Open mike 29/02/2024

23 comments on “Open mike 29/02/2024 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. newsense 1

   29 February 2024 at 7:37 am

   Innovate or die, said Christopher to the newsrooms. As I did as head of a state-guaranteed monopoly!
2. newsense 2

   29 February 2024 at 7:41 am

   And there’s also a kind of aluminum smeltery taste in the air…
   • Peter 2.1

     29 February 2024 at 7:47 am

     We didn’t want independent news until we needed independent news.

     Sort of reminds me of us not needing control of our own fuel supplies.
3. Sanctuary 3

   29 February 2024 at 7:55 am

   It is always sad when people lose their jobs. But some of the exceptionalist wallowing in self-pity coming from our shocked middle class media commentariat at the demise of TV3 is a bit much.

   You know, on December 21st, just four days before Xmas, 1000 – mostly low paid, migrant visa and Filipino – construction workers got laid off by ELE group. Not with three months notice. Straight away. The story lasted in the MSM for about two days, mostly in the business section where it was covered mainly through the lens of a commentary on the state of the economy.

   The disparity of coverage between that and a bunch of middle class workers losing their jobs tells us a lot about the nature of the MSM and should provide a few clues as to why it is increasingly seen as irrelevant to the lived experience of most of the public.
   • Tiger Mountain 3.1

     29 February 2024 at 9:03 am

     Fair comment Sanctuary.
     • weka 3.1.1

       29 February 2024 at 12:18 pm

       agree.

       We need more writers at TS covering this kind of thing.
   • SPC 3.2

     29 February 2024 at 9:26 am

     It's not a great example – are they really our working class?

     The real story there was more an example of pandering to business that finds such an expendable migrant labour workforce more convenient than training up locals/apprenticeships.

     The claim of a desperate need for new workers and then some get laid off and others have no jobs to go to simply because of a downturn in the local market (given tightening market conditions this was entirely predictable) has always been risible.

     We need to tighten up migrant labour use to increase local wages – so we do not lose workers to Oz.
     • Sabine 3.2.1

       29 February 2024 at 9:48 am

       Too late.

       Everyone who has skills and is mobile will leave, has left already

       A record number of New Zealand citizens left the country in 2023, but migration gains show signs of softening. A net 47,000 New Zealanders left in the year-ended December, while 173,000 non-New Zealanders arrived, data from Stats NZ showed

       https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/509260/record-number-of-citizens-left-new-zealand-in-2023#:~:text=A%20record%20number%20of%20New,data%20from%20Stats%20NZ%20showed.

       There was a provisional net migration loss of 13,400 people from New Zealand to Australia in 2022, according to estimates released by Stats NZ today. This compares with a net migration loss of 5,400 in 2021.

       https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/net-migration-loss-to-australia-in-2022/#:~:text=There%20was%20a%20provisional%20net,loss%20of%205%2C400%20in%202021.

       There was a provisional net migration loss of 13,400 people from New Zealand to Australia in 2022, according to estimates released by Stats NZ today.

       This compares with a net migration loss of 5,400 in 2021. These estimates use data from Stats NZ and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, whose data is currently available up to December 2022
       • SPC 3.2.1.1

         29 February 2024 at 9:55 am

         No, it is never too late to adopt the right policy.
         • Sabine 3.2.1.1.1

           29 February 2024 at 10:27 am

           Well, we will lose a few tens of thousands more.
           • SPC 3.2.1.1.1.1

             29 February 2024 at 10:45 am

             There is nothing new about the migration – but the reason being a wage gap or wage to rent/mortgage affordability is more novel.

             The history of migration to Oz up to 2000.

             https://teara.govt.nz/en/kiwis-overseas/page-4

             This in the Herald 2017.

             Now as the Australian economy roars back into life and the job market picks up, we may need to brace ourselves for a shift in migration flows that could also hit our GDP growth.

             As recently as 2012 the flow of migration to Australia was a significant drag on New Zealand's population growth.

             In fact, despite the 1970s and 1980s being remembered as the golden age of Kiwi migration to Australia, 2012 was a record year with a net loss of nearly 40,000 New Zealand residents across the Tasman.

             But as Australia's economy slipped into post-mining boom doldrums the trend changed rapidly. For more than two years, up until the latest data released this week, New Zealand was in the black, gaining more migrants from Australia than it lost. Less New Zealanders left home and many who had been in Australia for years returned home.

             "It was both Australia's labour market weakening on the mining sector decline and the New Zealand story taking off," says Paul Bloxham, HSBC's Sydney-based Australia New Zealand chief economist.

             "New Zealand was the rock star economy in 2014 and 2015. That growth story attracted migrants back across the Tasman."

             In 2014 it was Bloxham who grabbed headlines, here and in Australia, when he dubbed New Zealand the "rock star economy", pointing out how much better shape we were in at the time.

             As the story unfolded the net migration gain for New Zealand peaked at 1933 people in the year to June 2016.

             If that doesn't sound like a massive figure consider that New Zealand lost an average net 17,000 people a year to Australia between 1979 and 2016.

             https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/return-to-oz-is-the-brain-drain-back/WKFI5WGTLL57WEOETTE6CD7G3U/
             • Sabine …

               29 February 2024 at 11:05 am

               between 1979 – 2016

               so the running away from NZ is literally a bipartisan created problem and neither side will fix it.
4. Sabine 4

   29 February 2024 at 10:28 am

   this is quite funny actually

   https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/february-29-allied-fuel-pumps-around-nz-ground-to-a-halt-as-systems-forget-leap-year/XEQBK5JLBZG6LO3VGUQ6Q2WGC4/

   Fuel stations are reporting nationwide outages at self-service pumps.

   Allied Petroleum, Gull, Z, Waitomo and other fuel stops around New Zealand have reported problems with card payments on Thursday because of a software glitch they say is likely caused by their systems not being programmed to deal with the date February 29.

   A Gull spokesman said a software glitch meant some payment terminals were not able to be used to pay for fuel across the motu (country).

   ”We understand there is a nationwide payments issue.

   yes, Virginia, a leap year comes every four year. The next one will be in 2028.
5. Robert Guyton 5

   29 February 2024 at 10:44 am

   This isn't quite funny actually:

   "Resources Minister Shane Jones has sought advice on whether oil and gas companies could be offered “bonds” that they would able to redeem in the event that drilling rights issued by the Government were cancelled down the track.

   His comments suggest they could be compensated by the public if a future government cracked down again on drilling."

   https://www.thepost.co.nz/business/350194089/shane-jones-seeks-advice-compo-oil-and-gas-firms-if-rights-extinguished
   • SPC 5.1

     29 February 2024 at 10:59 am

     Possibly exploiting National Party seeming to be content on being liable under the Paris Accord to taxpayer funded liabilities, it appears that Shane Jones has a plan for NZF to be the creature of the extraction of finite resources industries – mining/over-fishing.

     He should note that once, he has given all he can give, they can then sponsor another party. Over-delivery is not as secure a NZF back under Shane Jones in 2026 strategy as he thinks
   • E.Burke 5.2

     29 February 2024 at 11:31 am

     Ok, Robert. Right or wrong, cars, trucks, factories, hospitals and homes need energy to function – thats a given, yes?

     Most of us applaud moves to more efficient and less environmentally dubious sources of energy.

     In the medium term there is no getting away from the fact that "alternative" (renewable) energy sources simply cannot meet the demands of NZ. Its not an opinion, its a fact.

     So, you either a) find those legacy energy sources locally, and take some ownership to ensure environmental harm is minimised or you b) outsource the provision of that energy to other countries. Who may or may not have the same priorities about the environment. It doesnt alter the fact that for the foreseeable future we still need the energy.

     If you decide to take option A and produce locally you are asking an organisation to invest capital to extract, refine and ship the energy. The depreciation on that investment is often 10 or 20 years. Who, but an idiot, is going to invest that capital if there is a real risk that the next PM makes a captain's call and unilaterally wipes out that industry? Clearly, thats the advice that has been given to the Government. These are rational actors who are used to dealing with tinpot third world countries who have little respect for the rule of law.

     So now the price becomes clear for that bit of virtue signaling kabuki by the last PM.

     Or tell us what you propose to turn off when the energy stockpiles cant meet demand….
     • Ad 5.2.1

       29 February 2024 at 12:37 pm

       Are you really proposing that there's some causal link between some foreign oil exploration company successfully mining and extracting oil in NZ, bringing the oil onshore here, a company refining it here, then selling that energy for other companies to build cars and trucks here?

       The rational actors are those with the capital to invest in all of those things. None of them are domiciled in New Zealand.

       The largest legacy sources of energy in New Zealand are the entirely renewable hydro dams built from the 1890s to the 1990s.
     • weka 5.2.2

       29 February 2024 at 12:48 pm

       Let's tease this out a bit.

       Ok, Robert. Right or wrong, cars, trucks, factories, hospitals and homes need energy to function – thats a given, yes?

       yes. But what is not a given is that we have to be demanding and consuming energy at the rate we currently are. It's choice.

       Most of us applaud moves to more efficient and less environmentally dubious sources of energy.

       Sure, but that's not what is needed now. What is needed is wholesale commitment to preserve what we can of the natural world before systems start collapsing so fast that human civilisation can't adapt. It's not a nice to have, it's the most important issue we face, far more important than the energy crisis.

       In the medium term there is no getting away from the fact that "alternative" (renewable) energy sources simply cannot meet the demands of NZ. Its not an opinion, its a fact.

       Not really a fact. You don't say what you mean by medium term for a start. But let's say aliens appear and park outside Earth's orbit. They tell us the closest universe parliament arrived at a consensus that humans were breaking universal laws by destroying such a beautiful and abundant planet. They say we have to transition to renewables completely within 5 years. If we don't they will start destroying humans. Humans prevaricate, so the aliens start taking out major cities with their alien tech (think massive emf pulses or something). New York and London now no longer have any usable electrical and electronic tech. Do you think that the world leaders would keep prevariacating or they would get into a war type footing and transition to renewables in the time frame?

       The point here is that the blocks to transition are political and social, they're not technical or systems based (we can do both of those, we're just not).

       So, you either a) find those legacy energy sources locally, and take some ownership to ensure environmental harm is minimised or you b) outsource the provision of that energy to other countries. Who may or may not have the same priorities about the environment. It doesnt alter the fact that for the foreseeable future we still need the energy.

       Harm minimisation is a death sentence. If we don't drop GHGs very fast, we will have run away climate change, which means ecological and thus societal collapse. That's not fringe thinking, it's supported by science and is talked about in fairly mainstream places now.

       I agree with you are are in a dilemma. Stopping oil drilling in NZ but still relying heavily in imported oil is morally bankrupt. We should take the next step and transition to a steady state or degrowth economy. I'm pointing this option out because you are arguing a misleading binary. There are other options.

       If you decide to take option A and produce locally you are asking an organisation to invest capital to extract, refine and ship the energy. The depreciation on that investment is often 10 or 20 years. Who, but an idiot, is going to invest that capital if there is a real risk that the next PM makes a captain's call and unilaterally wipes out that industry? Clearly, thats the advice that has been given to the Government. These are rational actors who are used to dealing with tinpot third world countries who have little respect for the rule of law.

       that's a BAU economics argument. Again, we don't have to be running the economy this way, and if we keep running it this way, climate/ecological collapse will take it from us anyway. Who but an idiot would choose that?

       Or tell us what you propose to turn off when the energy stockpiles cant meet demand….

       To grasp the solutions here, start with the really low hanging fruit. Turn off all the electrical things every night that don't need to be running. It's not that hard, but we don't. Again, this is simply a choice atm. If the aliens were forcing us, we'd be doing it pretty damn fast.
       • E.Burke 5.2.2.1

         29 February 2024 at 4:46 pm

         OK, the best I can find was on the MBIE website that seemed to be suggesting that the average energy consumption per capita in NZ was trending to decline. Future predictions on that rate of decline are driven by assumptions about population stability (Per capita can decline while gross consumption goes up if the population increases).

         Industry and transportation seem to account for slightly more than 50% of NZ's energy consumption in 2022.

         MBIE forecast Electricity demand and generation scenarios: Scenario and results summary (mbie.govt.nz) is predicting a shift in electricity generation from ~78% renewables to 95% by 2050. They also acknowledge that beyond 95% the greenhouse savings diminish. The report is really light on phased forecasts but they seem to be implying a significant rise in the future in renewables – eg not much change in the short term.

         The energy useage in transportation is currently largely diesel of course.

         The medium term (5 years to 2028) (2023 forecasts) in the same report show diesel usage increasing as the economy lifts post Covid. There seems to be a low expectation about transport shifts to renewables. So NZ diesel imports are forecast to increase every year for the next 5 years (the data doesnt seem to go further out than that). Thats going to be all made up of imports as there are no forecasts for increased domestic supply. So, yes, the data does seem to suggest its a binary choice – at least as far a diesel (and aviation fuel) goes for the medium term at least that we are stuck with diesel, its just down to where it comes from, eh? Realistically, you cant see any refining capacity being stood up in NZ can we? So even if we pump crude out of the ground, its going to have to go offshore for processing.

         Again, back to my original point, no one is going to invest in extraction capability in a market with a proven track record of making unilateral decisions to stop extraction without firm guarantees of compensation if NZ decide to pivot again.

         As an aside, turning off the lights at home wont change our diesel utalisation – its baked into the economy.

         The same MBIE paper (again a masterpiece of obfuscation) seems to be suggesting that Hydro currently supplies the bulk of our electricity but that the forecasts are for the increased supply to largely come from non-traditional sources (solar, geothermal etc) which currently account for fuck all of the total as far as I can tell from that report.

         There is probably as much chance of a substantial increase in Hydro as there is someone building a new coal powered power station – eg none – agreed?

         So we appear to be back to wiping out the productive components of our economy (Farming and Industry) unless the bet on non traditional technologies pays off big time.

         According to this: https://environment.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-greenhouse-gas-inventory-1990-2020-snapshot/#:~:text=In%202020%2C%20the%20share%20of,of%20the%20world's%20gross%20emissions.

         we contribute .15% of the world's greenhouse gas emission. So if NZ eliminated 100% of our greenhouse gas emissions it wouldnt show up on the measurements.
         • weka 5.2.2.1.1

           29 February 2024 at 10:11 pm

           did you put that comment in the wrong place? Or did you miss the bit where I pointed out that none of the economics, industry and infrastructure you are referring to will survive climate collapse?

           we contribute .15% of the world's greenhouse gas emission. So if NZ eliminated 100% of our greenhouse gas emissions it wouldnt show up on the measurements.

           That is garden variety climate denial. All the small emitters add up to around 36% of global emissions. Climate change is a global phenomenon, not a local one. If the small emitters don't pull their weight, there is no preventing collapse.

           https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/small-emitters
     • SPC 5.2.3

       29 February 2024 at 1:20 pm

       You are under the illusion that those who explore for oil, refine it. They do not even ship the unrefined oil, others do it for them. We have no refinery.

       We import refined oil, the only difference with local field production to any other in the world is royalty proceeds from local discovery.

       We do not use oil to produce power. And if we use carbon, coal is cheaper and we already have the coal.

       The USA reduced their carbon use level by moving from coal to gas. If it is about local power, it is exploration for gas – used instead of electric power, or as a cleaner fuel to burn than coal.

       Google Musk and battery. Renewable supply can and will be stored.

       Onslow covers the risk of dry years – but National think they can get by without it.

       There is also the spare power used for the smelter, it can provide energy for SI EV's and or we increase the Cook Strait cable capacity. Or there is green hydrogen.

       https://www.mbie.govt.nz/building-and-energy/energy-and-natural-resources/energy-strategies-for-new-zealand/hydrogen-in-new-zealand/roadmap-for-hydrogen-in-new-zealand/
   • tc 5.3

     29 February 2024 at 12:33 pm

     Our very own rendition of the republican party with Jones quite comfy with what he's doing here.
6. Hunter Thompson II 6

   29 February 2024 at 6:11 pm

   TV news at 6pm today (29 Feb) featured an item critical of allegedly unfair contract terms in retirement home contracts.

   I see Southern Cross has retirement care villages in some Oz states, but apparently none in NZ.

   Presumably SC would be a cheaper option for NZ retirees (and more customer-oriented) if they set up here, as they are non-profit.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS