Open mike 27/09/2020

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, September 27th, 2020 - 109 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 …

109 comments on “Open mike 27/09/2020 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Patricia Bremner 1
    27 September 2020 at 8:57 am

    Thank goodness for online grocery shopping. It means we can stay in the warm, and we will let the delivery person know how grateful we are not to have to venture out into this weather at age 79.

  2. PsyclingLeft.Always 2
    27 September 2020 at 9:16 am

    Even after 10 Years…

    'Young said despite his hopes, even over the past year, not much had changed.

    "Unfortunately, there's no evidence of a real improvement.

    "There's no evidence of going backwards either.

    "We know there's been increasing recognition of the concerns with fresh water systems over the last 10 years or so, and there is a lot of action going on.

    "But there's no evidence of an improvement yet, so that suggests more effort and more time required to make those benefits show up."

    He said it could take some years if not decades before improvements would be seen.'

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/427008/water-quality-of-rivers-and-streams-not-improving-study-shows

    Just shows…dont let the nats back…even any fake blue/green ones. Jacquie Dean….

    Anyway let their own words speak :

    “They’re gone by lunchtime,” the party’s agriculture spokesman David Bennett said in a Facebook Live last night, talking about the water policy.

    His leader, Judith Collins, was critical of what she saw as bureaucrats in Wellington making all the rules when it comes to farmers, particularly in Southland.

    She was sick of these people “bossing everyone else around”.

    “We should just boss out those regulations.”

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12359810

    (And yes I do note Urban Streams too…: (

  3. Morrissey 3
    27 September 2020 at 9:35 am

    The Cost of Resistance
    by CHRIS HEDGES, Sept. 22, 2020
    Two of the rebels I admire most, Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks publisher, and Roger Hallam, the co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, are in jail in Britain. That should not be surprising. You can measure the effectiveness of resistance by the fury of the response. Julian courageously exposed the lies, deceit, war crimes and corruption of the ruling imperial elites. Roger has helped organized the largest acts of mass civil disobedience in British history, shutting down parts of London for weeks, in a bid to wrest power from a ruling class that has done nothing, and will do nothing, to halt the climate emergency and our death march to mass extinction.

    The governing elites, when truly threatened, turn the rule of law into farce. Dissent becomes treason. They use the state mechanisms of control – intelligence agencies, police, courts, black propaganda and a compliant press that acts as their echo chamber, along with the jails and prisons, not only to marginalize and isolate rebels, but to
    psychologically and physically destroy them. The list of rebels silenced or killed by ruling elites runs in a direct line from Socrates to the Haitian resistance leader Toussaint L'Ouverture, who led the only successful slave revolt in human history and died in a
    frigid French prison cell of malnutrition and exhaustion, to the imprisonment of the socialist Eugene V. Debs, whose health was also broken in a federal prison. Rebel leaders from the 1960s, including Mumia Abu Jamal, Sundiata Acoli, Kojo Bomani Sababu, Mutulu Shakur and Leonard Peltier, remain, decades later, in U.S. prisons. Muslim activists, including those who led the charity The Holy Land Foundation and Syed Fahad Hashmi, were arrested, often at the request of Israel, after the hysteria following 9/11, and given tawdry show trials. They also remain incarcerated.

    Resistance, genuine resistance, exacts a very, very high price. Those in power drop even the pretense of justice when they face an existential threat. …

    Read more…

    https://scheerpost.com/2020/09/22/chris-hedges-the-cost-of-resistance/

  4. Robert Guyton 4
    27 September 2020 at 9:59 am

    "In fact, the milquetoast offerings of National are a window into their soul – and it is disappointing viewing."

    smiley

  6. Ad 6
    27 September 2020 at 11:13 am

    Really interesting self-acknowledged failure from Green MP jan Logie here on her delegated field of domestic violence:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/300116850/strategy-to-transform-family-violence-written-off-as-too-mori

    If you get to the end, the result sounds depressingly familiar to many of the social welfare policies and stupendously huge budget allocations of this government including benefit levels, child poverty, Oranga Tamariki, and mental health:

    Domestic violence budget line got $320 million in the 2019 budget, and

    $250 million in the COVID19 response.

    That's over half a billion dollars, with no result.

    The biggest attack line Nation should be using against this government is simply this:

    Failure to execute.

    • weka 6.1
      27 September 2020 at 11:44 am

      Not quite. Hard to tell exactly what has happened there until the documents are released, but lots of conflict between the people wanting transformational, the people resisting that, Logie being given the responsibility but not the authority to act and so on. I'll wait until the documents are released and analysed before forming an opinion on whether the plan was unworkable in reality, or was too radical, or a combination of both. Am really curious to see if the plan doesn't work for Pākehā or how it works was missed.

      Reading between the lines, my guess is that Labour will take over the project, water it down and implement something that makes some improvements but fails the agreement of transformation.

      • Ad 6.1.1
        27 September 2020 at 12:49 pm

        It's pretty hard to see a Green MP keeping it that's for sure. Logie was clear that she just didn't have the seniority to effectively push it – a curious admission.

        If the Greens get in and want a serious portfolio outside of plants, they could always propose someone for Minister of Social Welfare, and Minister for Children. Clearly the big program changes and big budget moves need more heft at Cabinet beyond budget allocations.

        Question is, should they be in the position to ask: if it's beyond Jan Logie, who in the Green caucus would want it?

        • weka 6.1.1.1
          27 September 2020 at 1:06 pm

          "Logie was clear that she just didn't have the seniority to effectively push it – a curious admission."

          How so? Wouldn't it have been Ardern who decided that she should be an under secretary and thus have limited authority? And hence the oversight from the Labour and NZF Ministers.

          "Question is, should they be in the position to ask: if it's beyond Jan Logie, who in the Green caucus would want it?"

          I'm not clear yet that it was beyond Logie, as opposed to being a poor set up with substantial conflicts, and then covid.

    • JanM 6.2
      27 September 2020 at 3:34 pm

      Somehow I can sense Winston's sticky little fjngers in this mess

    • Incognito 6.3
      27 September 2020 at 3:47 pm

      That's over half a billion dollars, with no result.

      The biggest attack line Nation should be using against this government is simply this:

      Failure to execute.

      Bugger the attack line. That’s for headline writers in MSM, for the Party spin-doctors, for the National Party’s Meme Working Groups on Facebook, and for lazy commenters on SM who want to score easy points. They don’t do anything to help solve problems. Where’s National’s viable and realistic alternative that has been costed (but not by Paora)? Which party has a compelling policy platform to deliver and do anything better?

      Has that half a billion dollar been all spent? Has it absolutely nothing to show for it? Where has it gone? Should we expect quick and easy solutions?

      The Stuff article is in-depth and nuanced and it goes into much background context. It would be great if the author could follow up with an analysis of National Party policy to tackle family violence in Aotearoa-New Zealand. As far as I can tell, National is framing it as a Law & Order issue and treats it like it treats crime instead of approaching it as a social-cultural issue. They are bloody dinosaurs when it comes to complex social inequalities and inequities. In fact, their outmoded thinking has no place in Government.

      • Ad 6.3.1
        27 September 2020 at 3:53 pm

        Nope. This is where the government is held to account.

        If I wanted to do the National Party social welfare policy, I would. As would Stuff.

        It always amazes me how the tiniest piece of criticism of the Greens requires a wall of self-righteous defence, no matter how irrational.

        It's an election: that time where you evaluate performance, to help figure out if parties are worth another go or not.

        Whereas Labour and NZF Ministers take it on the chin. They reform, or they get fired, or they get their funding taken. Even Shane Jones figured that out.

        Seriously if the Greens can't figure out how to get critiqued and improve, and on as easy a topic as domestic violence, rather than ranting with rhetorical questions and doing another turn of Whataboutthemism, then maybe politics just isn't for them.

        • Incognito 6.3.1.1
          27 September 2020 at 4:26 pm

          Bollocks!

          Referring to the “biggest attack line Nation [sic] should be using against this government” is engaging in attack and negative antagonistic opposition, not holding the Government to account. Personally, I think this is mind-numbingly stupid 🙁

          In an election campaign, Parties present their policies and engage in a contest of ideas. If you want to suggest an attack line to and for National to attack this Coalition Government with then you should at least mention the other side of the coin too.

          It's an election: that time where you evaluate performance, to help figure out if parties are worth another go or not.

          There you go. If they (as in Labour, NZF, and the Greens) are not worth another go then we need to look at and know Plan B, don’t we? This is not holding the Government to account but really about making choices (i.e. electing) for the next one.

          If you insist on framing this as a criticism of the Greens per se then knock yourself out with that. I did not take it as such from the Stuff article nor from your comment @ 6 and to me it comes across as unnecessary needling of Green Party supporters on this site but hey, whatever floats your boat 🙂 However, if you think my comment @ 6.3 was intended as a defence of the Greens, in general or against you, then you need to take remedial reading lessons ASAP.

          I hope you’re enjoying watching the MMA.

      • sumsuch 6.3.2
        27 September 2020 at 11:00 pm

        I rather liked the National leader's attack on Jacinda about looking out for the poorest. Though she should have out-skirted her. Anyone who thinks on the social democratic side despise this govt for talking but not doing for the neediest.

    • Treetop 6.4
      27 September 2020 at 4:09 pm

      Domestic/family violence, ACC settlement compensation for sexual assaults, settlement compensation of abuse (sexual, physical and psychological) in state or religious faith based care, this is all a priority. The cost is enormous and a timely response is required so as to not re abuse the claimant.

      Housing to go to and be safe is imited, so is no cost counselling and addiction services and legal services may also be required. Clients accessing a service or several services, advocates who know what they are doing are required.

      Children who are exposed to poverty and any form of abuse and violence also require the appropriate intervention, care or service.

      Those already in the system, the system is failing many.

  7. ianmac 7
    27 September 2020 at 11:57 am

    Watched the Q&A this morning. What a pity Jack didn't get to be the one to ask his quality questions in the Leaders Debate.

    Focussed questions versus Woolley questions.

    • Dennis Frank 7.1
      27 September 2020 at 12:15 pm

      He seems to have developed an aversion to bland: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=12368210

      National had been trying to push a more gentle side to Collins. They know they can't out-kindness Labour's Jacinda Ardern, but they thought a few soft Labour voters could be tempted back to supporting National if Collins could only smooth off some of those sharp corners.

      I think Collins scrapped that strategy about 7.36pm on Tuesday evening. Throughout the debate, she steadily brought back the snark. She had the Muldoon grin going and was peacocking in the post-debate interviews.

      He captured the left/right banality thing nicely in a couple of sentences:

      There was no blue sky thinking. The debate perfectly exposed Labour and National's total lack of courageous policy when it comes to addressing some of our biggest issues.

      • solkta 7.1.1
        27 September 2020 at 12:24 pm

        The Centre doesn't have courageous policy either. There is some courageous policy on the left though.

  8. Dennis Frank 8
    27 September 2020 at 12:42 pm

    Had a skype with an old female friend this morning, sharing views on other old friends who succumbed to new-age mystique in the '90s and are now hooked on conspiracy theories. We both declared that we'd do a covid vaccine, which puts us in the largest population category – but still a minority: https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/most-kiwis-would-likely-get-covid-19-vaccine-if-one-becomes-available-1-news-poll

    So 44% definitely would, plus 32% likely makes three-quarters of the nation willing to sacrifice themselves as guinea pigs in the cause of science & public health.

    Definitely not comes in at 10%, but with another 11% unlikely, we have one person in five willing to gamble on nature alone.

    • greywarshark 8.1
      27 September 2020 at 2:01 pm

      Nature? Everything with humans is perception – the prejudiced's 'idea' of nature is what they pay attention to plus their idea of them being exceptional and anyone who disagrees is part of a giant conspiracy against the 'sensitives' or'more informed'.

    • Chris T 8.2
      27 September 2020 at 3:50 pm

      Personally have no problem taking a vaccination for it, but would quietly prefer if it was a year or two after released for other people, given how fast it will hopefully come through compared to other medicinal.

      Just so I can see if people taking it start growing an extra arm, having fits, or their bits fall off etc (joke, but would prefer a larger testing sample)

    • McFlock 8.3
      27 September 2020 at 5:21 pm

      sacrifice themselves as guinea pigs in the cause of science & public health.

      Nope. The people who do that are the ones who participate in the clinical trials. Getting a vaccine post-trial is lower-risk than waiting to catch the disease.

  9. Robert Guyton 9
    27 September 2020 at 12:59 pm

    "Because National listens to laggards not leaders, it is setting itself up for a mighty fall."

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/rod-oram-why-national-is-no-longer-the-party-of-business

    • Uncle Scrim 9.1
      27 September 2020 at 1:26 pm

      That is an excellent article. Collins claiming to speak on behalf of 'farmers' is just not true. Federated Farmers are a lobby group but Fonterra and all those other companies are the business leaders in rural NZ, and they are looking forward not back.

      • bwaghorn 9.1.1
        27 September 2020 at 3:15 pm

        Yip if your the ag minister forget about the fed farmers, talk to the CEOs of Fonterra ,Silver fern farms and alliance,they have the power to drive change., probably wasting your time with the talley owned affco though.

    • ianmac 9.2
      27 September 2020 at 1:53 pm

      Well spotted Robert. Thanks. If only some of the non-laggard could get a platform to explain their forward momentum. As for the destructive Collins and Federated Farmers, expose the blighters!

      • Uncle Scrim 9.2.1
        27 September 2020 at 3:28 pm

        This article shows a similar approach – even Barfoot & Thompson realise healthy homes are a good thing:

        Group letter on healthy homes

        As with farming and water standards, it shows the difference between working with business who want to move forward and pandering to backward-looking, loud lobby groups, whether fringe farmers or bad landlords.

    • weka 10.1
      27 September 2020 at 1:31 pm

      how so?

      • Incognito 10.1.1
        27 September 2020 at 2:06 pm

        If you read the article, it is very clear that changes implemented now can have a huge lag in their impact, i.e. improving water quality. Similarly, much crap, literally, is working its way through the ecosystem, which means we could see things actually getting worse, because of past polluting behaviours, despite our (best?) efforts at present. This is a problem with setting policy and selling it to stakeholders and the general public in order to get it initiated and actioned but then to keep following up and persevering over a prolonged period of time. The further out the ‘reward’ the less one can rely on the ‘instant gratification’ mechanism of people to comply. If this is not acknowledged and communicated clearly and properly from the outset then these policies will lack the required resilience to be sustainable in the long-term and they end up being ineffective. A further consequence is that they could end up being counter-productive because they could (be used to) turn public and political ‘sentiment’ against future efforts to make meaningful changes. It is the proverbial one-step-forward-two-steps-backward scenario.

        • Draco T Bastard 10.1.1.1
          27 September 2020 at 2:41 pm

          If this is not acknowledged and communicated clearly and properly from the outset then these policies will lack the required resilience to be sustainable in the long-term and they end up being ineffective.

          Quite specifically, we'd have National get in power, point to reports like this, say that its not working and drop them all. And thing's would just get worse.

          • Incognito 10.1.1.1.1
            27 September 2020 at 2:55 pm

            Quite specifically, we’d have National get in power, point to reports like this, say that its not working and drop them all. And thing’s would just get worse. [my italics]

            Exactly!

    • Stuart Munro 10.2
      27 September 2020 at 1:35 pm

      We watched these rivers being degraded in our lifetimes, and it is reasonable to expect that they be restored within the same period, however inconvenient that might be for politicians who prefer not to act meaningfully, if they must act at all. If we wait, and let these lazy troughers get away with doing nothing, nothing is all we will have to show for it. One would expect that significant risks to ecosystem health would stimulate prudent and timely responses. Experience teaches us otherwise.

      • greywarshark 10.2.1
        27 September 2020 at 1:54 pm

        Stuart M +100

      • McFlock 10.2.2
        27 September 2020 at 5:25 pm

        Entropy. It's easier to destroy things than rebuild them.

        • Stuart Munro 10.2.2.1
          27 September 2020 at 5:42 pm

          It's often only a matter of a bit of planting and some aeration to speed up breakdown of organics and prevent rivers going anaerobic.

          We are headed for a collision with the consequences of our environmental delinquency – and to avoid collisions you take early and substantial action. Does “hard and early” ring a bell?

          We don't have time to 'fluff' about, the kinds of change that made Oz's fire season are still rolling along. Likely we'll need to make substantial changes to farming, fishing, and water supply, with a sporting chance of needing to accommodate or support Pacific climate refugees in place.

          This is not the time to go demonstrating the fungibility of neolib 'policy' in hopes of a few donations.

          • McFlock 10.2.2.1.1
            27 September 2020 at 6:19 pm

            I'm no expert in water ecology, but I'm not sure an ideal pandemic response would be an ideal response to every dire situation we face.

            • Stuart Munro 10.2.2.1.1.1
              27 September 2020 at 7:22 pm

              Early & substantial action is from navigation – but the parallel holds. If an intervention is warranted, it is more effective to intervene earlier rather than later. Same holds with ecology – the best time to plant trees was ten years ago – now is only second best.

              Frittering away our time with bullshit gameplaying is a luxury more suited to the halcyon days before the anthropocene got the bit between its teeth. When Parker set a nitrate level eight times higher than China's, he should have accompanied it with his resignation – since he had decided not to do his job.

              • McFlock …
                27 September 2020 at 7:31 pm

                Except if there's a delayed response between input and measurement, you end up "chasing the gauges" (a flight control term), overcorrecting each time, and pile into the ground.

                Not to mention the fact that no policy should be considered in isolation. That's why the government had a good covid response, but didn't follow every single MoH recommendation to the letter.

                I mean, we could just shoot hundreds of thousands of cows to help solve the problem, but that would have unexpected [figurative] downstream effects on society in the regions.

                • Stuart Munro …
                  27 September 2020 at 7:38 pm

                  Well there's certainly no danger of an overshoot at the levels Parker set. Cancer, and infant deaths maybe, but no overreaction.

                  We are so privileged to live under a government so backward it promises generational change so slow it cannot even be measured. At which point there is no reason to assume that there is any change contemplated at all – which would be par for the course from these career neolibs.

                  I don’t think anyone was calling for mass culling of cattle – though moving some to other catchments might be appropriate if they blow nitrate levels out – bit of a straw man really.

                  Perhaps we can worry about over correction somewhat after there is evidence that there has been any correction at all.

                  • McFlock …
                    27 September 2020 at 7:47 pm

                    So go hard, but not that hard, huh?

                    You know what? We are privileged/lucky to have this government. Look around the world. Yes, things need improving, in so many areas. But by and large this government is doing pretty bloody well. I'm not going to gnash my teeth and demand resignations just because I think I could run things better.

                    • Stuart Munro …
                      27 September 2020 at 8:09 pm

                      They are not doing well on freshwater – or Mike Joy & Dr Death wouldn't be condemning their actions.

                      They have done well on Covid, but there are a lot of other issues. This is one that they have handled particularly badly, and polling has consistently shown rivers to be the public's leading environmental concern.

                      They need to be reminded of this by ordinary members of the public, because the current opposition is not fit for the purpose.

                      demand resignations just because I think I could run things better

                      Setting nitrate levels eight times higher than the WHO recommendations doesn't seem prudent to me. And I suspect Parker is not sufficiently expert to rebut them on any objective grounds.

                    • McFlock …
                      27 September 2020 at 9:56 pm

                      "Ordinary members of the public" do not look up WHO nitrate recommendations.

          • Incognito 10.2.2.1.2
            27 September 2020 at 9:08 pm

            I think that nobody really knew what ‘hard and early’ meant in reality but people dropping like flies in Lombardy and Wuhan was a good incentive to doing something. That sense of immediacy is missing from water quality or anything environmental for that matter with the possible exception of the measures to prevent the spreading of Kauri disease.

            • Stuart Munro 10.2.2.1.2.1
              27 September 2020 at 9:54 pm

              It's a general principle for some kinds of response, but of course the unique circumstances of each required intervention are very different. I imagine historians of futurity, if we have one, will have a task explaining to students quite how difficult it was to make such a decision over Covid, with political consequences on one side, and public health on the other, even with the relatively abundant examples (compared to those other countries had when they were forced to choose) at our disposal.

              There have been a number of expositions of NZ's level process, and the clarity it generated for the public, when health services were, behind the scenes, in a state of flux as they conformed to meet a threat for which they had few treatment options. The verdict has been very positive, with minor errors like the stance on masking, and some frankly odd attitudes among testing authorities noted, but not diluting the overall positive perception and the compliance it generated contributing to the strong result.

              A hard and early response to water quality would mean different things in different catchments, with restrictions likely in oversubscribed and rapidly nitrifying areas like south Canterbury. But it need not be introduced in a draconian fashion, it can be phased in over a reasonable period as it is expected is happening with emissions, allowing farmers time to weigh mitigation options, or possibly limit some types of intensification on a regional or catchment basis.

              What it should not have done was to allow lobbying to get across the objective part of regulations – the nitrate levels, because these are set on a physiological basis, and, like any other physical constants, they do not make allowances for the human capacity for self or habitat destruction.

              Think of nitrogen in a river like it's alcohol in our bloodstream. Setting a nitrogen limit at the toxicity level is like setting the drink-driving limit at the toxicity level. You're not dealing with all the bad things that happen before you've been poisoned.

              As has been noted elsewhere, the standard broadly adopted internationally, 1mg/l, will become a customer expectation, and willing or not, NZ farmers will be obliged to meet it, or suffer a price and a reputational loss in the market.

              Better then to lay that out clearly at the beginning, and put efforts into supporting the transition, than to prop up a poor standard that will ultimately need to be revised, but will still incur the price and reputational and ecological and public health cost.

              • Incognito …
                27 September 2020 at 10:17 pm

                I agree with all that. My point is that for many (but not all!) people there’s no greater motivator than death knocking on your door at any moment. People are also scared shitless of stuff they don’t understand such as a killer virus, just think of the many Hollywood movies featuring runaway viruses and diseases decimating the human population and turning survivors into monstrous zombies. Turds floating in rivers or streams just don’t have the same impact on people’s minds and behaviours.

  11. Andre 11
    27 September 2020 at 1:31 pm

    The idea of Covid testing before getting on a flight has often been suggested as a means of improving border control. Dubai in the UAE already requires it. One of our latest cases detected in managed isolation had transited through Dubai, so would have required a clean test before being allowed on that flight.

    Which illustrates the point: pre-flight screening would do nothing to change what needs to be done on the ground here, and just adds another layer of complexity and expense to the whole border control situation.

    One person arrived on a flight from Germany on 21 September via the United Arab Emirates and Malaysia.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12368265

    Test requirements for Dubai:

    Before you travel

    Take a COVID-19 PCR test:

    • All passengers travelling to Dubai from any destination, including passengers connecting in Dubai, must have a printed negative COVID-19 PCR test certificate to be accepted on the flight.
    • The test must be taken a maximum of 96 hours before departure.
    • The certificate must be for a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Other test certificates including antibody tests and home testing kits are not accepted in Dubai.
    • Bring an official, printed certificate to check-in – SMS and digital certificates are not accepted. Without a printed negative test certificate, you will not be accepted on the flight.

    https://www.emirates.com/english/help/covid-19/dubai-travel-requirements/tourists/

    • Draco T Bastard 11.1
      27 September 2020 at 2:38 pm

      Yes, but extra the testing probably isn't there to protect the people but as another form of profit making. Because you can be sure that it will be private enterprise that's doing it and, if National get in and puts in place legislation requiring such testing before coming to NZ then you can be sure that they will require testing on the way out and they will have private enterprise doing it.

      Its the same for many uneconomic actions that exist in society. They produce more profit and more jobs and so getting rid of them then becomes impracticable, as far as the capitalists and government are concerned, to remove them.

    • greywarshark 11.2
      27 September 2020 at 2:47 pm

      I question Malaysia as having good controls generally. Anyone know enough to rate them?

    • Gabby 11.3
      27 September 2020 at 3:48 pm

      And how long before a negative certificate printing industry springs up to cater for the businessperson in a hurry.

      • Draco T Bastard 11.3.1
        27 September 2020 at 4:40 pm

        Probably already exists. After all, even laser printers are cheap these days and its not as if such a business would need a commercial grade printer capable of printing hundreds of thousands a day.

        As I say above, such requirements are there just for the profit opportunities that it generates.

  12. Anker 12
    27 September 2020 at 2:51 pm
    • Family member travelling back from UK soon. She is required to take a test 3 days prior to departure she’s flying Etihad. She quite worried about being able to get the test done and completed on time as UK cases surge. Adding a lot of stress for her as she tried to get home in March and flight canceled. She is unwell so not at all easy.
    • I understand the rationale for the pre flight tests and it may help passengers like who stay safe, but as we all know it’s no guarantee passengers are covid free.
  13. georgecom 13
    27 September 2020 at 3:33 pm

    good to see the likes of the conservative party and regress NZ party showing up in polls. want to see them get another 2 or 3 % of votes yet. that way when combined with TOP and NZF it will guarantee a Labour lead govt even if the greens don't make it in. I wonder if conservative voters realise that as things stand every 1 out of 2 conservative votes will go to Labour

    • Ad 13.1
      27 September 2020 at 3:56 pm

      All those split+redistributed votes give me a warm feeling all over.

      • woodart 13.1.1
        27 September 2020 at 4:10 pm

        apparentley not all is well in the conspiracy party (advance,nzpp). many of their members and candidates are walking away in disgust. splitters! hah!so the judean peoples front and the peoples front of judeah cant agree. , many of the tin hit brigade are yet again, wandering in the wilderness, looking for another conspiracy.

        • Robert Guyton 13.1.1.1
          27 September 2020 at 4:49 pm

          Will Billy's nose-pokey-outey refusal to mask-up properly on board Flight 666 to Nowhere endear him to his flock of flockers, or will they see through his charade and shift their voting preference to the Eminently More Sensible "New Conservatives"???

          • woodart 13.1.1.1.1
            27 September 2020 at 6:56 pm

            think some will follow brian,sorry, billy all the way down the rabid hole, some will drift off to new cons, some to maori party, most will probably not vote cause its just a government plot to harvest and store their dna!

  14. Pete 14
    27 September 2020 at 4:37 pm

    Hate speech. Labors new law they'd propose to govern hate speech. Where can i find info on exactly what it will be that the labor government might propose?. This proposal is a bit worrying, i feel. Will freedom of speech be soon to be deemed to be hate speech. Will it?. How will labor intend to decide?. Will it be soon to become hate speech for Dennis Gates to be saying what he does in this following article https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/09/top-lawyer-compares-gloriavale-s-leadership-to-islamic-state.html

    I'm certainly interested to see some sort of rock solid detail before i make my decision up on who i'd vote for.

    • Draco T Bastard 14.1
      27 September 2020 at 4:46 pm

      Will freedom of speech be soon to be deemed to be hate speech.

      Freedom of speech should not be carte blanche to say anything you please. There are limits.

      Will it be soon to become hate speech for Dennis Gates to be saying what he does in this following article

      Probably not.

      • Pete 14.1.1
        27 September 2020 at 8:34 pm

        Yeah i agree that certain limits should apply. But how would we decide what limits would allow. And who would decide. And how can we make sure that these limits wouldn't suppress discussion what should need to take place, even if somebody might interpret this discussion as being hateful. The way like what i suspect that some gloriavale citizen might interpret Dennis Gates opinion to be. I hope that labor government might enter into discussion about this subject more before final date of election. Citizen should have a right to know. Hopefully the other parties might begin to push labor into discussing this matter more

        • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1.1
          27 September 2020 at 10:10 pm

          And how can we make sure that these limits wouldn't suppress discussion what should need to take place, even if somebody might interpret this discussion as being hateful.

          Ask a linguist or three?

          The way like what i suspect that some gloriavale citizen might interpret Dennis Gates opinion to be.

          I figure that he's pointing out similarities and if they don't like that then their only option is to become better.

          But the most important point is that he's not actually stirring up hatred against them.

    • Robert Guyton 14.2
      27 September 2020 at 4:51 pm

      Yeah. Hate speech. We should be free to spout hate, whenever, wherever. I too am concerned that Big Government is anti-hate! Give hate a chance, I say! #sarc

      • Pete 14.2.1
        27 September 2020 at 8:25 pm

        Sarc can have its place. But hey, its a reasonable question to think about. At what point should freedom of speech be deemed to be hate speech. How would you decide. And who should be the one who'd get to decide. Can you actually provide an answer to those question?. Or is sarc about all you'd be able to come up with. I'd love to see you answer

      • Pete 14.3.1
        27 September 2020 at 8:46 pm

        That's interesting Incognito. I'm fairly certain i saw Jacinda promising that she would intend to strengthen hate speech law if Labor government is re-elected . I'm not exactly sure what she had meant by this. Perhaps it might just be to strengthen law against inciting hate speech what could lead to acts of violence. Which i feel would be fair enough. But exactly what her intention would be, i really don't know

        • PaddyOT 14.3.1.1
          27 September 2020 at 9:03 pm

          Is there deliberate creation of confusion and misinformation employed when using terms like 'hate speech' to create an assumption that freedom of speech under the Bill of Rights is being taken away?

          It's election time and a newer 'falsehood' is thrown out there fuelled by Seymour.

          There is NO current new law Labour is passing. Since 2019 a review has been underway, scheduled since 2018. There is an outdated set of laws needing inspection and people's rights to be safe need strengthening.

          The Justice Ministry has looked at relevant aspects of laws that already exist – the Human Rights Act, the Harmful Digital Communications Act, and sections of the Crimes Act to see what laws may need to be changed or added. A REVIEW by the Human Rights has been underway, including Section61 constructed some years back to see if it is fit for purpose; particularly needed with the fast paced development of social media and the current section61 not protecting all people.

          Seymour last Friday, took words from Jacinda's mouth, invented a sinister twist omitting any fuller information on the day. Jacinda was unveiling the plaque at the mosque on Friday. It wasn't coincidental timing, there is no " hate speech" NEW law per say. Seymour was playing to ignorance of the existing laws and unfounded fears.

          " By law in the Bill of Rights Act, everyone in New Zealand has the right to freedom of expression, including the "freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form".

          IMO Seymour is rallying to a hard core of haters having choosen that day specifically as JA spent time with Muslim victims. The timing of Seymour's rant was despicable as he drew the media and public attention away from NZers and the Muslim community commemorating victims of a massacre.

          What the public are now led to assume in advance of an election from Seymour's release is that your freedoms are being denied. The exact fear effect ACT was hoping to instil has been uptaken. MSM happily disseminated this also in a shallow, click bait way.

          " Existing law makes no explicit reference to hate speech, but under Section 61 of the Human Rights Act, it’s unlawful to broadcast, publish or distribute material that is “threatening, abusive or insulting” and “likely to excite hostility against, or bring into contempt, any group of persons in New Zealand on the ground of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins”. The Christchurch shooter under this law could arguably say what he liked about "Islam" or gays, or any disabled person he likes in any manner.

          Under current law, unjustly so, there are vulnerable groups NOT protected. What was being reviewed as mentioned by Jacinda was that the current law does NOT give protection from hate that incites 'hostility' towards people in categories of gender identity, sexual orientation, religion or disability.

          The Human Rights Commission review was, as mentioned, not only to look at lack of all vulnerable person's protections but to see if that older law needed changes to encompass modern developments.

          The HR review tribunal consultations etc. were put on hold with Covid19 's emergence; Andrew Little believes those findings when completed should be dealt with post election as an issue for the new parliament. Rightly so.

          Facebook's stance had rules updated in 2018, New Zealand has not updated with the times.

          " Facebook, which recently adopted stricter controls on what users can post online, uses more specific criteria. Its policy targets direct attacks on people’s “protected characteristics” such as race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, serious disability or disease."

          Janet Anderson-Bidois, the HR commission’s chief legal adviser has talked of the confusion of people around issues , confusing hate speech with hate crime and freedom of expression just as Seymour has done with his deliberate misinformation mash up.

          "Anderson-Bidois insists that the commission isn’t bent on rewriting the laws governing hate speech. All it’s doing, she says, is suggesting they should be reviewed to ensure they’re still “fit for purpose" …

          "New Zealand has become culturally far more diverse since the Human Rights Act was passed and the internet was then still in its infancy. Anomalies have arisen, she says."

          "Of course freedom of speech comes into it, “but with rights come responsibilities. People also have a right to be safe. "

          A person's right to exercising free speech, even if extremely offensive, is still upheld by NZ law. An example of this was the Human Rights Commission not ruling in favour of Louisa Wall's case she brought over racist cartoons published by Fairfax. In other words the cartoonist's right to freedom of expression were upheld not Wall's feelings of taking offence.

          Unlike Seymour's supposition on his FB page, ideas can still be freely attacked and even offensive opinion expressed.

          The HRC review will also hopefully bring clarity in helping " to distinguish attacks on people from attacks on ideas and beliefs?"

          In 2018 Labour’s Duncan Webb, who was a lawyer and legal academic before entering Parliament, "
          says he’s acutely aware of the tension between freedom of expression and hate speech, but he doesn’t think the free-speech defence can be applied in cases where speech is calculated to injure or terrorise people."…
          " But there’s a real danger of confusing honestly held opinion with attacks on people, and by lumping it all into this category of hate speech they conflate targeted speech, aimed at destroying or bullying people, with honest expression of opinion.”

          There is a scenario to help illustrate when a line is crossed, the difference between hate speech and free speech in the Listener at the time of Lauren Southern's and Stefan Molyneux's NZ visit.

          " Wellington business consultant Dave Moskovitz brought a touch of levity to the proceedings, describing himself as a “walking bullseye” for purveyors of hate speech: “middle aged, Pākehā, cis, hetero, male, geek, property owner, investor, company director, immigrant, American, religious, Jew, and – wait for it – Zionist”.

          But the tone turned serious when Moskovitz told of a New Zealand white nationalist blogger who published an online guide to “Zionists in your neighbourhood” and included a photo of Moskovitz’s house. The blogger went on to say that Jews were a slap in the face to the human race and were not welcome in this country.

          Moskovitz said the same man later said in a newspaper interview that Jews should have been exterminated – “and that’s where the line was crossed. Saying you do not like a group of people, while repugnant, is exercising free speech. Implying that they should all have been killed is quite another thing. That borders on incitement.”

          https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/currently-social-issues/free-speech-hate-speech-where-should-we-draw-line

          https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12367481

          Currently the hate speech laws in New Zealand make it illegal to "excite hostility against or bring into contempt any group of persons … on the ground of the colour, race, or ethnic or national origins".

          But that protection doesn't extend to gender identity, sexual orientation, religion or disability.

          "I think everyone would agree no one should be discriminated against for their religion," Ardern said.

          https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/121922974/hate-speech-law-stalled-until-after-election–no-support-yet-from-nz-first

  15. Dennis Frank 15
    27 September 2020 at 4:53 pm

    House shook @ 4.50pm – quakes in New Plymouth are rare. Wonder how soon it'll show up here: https://earthquaketrack.com/p/new-zealand/recent

  16. Andre 16
    27 September 2020 at 5:37 pm

    Ooooh, give him a few favourable polls and Rimmer starts getting all coq-y. He better be careful. If he gets too mouthy, that cuppa tea in Remmers might not happen next time he needs it.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300117874/election-2020-david-seymour-tells-voters-to-skip-the-knockoff-cover-band-and-choose-act-over-national

    • Draco T Bastard 16.1
      27 September 2020 at 6:07 pm

      Wonder if we should inform him that ACT was originally Labour.

    • woodart 16.2
      27 September 2020 at 7:21 pm

      Im really looking forward to the new parliament. with act's very chequered history of having m.p.s resign in disgrace, not resigning but staying in disgrace, commiting fraud, going to jail etc, as well as having general sc*mbags as m.p.s. seymour will be busy holding hands, putting ot fires, etc. wonder who the first act m.p. will be that carries on this proud tradition.

    • Pat 17.1
      27 September 2020 at 7:12 pm

      "Alongside National, the poll's other casualty is New Zealand First. It's on 1.9 percent down 0.1 points. Despite leader Winston Peters' best attention grabs, NZ First is goneburger."

      Tempting fate?

  18. observer 18
    27 September 2020 at 6:26 pm

    Always revealing to see the difference between hype and reality.

    "Advance", the anti-lockdown mob. No support whatsoever. Maybe their rants shouldn't be headline news, given they represent fewer people than the NZ underwater hockey community.

  20. PsyclingLeft.Always 20
    27 September 2020 at 6:58 pm

    "Immigration New Zealand says three German yachties treated New Zealand's Covid 19 laws with contempt and have to face the consequences of their actions."

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/427031/german-yachties-had-blatant-disregard-for-new-zealand-law-immigration-nz

    Certainly

    • Andre 20.1
      27 September 2020 at 7:11 pm

      I don't get it with these claims that the cyclone season is such a hazard to be feared. It appears that even during an El Nino season, Tahiti and northwest from there are very low risk, possibly lower risk than New Zealand.

      https://www.bwsailing.com/cyclones-in-french-polynesia/

      For the coming summer, it appears most likely that it will be La Nina or slightly less likely neutral, with only a very low probability of El Nino conditions.

      https://public.wmo.int/en/our-mandate/climate/el-ni%C3%B1ola-ni%C3%B1a-update

      • weka 20.1.1
        27 September 2020 at 7:46 pm

        were they sailing from Tahiti?

      • Koff 20.1.2
        27 September 2020 at 8:15 pm

        Dead right. There are normally plenty of E.U. yachts that spend the summer cyclone season in French Polynesia on the way west and many that are based there for years. In a La Nina, French Poly is probably safer than NZ as cyclones are more common further west and with climate change more are spinning off down NZs way. I think the yachtie outrage thing is overblown MSM nonsense and most yachties originally intending to keep going will just spend a lovely time floating around in the tropics instead. The MoH has made the right decision to exclude non NZ yachts. If they can be allowed to get in, what about the rest of the Pacific islands? Living in a home built vale is not much fun with a cyclone bearing down!

  22. Ad 22
    27 September 2020 at 8:29 pm

    OK this is the kind of thing I just love discovering.

    A New Zealand company, based in Christchurch, is now one of four global partners to Microsoft about water quality and conservation.

    https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU2009/S00473/seequent-and-microsoft-partner-in-global-water-sustainability-commitments.htm

    CEO Shaun Maloney says Seequent’s software solutions are being used on hundreds of projects around the world to enable a clear view of groundwater and contaminants. “Users such as the Water Replenishment District, the largest groundwater agency in the state of California, can readily communicate to end clients, regulators, and the general public with 3D models of groundwater systems and contaminated sites in a fully auditable data-driven approach across the entire lifecycle of site management."

    Sure hope NZTE is finding ways to support these guys.

  23. NZJester 23
    27 September 2020 at 9:59 pm

    Nice little news piece linked on MSN

    “Why National is no longer the party of business”

    by Rod Oram

    The National Part’s agricultural policy will pacify the angriest of Federated Farmers’ members who believe townies and the Labour-led government are trying to drive them out of business. Or to”oblivion,” as Judith Collins, party leader, said as she launched the policy on the campaign trail on Thursday.

    But the policy will dismay any farmer, processor or marketer who knows what’s going on out in the real world where our food is sold. Out there, the best of our competitors are working hard and fast to make farming and food deeply sustainable. They are intently focused on revolutionising their businesses to meet the demands of consumers and the environment.

    But all National knows is how to cut regulations. So if a National-led government simply fiddled with farming, our competitors would delight in telling their customers, from individuals to huge supermarket chains, how superior their practices and products were to ours.

    https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/why-national-is-no-longer-the-party-of-business/ar-BB19scRQ?li=BBqdg4K

    This story is a good read and I love the quote of “National listens to laggards not leaders” in the story.

  24. greywarshark 24
    27 September 2020 at 10:03 pm

    Surely not. Undercut by foreign imports on this?

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/427029/thai-cannabis-company-says-projected-economic-benefits-won-t-materialise

    Plamondon expected laws drafted in anticipation of recreational cannabis being legal would eventually change to allow cheaper, imported products.

    He said New Zealand was his company’s first export target market…
    A Nelson-based medical cannabis firm, Medical Kiwi has already sold its first two years of production to Hektares, a global player in the medical cannabis industry, equating to $30 million for 2021, and $60 million in 2022.

    It recently launched a crowdfunding campaign to raise $2 million to get production underway in Christchurch and help fund its Nelson development and technology purchases.

    Co-founder and chair, Aldo Miccio, said Plamondon’s statement was interesting, especially around Thai product being potentially a tenth of the cost of New Zealand cannabis.

    “There are reasonably good margins involved – which is why a lot of people are investing, but we aim with our pricing to be way cheaper than products imported at the moment.”

    Miccio said cannabis grown outdoors, such as that at grown at tropical altitudes in Thailand was certainly cheaper to produce, but only indoor-grown product would pass the scrutiny of pharmaceutical standards.