Open mike 24/01/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 24th, 2025 - 57 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 …

57 comments on “Open mike 24/01/2025 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. tWig 1
    24 January 2025 at 7:38 am

    The Guardian exposes US big tech involvement in Israel's anti-Gaza efforts in recent years. This includes use of chatGP in intelligence monitoring, a Palestinian population register and movement log (shades of IBM in Nazi Germany), and tailoring by Microsoft of integration of Microsoft cloud computing into large-scale databanks of potential targets in the current war.

  2. Drowsy M. Kram 2
    24 January 2025 at 10:24 am

    Scientists' association worries Crown Research Institutes reform will lead to more job cuts [24 Jan 2025]
    The country's seven Crown Research Institutes will be merged into three entities, and Callaghan Innovation will be disestablished.

    The disestablish / dissolve / split and merrge cycle continues – bye bye Kiwi scientists.

    Recently, former National party cabinet minister Dr Nick Smith questioned the veracity of President Trump's claim (in his second inaugural address) that US scientists were first to split the atom, and rightly so as Lord Rutherford (featured on the NZ $100 note) played a significant role in that achievement at Cambridge University (UK).

    The Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) was founded in 1926 after calls from Ernest Rutherford for the NZ government to support education and research.

    In 1992 the 4th National Government (Bolger administration) split the DSIR "into initially 10 semi-independent entities called Crown Research Institutes". One CRI (the Institute For Social Research and Development) fell by the wayside in 1995, and two others (Crop and Food Research, and HortResearch) were merged into Plant and Food Research in 2008, so now there are eight including Callaghan Innovation (formerly Industrial Research Ltd / Advanced Technology Institute) – soon to be three.

    The Government has announced that Callaghan Innovation is to be disestablished. Read more here.

    Te Pokapū Auaha Callaghan Innovation is a government agency. We were born out of the simple but powerful idea that Aotearoa New Zealand’s intergenerational prosperity won’t come from traditional businesses or business models. It will be driven by smart, bold entrepreneurs creating world-class companies that are also dedicated to making the world better.

  3. arkie 3
    24 January 2025 at 11:28 am

    As predicted, it begins

    Act leader David Seymour is today expected to blow open what will likely be a controversial public debate on privatisation.

    The Herald understands Seymour will use his State of the Nation speech in Auckland on Friday to suggest New Zealand needs to move past squeamishness about privatisation and consider whether taxpayers are getting bang for their buck from government services and assets.

    …

    The rising cost of services like health, which has jumped from costing about $20 billion in the 2020/21 year to nearly $30b (about $6000 per citizen) in the current year, is also likely to be highlighted.

    It’s expected Seymour will question whether Kiwis should have the option to give up their right to the public healthcare system and take their $6000 for their own private insurance.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/act-leader-david-seymour-expected-to-blow-open-privatisation-debate/WFBKV726YZF2XKMFE6XHSCIH5U/

    • adam 3.1
      24 January 2025 at 11:52 am

      So the smeg eater is going total ideological snake oil salesman.

    • Macro 3.2
      24 January 2025 at 11:53 am

      It’s expected Seymour will question whether Kiwis should have the option to give up their right to the public healthcare system and take their $6000 for their own private insurance.

      Simultaneously – Trump has just axed Health Care for over 20 million Americans.

      Within his first 48 hours back in office, Trump has signed several executive orders that threaten the healthcare of millions of Americans.

      Amid a flurry of executive orders, some of which were signed live on TV on inauguration night, the US president issued several orders that repeal Biden-era directives that had expanded healthcare access and options for lower-income and middle-class Americans.

      Those orders are expected to affect the medical insurance coverage for upwards of 20m people in the US

      The consequences of this are again the opposite of what the idiot thinks will happen:

      “The consequences of more people going uninsured are really significant, not just at an individual level with more medical debt and less healthy outcomes, but also has ripple effects for providers,” Sabrina Corlette, a research professor and co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University, said.

      Commercial insurance has already proved difficult to navigate for millions, as people with insurance have been almost as likely to experience medical debt as those who are uninsured. In fact, people with health insurance may now represent the majority of debtors American hospitals struggle to collect from, according to medical billing analysts.

      “Premiums go up for the people who do have health insurance. For the people without health insurance, it’s financially devastating,” Corlette said. “The result is medical debt, garnished wages and liens on people’s homes because they can’t pay off their bills.”

      • Mike the Lefty 3.2.1
        24 January 2025 at 5:14 pm

        Education and health vouchers were an early ACT policy when the party was founded. Given his intoxication with power it wouldn't be surprising if Seymour tries again to do this. Douglas wanted to do it earlier but he got overruled.

        Health vouchers would be a disaster for the public health system. Costs would escalate, people would sell off their vouchers to buy their first homes and risk deteriorating health later, and it would effectively privatise the health system.

        Just what ACT want eh?

      • Psycho Milt 3.2.2
        24 January 2025 at 6:44 pm

        …whether Kiwis should have the option to give up their right to the public healthcare system

        The headline here should have been "Seymour proposes Kiwis be allowed to contract out of their rights."

        Then there's the grift itself: private healthcare's only profitable because it leaves unprofitable healthcare to the public health system. If it were to become possible to dupe people into contracting out of their right to treatment in the public system, it could end up with a lot of working class and lumpenproletariat people having very nasty surprises awaiting them.

    • BK 3.3
      24 January 2025 at 12:28 pm

      Unfortunately the headline is wrong, this is not going to be a debate as the outcome will have already been decided

    • gsays 3.4
      24 January 2025 at 2:31 pm

      It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.

      The idea that private health can exist independent of the public health system. The relationship is akin to a parasite and it's host.

      In this case the parasite does the odd contract but depends on a public health system when clients get to have high needs and non profitable.

      My brother, who voted ACT, has had an ambulance called for him twice in the last 5 years. Both times related to the chainsaw/firewood/no tax work he does.

      Next time I kinda want to shoo the ambulance away and say he is happy to wait for a private provider to come and stop the blood flow…

      . Only kinda.

    • Bearded Git 3.5
      24 January 2025 at 10:34 pm

      I think that destroying the public health system, much beloved by the plebs and by anyone with a sense of fairness, is a step too far.

      If Luxon doesn't come out against this clearly his poll numbers will continue to tank.

  4. Muttonbird 4
    24 January 2025 at 11:34 am

    ^

    Rimmer is to deliver his 'Divide the Nation' speech today. In he'll be touting the dismantling of society with education vouchers, asset sales, and voluntary health care (don't worry there is a safety net for this – assisted suicide, another of his monstrous projects).

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/act-leader-david-seymour-expected-to-blow-open-privatisation-debate/WFBKV726YZF2XKMFE6XHSCIH5U/

    • Karolyn_IS 4.1
      24 January 2025 at 4:33 pm

      And how many people, unable to get adequate health care or palliative care, will opt for assisted suicide?

  5. joe90 5
    24 January 2025 at 12:30 pm

    Inflation under Trump: get over it.

    /

    Key Points

    • JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday that the looming tariffs that President Donald Trump is expected to slap on U.S. trading partners could be viewed positively.
    • “If it’s a little inflationary but it’s good for national security, so be it. I mean, get over it,” Dimon said during an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/22/jamie-dimon-on-trumps-tariffs-get-over-it.html

  6. SPC 6
    24 January 2025 at 12:35 pm

    Trump's new directive that AI should “promote human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security.”

    Hello "Samaritan" (Person of Interest).

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360553285/live-judge-blocks-trump-executive-order-ending-birthright-citizenship

    • Bearded Git 6.1
      24 January 2025 at 10:39 pm

      If both Starmer and Trump are hanging their hats on AI that confirms my feeling that AI will never deliver. It's all hot air.

      Tbe many billions being spent on AI is going to cause the biggest tech crash in history.

  7. SPC 7
    24 January 2025 at 12:42 pm

    A net gain of 78,500 non-New Zealand citizens and a net loss of 48,000 New Zealand citizens

    in the year ending November 2024.

    If we restricted voting to citizens our voting rolls would be in decline.

    I am picking a new record for net loss of New Zealand citizens throughout 2025 (above the current 12 month record of 78,500).

    https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/01/23/number-of-people-leaving-new-zealand-hits-highest-on-record/https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/01/23/number-of-people-leaving-new-zealand-hits-highest-on-record/

  8. Jenny 8
    24 January 2025 at 1:31 pm

    Pot calls the kettle black.

    I guess it takes 'one', to know one.

    After many decades, where it was impolite to name 'UN imperialism. British concerns over Trump's extreme hyper-imperialist rhetoric results in an editorial in the Observer, decrying the return of the US as an 'unapologetically imperial power'

    The Observer view: Donald Trump’s imperial bullying must be nipped in the bud

    Observer editorial

    ……These days it It is somehow considered impolite, especially if you are British, to remind Americans that their republic was also once an unapologetically imperial power. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, US administrations aggressively pursued their own version of the colonial empires of contemporary Britain, Germany and France. In 1893, the sovereign state of Hawaii (whose royal family enjoyed close ties to Queen Victoria) fell victim to an American-assisted coup. In 1898, the US annexed Hawaii. Guam, Samoa and Puerto Rico followed. America’s loosely interpreted “manifest destiny” demanded ever more. The Philippines, Cuba and even China were all on the receiving end of US political-military, commercial and territorial ambitions.

    Far from being abandoned, neocolonialist American thinking persisted well into the latter half of the 20th century, operating under various guises. Newly-independent countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia, liberated from collapsing European empires, were invited to join the “free world”, as defined and dominated by Washington. America promised protection and prosperity within the US-policed, post-1945 cold war order in return for fealty (plus military bases, trade concessions and access to resources). States that declined the invitation, such as Iran, Vietnam and Nicaragua, paid a high price……

    The fact that the Observer was once the official British government subsidised mouthpiece of the British Empire, would make the Observer uniquely qualified to recognise and call out imperialism.

    But, the Observer claiming the US was "once" an imperial power. Begs the question; When did America stop being an imperialist power?

    In its editorial, the Observer suggests that the US stopped being an imperialist power after its wars in Vietnam and Nicaragua, which ignores the US invasion, of Grenada, Iraq, Afghanistan each one under spurious grounds.

    Maybe the Observer just didn't want to be 'impolite'

    The fact is Imperialism is a bi-partisan American foreign policy position, and always has been.

    Trump is just more 'unapologetically' open about it.

    • SPC 8.1
      24 January 2025 at 3:49 pm

      It began with the land to the West Coast off Mexico and continues via territory in Cuba, and ambition for Panama Canal and Greenland.

      Afghanistan is more tenuous, the Mujahadeen (and onto Taleban) only won power there with American military support. Removing the Taleban (after 9/11) was restitution. Leaving and allowing the women of Afghanistan to be subjugated once again is not honourable.

      Iraq is also tenuous, as an imperial act, because they enabled an elected government to be sovereign (will Iran?).

      Iran a little bit, removing Mossadeq was imperialist because it was a transition from democracy to the autocracy of a dependent "ally" (security as per western economic dependence on ME region oil).*

      The Cold War was both two rival empires and the suppression of a communist alternative to capitalism (the second part was not security).*

      NATO is a little imperialist, but more collectively than a singularity. It's continued existence is seen as imperialist by Russia.*

      In some part it is the enforcement arm of the UNSC (when Russia and China do not veto) – Korea and Kuwait.

      *** (there seems to be policy to marginalise any oil producing nation not of the western regime)(as in the means to independent economically and thus politically).

    • Jenny 8.2
      24 January 2025 at 9:30 pm

      Typo alert

      Good Grief. How come I didn't pick that one up?

      After many decades, where it was impolite to name 'UN imperialism

      Should read:

      After many decades, where it was impolite to name 'US imperialism.

      My apologies for any confusion caused.

  9. joe90 9
    24 January 2025 at 1:56 pm

    Squealing porkers doing whatever it takes to get their noses in the trough.

    .

    At weddings, bar mitzvahs and work dinners, it's commonplace to see guests fiddling with the seating arrangements. It also happened Sunday night at a formal dinner for GOP megadonors, Cabinet nominees, top political leaders, and senior White House staff.

    "A lot of people got screwed up on the name cards. A lot of big people," said one guest at President Trump's pre-inauguration Candlelight Dinner at the National Building Museum. "I didn't want to get out of my seat because I didn't want to lose it."

    […]

    "It didn't matter who you were," said one guest who had donated millions to Mr. Trump's campaign and super PACs.

    Upon entry, guests found that some last-minute placecard swapping had shifted the seat assignments, multiple attendees told CBS News.

    Chicago Cubs owner Todd Ricketts' name placecard had been moved slightly, from a seat next to a Cabinet secretary to a spot across the table.

    Several sources for this article asked to remain anonymous because being bumped was considered an embarrassment. The drama illustrates the level of desire to be close to Mr. Trump and his inner circle. CBS News spoke to multiple sources who attended the dinner and confirmed the details in this story.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-dinner-seat-switching-drama/

  10. Drowsy M. Kram 10
    24 January 2025 at 2:41 pm

    Our writers pick the 26 best science fiction short stories of all time
    [New Scientist, 20 Dec 2024]

    They're all good – I prefer the familiar feel of the older ones such as The Machine Stops, and The Pedestrian, as we welcome our AI overlords courtesy of tech billionaires, and also enjoyed 'Computers Don't Argue', which wasn't picked.

    Master of Paxwax
    The story of Master of Paxwax, Mann's second book, centers around the life of Pawl Paxwax. Pawl – and his name is significant – is the second son of the Fifth Family in a galaxy-wide empire ruled by Eleven Great Families.

    More Everything Forever: AI Overlords, Space Empires, and Silicon Valley's Crusade to Control the Fate of Humanity [22 April 2025]
    How Silicon Valley’s heartless, baseless, and foolish obsessions—with escaping death, building AI tyrants, and creating limitless growth—pervert public discourse and distract us from real social problems

  11. Joe90 11
    24 January 2025 at 3:35 pm

    The "chicken little" replies make me want this to happen.

    (vid)

    @disclosetv

    NOW – Spain's leftist PM Pedro Sánchez wants to "end anonymity" of all users on social media.

    https://xcancel.com/disclosetv/status/1882140407573946378

    DAVOS, Switzerland — Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said on Wednesday that tech billionaires want to use social media “to overthrow democracy” — adding he’ll push EU leaders to take action.

    “The technology that was intended to free us has become the tool of our own oppression,” he said during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “The social media that was supposed to bring unity, clarity and democracy have instead given us division, vice and a reactionary agenda.”

    […]

    “What truly limits democracy is the power of the elites,” he said. “It is the power of those who think that because they are rich, they are above the law and can do anything. That is why, my friends, that is why the tech billionaires want to overthrow democracy.”

    Sánchez said that at the next meeting of European Union leaders in Brussels he will propose that the bloc move to “make social media great again” by imposing regulations and going after their billionaire owners. Among other measures he proposed fighting bots and fake profiles by requiring that users digitally identify themselves, and using the Digital Services Act to go after tech barons whose sites undermine democracy.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-pedro-sanchez-big-tech-billionaires-democracy-social-media/

    • weka 11.1
      24 January 2025 at 7:05 pm

      Among other measures he proposed fighting bots and fake profiles by requiring that users digitally identify themselves…

      the piece doesn't say how. Or if it would be applied retro-actively (presumably not, that would be a legal nightmare). He looks like someone who doesn't understand how the internets work.

      Something needs to be done about social media in particular, but it's hard to see how this would work.

      • joe90 11.1.1
        24 January 2025 at 7:15 pm

        @1:30 in the twitter vid

        • weka 11.1.1.1
          24 January 2025 at 7:25 pm

          that's interesting, thanks. He still sounds like he doesn't know how SM works. What's the agency that would hold all the IDs? Is it only Euro citizens? What happens to visitors to EU countries?

          No multiple IDs, that's the death of twitter right there lol (ok, that might convince me).

          • joe90 11.1.1.1.1
            24 January 2025 at 7:36 pm

            He talked about tying user names to national IDs/passports/realme etc.

            Maintaining your anonymity will be dependent on your online conduct.

            • weka 11.1.1.1.1.1
              24 January 2025 at 7:49 pm

              how would anonymity be retained if your user name and RL ID are connected?

              • joe90 …
                24 January 2025 at 8:10 pm

                All sorts of data is privileged, i.e my GP has access to data held by Health NZ but not to data held by IRD/Police/etc, right up until a court says it no longer is.

                Same with user names, privileged, until a court orders otherwise.

                • weka …
                  24 January 2025 at 8:42 pm

                  do you mean a government agency would hold it?

                  Your example is one that demonstrates loss of privacy, not protection of privacy. Basically health notes are not particularly private, lots of people have access to them. They're not publicly available, but if any number of people could leak RL ID if it was handled similarly.

            • Psycho Milt 11.1.1.1.1.2
              24 January 2025 at 8:30 pm

              He talked about tying user names to national IDs/passports/realme etc.

              In a context of large numbers of people who'd like to get others harassed by the Police, hounded by protesters, fired from their jobs, ejected from groups, ostracised by friends and family etc for holding currently unpopular opinions, that's a complete non-starter.

              • weka …
                24 January 2025 at 8:44 pm

                the only way I could see it working is the ID was blind to all humans unless the courts or whoever got involved (no idea how possible that is technically). But I'm not sure how that would hold up from eg malicious complaints to police. Haven't seen this discussed much in detail but I assume that the Brits that have ended up in a police station over tweets had their online IDs broken even where they hadn't committed a crime.

                • Psycho Milt …
                  25 January 2025 at 11:07 am

                  Yes, our identities are already available to officials, which is not inherently bad (eg we want people posting child sex abuse images to be identifiable by police), even though UK police are egregiously abusing the privilege lately. But this Spanish guy seems to want everybody individually identifiable to everyone else, which is just plain nuts. There's a reason everyone hates doxxers.

  12. tWig 12
    24 January 2025 at 3:44 pm

    Yup, I support the idea of a digital ID. You used to have to identify yourself by name and address to the publication you submitted an opinion letter to. Something of that sort should be similar for online opinions. You can keep a pseudonym for the post itself, if needed.

    • SPC 12.1
      24 January 2025 at 4:13 pm

      That reduces the privacy of the public – depends on the social media site being able to keep its information secure (from partisan cause hacking or blackmailers or government demand for info). It might well undermine the whistleblower.

      • Karolyn_IS 12.1.1
        24 January 2025 at 4:40 pm

        Big Tech already has a pretty good idea of who we are individually. That's how we get targeted with ads, etc.

        The book, "The Rise of Surveillance Capitalism", records how Google led the shift to develop algorithms to analyse our metadata in free apps, and worked out how to manipulate each of us, then sold the results to advertisers, later Obama's campaign, etc. FB followed quickly behind. it's the only way they could continue to make a profit.

        • SPC 12.1.1.1
          24 January 2025 at 4:45 pm

          Sure by a profile (based on what each knows), but not necessarily (all) by a name – maybe just an email and computer.

          Whistlebloweres would set up a temporary account, unrelated to that – while they were allowed.

          • Karolyn_IS 12.1.1.1.1
            24 January 2025 at 4:55 pm

            They also analyse emotions via analysis of syntax and word choice, plus, in audio and video chats, etc, they analyse voice tone, facial movements, gesture etc for emotions. And they are pretty much able to put a name to us.

            If it's free, they are analysing the metadata.

    • weka 12.2
      24 January 2025 at 7:14 pm

      which of the people that currently have a login to the back end at TS should have access to your real life identity? What would happen if the dirty politics crew try to hack the Standard again? Unlikely to succeed but what about other blogs who don't have an experienced sysop? I'm sure there are ways to do what you propose that lessen risk, but ultimately it becomes about trust, and because of that there will always be people that self select out.

      For instance on political blogs, people working in the civil service, or parliamentary staffers. People in jobs where you are not allowed to have a political opinion publicly that might go against your employer's views or the business.

      Women hiding from dangerous exes are another group.

      People on benefits.

      There are lots of reasons why pseudonymity matters.

  13. tWig 13
    24 January 2025 at 3:50 pm

    Led By Donkeys background Musk.

  14. tWig 14
    24 January 2025 at 3:55 pm

    And Big Hairy News interview Craig Rennie over Luxon's SON address (from 9.30 min). Amusing watching the micro-expression analysis on the podium.

    • adam 14.1
      24 January 2025 at 5:56 pm

      Class war from this government plain and simple.

      We asking in our house whose next to die at work? Farmer, shear cropper, security, or forestry.

  15. adam 15
    24 January 2025 at 6:02 pm

    Is it just me or does anyone else get the shits when they see the board of worksafe. Can't see any one who has every got their hands dirty at work.

    https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/about-us/who-we-are/our-board/

    • SPC 15.1
      24 January 2025 at 6:42 pm

      It should be automatic that there is an appointee from the CTU.

      And there is a former union boss. Bill Newson.

      Mark Leslie is a sort of farm sector equivalent

      And the lawyer with experience in the field.

      Otherwise the board type making up numbers, the people conversant with the governance expectations.

      • adam 15.1.1
        24 January 2025 at 7:25 pm

        an appointee from the CTU

        An, bugger me if it's not 75% from union membership then the board is fubar.

        Oh wait is this the new labour policy – give them one?

  16. joe90 16
    24 January 2025 at 7:11 pm

    He's protecting women, whether the women like it or not…

    /

    CHICAGO (AP) — President Donald Trump announced Thursday he would pardon anti-abortion activists convicted of blockading abortion clinic entrances.

    Trump called it “a great honor to sign this.”

    “They should not have been prosecuted,” he said as he signed pardons for “peaceful pro-life protesters.”

    The people pardoned were involved in the October 2020 invasion and blockade of a Washington clinic

    https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-executive-order-pardon-817774b21d32a4edf6d39ee43cbc18f4

  17. joe90 17
    24 January 2025 at 7:28 pm

    Smells like ethic cleansing….

    In the Trump administration’s arguments defending his order to suspend birthright citizenship, the Justice Department called into question the citizenship of Native Americans born in the United States, citing a 19th-century law that excluded Native Americans from birthright citizenship.

    […]

    The Trump administration then goes on to argue that the 14th Amendment’s language — the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” — is best understood “to exclude the same individuals who were excluded by the Act —i.e., those who are ‘subject to any foreign power’ and ‘Indians not taxed.’”

    The Justice Department attorneys return to the topic of whether or not Native Americans should be entitled to birthright citizenship later in their arguments, citing a Supreme Court case, Elk v. Wilkins, in which the court decided that “because members of Indian tribes owe ‘immediate allegiance’ to their tribes, they are not ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States and are not constitutionally entitled to Citizenship.

    https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/editorpicks/excluding-indians-trump-admin-questions-native-americans-birthright-citizenship-in-court/ar-AA1xJKcs

  18. Muttonbird 18
    24 January 2025 at 8:05 pm

    The prime minister has ruled out signing up to a treaty referendum if National and ACT are back at the negotiating table after elections in 2026.

    The Treaty Principles Bill continues to dog the National Party despite Luxon's repeated efforts to communicate the legislation will not go beyond second reading.

    Perhaps he should ask himself why people do not trust him.

    Luxon said there was no doubt the Treaty Principles Bill had caused anxiety on both sides of the debate and blamed the former Labour government for the angst.

    "We are where we are because of, I think, the previous government not making the case for the changes it was driving through that period of time, but that then creating that division."

    The Treaty Principles Bill is government legislation Luxon himself signed, sealed and delivered for ACT through the coalition agreements at the start of the term.

    Ouch!

    Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer later told reporters the strong statements had only left people asking why the bill had got this far if neither National or New Zealand First liked it.

    Bloody good point.

    Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick said National could halt select committee proceedings now if it wanted.

    "The coalition agreement says to take it to select committee, it doesn't promise a second reading."

    Fascinating…

    Labour leader Chris Hipkins said the statements at Rātana Pa would do little to assuage people's concerns about the legislation.

    "The damage has been done. They've set the relationship between Māori and non-Māori back by decades and it was an unnecessary debate. We didn't need to do this."

    True, that man.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/539881/treaty-referendum-ruled-out-under-luxon-s-watch

    • SPC 18.1
      24 January 2025 at 9:16 pm

      why the bill had got this far if neither National or New Zealand First liked it.

      The two parties want to use this debate to build support for their policy, diminish the Tribunal and take the Treaty out of legislation – the boil the frog method used by Key.

      The prime minister has ruled out signing up to a treaty referendum if National and ACT are back at the negotiating table after elections in 2026

      Seymour is using the debate to prepare for a citizens initiated referendum.

      All Luxon can do about that is say that results do not bind governments.

  19. joe90 19
    24 January 2025 at 8:26 pm

    Remember when crypto was supposed to be independent of governments?

    ettd

    President Donald Trump announced Thursday that his administration will evaluate whether to create a "national digital asset stockpile" — making good on a promise to support the use of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin.

    However, his executive order fell short of creating a strategic bitcoin reserve outright, as some crypto advocates had hoped.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/business/markets/trump-bitcoin-digital-asset-stockpile-strategic-reserve-cryptocurrency-rcna188921

    • adam 19.1
      24 January 2025 at 8:37 pm

      The essential problem with libertarians – libertarian up until they get hold of the government.

  20. Muttonbird 20
    24 January 2025 at 8:50 pm

    I wonder if the Atlas network, overall sponsor of The Treaty Principles Bill, has been asking schoolboy politician, David Seymour, for a please explain how their brainchild has been so destroyed by Maori, and by the both the left and right of New Zealand.

    The demolishing of the Yes vote in Australia was the blueprint of how racist policy should be nursed in colonised countries, so where did it all go so wrong for Seymour and Atlas in NZ?

  21. Muttonbird 21
    24 January 2025 at 8:55 pm

    NZ's economy took 'developed world's biggest hit'

    New Zealand's economy suffered the biggest hit in the world in 2024, HSBC says.

    I wonder who was in charge in 2024?

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/539891/nz-s-economy-took-developed-world-s-biggest-hit

  22. SPC 22
    24 January 2025 at 9:42 pm

    Seymour describes ACT as change makers and others as the "mediocrity"

    Speaking to party faithful today, Seymour also painted a picture of what he believed was the country's social divide, describing a battle between what he called "change makers" and those seeking what he termed a "majority for mediocrity".

    He re-writes history using the term hollow men as the political opposition rather than those to the right of John Key who wanted more extreme policies (ACT change makers).

    Note the slanders he resorts to describe critics of ACT.

    shoplifters, conspiracy theorists, and hollow men who make up the political opposition

    Hilariously he says that the emigration to Oz, caused by economic failure (western worlds worst performing government), is itself of some conspiracy.

    "New Zealanders who leave for Australia are tipping us towards a majority for mediocrity.

    "A few more good people leaving is all they need for their majority of mediocrity. The more that aspirational, hardworking people get up and leave New Zealand, the more likely it is we’ll get left-wing governments in the future."

    Polls show people are not confident about the direction the country is in. By the end of 2024 the numbers leaving were more than year earlier.

    A MW increase below half the level of the rent increase. The government has signalled it is not going to match the wages across the Tasman, and seem intent on them falling further behind.

    There will never be a majority for ACT led change because it is not intended to benefit one, but only a few.

    https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/01/24/seymour-pushes-for-privatisation-govt-hopeless-at-owning-things/

    • Populuxe 22.1
      25 January 2025 at 12:00 pm

      Not sure how calling the majority of the electorate "mediocre" is supposed to get him votes, but it's at least a realistic view of how many people hate ACT I suppose.