Spelling!

Nice to see our Union Movement are full of well educated, informed people - check out how they spelt 'Pizza Hut':

Great Time Waster

http://n.ethz.ch/student/mkos/pinguin.swf

My best is 313.4m

Is there an answer to this?

What is better:

Thrashing Fiji then three defeats on the English OAP and some others Team (aka The Lions) then South Africa (once, and losing once) and Australia (twice) followed by thrashing Wales, Ireland, beating the English and finally the Scottish at Rugby;

or:

Thumping Australia 24-0 at League.



Now imagine thrashing Australia 3-0 at Cricket - what a good thing to add onto this conundrum. Here's to dreaming!

What Sort of 'Intellectual' are you?

You're an introspective intellectual.


What Sort of Intellectual Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

HP 4

Went to the Embassy on Friday Night to see HP4 - it's much darker than even the previous movie and includes it first swear word!

James and Oliver Phelps often steal the scene as Fred and George Weasley. And new 'Doctor Who' David Tennant is very creepy as Barty Crouch, Jnr.

And I recommend paying a little extra for the premium seats - Three and a half hours is a long time to be seated.

Interest Free Student Loans

I've always thought the Student Loan scheme was a fair plan to help students gain qualifications without burdening the rest of New Zealand with those costs. Those genuinely in need of assistance to go to university were still able to get allowances.

Now tertiary students are intelligent people, and being young rather idealistic. Some have run a well organised, vocal, lobby group who have sucessfully made themselves visible enough to roll back some of the costs of tertiary education that they recieved under the Richardson 'user pays' model of the early 1990s.

But these (usually Lefty) Uni Students are easily the greediest people in NZ. They want free education and a regular allowance payment. Once they are qualified they will still bugger off overseas because salaries in London/Sydney/New York are much higher. Probably more likely given the higher taxes required to sustain the 'free' education and allowances.

I think this quote says it best: "There's a hell of a lot of people your age who don't go to university paying for you to go." From Labour Minister Phil Goff, who lost his cool at student protesters who blocked his car in at Victoria Uni forcing him to walk back to Parliament, circa 1989.

One way to get a dividend, I guess

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0511/S00393.htm

I see Judith Tizard is welcoming the judgement that Air NZ breached the Fair Trading Act by advertising 'misleading' air fares.

Seeing as us taxpayers gave Air NZ $1 Billion in 2001, it's about time we got some back. Normally, we should get it back as a dividend. But seeing as we've got none so far, I guess we'll just have to take it any way we can.

Thanksgiving

Have just returned from the NZ/US Association 'Thanksgiving Day' Dinner at the Wellington Club. Was impressed with the meal and the club (was only the second time I'd been there).

At the end of the night there was a quiz - I failed miserably at spelling the name of a state (in New England, starts with M, Boston is the largest city - have a go yourself) but Chaucey was clever enough to know that if your Pontiac is 13 ft 10 in long with 40 pounds of luggage in the trunk, that the engine will be located under the hood.

School friends

I had lunch with David and Graham from school. That is, I went to school with those two 17 years ago. It seems more than half of my classmates are now married with children.

It makes you feel old.

All Blacks Vs England

The British Media are falling over themselves reporting how wonderful the English Rugby Team are for playing so well against the All Blacks. I'd like to make the following point:

We won, you lost - Eat that.

Remember when the All Blacks drew with England at Twickenham (about 5 years ago) and the English team did a lap of honour while the All Blacks walked off with their heads down - The day a New Zealand reporter writes that the All Blacks played well but lost to an inferior team will be a sad day for New Zealand Rugby.

UN Resolution 687 (1991)

Read the full resolution here.

8. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally accept the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of:

(a) All chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities;

(b) All ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and related major parts, and repair and production facilities;

9. Decides, for the implementation of paragraph 8 above, the following:

(a) Iraq shall submit to the Secretary-General, within fifteen days of the adoption of the present resolution, a declaration of the locations, amounts and types of all items specified in paragraph 8 and agree to urgent, on-site inspection as specified below;

(b) The Secretary-General, in consultation with the appropriate Governments and, where appropriate, with the Director-General of the World Health Organization, within forty-five days of the passage of the present resolution, shall develop, and submit to the Council for approval, a plan calling for the completion of the following acts within forty-five days of such approval:

(i) The forming of a Special Commission, which shall carry out immediate on-site inspection of Iraq's biological, chemical and missile capabilities, based on Iraq's declarations and the designation of any additional locations by the Special Commission itself;

(ii) The yielding by Iraq of possession to the Special Commission for destruction, removal or rendering harmless, taking into account the requirements of public safety, of all items specified under paragraph 8 (a) above, including items at the additional locations designated by the Special Commission under paragraph 9 (b) (i) above and the destruction by Iraq, under the supervision of the Special Commission, of all its missile capabilities, including launchers, as specified under paragraph 8 (b) above;

(iii) The provision by the Special Commission of the assistance and cooperation to the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency required in paragraphs 12 and 13 below;

10. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally undertake not to use, develop, construct or acquire any of the items specified in paragraphs 8 and 9 above and requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Special Commission, to develop a plan for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with this paragraph, to be submitted to the Security Council for approval within one hundred and twenty days of the passage of this resolution;

11. Invites Iraq to reaffirm unconditionally its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968;

12. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material or any subsystems or components or any research, development, support or manufacturing facilities related to the above; to submit to the Secretary-General and the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency within fifteen days of the adoption of the present resolution a declaration of the locations, amounts, and types of all items specified above; to place all of its nuclear-weapons-usable materials under the exclusive control, for custody and removal, of the International Atomic Energy Agency, with the assistance and cooperation of the Special Commission as provided for in the plan of the Secretary-General discussed in paragraph 9 (b) above; to accept, in accordance with the arrangements provided for in paragraph 13 below, urgent on-site inspection and the destruction, removal or rendering harmless as appropriate of all items specified above; and to accept the plan discussed in paragraph 13 below for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of its compliance with these undertakings;

13. Requests the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, through the Secretary-General, with the assistance and cooperation of the Special Commission as provided for in the plan of the Secretary-General in paragraph 9 (b) above, to carry out immediate on-site inspection of Iraq's nuclear capabilities based on Iraq's declarations and the designation of any additional locations by the Special Commission; to develop a plan for submission to the Security Council within forty-five days calling for the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless as appropriate of all items listed in paragraph 12 above; to carry out the plan within forty-five days following approval by the Security Council; and to develop a plan, taking into account the rights and obligations of Iraq under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968, for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with paragraph 12 above, including an inventory of all nuclear material in Iraq subject to the Agency's verification and inspections to confirm that Agency safeguards cover all relevant nuclear activities in Iraq, to be submitted to the Security Council for approval within one hundred and twenty days of the passage of the present resolution;

14. Takes note that the actions to be taken by Iraq in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the present resolution represent steps towards the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery and the objective of a global ban on chemical weapons;

32. Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism;

Question Time

One of the great things about living in Wellington (and being interested in politics)is the ability to pop along to Question Time at 2pm on House Sitting days. While you can get an advance Hansard transcript of Question Time, you can't get a feel for who's really attacking who.

Today, I went along - in particular to see how Helen Clark would defend the unusual arrangements in forming a Government. She batted away the questions she was asked expertly.

Every time David Benson-Pope gave an answer, the words 'tennis ball' seem to float around the chamber.

It was also interesting to see how Gerry Brownlee and Rodney Hide treated Te Ururoa Flavell when he read his question (which he lodged in English) in Maori. Both tried to ensure that Speaker Margaret Wilson would advise the Maori Party to lodge questions in Maori.

But one thing I saw that I hadn't expected was the interjections from Tau Henare to Ron Mark and Peter Brown. Tau kept insisting that Ron Mark was 'part of the Government' - an accusation that seemed to rile Ron Mark visibly - and yelled 'That's a patsy question' when Peter Brown spoke.

Very interesting - I'll have to make an effort to go along in a month or so to see how things are going then.

Coincidence?

Tomorrow is the first Question Time of the new Parliament - the first oppurtunity Opposition MPs get to grill Ministers, and in particular, the Prime Minister.

Now if you're the Prime Minister faced with a grilling over the new Government's arrangement, which is constitutionally unprecendented anywhere using a Westminster style Government; a grilling over your promise to stamp out a 'culture of extravagance' in the state sector in light of the latest scandals at TVNZ; the prospect of having to explain the Ombudsman's statement warning Ministers to stop dragging their heels on releasing information; the return of the Waka Hopping Law; University Fee increases; Josie Bullock being fired; Australian Terror Arrests; The firing of several Ministers; (I could go on all day)

Now, even if you prefer a good book to a game of rugby, doesn't a trip to Dublin to lobby on behalf of the Rugby Union look like a good option?

Why I like Don

Follwing is an excerpt from Don Brash's interview with Simon Dallow on Agenda yesterday morning, in which he rips the Government to shreds in that cool manner that Don developed back when he was telling us that raising interest rates is good for us:

SIMON You alluded to collective responsibility a couple of moments ago, with the new government arrangements including Winston Peters and Peter Dunne as ministers outside of cabinet, how relevant is the notion collective responsibility now?

DON Well it's not just that they're outside cabinet, we've had plenty of ministers outside cabinet before but these are people who are ministers outside cabinet who want to reserve the right to oppose the government in everything but their own portfolio areas. Winston Peters party wanted to sit with the opposition, he's sitting now as far away from Helen Clark as Jeanette Fitzsimons is from me in the House. Now I mean he's either part of the government or he's not, he can't be part of the government and part of the opposition he's leading a kind of double life and I mean that’s in any kind of conventional sense, absurd.

SIMON Several constitutional experts have said though that essentially this convention, collective responsibility, is no more than a practice and that’s what the cabinet manual describes it as. Canterbury University constitutional expert Phillip Joseph said on Thursday 'it's just a practice that can be dispensed with modified or altered depending on what the public institution requires'.

DON Well I don’t think we've ever seen this – never seen this happen in New Zealand, we've never seen it happen in any other country of a western democracy type at all to my knowledge. Never have we seen someone who says I'm a minister but I want the right to oppose the government in everything other than my portfolio. I mean he's off to APEC next week, Winston Peters.

SIMON Not on his own.

DON Well no, but I mean when he's asked what do you think about the free trade agreement your government is negotiating with China, what does he say, I oppose it as Leader of the New Zealand First Party but support it as Foreign Minister? I mean it's a crazy situation.

SIMON What happens when he gets portfolio conflict, when you’ve got Foreign Affairs he has to say one thing yet on the other hand his own party will be demanding that it intersects say with Immigration or …

DON Indeed, I guess it's a question you'd have to ask Winston Peters. I mean I'll be fascinated to see what happens.

SIMON But it's a contradictory situation.

DON And that’s what prompted Gerry Brownlee's comment.

Name Suppressions

These views have been canvassed well before in the past, but with my post on Friday I thought I should have my say on why Name Suppression doesn't work and should be dropped:

Name suppression doesn't protect the innocent - I remember a case from a few years ago where a Christchurch businessman requested a prostitute bring a child to their next appointment for him to have sex with. The prostitute went to the Police and the man was arrested, charged and convicted - and given name suppression. Christchurch went wild with speculation, and it focused on one man - an innocent man. And recently, it didn't take long for word to get around that it was Marc Ellis who had been charged with a drug related charge. Then speculation was rife that a number of television celebrities were involved in a drug ring when one person from the same television shows was charged. (I went to one quiz night where a team dressed up as 'Snort Cafe'.)

Media outside New Zealand doesn't have to obey the suppression order - Five minutes of searching on South African Rugby related websites earlier this year netted the name of the West Auckland All Black who was convicted of beating his pregnant partner. CNN (which SKY rebroadcast to NZ) gave the name of the billionaire convicted of bring marijuana into New Zealand - once again a five minute search on the internet . And The Sun newspaper in Britain

New Zealand is too small a community - The NBR story on Friday used a series of simple clues and eliminations for me to speculate on who it is. I had narrowed it down to one person pretty quickly. And by variously calling Marc Ellis a former sportsman and a current television celebrity, who has name suppression as he was out of the country, lead speculation straight to him.

NZ Media have acted responsibly in cases in the past - 'Constable A', who was acquitted of a private murder prosecution bought by the family of Stephen Wallace, had his name suppression lifted when the charge was laid. Only the NBR published his name before the depositions hearing (where a case to be answered is established)was completed.

Having said this, I do believe that name suppression can continue to be used on rare occasions where a victims relationship to the offender means that it will expose the victim of a crime to the community. But if you are charged with a crime - or convicted of a crime - the community must have the right to know, and to take the steps necessary.

So, who's been naughty then?

In today's NBR there is an article about a lawyer who is charged by the Serious Fraud Office with defrauding legal aid from the Legal Services Agency. The case came to light when a secretary noticed she was billing for hours of work done when she wasn't even in the office.

The article reveals:

• The lawyer is a female


• The lawyer is prominent (i.e. you've probably heard of them)


• The lawyer is from Wellington


• That the suppression order includes the type of work she is accused of so the paper is unable to say if it is for criminal, civil, family law or Treaty of Waitangi work.

Now, work it out - it's not hard.

P.S. I've disabled comments on this post as I don't want any speculation.

Paper Rock Saddam

This made me laugh and laugh. So, if you've missed this doing the rounds today ....

Flash version: http://www.rockpapersaddam.com/flash/

Or

HTML Version: http://www.rockpapersaddam.com/

Who Do You Know?

Cathy Odgers started this, David Farrer picked it up, so here are the bloggers I know:

Chaucey: Yep, I'm married to her. For the full story see here.

ACT on Campus: Michael Collins, met through working at Parliament.
Aaron Bhatnagar: Met Aaron through the ACT Party about 10 years ago. Haven't actually seen him since then.
Cathy Odgers: Alledgedly, I met her at the ACT 2002 Election Night Party at Shadows (Auckland University Bar). If so, I don't recall.
A (Sometimes) Considered Rant: Doesn't take to much thinking to learn who's behind the non-de-plume.
Darkness Net: Worked with Gavin at Parliament. Have to be nice to him as he knows what I'm like when very, very, very drunk. ('I'm just a sweet .....')
Every Which Way But Left: Clint Heine - Is there anyone under 40 who has been involved with ACT not had a drink with Clint at least once in their lives?
Excruciating Correct Behaviour: Anna Nuzum, have met once or twice, usually just in passing when I've had to pop into the National Party HQ.
KiwiBlog: First met David at a Young Nat Function when I was chatting up Chaucey. long before we started going out.
Kiwi Pundit: Nigel Kearney replaced me as a Deputy Board Member for Wellington when I joined the ACT Parliamentary Staff.
Right Kind of Girl: Hannah is the only person who has actually owned up to voting for me to Deputy Board member.
Rodney Hide: Worked in the office next to him - his laugh could be heard through two walls!
The Whig: Blair and Graham worked for the ACT Party at the same time I worked at Parliament
Dog Biting Men: Worked with David Young at Parliament.
FrogBlog: Have met one Frog at Bloggers Drinks
Just Left: Met Jordan Carter at Bloggers drinks.
SpanBlather: Never met Span, but she posted good advice on NZ Wedding Planner before I realised she posted bad politics on her blog ;-)

So that's 13 met, plus one I've married, plus Span.

Spot the Difference

Where Helen's flip-flopped:

"New Zealand remains overdependent upon the production and exporting of commodities." - Speech from the Throne, 21 December 1999

"The backbone of the New Zealand economy will continue to be our primary industries." - Speech from the Throne, 8 November 2005

Where Helen's done nothing:


"The general issue of lifting our savings performance will be part of the broad structural review of the taxation system which will be undertaken." - Speech from the Throne, 21 December 1999

"Work will continue on relevant taxation regimes to ensure that they are conducive to the promotion of savings." - Speech from the Throne, 8 November 2005



"It is crucial that government policies ensure that New Zealand transforms the base of its economy much faster than has been the case in recent years. The future must be one of a high skills, high employment, high value added economy." - Speech from the Throne, 21 December 1999

"The security of the New Zealand economy in the 21st century will come from the ability of our firms to be part of a high skill, high productivity, and high wage economy. New Zealand's transformation demands the move to new business models of higher value and more sophisticated products." - Speech from the Throne, 8 November 2005

Rod Donald

Regular readers will probably be aware that I disagreed a lot with what Rod Donald said. But his passing is a sad moment for New Zealand politics. His views, while radical to some, have enhanced political debate in New Zealand - he punched above his weight.

My sincerest sympathies to Rod's family, friends and colleagues.

No Hair Combing!

This has been passed on to me from a New York Rugby email newsletter. It's quoted from "The Telegraph" but I can't find any reference anywhere from searching the web. But it's sound advise for both teams tomorrow night:


Not only was Gwyn Nicholls, captain of Wales in 1905, among the most revered of all Welsh players, he could deliver a belting speech as well. Let's eavesdrop in the Cardiff Arms Park dressing room 10 minutes before kick-off 100 years ago. Here are extracts of his pre-match exhortation, as reproduced by the Western Mail the following Monday morning.


"Gather around men. The eyes of the rugby world are on Wales today. It is up to us to prove that the old country is not quite barren of a team capable of giving New Zealand a hard fight.


"It has been suggested by some of the English papers that they come to Wales more or less stale; but as they played two English counties last week and won each match by 40 or 50 points with half their best players resting for today's game, that staleness is not very apparent.

"We have already discussed tactics. So it only remains for me to appeal to you to be resolute in your tackling. You all know what New Zealand are like if they are given latitude. They throw the ball about and their system of intensive backing up makes them very dangerous. So there must be no hair-combing. Every man in possession must be put down, ball and all."

Word Verification for Comments is Now On

After fighting a losing battle with spam comments, word verification is now on.

If you wish to use my website for advertising, please contact me and I can discuss pricing.

Latest Govt Announcement

"New System for Punishing Those Responsible for Speeding"
Press Release - Land Transport New Zealand
3rd Nov 2005

The LTSA announced today that in future Oil Companies will be forced to pay speeding fines incurred by drivers.

"It's an innovative approach to prevent speeding by holding the supplier of the cause of drivers speeding account for their actions," said LTSA Spokesperson Andrew Knepsted.

"For too long we've been blaming the drivers who force more fuel into the cars engines. It's the fuel that causes that car to speed, so the supplier of fuel is to blame."

Mr Knepsted said that the new policy was a follow on from Mr Bollard of the Reserve Bank blaming Banks for lending to customers who want loans, and then spend the money to the detriment of New Zealand's Fiscal and Trade Deficits.

"Drivers will need to keep their receipts from the last fuel purchase so we can ascertain which oil company is to recieve the speeding ticket. Every time they fill up they can discard the previous receipt where they like - we will also be charging oil companies for the litter."

"In this day and age it's no longer a persons responsibility to make responsible choices - it's up to the supplier to take responsibility for the downstream consequences," Mr Knepsted concluded.

Just Whose Fault Is It?

I've always thought of Michael Laws as a low-intelligence prick. I did admire him for his standing up to the self-rightgeous arty-farty types who insisted that the Wanganui Council should pay for an upgrade of the Sargent Gallary, but this destroys that respect.

Michael Laws wants to bill McDonalds and KFC for litter that is dropped by their customers. That's right, Michael Laws wants McDonalds and KFC to pay for the actions of others.

If someone throws something on my lawn I have to clean it up. The Streets that are messy belong to the council.

What Michael Laws needs to do is pass a bylaw allowing for a hefty instant fine of anyone caught littering - say $1000 - then back it up with enforcement. Once word gets round that litterbugs have a fair chance of getting caught and fined litter would not be a problem.

UPDATE: I see Rod Donald of the Greens weighed in with support for Michael Laws today - I'm not surprised, the Greens like any oppurtunity to criticise McDonalds.