from males transitioning and insisting they are women. Women have a right to weigh in.

                    2. detrans people aren't getting the support and medical care they need because apparently only trans people deserve that. Detrans people have a right to weigh in.

                    3. there is a specific set of gender critical activists who are the parents of children that transition or want to transition and where those parents believe it is a very serious mistake. They have a right to weigh in.

                    4. It's very strange to see liberals making such a distinct libertarian argument, that extreme body modification is between the person and their doctor, especially after Cass. Those of us who see transhumanism as a threat to humans and nature, have the right to weigh in.

                    5. Some of the people who have transitioned turned out to be lesbian or gay and/or autistic and they were subject to medical malpractice. It's a kind of conversion therapy. LGB people have a right to weigh in as do neurodiverse people.

                    6. Society pays not only for transition, but life long medical costs. Society has a right to weigh in.

                    7. Transwidows have a right to weigh in.

                    8. regret about knee surgery is not like transition regret. Patient rights advocates have a right to weigh in.

                    9. whatever the issues around regret, there are also issues in the number of people who were transitioned by malpractice. Regret is not the right word for the feelings of detrans people who were put on a medical pathway as a young child, or got caught up in social contagion as a preteen or teen, or who grew up in a homophobic family/community society and hated their sex and were convinced that transitioning was the solution. Everyone who cares about children and young adults has a right to weigh in on that.

                    • roblogic …
                      23 May 2024 at 3:55 pm

                      I did read the article and it was incredibly lazy and incurious. He makes eminently fair criticisms of Brian Tamaki and other fringe figures whose rhetoric tends towards unhinged violence.

                      But the reporter makes less than zero effort to understand the core arguments of the GC position – it is a literal smear job.

                      The media loves to platform the loonies and ignore the left wing GC feminists who stick to the science and human rights arguments. In this the Spinoff (and idpol left) is a mirror image of the emotive bullshit from Tamaki and Posie Parker.

                      And why is it always low-T millennial dudes taking these potshots?

                • SPC …
                  22 May 2024 at 5:06 pm

                  Perhaps the most useful way to examine regret is to look at the proportion of people who cease their transition and go back to the gender they were originally. A large national study found that 13.1 percent of transgender people participating in the U.S. Transgender Survey reported detransitioning at some point in their lives. I think that’s a fairly reasonable estimate of the rate of people experiencing some measure of regret around their transition experience.

                  For the USA at least. Other nations might have different rates – the difference may be based on the rates of transitioning (as per health care practice), or cultural factors.

                  • weka …
                    22 May 2024 at 6:50 pm

                    there are too many people who cannot go back to the gender they were. Once your penis has been removed and you have a simulacrum of a vagina inserted in your body, there is little going back.

                    Some of the effects of artificial hormone treatment aren't reversible.

                    Puberty blockers aren't reversible depending on the age/stage they were starting and how long they were taken.

                    Anyone who has an opinion on transition needs to listen to the succinct and very clear 3min testimony of this young man,

                    https://youtu.be/Ko_MJln6c_4?si=ta5Hky1xzYWsNfa0

          • David 1.2.1.1.2
            22 May 2024 at 2:45 pm

            I would hope that the real story is that surgeons are removing healthy appendages of young people who have not received the proper care and treatment from medical professionals.

            • SPC 1.2.1.1.2.1
              22 May 2024 at 5:49 pm

              Are you arguing that there should be no such surgical procedures for those under 18?

              At the moment the focus has been on no use of puberty blockers (ignoring the fact that the original purpose to delay early onset puberty remains) and no hormone treatments under age 18.

              The number of surgery cases being much lower.

              Or does proper care have another meaning?

              • weka …
                22 May 2024 at 6:54 pm

                We should have a moratorium on surgery, hormonal treatments, and PBs in people under 18, until as a society we get past No Debate and the issues can be looked at in valid ways. At the moment people in academia and medicine are too scare to speak. There is no ethical medical treatment under those conditions.

                There should be no surgical and hormonal treatment for anyone until the needs of detrans people are acknowledge and medical and health system supports are put in place around detrans healthcare. Again, there is no ethical medical treatment until that happens.

                In any other area of medicine, what I just said wouldn't be controversial.

                • SPC …
                  22 May 2024 at 7:01 pm

                  No surgical or hormonal treatment for anyone (as per different to birth sex for gender dysphoria reasons) – including private and paid for … until there is support for “detrans healthcare”?

                  What detrans health care (not available now) would that be?

                  • weka …
                    22 May 2024 at 7:11 pm

                    Medical (PB, hormonal, and/or surgical transition) means becoming a lifelong patient.

                    Sometimes after surgery, other surgeries are needed to fix the first one or the complications. People having simulacrum vaginas can end up with a wound that extends into the bowel. That means the shit leaks out. This can be life threatening if not treated properly.

                    Post-mastectomy pain is not unusual. Nor bladder issues and pain.

                    And so on. All of this should be known and support available to deal with it. Trans people seem to be getting follow up surgeries some of the time, I hear detrans people talking about how difficult it has been to get that follow up care once they say they are detrans.

                    Afaik there are no specialist services. So while trans people can get affirmation only care, detrans people can't get support around being detrans.

                    I've actually not seen a good write up on this, I just know from following a lot of detrans people on twitter and watching/listening to them speaking.

                    • weka …
                      22 May 2024 at 7:14 pm

                      the state of what I am referring to is criminal imo. The problem is that the pro-transition medical community can't be honest about the situation because then they'd have to be honest about how experimental the surgeries are, and the failure rates.

                      But because of trans ideology, no-one will or is allowed to talk about it. There have been whistle blowers that have worked in clinics, so we know some of what is going on from them in addition to listening to detrans people.

                      Also, fuck all the people who have supported No Debate. I'd be writing about this on TS weekly if I could.

      • SPC 1.2.2
        22 May 2024 at 5:01 pm

        Given the woman decided to be a transgender man at age 18 and did not have the breast removal until age 26 – it is one separate from the campaign to end puberty blocking and transitioning support to those under age 18.

        The issue there is that she was identifying as male for 8 years, apparently because of body dysmorphia.

        • weka 1.2.2.1
          22 May 2024 at 7:05 pm

          The conference is about the transitioning of children and young people, it's not limited to PBs and medical transition (nor for many others).

          it's unlikely that Mel Jeffries suddenly decided to be a man at 18. She would have been exposed to trans ideology before then. She also says she couldn't have given informed consent because she wasn't given the relevant information.

          We are told less than 1% regret doing this. We are told the "informed consent" model works. But let me ask you, how can we give informed consent if we aren't given accurate information to base these permanent, life altering decisions off?

          …

          Let me ask you something: if you were told you have cancer, underwent chemo and had your breasts removed and later found out you never had cancer – how would you feel? This is analogous to our experiences as detrans people.

          https://x.com/xmjefferies/status/1786711839663067561

  2. Traveller 2
    22 May 2024 at 11:47 am

    ""They [Government] seem to be talking about the fact that because we built 13,000 additional houses, Kāinga Ora has more debt and they seem to be talking about that as if it's a terrible thing," he said."

    Chris Hipkins defends Kāinga Ora after scathing review, lashing from Christopher Luxon | Newshub

    Chris Hipkins still doesn't get it.

    "…the Board followed directives from the previous government to rapidly increase the number of additional social houses."

    "…we consider that the imperative to increase the number of houses rapidly has resulted in a high-cost structure and poor financial discipline."

    and

    "Kāinga Ora is struggling to meet its delivery targets. In the absence of acquisitions, their build programme would not be meeting its annual targets. Over the last five years, it built on average 2,400 gross homes each year, growing the stock by on average 1,600 net homes each year. Kāinga Ora forecasts procuring on average
    4,600 new build homes each year and are already not meeting this plan."

    Independent Review of Kainga Ora.pdf (beehive.govt.nz)

    It's not about whether or not they built extra houses. It's about organisational incompetence.

    • bwaghorn 2.1
      22 May 2024 at 12:10 pm

      Na it's about national being on the campaign trail 24/7, 365 days if the year, just trowing constant shit, is all the have.

      • Traveller 2.1.1
        22 May 2024 at 12:17 pm

        The quotes are from an independent review. If you have a problem with any of the content, take it up with the review panel.

        • Macro 2.1.1.1
          22 May 2024 at 12:36 pm

          An "independent" review conducted by failed Nat PM. So independent.Yeah Right. 🙄

          • Traveller 2.1.1.1.1
            22 May 2024 at 12:46 pm

            The review was prepared by a panel of three. But again, run a critique.

            • Macro 2.1.1.1.1.1
              22 May 2024 at 4:26 pm

              The conclusion to that so called report was most likely written prior to the so called report. It's SOP when you want to find things wrong in an organisation, and BE is hardly independent and surprise, surprise! He comes up with Social Housing.Now who was it that introduced that during the last Nat admin?

      • Incognito 2.1.2
        22 May 2024 at 12:42 pm

        laugh

        Did you just describe Traveller? cheeky

    • SPC 2.2
      22 May 2024 at 4:37 pm

      I suppose you do not care that National's focus on financial discipline is a cover for having no intent to increase social housing stock – just transfer some of Kainga Ora housing to other providers to provide a stronger social housing market.

      This despite the fact that the numbers of disabled and those unable to work because of health problems is growing. And the number of people reaching retirement age without home ownership is growing.

      One of the expectations of nations of the UN is The Universal Declaration of Human Rights – it does mention housing.

      • Traveller 2.2.1
        22 May 2024 at 4:47 pm

        If you could provide any evidence of those claims, I'd certainly be interested.

        • SPC 2.2.1.1
          22 May 2024 at 5:24 pm

          I suppose you do not care that National's focus …

          You could express an opinion on the point … rather than not …

          Until the Government has received and approved the turnaround plan demanded of the refreshed board, no further funding will be budgeted for the organisation to deliver additional social housing places.

          https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-invests-1500-more-social-homes

          There is as yet no known commitment to increase Kainga Ora housing stock numbers – new homes at a rate to replace demolished stock or higher or higher …and a suggestion of transferring to other social housing providers to strengthen that market.

          Fun question – is there any evidence of social housing stock increasing under a National led government in the past 40 years?

          All we have is 1500 places over * 3 years to other social housing providers instead of supporting people into first homes.

          One might well compare that to the rate that Kainga Ora has being buying (and or leasing) on the market to let at income related rent.

  3. bwaghorn 3
    22 May 2024 at 12:05 pm

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350285938/fast-track-committee-not-undermined-mps-donation-national

    “”The National Party insists there has been no conflict of interest in David Macleod’s chairing the committee considering the contentious fast-track bill.

    “”The New Plymouth MP received $10,000 from a donor with shares in a company hoping to benefit from the legislation.

    Corruption in the open , national knows nothing will happen so don’t even try cover it up

    • Drowsy M. Kram 3.1
      22 May 2024 at 1:23 pm

      Corruption in the open…

      Follow(ing) the (lovely) money (at all costs) sad

      Top oil firms’ climate pledges failing on almost every metric, report finds [22 May 2024]
      Oil Change International says plans do not stand up to scrutiny and describes US fossil-fuel corporations as ‘the worst of the worst’

      “The Big Oil Reality Check data illustrates these companies’ dangerous commitment to profit at all cost,” said Tong.

      UN expert attacks ‘exploitative’ world economy in fight to save planet [7 May 2024]
      Outgoing special rapporteur David Boyd says ‘there’s something wrong with our brains that we can’t understand how grave this is’
      …
      This article was amended on 8 May 2024. An earlier version said that [annual] fossil fuels subsidies had reached $7tn with a rise of “$2m” since 2021. The rise was in fact $2tn.

      "Throw is some cognitive dissonance, craven greenwashing and faux concern and here we are. Profit before planet."

  4. Jimmy 4
    22 May 2024 at 2:08 pm

    Kiri Allan decided to change her plea to "Guilty" at the last minute to refusing to accompanying police.

    I guess she decided that grey area in the law wasn't so important to test or wasn't so grey after all.

    Kiri Allan crash: Former Justice Minister convicted for drink-driving crash, refusing to go with police – NZ Herald

    • Mike the Lefty 4.1
      22 May 2024 at 2:29 pm

      Keep guessing Jimmy, that's all you will ever do.

      You don't actually know anything, you just guess.

    • bwaghorn 4.2
      22 May 2024 at 3:10 pm

      You'll be be filled with joy that Kiri decided to save the poor old tax payer some money!!

  5. Drowsy M. Kram 5
    22 May 2024 at 2:33 pm

    National’s New Plymouth candidate David MacLeod failed to disclose $178,000 in donations, including $55,000 from Auckland-based property developer [21 May 2024]

    Wonder if any of MacLeod's big donors will be concerned that he may be prone to making 'errors' of an "inadvertent" kind. Probably not, as long as he ums and errs in their favour.

  6. Peter 6
    22 May 2024 at 2:45 pm

    My feeling is that Parliament today is a disordered rabble. My feeling is that the Speaker very easily becomes a flippant boofhead.

    • ianmac 6.1
      22 May 2024 at 4:08 pm

      Yes Peter and he lets Luxon carry out long election rants but seldom answers the question. Pointless having QT really. And much harder to run the On Demand and then not till the following day.

    • SPC 6.2
      22 May 2024 at 4:29 pm

      The House is in decline and so is coverage of it at the parliament site.

      It is part of the lowering of standards across "government" since the election – if Transparency International does not do a downgrade we can resume they are not paying close attention (elsewhere either?).

  7. ianmac 7
    22 May 2024 at 4:17 pm

    I wonder what this means?

    Bishop and PM …"as new funding for 1500 new social housing places.."

    Is that people or houses? Luxon uses it repeatedly.

    • SPC 7.1
      22 May 2024 at 4:31 pm

      They ended a programme to support people into housing ownership they began in 2017 and say they will transfer the money to providing social housing places instead.

      • ianmac 7.1.1
        22 May 2024 at 4:43 pm

        Yes SPC but is places = houses?

        • SPC 7.1.1.1
          22 May 2024 at 5:31 pm

          They have allocated $140M (over 3 years) from July 2025 for 1500 places.

          It is under $100,000 per house.

          https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-invests-1500-more-social-homes

          • ianmac 7.1.1.1.1
            22 May 2024 at 6:58 pm

            Hate to bang on but if they meant houses surely they would call them houses, but to me, calling them places might be a sleight of hand.

            • Graeme 7.1.1.1.1.1
              22 May 2024 at 7:45 pm

              The language is sort of implying payments to providers on a per person basis, same way as the word "places" is used in tertiary education funding or social programs.

              • SPC …
                22 May 2024 at 8:11 pm

                At $100,000 a place … it will inspire some interesting bed sit designs.

                • Graeme …
                  22 May 2024 at 9:55 pm

                  My take is they are paying for 1500 rentals at $600 / week for 3 years.

                  Either that, or they're getting someone other than Kāinga Ora to build internment camps.

                  • SPC …
                    22 May 2024 at 10:05 pm

                    Maybe, but they are framing it as enabling other social housing providers to have some guarantee of funding for new supply (even if it is merely $600 a week for each new place, rather than the cost of the new building supply up front).

                    “The Government’s new investment in 1,500 social housing places will start to become available from July 2025 onwards, giving the community housing sector much-needed certainty about the social housing pipeline, allowing them to plan for the future, and scale-up their build programmes.

                    • ianmac …
                      23 May 2024 at 10:01 am

                      I heard the tail end of Bishop this morning on NRadio talking about houses. I will keep listening.

    • Patricia Bremner 7.2
      22 May 2024 at 4:54 pm

      I think they are still pushing that "short term help", not considering how disruptive being moved on from temporary places truly is to schooling work and community.