Sunday Scraps and a New Hall of Shame Entrant

I wasn't surprised by the Chiefs' loss this morning. Most people won't be, although the margin will surprise some. I expected it would be either extremely tight or a complete blowout. And so it was the latter.

I didn't see the game, because I'd figured the Chiefs' chances of winning were minimal, and having two small children means only the biggest games get a look in.

The Chiefs played well all year, and it's nice to see their captain also get the All Black role while McCaw is sidelined.

I'm more excited by the prospect of Shane Bond returning to the Black Caps. Whether he's fit enough to play test cricket is another matter. Even in his prime he was prone to regular breakdowns. How will he cope now? He's almost 34 years old and hasn't played test cricket since late 2007.

******

So how about that Mr Laws then? Every week I seem to write something about him. It's probably becoming boring to read. But this week's topic? Cats.

I like cats. He hates them. I've always despised Laws' polemic style of writing, but his revelation has given me an insight into his soul. I now understand why he writes such monstrous things.

******

Most people who follow the NZ blogosphere knows about Whaleoil. The man behind the Whaleoil blogsite, Cameron Slater, is a noteworthy lowlife who would have remained a largely anonymous potty-mouthed right-wing racist misogynist, but for the fact that Daddy is President of Citizens and Ratepayers, the party that currently dominates Auckland City Council. Because he likes to roll in the muck his Dad's mates like to use him to smear their opponents. To quote John Banks:

I leave this to Whaleoil

David Farrar often uses him as a source for the material on his own blogsite, Kiwiblog. Though Farrar's commentary on Kiwiblog is usually relatively sane (though still well to the right), the majority of posters on his site appear to be either certifiable lunatics, fascists, or angry men with serious personal problems (I can't keep using the word "misogynists" after all, in case the word loses its power). So the two blogsites have much in common.

Here's an example of Slater's utter foulness. He writes about the recent death of Mike Tyson's baby daughter, Exodus:

This silly fool thinks it was the treadmill that killed. WRONG! it was her silly first name.

How anyone can joke about the death of a child is beyond me.

Slater's site has a Trophy Wall (which I won't link to, because it merely gives him more traffic), which the cretin uses to claim credit for exposing various "scandals". So in a similar spirit I'm adding Slater to the Imperator Fish Hall of Shame.

******

Freedom of religious expression is a hallmark of any civilised society. I'm not remotely religious, but I respect the right of people to worship freely whoever and whatever they choose - so long as they don't come proselytising near me or my family. But religious freedom must also go hand in hand with freedom of speech. Many religious people don't like this idea, because they believe anyone who disagrees with them is dangerous and must be silenced.

So it is with some joy that I read of the recent blows to the Church (or should that be Cult?) of Scientology. The Scientologists are masters at shutting down dissent, and of going to extraordinary levels to silence anyone who tries to criticise them.

In France, however, it seems only Christians are allowed to practise religious intolerance. Muslim girls have been forced to lift their veils while at school. And now the Scientologists are under legal attack in France for targeting the vulnerable for commercial gain.

Scientology's claim to be a religion is dubious. It has all the hallmarks of a cult. It was founded by a science fiction writer, L. Ron Hubbard in 1953, and its belief system does read like a bad sci-fi novel. How anyone would fall for it is beyond my comprehension, and yet people do. To most people it would have remained just a wacky cult, but for the efforts made by the Scientologists to silence those who dare to criticise or question its teachings. Those efforts have been numerous and well-documented.

Now even Wikipedia is fed up by the Scientologists' distortions and manipulations. It has banned the Church of Scientology from making online edits to what is posted about Scientology on Wikipedia. This is what Wikipedia has on the Church of Scientology.

No doubt the cult will fight back. It has plenty of cash, and a horde of overpaid Hollywood celebrities to bankroll its legal efforts. But this is the internet age, and the cult's efforts to control information about it seem ultimately doomed.

Budget '09: Legal Aid Rates to be Cut

I received an email late yesterday afternoon from the President of the New Zealand Law Society.

I thought I'd share it with you, since it raises an issue that nobody in the news media seems to have picked up on.

To: New Zealand Law Society Members
From: NZLS President
Legal aid remuneration rates—decrease
I appreciate that many of you dislike broadcast emails but I seek your understanding on this occasion. I have a serious message to convey to legal aid lawyers, in particular, but I am sure it will be of concern to lawyers generally.
I am extremely disappointed to report that a reduced Budget allocation for legal aid will see the Legal Services Agency decrease the rates paid to lawyers undertaking legal aid work.
As the Budget was read, the Minister of Justice issued a media release stating that the Legal Services Agency would receive $9.9 million in 2009/10 to help retain its legal aid providers.
I contacted the CEO of the Agency, Tim Bannatyne, for clarification as to what that meant for rates.
He confirmed that the $9.9 million was in addition to the Agency’s permanent legal aid allocation and represented a decrease of $1.274 million on the amount allocated in the 2008 Budget to fund last year’s 10% increase in legal aid rates. Accordingly, he
said, that increase would now be reduced.
He said there would be no reduction in Duty Solicitor, PDLA or fixed fee work, but that hourly rates would reduce on average by $2–$3 per hour from 1 July.
The LSA is sending a letter to all providers next Wednesday (3 June) advising the new rates.
The NZLS considers the reduction unacceptable and will be conveying that to the Minister and publicly. It will be asking why legal aid providers should be singled out
when other Government-funded rates of pay, including Crown Prosecutors' rates, have not been reduced.
The 10% increase was hard won and came after 12 years on 1996 rates. It was nearly 6% below that recommended by the independent panel who had reviewed the legal aid rates in 2007 – and far short of covering the ground legal aid providers had lost since 1996.
Aware that the $11.174 million allocated for the increase in the 2008 Budget was for the 2008/09 year only, the Law Society pushed hard for the new Government to cement in that 10% increase in this year’s Budget. Had the economic situation been less serious, we would also have anticipated a further 4.5% increase, a figure established using the benchmark model developed by the independent review panel in 2007. Given the state of the economy, that was not a realistic possibility this year.
It is very disappointing to see the allocation reduced although, on the positive side, extra funding for Community Law Centres has been provided.
The 2009 allocation is for the 2009/10 year only and is an interim measure pending
the outcome of the Government’s comprehensive review of legal aid being led by Dame Margaret Bazley. We have already met Dame Margaret and will be putting our views to her over the next few months, not only on rates of pay but on other improvements which can be made to the legal aid system.
The Minister’s release is available at http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/budget+delivers+access+justice+promise
My media release, to be issued tomorrow, will be on the NZLS website.
John Marshall QC
President

The increase in Community Law Centre funding is good news. But cutting legal aid rates is a serious backwards step. Hourly rates remained static for years and years, despite inflation, while the hourly rates of non-legal-aid lawyers continued to gradually climb. Legal aid rates were only increased a year or two ago. I remember when I was a junior lawyer in the mid-'90s having to deal with the legal aid system: the bureaucracy was like something out of a Kafka novel, and most of my time was spent filling in forms, rather than helping the client. Even then the hourly rates were lousy.

I've not gone anywhere near the legal aid system for years, so I have no idea what the administration side of it is like nowadays. But legal aid is still lousily paid work. Bear in mind also that the type of work is also often unpleasant. Our society is remarkably skilled in ensuring those who do the jobs nobody else can handle get the worst pay.

In case you think I'm blogging out of self-interest, think again. Like I say. I've had nothing to do with the legal aid system for years. Most lawyers won't touch legal aid work because the work is poorly remunerated. So cutting the rates will only drive more lawyers away from legal aid work. Those who are talented and ambitious will find other areas to work in.

So bad news for those who might need legal aid. Cutting the rates will only make it harder for those who need help to get legal representation.

Budget '09: Modest Science Funding Increases but Little Else for the Sciences

I thought I should probably post something serious for once.

I was hoping there might be something in the Budget for IP lawyers. I was disappointed, though not surprised.

Wait... oh, I said I'd post something serious. Anyway, I decided to look at what the Budget was offering my clients. The best thing for them would be a big increase in R&D spending, or incentives to encourage private sector R&D spending.

Incentives? Nah!

Well, there were no real incentives, but then none were expected. The Government showed when it scrapped the R&D Tax Credit System that it was an administration devoid of vision or imagination. They put on their accountants' caps and decided that the whole R&D Tax Credit System had been designed to keep bean counters busy. That the system might have actually encouraged investment in this country's research and science industry never entered their minds.

The irony of course is that the Government campaigned in the last election on trying to keep people from leaving for Australia in droves. Of course, Australia has an R&D Tax Credit system, so it's a wonder we still have any R&D in this country.

Increases in funding? Yeah, but modest

It's fair to say nobody seriously expected any major increase in RS&T (Research, Science and Technology) funding. But there were some winners, and the overall spend was increased.

CRI Capability Fund

Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) are a big winner. The CRI Capability Fund is increased for the next four years by $10 million to $61 million. This Fund amounts to about 8% of total CRI revenue.

The CRI Capability Fund was established in July 2005. It is a source of funding administered by Ministry of Research, Science and Technology and is available only to CRIs. CRIs are Crown-owned companies. There are 8 CRIs: Agresearch, Plant and Food Research, ESR, Scion, GNS, IRL, Landcare Research and NIWA.

Marsden Fund

The Marsden Fund gets a major funding boost. Funding will rise from the current level of $37.88 million per year to $46.88 million per year for the next four years, from 1 July. This is a 24% increase, and is the largest increase in the Fund’s history.

The Marsden Fund was established in 1994. It is a contestable fund administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand on behalf of the Marsden Fund Council. It funds science that contributes to the global advancement of knowledge. Researchers are not required to undertake research that aligns with government priorities, unlike with other RS&T funds.

Health Research Council

The Health Research Council of New Zealand (HRC) gets a funding increase of $8 million per annum for the next four years, a 13% increase.

The HRC is the Crown agency responsible for the management of the Government's investment in public good health research. Ownership of the HRC resides with the Minister of Health, with funding being primarily provided from Vote Research, Science and Technology.

PBRF

The Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF) gets $250 million per annum.

The PBRF is a fund administered by the Tertiary Education Commission. It was established in 2003. The PBRF is a research fund available to tertiary institutions.

Primary Growth Partnership

A new Primary Growth Partnership is established, with injections of $30 million, $40 million, $50 million, and $70 million over the next four years. This fund will match private sector investment in the primary sector. Details of the fund are to be announced on 2 June.

Science Prize

A Prime Minister’s Science Prize of $1 million per annum, has been announced. The amount may be modest, but it offers prestige and publicity to the winner.

Verdict

While the increases are welcome, they arguably do not make up for the scrapping of the $700 million Fast Forward Fund.

Some people will criticise the Government for not doing more to encourage R&D, and investment in RS&T. And yet I suspect nobody was unpleasantly surprised by the Budget. That any increases at all were announced may surprise many.

On the other hand, the current Government does not appear to consider spending in RS&T a high priority. So the Budget probably gets a pass mark, but only just.

Elderly Man Causes Chaos in CBD

Police last night arrested a man in his late sixties after a series of incidents in central Auckland.

Officers were called to an address on Albert Street after reports of an elderly man attacking cyclists.

Student Tanya Molineux, 18, was cycling down Albert Street just after 5pm last night. “This crazy wild-eyed guy just came at me,” she said. “He rushed at me from the pavement and chucked a rock at my front wheel.” She fell from her bicycle, but apart from some minor abrasions was unhurt.

“As I was getting up he began yelling at me and hitting me with a cane. He said young people were good for nothing and that the police should just shoot me. I was really scared. The guy looked like he could have been my grandfather, but he was just mean.”

Witnesses say the elderly man then stormed down Wakefield Street, where the second incident occurred.

A cycle courier, who would not be named, said the man was carrying a brick. “He looked like just some sweet old guy, but I didn’t pay much attention until he jumped in my way.

“He threw the brick at me. I swear he was going for my head. I swerved and crashed into a car. I was on the ground and was dazed for a while.”

The elderly man then stood over the fallen cyclist. “He looked down at me and started to laugh. Then he told me I’d got what was coming to me. I think he also said something about Jesus.”

Bank worker Shaun Andrews briefly scuffled with the elderly man until the cyclist could escape. “He was strong for an old guy,” said Mr Andrews, “and I could smell his cigarette breath.” The man was able to break free from Mr Andrews’ hold and escape back up Wakefield Street. The man then allegedly entered a commercial building on Albert Street.

Police were at the scene within a few minutes. They entered the building and apprehended the man after a short struggle. “He put up a fight,” said one witness. “He was just going off at the cops. He kept screaming about being tasered. I think he wanted the police to shoot him.”

Police would not release details of the man, but it is believed the man was an employee of APN. He is due to appear in the Auckland District Court today on a number of charges, including assault and resisting arrest.

Budget '09: Nats Announce Genocide Plans

The Herald:

But Mr Goff called the indefinite postponement of Super Fund contributions the "death knell" for generations of New Zealanders.

Translation: the deferral of superannuation payments will lead to a massive slaughter of future New Zealanders, on a scale we cannot begin to imagine.

The actual Labour Party press release:

The Budget’s “decade of deferrals” of payments to the New Zealand Super Fund is the death knell for superannuation for generations of New Zealanders, says Labour leader Phil Goff.

Translation: the deferral of superannuation payments will bring an end to superannuation as we know it. This is bad for future generations.

I like the Herald version better. More dramatic, don't you think?

Osama the Captured One

Fugitive Osama bin Laden was brazen to the end of his long run from the law, says the farmer who sparked his capture.

bin Laden, 52, who had been on the run since 2001, was arrested about 1am yesterday after farmer Azam Dadfar reported a disturbance at his dairy farm near Kandahar. Police caught bin Laden nearby. He was in a ute allegedly stolen from Spin Boldak this month.

In the Kandahar District Court yesterday, a thin, turbaned bin Laden appeared before Judge Abdul Salam Azimi facing charges of dangerous driving, and possession of firearms and terrorist utensils. He was remanded in custody without plea until June 10. More charges are likely.

bin Laden raised his cuffed wrists above his head as he was led from the court.

Dadfar said he and his wife had spotted vehicle lights in their yard after being woken by barking dogs.

The vehicle's arrival was strangely conspicuous, Dadfar said. "He did drive in the gate with the lights on and basically backed up to the shed with the dogs barking away."

He was allegedly attempting to steal a quad bike, but Dadfar believed his target was the contents of the shed's freezer. It contained only dog food.

Dadfar called police and waited for his neighbour to arrive before scanning the property.

He said they never considered that the man was bin Laden. "We didn't put two and two together until the police said (yesterday) morning."

Knowing about bin Laden’s presence in the area had been a "scary feeling".

bin Laden had dubbed himself "Osama the Hunted One". He left the message in a carved thank-you note at a Ghorak farm where he allegedly helped himself to a meal.

His alleged escapade led to T-shirts and a song, but police yesterday said he was "a bit of a nobody".

Police commander Sarwar Danish said bin Laden’s capture was not as significant as last week's arrest of 29-year-old Yunus Hanif.

Hanif, who had been on the run since February, was captured in Spin Boldak last Thursday. He faces 21 charges, including kidnapping and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

"bin Laden was a bit of a nobody," Danish said. "Though it is certainly good to have him locked up."

Police had been able to devote only limited resources to bin Laden with the search for Hanif and the search for the killer of Ahmad Shah Massoud taking priority, Danish said. "We have had much bigger fish to fry."

Danish said bin Laden appeared relieved to be arrested, admitting to police that he had "had a good run".

Police did not immediately recognise him.

"We didn't know, other than the fact he was still driving the same stolen car. We had to check his tattoos and marks on his body ... and once we got him back to Kandahar, we put his fingerprints through the scanner."

Danish said police believed someone had been helping bin Laden. "We believe he's been getting assistance. He looked quite unkempt but relatively well-fed."

Mid-Kandahar, where bin Laden was found, had many little-used bunkers, woolsheds, and goatshearers' quarters where he could have been hiding, Danish said.

Spin Boldak Store owner Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, said bin Laden’s arrest had created a buzz in the area. Most were relieved he had been caught, he said.

"No-one has come in here saying they're sorry it's finished. I think they're quite pleased."

A friend of bin Laden’s, Fauzia Gailani, was in court to support him, wearing one of his robes. Gailani said bin Laden lived with her and her partner before allegedly going on the run from the authorities.

"He's a good guy. I thought the chase turned into a bit of a joke. When he was staying with us, Osama was always very courteous.."

Gailani said she had spoken with bin Laden and advised him to turn himself in. "I said 'it's never going to end well, Osama’, but he said he was OK and would stay out there while he sorted some things out. "He knew he would end up in prison and wanted to be prepared for it."

Gailani said bin Laden was proud of his turban and kept it in prime condition.

Pass the Ketchup - This Seal's Heart is Divine!

In shocking news announced today, it has been revealed that Canada's Governor General ate raw seal's heart.

Governor General Michaelle Jean ate a piece of seal's heart during an Inuit festival.

She apparently said "It's like sushi. ... and it's very rich in protein."
Her office denied rumours she also asked Inuit elders if she could suck the blood from a puppy.

Enough is Enough! Urgent Action Against Cake Abuse Now!

Anyone who witnessed that brazen assault on a defenceless lamington by the large head of ACT MP John Boscawen, would have been sickened by what they saw.

For too long now we as a society have been content to let this kind of abuse go on. This abuse has reached pandemic levels, so much so that when you think “custard pie” you immediately think “in the face”.

What does that say about us as a society? We profess the virtues of tolerance and the protection of the vulnerable, and yet when it comes to these precious cakes and sweet pies we turn our backs on rampant abuse. We owe it to future generations of custard squares, jam tarts and donuts to do something.

So we say enough is enough. We have previously called on the Government to take immediate action, and to put a stop to this violence. But they have done nothing.

So we are now calling on the public to join us in protest. Our Hikoi Against Violence to Cakes, Pastries and Pies will begin in Epsom (outside Eve’s Pantry) tomorrow and will march into the centre of Auckland. We urge you to join us. Do it for your lamingtons.

Neemish von Tartt
CEO, For the Sake of Our Cakes Trust

Memorandum to Staff at Auckland Zoo from Management

Dear staff members

The upcoming visit by Standard and Poor's is a potential turning point in the fortunes of this organisation. It affords us an ideal opportunity to implement urgent structural change. A credit rating downgrade at this difficult time would be a catastrophe for us. We must do everything we can to avoid one.

With that in mind, Zoo management have undertaken a systematic review of all Zoo activities. We have outlined below five critical actions that need to be taken to ensure the ongoing viability of the organisation and its animals.

We need to incentivise success

The tigers are a major drain on the Zoo’s resources. They sleep for most of the day and subsist on handouts. This situation needs to be urgently rectified if we are to become a more progressive forward-looking organisation. Having a sector of the animal population simply unwilling to pull its weight in these difficult times is unsustainable in the long term. Appropriate measures will incentivise these animals into showing more of the wild aggression our paying customers want to see.

For that reason management has decided to no longer provide food for the tigers.

We must remove barriers to entry

There is a mountain of empirical evidence to show that the imposition of artificial barriers has a deleterious effect. For that reason we will shortly commence a staged removal of all fences, cages and walls. By encouraging the free movement of animals without restriction, we will be ensuring the continuing viability of this organisation.

In the first 12 months we will reduce all of these barriers by 20%. Further reductions will occur until 2015, when all barriers to movement have been eliminated.

We must provide choice

The removal of barriers will also promote choice, which will in turn allow animals to compete with each other. Rather than being prevented from attending parts of the Zoo due to restrictive animal zoning rules, animals will be free to go where they please on the site.

Some of our critics will claim such a move will disadvantage the smaller and weaker animals. On the contrary, the provision of choice will incentivise smaller animals, like the meercats and otters, to compete with the lions, rhinos and hippos, where previously Zoo regulation prevented them from doing so.

Competition is the key to success

Everything we do must ensure natural competition between animals is encouraged and advanced. The reduction of barriers will greatly assist in this regard.

However, urgent action needs to be taken. We believe strongly that competition can be enhanced by moving the lions from their previous enclosure and into the zebra enclosure, so they may compete with the zebras for food and resources. We are convinced that this will promote competition between the lions and zebras.

We must cut spending

It is critical to the survival of the Zoo that costs be slashed. Over the last nine years or so this organisation has seen a culture of extravagance, with rampant overstaffing. We believe the removal of all animal barriers will take care of staffing levels, but we need to move quickly to reduce costs.

For that reason we are announcing, effective immediately, an across the board 20% reduction in meal sizes. The lions will be exempt. They are critical revenue earners for the Zoo and they need to be fully resourced.

Conclusion

Let me finish by reiterating how critical the wellbeing of the lions is to the Zoo. Without these brave animal leaders our organisation will be rudderless. So everything we do must be for the betterment of the lions.

We must do everything we can to keep the fat cats happy.

Management

A Moderate Plea for a Moderate Amount of Moderation

Warning: this post may contain navel-gazing. Reader discretion is advised.

I would describe myself as a political moderate. That's not to say I don't have strong views on many things. Why else would I blog? But if I had to position myself on the political spectrum I'd end up be somewhere in the middle.

Am I a Nazi?

I've heard people I would think of as extremists say much the same thing. Often it can be difficult to accept you're way out on the fringe, that you're not "mainstream". This interesting fact made me wonder exactly where I fit. Am I really such a smug centrist. Or am I in fact a Stalinist in hiding, or a closet fascist?

Gazing at navels

On most social, moral and ethical issues I consider myself liberal. I respect the right of people to do as they please, so long as no harm is done to others. You can believe in any god you choose. If you want to believe all the answers to the universal questions reside in an old dusty book, then be my guest. Just don't tell me your faith is based on anything other than blind hope, otherwise I'll go all Richard Dawkins on you.

I believe in science and reason, rather than absolute unquestionable truths. Science is all about the accumulation of knowledge. As scientific learning grows, so does our base knowledge. Mistakes are made, and promising paths turn out to be dead ends. So we go back and look for another path. We creep forward slowly. That is why deniers of evolution and climate change make me despair. And strident anti-GE campaigners also get my goat (though they don't eat it, being vegans and all).

On economic matters and the role of the state, I'm a centrist. The free market works best, provided it is tempered with some government control. Too little and we get social dislocation, like we saw in the 80s and 90s. Too much and economic growth suffers. Muldoonism is a good example of how suffocating regulation can destroy economic growth.

But the state has a duty to provide for those who need help. Some people need more help than others. Some people don't have the life skills or education to ever make a meaningful contribution to our economy. That doesn't make them bad people.

So having established my moderate credentials, I'll now ascend my moderately-sized soapbox and offer moderate and restrained opinions.

Don't frighten the horses

Being a moderate, I want moderation in most things. When ACT tells me we can thrive economically if we just slash taxes, cut welfare and privatise public assets, my bullshit detector starts to buzz. And when some on the left compare the Government's supercity plans to a Nazi Blitzkrieg or Italian fascism my eyes roll.

Any policy enunciated by a political group has to be well communicated. Convince people that it sounds reasonable and you'll get followers. Use rhetoric, ad hominem attacks, and labels and your core supporters will love you, but the mass of voters won't.

So, speaking as a centrist, here are some communication hints to a couple of parties lurking on the edge of the spectrum:

To the Greens: don't compare the Supercity moves to a coup, or a Blitzkrieg. You may not like it, but actually a lot of people are in favour of the Supercity. Focus instead on the lack of consultation. Don't keep talking about "Them", as if we all know who the enemy is. Some quite intelligent and reasonable people are in favour of the Supercity. So engage with those people and convince them of your case.

To ACT: You're at about 3% or thereabouts in polling. So why, if your policies are supposedly such works of genius, do you suck poll-wise? Well here's a clue. Disagreeing with your policies doesn't make someone a socialist or a leftist. I'm willing to concede you're not all fascists, so when someone disagrees with your law and order policies (like, for example, the Law Society), please reciprocate with good will rather than labelling them a "Wadestown Liberal".

Great stuff, huh? And I don't even charge for this. Yet.

Five Friday Questions

Question 1:

The link to this article on the Herald website said “Lee expecting to come second in Mt Albert”

Expecting a Second Coming? What?

Are her prospects for success so dire that only divine intervention can save her?

Question 2:

Does Stephen Donald know eye gouging in rugby is illegal?

Question 3:

Does my now being a blogger make me a computer nerd?

Question 4:

Was this man born without an irony bone?

Question 5:

Is this guy a joke candidate? I thought so at first, but now I’m really not so sure.

Your Views Readers are Dirty Thieves!

I have always thought of the Herald's Your Views as a bastion of angry, conservative law and order types who want nothing more than to see a gibbet on every street corner.

So I was a bit surprised to read the latest Your Views.

The newspaper asked readers whether they would give $10 million back if the bank mistakenly deposited it into their bank account.

It turns out that, while these law and order types are quite ready to exact terrible punishment on others who transgress our sacred laws, if they can steal a shitload of cash and get away with it they'll do so in a second.

Whatever happened to good old fashioned Christian honesty? It's PC gone mad, I tells you!

When Fools Rush In

A fool may be well spoken, but he is still a fool.

Such is the case with Family First’s Bob McCoskrie.

His latest pieces of foolishness are here and here. For those who don’t have the strength or willpower to look at anything written by Family First, here’s what McCoskrie said about the guilty verdict in the James Mason case:

As the police and judge have reiterated, this case has nothing to do with the anti-smacking law as was previously suggested in media reports

Translate: “This is all a media concoction. We never said it had anything to do with section 59.”

James Mason is perplexed by the guilty verdict

But wait, what about this?

Family First national director Bob McCoskrie was astounded to be told Mason had been charged. "That's amazing," he said. "That's going to be a test case. I think everybody has been waiting for a case like this to go before a judge so we can get a new interpretation of the law. It's an uncertain law, which is the worst part of it. Some say it totally bans smacking and some say it doesn't."

People, I think we have a new Fool of the Moment to induct into the Imperator Fish Hall of Shame.

Lynchmob Gathers to Exact Justice

A predominantly white crowd gathers at Auckland University.

They heckle and pour scorn on a small Asian woman.

They wave banners showing her face disfigured.

Apparently she's a racist.

Does Auckland University have a School of Irony?

Anti-Smacking Opponents Throw a Big Bash

CROWDS GATHERED in churches and public places throughout the country today, after Parliament repealed the unpopular "anti-smacking" law.

The law was repealed by Parliament following a Citizens Initiated Referendum, which established that the majority of New Zealanders wanted the right to beat their children.

At the Eternity Church in St Heliers, hundreds congregated to celebrate the law change. The leader of the Eternity Church, Pope Brendan Takanini, spoke of the significance of the law change.

"The greatest gift a father can give his children is love, unconditional love", said Pope Takanini, "like the unconditional love Jesus Christ bore for us all. When this unholy law was first passed, they tried to tell us it was wrong for us to express that love. We resisted fiercely, like the Jews of the Temple against the Romans, but like the Romans the worldly powers were too strong.

"But our faith in the Lord has borne fruit. Did I not say to you this day would come?

"Now, no earthly authority may come between the loving chastisement a parent wishes to visit upon his or her beautiful children.

"No temporal power may now prevent the miracle of life that is the loving beating a father inflicts upon his precious sons and daughters. As the Lord Jesus bled for out sins, now let our children do so.

"Take now your plowshares and turn them into swords, canes, whips, bats and paddles."

In Christchurch a noisy crowd assembled in Cathedral Square to celebrate the repeal of the anti-smacking law, and to hold a special celebratory Smackathon.

Justine Manson, CEO of the Won't Someone Think of the Children Foundation, fired the crowd up with a speech that blasted the politicians who passed the 2007 law. Then over a hundred children lined up to receive a loving chastisement from volunteers who had offered to beat, thrash and punch the love of Jesus into them.

Afterwards, Jim, a father of three, showed our reporter his heavy leather strap he had just bought from a nearby stall. "I've been itching to put this into action," he explained. "I'm going to put the fear of God into those little bastards."

Most other fathers we spoke to at the Christchurch gathering were enthusiastic about the law change. "I brought all four of my kids along," said Dave, a teacher from Sumner. "I wanted them to see this historic day, and to make them feel the brutal miracle that is their father's love."

Across town, Wayne and Judy Kerr, owners of the Resurrection Christian Shop, told us how business picked up the moment the 2007 law was repealed.

"After the anti-smacking legislation came in," said Judy, "we almost went out of business. Suddenly nobody wanted to buy our range of patented leather corrective devices. Now we can't keep up with demand."

Judy picked up a large wooden paddle from a hook near the counter. "This is our top-seller now. The Hail Mary 2000. Guaranteed to beat the fear of God into your kids".

The repeal of the anti-smacking law has delighted the Executive Director of Family Fists, Rob MacGonagall. "The law was an ass," he said. "It criminalised good decent parents who just wanted to thrash their children into bloody unrecognisable masses. This is a victory for good common sense. Now where did I leave my cattle-prod?"

Sharing Family Values Punch by Punch

The "anti-smacking" lobby will be in damage control mode for a few days, after a jury found a Christchurch man guilty of assaulting his four-year-old son.

James Mason has become almost a poster-boy for the Christian Right. The group Family Integrity had this to say:

Anti-Parental-Authority Law Criminalises Loving Father
Jimmy Mason was out for a walk with his two boys - Seth, 3yrs and Zach, 2yrs. They were having a great time learning to ride the bikes that they had recieved as an early Christmas present. Making their way along Cashel Mall in Christchurch, they came up to the Bridge of Remembrance.

This magnificent memorial was built as an enduring mark of gratituded to the thousands of young men from Christchurch who selflessly gave their lives to defend our Free Land of New Zealand from the tyranous usurpers, many thousands of miles over the water. They fought and died so that the generations that came after them might live in freedom and without fear of oppression from any government, whether it be their own, or a foreign governement.

As all little boys do, Seth and Zach crouched low over their handlebars, racing down the ramp leading down from the bridge, the path leading around a sharp corner. Seth, one year older than his brother, took the corner nicely. Zach however, struggled to keep control of his bike - and losing control, he smashed into the solid brick construction of the bridge. When his father ran up to assist his 2yr old son, he found him lying on the ground, holding his hand to his eye.

Seth had stopped at the corner. He looked down at his brother, lying on the ground, slipping in and out of conciousness. He saw the concern on his dad’s face, and heard him say “wait Seth, we have to look after Zach”. Whether or not he understood how serious the situation, it was with loving fatherly discipline that Jimmy flicked his son on the ear as he started peddling away.

An off-duty police-officer stood nearby, and she immediately reported the incident. With a few minutes, six uniformed police officers stood around the Man and his two little boys. As Jimmy cradled his injured toddler in his lap, one policemen pulled out his notebook as another pulled out his radio and spoke brusquely to head-office.

One can only imagine how scared the two little boys must have been, and the terrifying thoughts rushing through their dad’s head. How was he going to tell his wife that their children were going to be put into a foster-home?…

Seth and Zach are now confused, because they know that their daddy who they love is in trouble with the police. Jimmy is angry because he now has a warning on his record, and CYFS will be faster than ever to remove his children from him and his wife if they hear the slightest little thing.

So Mr Mason was engaging in "loving fatherly discipline", and merely "flicked his son on the ear."

The jury in this case found differently. Evidence was produced that Mr Mason had punched his son in the face, and the jury clearly believed that evidence. Nowhere on the Family Integrity site will you find any reference to a punch.

In all probability the police would not have brought the case if Mr Mason had merely ear-flicked his son. You would think the Christian groups who supported Mr Mason would now be keeping a low profile. But Family First has never been afraid of expressing an opinion:

"As the police and judge have reiterated, this case has nothing to do with the anti-smacking law as was previously suggested in media reports", said Family First's National Director, Bob McCoskrie.

But Bob, why on earth would the media have thought there was some link to the "anti-smacking" law?

Family First national director Bob McCoskrie was astounded to be told Mason had been charged. "That's amazing," he said. "That's going to be a test case. I think everybody has been waiting for a case like this to go before a judge so we can get a new interpretation of the law. It's an uncertain law, which is the worst part of it. Some say it totally bans smacking and some say it doesn't."

McCoskrie said his organisation could be interested in helping Mason, although it had not yet been asked to do so. "From the initial report it didn't seem that serious, but it would depend on the facts."

When groups like Family First and Family Integrity criticise the police for charging a parent with assault, without knowing the full details of the case, they risk making fools of themselves. And they risk giving comfort to genuine child abusers.

An Uplifting Message

The Imperator Fish Hall of Shame - a New Entrant

I knew from the start he'd be in the running. But his latest effort has secured his place for all time.

In case you weren't unlucky enough to read the latest opinion piece from Michael Laws, you can find it here. (warning: those with weak stomachs should seek medical advice before reading).

You may be astonished that just one person can hold so many offensive and uninformed views. But it's actually quite simple to write this stuff week-in week-out once you get your formula right.

What is this formula? Let's find out.

A little bit of misogyny

I'VE NEVER known what to make of Christine Rankin. She is not simply a polarising personality (thus drawing my instant empathy), but she has this unique style. All legs and cleavage.

Or what about this?

Especially, in Australia. Where footy/media star Matthew Johns lost his livelihood as a consequence of what he claims was a consensual group sex session in Christchurch seven years ago.

There can be no doubt in my mind that the complainant "Clare" anonymous, voice disguised, pixilated has embarked upon a course of cool revenge.

But there is no evidence to support her claims of use and abuse. There never was which is why the Christchurch Police lost interest so long ago. And still aren't interested. Sure, it's a strange practice but groupies and professional sportsmen will go at it for as long as groupies exist.

Johns' real crime was cheating on his wife and that is a torment that he has obviously atoned for. But spare me the historic bleats of a young woman who, according to work colleagues, bragged of the encounter and then discovered remorse. That the media then fed on Johns' commercial corpse proof that they eat their own.

Add an obsession with sex

It's not that I don't appreciate legs and cleavage: dear Lord, I'm a middle-aged heterosexual male. Appreciation is about all you get to do. And there are obviously some men in the public service who got to perv at much closer proximity.

Include lashings of rage at socialists, bureaucrats and political correctness:

Here's a good example:

This makes her ideally suitable for her new role as a family affairs "commissioner". Such startling gaucheness combined with a glorious lack of PC will make her a formidable champion of commonsense in the ether that is Wellington policy-making.

Or this:

That said, the pinko connection will still be in the ascendancy. How could it not be with Labour appointees such as Gregory Fortuin and liberals like Kim Workman still around the Families Commission board table? They were put in by Labour along with its chairperson Dr Jo Dryden to ensure ongoing political correctness from that quarter.

Or (sigh...) this:

And yet political correctness is not dead. Despite the Rankin appointment, it is not even in retreat.

Put in a dollop of racism

Laws is an expert in putting the boot into Maori:

Already she has claimed her first scalp: Druis Barrett, a Maori policy adviser who objected to Rankin uttering the truth about child abuse. That it is particularly endemic in the Maori community, and that it has more to do with drink and drugs than cultural subjugation.

This was too much for Barrett. She was looking for excuses, and the Families Commission was a nice, safe enclave from which to deny any cultural responsibility.

And after launching into a tirade against two "bad mothers":

And in both cases, the perpetrators of these outrages are brown. The sad soliloquy continues as Christine Rankin noted. But we're not meant to say such things in public apparently because, although accurate, they are deemed culturally insensitive.

And then:

It's time for some straight talking around child abuse in this country and the link with ethnicity rather than poverty.

The Award

Laws has been angling for this award for a while. Who could forget this effort, or this one, or this, or this.

So let's just make it official: Michael Laws is the first Ordinary Member of the Imperator Fish Hall of Shame.

Shadowy Reptilian Elite Meet for Cheese and Crackers

This is an alert for all the conspiracists who might be reading this site.

The Bilderberg Group has been meeting again recently. The Guardian has its man on the inside. You can read about all the activities of this shadowy elite right here.

Sir Roger Apologises for Recipe Confusion

ACT MP Sir Roger Douglas was forced to apologise today after his Recipe to Grow the Economic Cake went disastrously wrong.

In case you missed it, here is Sir Roger's recipe:

Yield: An equitable serving for all

Ingredients

2½ cup Productivity

1½ cup Fiscal Responsibility

1 cup Sound Infrastructure Investment

6 eggs Full of Savings

3/4 cup Free Trade

6 tablespoons of Choice in Health and
Education

2 teaspoons of Skilled Migration

1 teaspoon of Government

Ingredients for Icing

9 tablespoons Tax Cuts (more to taste)

7 oz sweet Economic Freedom

½ cup Entrepreneurial Spirit

Method

• Preheat economy oven

• Combine all ingredients liberally, taking care to restrain the amount of Government as too much will prevent the cake from rising and will create a bitter taste.

• Take a laissez-faire approach to cooking time, avoiding the temptation to adjust the settings.

• Once the cake has cooled, apply icing liberally.

• Enjoy the extra large servings – Bon Appetite!

Variations

• If you want a smaller cake as Labour delivered, increase Government expenditure, restrict trade, increase taxes and introduce Government central planning.

Douglas's apology came after numerous people complained of uncontrollable poverty, social dislocation and severe pain to the finances.

"I got it wrong," Sir Roger explained. "I mixed my recipes up. That was my Poverty Pie recipe. I hadn't used it since some time back in the 1980s. I'm sorry if people didn't like it."

Sir Roger has now sworn to stay out of the economic kitchen. But he did let this reporter in on one of his other concoctions. "Rodney and the boys tell me this stuff is dynamite," he said, speaking about his Special Economic Rat Poison formulation. "It kills almost everything. Apply this liberally to your country and I guarantee only the biggest meanest rats will be left alive."

Sir Roger's Special Economic Rat Poison

Yield: Generations of poverty and social upheaval

Ingredients:

4 cup discredited economic theories

1/2 cup tax cuts for the wealthy

5 cups of asset sales

3 heaped tablespoons of Choice in Health and Education (note: this ingredient is hard to find. It may also be known as "If You're Rich Enough You Get Genuine Choice, but if You're Poor then Tough Luck")

500 gms of cuts to welfare

1 packet of mass unemployment

liberal doses of meanness

Method

Throw the ingredients together as quickly as you can. Speed is essential. Don't worry if you get it wrong - you don't have time to consult or check whether you're doing it right.

When the toxic fumes are almost overpowering, let the mixture rest on a Round Table for a while.

Now your mixture is ready to use. Remember that the more you use the better the results will be.

Happy hunting!

What Do You Think?

I've posted two polls on the right hand of the page.

Tell me what you think. Vote!

National's Horrible Week

To say the Government has had a bad week would be to state the obvious.

Let's recap:

• Christine Rankin's appointment gets the media frothing. She gets a roasting, and Key and Paula Bennett are made to look foolish.
• Melissa Lee puts her foot in it again. And again. And again.
• Plans to build a motorway tunnel through Mt Albert are abandoned, much to the dismay of locals.
• The Government attempts to pass highly contentious legislation under urgency relating to the Supercity.
• The Ministry of Social Development announces large numbers of jobs are likely to be shed.
• National MP Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi is in hot water.
• Dreadful retail spending figures are released.

Rankin

I wrote earlier this week about the reaction to Christine Rankin's appointment. Her values are not those I would readily identify with, and many others have expressed alarm over Rankin's views on child discipline and family values. Rankin's stand on moral and social issues has put her own personal life in the spotlight. Why, some ask (such as Colin Espiner), should a person divorced three times be telling others how to run their families?

Her response:

They are talking about me being married four times and how can I possibly be a Families Commissioner? I think that is absolutely ridiculous. I have learned a great deal about children and families.

And it is hard to argue against her life experience. But a person prepared to express strong public views about moral issues must also be prepared to show their own house is in order, if they want to avoid claims of hypocrisy.

John Armstrong of the Herald concluded that Rankin's appointment was a blunder by Key, and it would be hard to disagree. In bowing to Paula Bennett's desire to have Rankin in the role, Key has managed to annoyed two of his three support partners. Peter Dunne described Rankin's appointment as a "terrible mistake", and Tariana Turia indicated she was surprised at the selection, given Rankin's views on the "anti-smacking" legislation.

Rankin seems to be enjoying the limelight. Perhaps too much. She has been eager to give interviews, and has not held back on expressing opinions about those who have criticised her. She has also tried to play the victim:

All this bullying is not going to make any difference to me. They've been doing it to me for ages.

She fails to see the irony, for Rankin is well used to making personal attacks herself. For example, in 2007, during a rally against the "anti-smacking bill" she said:

the childless Prime Minister thinks she knows better than the public

She has also previously made abusive comments about the former Children's Commissioner, Cindy Kiro.

If the Rankin experiment fails (which, if I were a betting man, I'd be putting a few bob on), the Opposition will be lining up to take shots at the PM.

Lee

The week started badly for Melissa Lee. On Sunday, she made a hamfisted attempt to discredit Labour's David Shearer on Holmes' Q&A show:

Yeah so I've been around for 21 years, unlike my opponent here.

And then:

But you’ve only been there for the last week as he said, he's only come back just a week ago, I've been there for longer than that and people are telling me – people are telling me...

When that didn't work she tried to work law and order into the debate:

I had a gun pointed in my head, don’t tell me that law and order issue are not actually a big issue for people of Mt Albert, just look at what happened in Napier.

It's always dangerous when a politician engages his/her mouth before their brain. But when Lee should have said something this week she said nothing. Earlier this week, Campbell Live ran a story alleging that Lee had misused taxpayer resources to help make a National Party promotional video. The main evidence appeared to consist of a disgruntled ex-employee's "eyewitness account". I did not find the evidence particularly convincing, and I suspect Lee might have killed the story had she simply gone on camera and denied the whole thing. Instead, she agreed to be interviewed by Campbell Live, only to pull out. To many it may have appeared that Lee had something to hide.

Worse was to come for Lee. On Wednesday night she told a meeting that the new motorway would reduce crime by channelling South Auckland criminals out of the electorate. As theories go it was bizarre in the extreme, but there was also a whiff of racism about it. The news media were all over the story, and Lee was forced to apologise.

Did I say apologise? Does this count as a genuine apology?

If South Auckland people (find) my comments offensive, I apologise. It wasn't about them. It was about criminals

Or to translate: "I'm sorry you are offended by what I said". This is not the same as "I'm sorry, and what I said was wrong."

Brian Rudman of the Herald had an interesting theory behind some of Lee's statements:

Ms Lee's obsession with crime is understandable. She still seems to be suffering post-traumatic stress from her home being invaded six months ago by two balaclava-wearing, armed hoods.

You would think that after this week Melissa Lee would have almost no chance of winning the Mt Albert seat. But who can really be sure what the voters are thinking?

That Motorway

Lee's chances won't have been helped by the Government's decision to abandon the previous plan to build the Waterview motorway extension underground. The new plan involves a mixture of "cut and cover" trenches and some tunnels. About 365 houses will have to be demolished.

Residents are likely to be dismayed by the new plan. The Government has justified the move by arguing the tunnel option was simply too expensive. That view has some support, although the economic arguments appear flawed. Much of the criticism of the plan centres on the lack of consultation.

Supercity Legislation

Lack of consultation appears to be a feature of this Government. After spending years on the Opposition benches carping on about Labour's "we know what's good for you" prescription, the Nats have suddenly realised they actually quite like all this power. The indecent haste with which the Government is trying to push through enabling legislation for the Supercity Transition Authority is a good example of this.

Opposition to the proposed law is fierce, and Labour has been filibustering in an attempt to delay the Bill's passage. At the time of writing, the Bill was still being debated.

This is bad news for the Government. The Bill will become law, eventually. But the Opposition is making much of the failure by Key and co to consult with the public.

Job Losses at Ministry of Social Development

Up to 200 redundancies are likely to be announced soon in the Ministry of Social Development.

This seems odds, when increasing unemployment ought to be putting more and more demand on MSD resources.

The move may save money in the short term, but many of these people will end up on benefits, costing the taxpayer money. In this case National's obsession with reducing the size of the public sector appears counterproductive. Will a leaner MSD end up being under-resourced? Will it end up having to hire more people in a year's time?

Another MP in Trouble

As if the week hadn't been enough of the shocker, then came a potential scandal involving National MP Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi.

It's too early to tell whether there's anything in this story. I expect we'll be hearing more, though.

The Final Kick in the Pants

And to finish the week off, out came news that showed retail sales fell by a record amount in the March quarter. If people aren't spending then every part of the economy suffers. That the figures were so bad must be alarming Key.

Any Good News?

On a positive note, Key did have a short telephone conversation with the US President, and it appears from reports about what was said that our relationship with the US is strong.

I wish I could find something else for Key to get excited about. It really was a dire week for him.

A Real Coup for the Greens

The Government has put through urgency a bill to establish the Auckland Transition Agency. In response the Greens have issued this press release.

Now I was thinking of posting something about the Auckland issue, but then when I read the press release I realised how utterly ridiculous it was. Take this as an example:

Sue Kedgley, Green Party Local Government Spokesperson said; "We knew that democracy was under threat in Auckland, but I had no idea that our Government would go to this extreme. It would make Benito Mussolini blush with pleasure."

Which just goes to prove that Sue Kedgely is an asset to the Greens' political opponents.

Or how about this?

"All transition costs will be borne by Auckland ratepayers, but controlled by the Lord Hide oligarchy," Dr Norman said.

Now I have some sympathy for many of the policies of the Greens, but, honestly, who is writing this stuff? Did the Greens morph into the Communist Party while I had my back turned?

About Christine Rankin

The appointment of Christine Rankin as Family Commissioner has surprised and enraged many.

The appointment will be seen by some as a startling shift to the right by Key's government. Sue Bradford has even suggested that Rankin's appointment is an act of sabotage, designed to discredit or destroy the Commission.

But whatever the political wisdom of the appointment, Rankin will be only one of seven Commissioners, and her influence will be limited. For that reason alone we should all draw a deep breath and stop fretting about the downfall of civilisation and the coming of the darkness.

Still, it's easy to understand why so many people are upset. Rankin's personality is a polarising one. Her opposition to the "anti-smacking" legislation was vociferous. And she has links to groups on the far right of the political spectrum, such as Family First and the Sensible Sentencing Trust. The values she espouses, "Family Values", may resonate with the Christian Right, but they are values that many in our society don't share.

It is difficult to see what influence Rankin will have at the Commission. She may claim to be an advocate against child abuse, but her views on smacking will make her a minority. In several radio interviews today she left the impression she was determined to shake the Commission up, but you have to wonder what she will achieve if she takes her usual combative approach.

Key must have realised the media would be all over this story. If not then his media advisers should be spoken to. Predictably, much of the coverage to date has been negative. If it remains that way Rankin's appointment may prove a political mistake. It has certainly energised the Greens and Labour.

Whatever happens, I predict we'll hear a lot from Ms Rankin in her new role.

Local Hero Ends Police Siege

TAURANGA - Bay of Plenty man Gary Dresden is being praised for his heroism after single-handedly ending the Tauranga siege last night.

The standoff between police and Tauranga resident Benjamin Gruber had entered its second day when Dresden stormed the house where Mr Gruber was holed up and killed him.

"I was just doing what anyone else in my position would have done," said a smiling Dresden to reporters as he held up Mr Gruber's severed head. "I'm not a hero."

The police siege began early on Thursday morning when a raid on Mr Gruber's house by two police officers went badly wrong. Details of what happened are still unclear, but witnesses report seeing Mr Gruber standing in his driveway waving a gun at the officers and shouting at them to get off his land.

Witnesses later heard a volley of shots. Both officers were killed. Police and armed offenders units quickly surrounded the house but were unable to retrieve the bodies of the fallen officers.

A bloodstained Mr Dresden told reporters he was on the internet when he heard about the incident. "I was on Kiwiblog and they were, like, going off about it. I was shocked. I started to get quite mad about this guy and what he had done.

"I thought about it for a while, and it seemed to me that the cops just didn't have the tools to deal with the problem. No disrespect to them, they do a great job, but this guy was a piece of work.

"So I came up with a plan to deal with the problem. I had to be prepared. So I put on my DVD of Die Hard III and watched it. Then I got in the car and drove up to the police cordon with my hunting knife in my back pocket."

Superintendent Steve Frew, the police commander at the scene, was initially sceptical about Dresden's offer of help. "He was just some little guy who came up to us and said he could help," explained Superintendent Frew. "He said he'd had enough of these crims and their guns, and that if we weren't prepared to go in all guns blazing he would deal with it.

"I thought it was some kind of joke," laughed the Superintendent, "I told him to move away from the cordon. The next thing I know all hell's breaking loose."

According to Dresden, he crept through the cordon and onto Mr Gruber's back section. He found the back door unlocked and entered the house. "The gunman was sitting in his living room," said Dresden. "He was surrounded by guns and ammo and explosives. I could see he wasn't planning to come out alive.

"He turned around and saw me, and that's when it all began. I remember the sound of gunfire as I dived out of the way. Then I rolled across the room, using the combat techniques I'd learned earlier that day. I kicked his feet from under him and he fell to the floor."

But Gruber wasn't about to give himself up, explained Dresden. "I leaped on him and waved my knife at him. I said 'surrender!' but he just kept yelling 'you'll never take me alive!' He was a strong guy and he managed to heave himself off me. He was about to go for his gun when I stabbed him in the chest."

Dresden's work was not done, however. "I thought he was dead", he laughed. "There was blood everywhere and he wasn't moving. I stood over him to check, just to be sure. That's when he grabbed my leg and pulled me on to him. It was lucky I still had my knife. I finished him off properly this time."

Police say Mr Dresden's intervention was timely and heroic. "It took a man, a special man," said Superintendent Frew. "Gary was that man."

Vote National or a Mad Gunman Will Get You

I don't watch anything with Paul Holmes in it (and I stopped listening to any radio station he was on years ago; but this is not an anti-Holmes rant, so I'll move on).

So I didn't see his interview show Q&A on Sunday with the candidates for Mt Albert, Melissa Lee and David Shearer. I have, however, seen the transcript.

The first cheap shot comes courtesy of Lee. At this point Holmes is still doing the "meet the candidates" thing. Here's what Lee says:

MELISSA Well I am somebody who was actually born overseas but for the last 21 years I've been living in and around Mt Albert, my son was born 10 years ago and I've been playing in Gribblehurst Park every since, my son wants to attend Mt Albert Grammar, I'm looking for a property right now to actually move back to the area. Yeah so I've been around for 21 years, unlike my opponent here.

Lee also gets in the second cheap shot, when challenged over her assertion that law and order is not the main issue facing the electorate:

MELISSA But you’ve only been there for the last week as he said, he's only come back just a week ago, I've been there for longer than that and people are telling me – people are telling me...

She then drops a complete clanger:

I had a gun pointed in my head, don’t tell me that law and order issue are not actually a big issue for people of Mt Albert, just look at what happened in Napier.

What exactly is the purpose of bringing the Napier tragedy into the debate? Never mind that it's tasteless and insensitive to do so. Is Lee suggesting that a vote for National will prevent another tragedy like Napier? Or is she suggesting that Mt Albert will have its own loony gunman to deal with if the voters don't give the seat to Lee?

The farce continues when Holmes responds by reminding Lee that Shearer had a bomb go off 25 metres behind him when he was sleeping. But Lee's retort is plain weird:

MELISSA True, but I mean maybe that is the reason he doesn’t think law and order is a big issue in Mt Albert, but it certainly is, 50,000 law and order issues, I mean reported cases in last year alone in Auckland City, 50,000 and don’t tell me 50,000 is a lot of numbers.

Time will tell whether Lee's attempt to steer the debate away from substantive issues (the transcript suggests she has not a clue about the motorway issue) will succeed. If not the seat will inevitably fall to Labour, unless the Greens can split the left vote.

I really know little about Melissa Lee, other than what I've seen on TV, heard on the radio, or read in recent articles. She may well be intelligent and articulate, despite what the transcript suggests. Maybe she had a bad day. But it borders on offensive to use the Napier tragedy for political gain.

D'oh!

In a previous post about the 3-Strikes Bill I made two mistakes.

I thought it important to acknowledge these.

First oops

I said:

Even if lawmakers could accept the principle that after three serious offences you're a goner, getting them to agree on what those offences should be would be next to impossible. If you scan through the offences listed at section 86A you'll see that most of them are serious violent or sexual offences. But then you see listed the offence of compelling an indecent act with an animal.

Now I'm an animal lover (no, not that kind!), but, really, does someone who's been amorous with a sheep on a lonely rural night really deserve to have a strike offence against their name?

Well, actually, the offence of compelling an indecent act with an animal isn't so innocuous. It involves person A compelling by force person B to do certain things. I'll let you work the rest out.

Second oops

I also said:

This Bill is a dead duck. If it survives to become law it will be so watered down as to be utterly ineffective, even if we accept it could ever have had any positive effect to begin with.

Ah, wrong again. The Bill contains other sentencing provisions that the Nats are quite keen on. What I should have said was that the Bill in its current form is a dead duck.

I could have just modified my original posts, but its always better to be open and honest about one's screw-ups. For those I set wrong I unreservedly apologise.

But I did so want a picture in that post, so the sheep stay.

Note to David Garrett: We Wadestown Liberals Are Out to Get You!

ACT MP David Garrett will do almost anything to see his beloved three-strikes bill pass into law.

His latest tactic is to portray his political opponents as leftist academics who reside in ivory towers.

Comedian Jon Bridges wrote a harmless piece in the Listener a couple of weeks ago about the proposed law. Bridges' jokes tend to be hit and miss. The piece in question wasn't especially amusing, but it wasn't the sort of thing you'd expect would arouse a politician's passions.

Garrett has responded to that piece in the Letters section of the latest Listener. He begins:

Jon Bridges' denunciation of Act's "three strikes" bill (Inbox, May 2) was most amusing.

Ouch!

I could hear the Wadestown liberals laughing from my office in Parliament.

Already he's sticking it to those liberals. Take that! But hang on, haven't I heard that phrase before?

At one time or another, several guys who have done lengthy sentences have been personal friends or at least acquaintances. Their experiences and perspectives are an interesting counterpoint to the academics' ...and those of the Wadestown liberals....

That was Garrett on the Public Address blogsite. Clearly he has a problem with Wadestown and its liberals. Obviously he's been burned, and burned bad.

Garrett waded into that debate with his usual panache. The comments on the Bill had to that point been quite reasonable: generally unfavourable, but without the usual vitriol that accompanies discussions about ACT's policies. Garrett then went on the attack, accusing the other posters of being middle class and of never having gone near a prison.

Anyway, back to the letter:

Most disturbing - but not at all surprising - is the tongue-in-cheek suggestion that we were not interested in "finicky research and wasteful consultation". Behind that claim is the assumption - sadly almost universal in this country of ours - that the "experts" must, by definition, be left leaning liberals. Only in New Zealand is the term "right-wing academic" considered an oxymoron.

There are many ways to deconstruct this particular piece of foolishness. But let's go for the main points Garrett is trying to make. He appears to be suggesting the "experts" who have opposed his Bill are all liberals, and so for that reason they should be disregarded.

Liberalism tends to manifest itself in an aversion to excessive and punitive sentences. Is it any surprise then that liberals oppose Garrett's Bill? But here's the other thing. The real experts are the people who work in the system. Most of them are against the Bill. The Law Society is against the Bill, and nobody would ever accuse them of being "Wadestown liberals". Judith Collins, Corrections Minister, was President of the Auckland District Law Society and Vice-President of the New Zealand Law Society. Is she one of these hated liberals?

The other bit of foolishness is Garrett's clam that right wing academics don't exist in this country. Anyone who has ever gone to a university would be able to name several.

The manner in which Garrett attacks his opponents says more about Garrett than it does about them. In dismissing every opponent as a hated ideological enemy he hope to ignore what they are saying. It won't work. The 3-strikes part of the Bill may not be as bad as it could have been, but if passed it will still be bad law.

National's Blogger Calls the Shots in By-Election

David Farrar's attempts to single-handedly deliver the Mt Albert seat to National are becoming tiresome.

His first trick was to convince the media that if Labour selected Phil Twyford (a strong candidate and a local who would probably have romped home) they would get Tizard. The underlying assumption behind this theory was that having Tizard back would be a terrible thing indeed. Poneke has a good blog post on these machinations, and Farrar's retort is unconvincing.

His next trick was to paint David Shearer as being to the right of the Labour Party and in favour of privatisation of the army. After cherry-picking quotes from articles written by Shearer Farrar went on to say:

I think Rodney should grab David Shearer for ACT. I want this man to be our Defence Minister.

Almost immediately after Farrar's postings on Shearer the news media picked up on Shearer's past articles. The Herald tried to invent a divide between Shearer and Goff. Matt McCarten, who had the previous week criticised Goff for falling prey to the influence of right wing bloggers, then showed the same weakness by bagging Shearer:

The Labour Party is opposed to the privatisation of prisons, but I'm not sure how Goff spins his way out of his candidate supporting the privatisation of war.

Nice work, Farrar. Even your ideological enemies are swallowing it up.

I can only assume that Farrar's game is to scare the pants off the left voters so that a good number of them vote for Russel Norman, the Greens candidate. If this happens, Melissa Lee, the National candidate, could take the seat.

His latest trick is to paint Shearer as being soft on crime. So will we see an article on the Herald tomorrow about how the Labour candidate thinks we should go easy on crims? Let's hope not.

David Farrar wears his National Party affiliations like a badge of honour, so it is surprising that the journalists who pick up on his articles don't scrutinize them a little more.

An Unexpected Family Reunion

The UK media is currently all over an expenses scandal that threatens to engulf the British Cabinet.

But for me this is the biggest story from the UK.

A plumber's embryonic twin spilled out of his stomach, in a scene reminiscent of the movie Alien.

Gavin Hyatt, 30, explained that the lump forced its way out after lying inside his abdomen since he was born.

Medics said the 4cm growth was a parasitic twin that died in the womb early in their mother's pregnancy.

Mr Hyatt, a former firefighter, from Witney, Oxfordshire, said: "Four hospital doctors had previously examined me and were all puzzled by the lump.

"Some thought it was a cyst, others an in-grown hair.

"Then one said it could be my undeveloped identical twin that I absorbed at a very early stage. I feel absolutely fine now but it has not sunk in yet that I could have had a twin brother. I have him in a jar at home and I call him little Gav. I haven't told many people. I feel like a bit of a freak."

I remember when I was younger having to share a room with my brother. We fought a lot as kids. It never occurred to me that I should pickle him.

To Make it Real You Just Have to Believe

The headline in this morning's Herald screamed:

GUNMAN DEAD

The first sentence of the article then said:

Police last night believed the Napier gunman to be dead

Now it may just be my pedantry, but when I read a newspaper headline I expect it bear some relation to the article below it.

Intriguingly, the Herald Online's headline says:

EXPLOSIONS AT SIEGE SCENE, POLICE BELIEVE NAPIER GUNMAN DEAD

The best way for APN to gag sites like Editing The Herald would be to get its act together.

Special Honours For Pharmacist Fool

I promised I'd have a real live person to induct into the Hall of Shame.

I've been scratching around for a suitable villain, but this is the best I could do at short notice. He's not exactly well known, or at least he wasn't until yesterday when this story adorned the inside page of the Herald.

White-haired Mt Albert pharmacist David Baird met his first living, breathing politician yesterday - and gave her an earful.

"Hi, I'm Melissa Lee, National candidate for Mt Albert," said the politician.

"Well you won't be getting my vote because I don't think we need any Asians in Parliament," the pharmacist shot back tartly.

Korean-born Ms Lee, a former journalist who has been in New Zealand for 21 years, asked brightly, "Why not?"

Mr Baird said he had his reasons. "They are very difficult people to deal with. They don't spend any money. I don't see that they bring any money into the country. Another problem is their English is very bad.

"You're all right," he told the candidate later. "You are almost 100 per cent. But, seriously, we find it difficult, particularly old people. We have Titus here to talk to them."

This particular article got the blogosphere especially heated, and it seemed to get the wingnuts and bigots actively typing on their keyboards. I won't link to any of the vileness, though you can probably guess where to find some of it.

I don't propose to debate at length the merits or demerits of what Mr Baird said, because what he said was clearly indefensible. However, Mr Baird's remarks don't bother me as much as they should. I'm not sure why that is, but it could be something to do with the everyday casual racism that appears everywhere in our society. Am I just so resigned to it all?

What really offends me (and I speak as a person who grew up a child of shopkeepers) is the crass stupidity of the man. A politician comes into your shop, followed by a journalist and a photographer. Wouldn't that be the perfect time to just STFU and smile? Sure, you're racist and can't stand Asians. So grin and bear it. You're a businessman. If you blurt out something stupid people may no longer come to your shop.

Now that's not to condone racism because, while the shopkeeper's son in me says this guy let the team down, I'm pleased the fool did have his brain explosion. Now at least we know to avoid his pharmacy.

Mr Baird is such a twit that he doesn't deserve a permanent place in my shame board. So I've decided to create a new category. He is our very first Fool of the Moment.

Introducing the Imperator Fish Hall of Shame

I've decided to add a new feature to my site. What better way to get my petty revenge on those who annoy or offend me than to induct them into my very own Hall of Shame?

Now I'll admit that most of my inductees won't lose much sleep over their selection. Hey, I said I was petty, so leave me alone!

Now you all know how occasionally some old '50s relic gets inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Well I have a few relics of my own to induct, from Roman history's "Rock 'n Roll" years (so what is it with the Roman thing already, you ask? Later...)

So to get the ball rolling, here's my first three inductees. I'll have some contemporary inductees real soon.

Lucius Opimius

What a complete shit this man was. Consul in 121BC, he led a savage assault on Gaius Gracchus and his followers. Gracchus was a reforming politician who sought to wrestle power away from the nobility, but Opimius had Gracchus murdered and then proceeded to put to death several hundred of Gracchus' followers.

Read Plutarch if you want to know more about the Gracchi.

What a shit.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla

From war hero and defender of the nobility to mass murderer. He fought a civil war with Marius (another complete swine), before taking control of Rome and being appointed dictator. To strengthen his hold on power he had thousands killed and confiscated their estates and money.

On the plus side, he did allegedly die of an unpleasant bloody messy disease.

Again, Plutarch's a good read if you want to know more about this unpleasant man. For good readible fiction on the era Colleen McCullough's Masters of Rome series is excellent.

Lucius Sejanus

Emperor Tiberius' bullyboy and murderer in chief. He started out as a prefect in the imperial bodyguard, where he came to do Tiberius' dirty work. When Tiberius retired to Capri to indulge his depravities (you simply must read Suetonius on this), Sejanus took Rome over and started to behave like he was the boss.

When Sejanus got too big for his boots Tiberius had him killed. Bad luck, old chap.

Read Tacitus for this period.

In Which the PM and I Discuss the State of the Electorate

So I was, like, leaving the lift in my building, and like, I was soooo tired after a hard day of lawyering, and, like, there he was, and I was, like, holy f**k!

Who was he? Just this bloke.

So what did I do? Did this intrepid blogger march past the PM's minders and give him a good telling off?

Um... no. He was past me before I even realised it.

Does this make me almost famous?

Pointless Laws Gets His Pointless Law

The mayor of W(h)anganui must be a happy man this morning. The gang insignia Bill got the necessary votes in Parliament last night. The Bill passed 62 votes to 59. National and United Future voted for the Bill, as did ACT's Garrett, Boscawen and Hide.

The new law imposes a file of $2000 for wearing gang insignia in certain public places. Police can also seize and destroy gang insignia. The new law is limited to Wanganui, but we can expect law and order lobby groups to push for similar laws throughout the rest of the country.

Most people would acknowledge that gangs are a blight on our society. But is a law like this the best way to deal with them? It's hard to see what difference a ban on insignia will make. The Police Association's Greg O'Conner almost admitted as much on Morning Report today. He admitted that almost nobody will be fined under the new laws.

Mr O'Conner also claimed that because gang members often commit crimes to be "patched", they were unlikely to risk having their patch seized. Of course, couldn't the law have unintended consequences? If you seize a member's patch might he not commit more crimes to get a new one?

Gangs are a symptom of social disease: unemployment, poor education and broken homes. Address those issues and gangs will wither away. I'm not suggesting for a moment those issues aren't enormous ones, but why spend money passing pointless laws when we could use that money to alleviate poverty?

A cynical view is that gangs serve a useful political purpose. When we ask "why is there so much crime in Wanganui?", the answer "because the Mob are out of control" is easier to sell than "because of chronic poverty and other complex social problems".

ACT's Sentencing Bill Strikes Out

The three-strikes law proposed by ACT MP David Garrett got a serve by the New Zealand Law Society's Jonathan Krebs today, reports the Stuff website.

The full text of the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill can be found here. It is currently before the law and order select committee.

The Bill proposes to introduce a mandatory 25 year jail sentence for criminals after their third serious offence. The Bill has been roundly criticised by most groups involved in the criminal justice system.

The Law Society's main objections to the Bill appear to be:

• an offender with two serious offences has nothing to lose by killing witnesses to the third offence


• the decision on what sentence an offender got would in some cases be taken out of the hands of judges and instead given to the police, who would decide what offence the person was to be charged with
  
• offenders on their third strike would have no incentive to plead guilty, so this might clog the courts
  
• the extension of preventative detention in 2002 has given judges more power to impose longer sentences
  
• the Bill permits judges not to impose a life sentence where it would be manifestly unjust to do so, but this sets the bar too high.

So is this the end of the Bill? Given that National has expressed some reservations and that most opposition parties are against it, you would expect so.

Even if lawmakers could accept the principle that after three serious offences you're a goner, getting them to agree on what those offences should be would be next to impossible. If you scan through the offences listed at section 86A you'll see that most of them are serious violent or sexual offences. But then you see listed the offence of compelling an indecent act with an animal.

Now I'm an animal lover (no, not that kind!), but, really, does someone who's been amorous with a sheep on a lonely rural night really deserve to have a strike offence against their name?

ACT MP David Garrett's Bill will protect our precious sheep

[Update 10/5/09 - as has been pointed out on The Standard, the offence of compelling an indecent act with an animal involves someone compelling someone else to do the nasty. Which is probably a bit more serious than it first sounded. And probably (at least I hope) one of those never-used provisions of the Crimes Act 1961. The other objections raised by the Law Society, however, are serious ones]

More importantly, ACT and the Serious Sentencing Trust have failed to establish that the proposed law would make any positive difference at all.

This Bill is a dead duck. If it survives to become law it will be so watered down as to be utterly ineffective, even if we accept it could ever have had any positive effect to begin with.

Police Press Charges: Swine Flu Fraud Revealed

The Sunday newspaper is like a badly made flat white: full of froth and leaving a nasty aftertaste. The editors of the Herald on Sunday, SST and Sunday News think that is what readers want. Maybe they figure we're all too polite to go up to the counter and tell them to make it again, and this time properly.

On most weeks the papers will lead with a story about house prices or a rugby player in trouble with the law. Delve deeper and you'll find page after page of gossip, society photos and horoscopes.

And then there are the columnists. Most are, to put it mildly, "of the right". I like to read opinion on both sides of the political spectrum, but it is becoming increasingly difficult in the Sunday papers to find sensible commentary from anyone on anything.

Take Michael Laws as an example. He writes for the SST, and his opinion pieces usually appear as if they have been written by one of his talkback listeners.

Michael from Wanganui in his latest piece leaves us in no doubt where he stands on the swine flu scare:

And now swine flu this concoction of public health officials and hysterical news media, both looking to justify their drawing of a salary from someone else's pocket. Indeed, it is not simply hysterical rubbish. It is a fraud.

Mr Laws is in his element when attacking officials, bureaucrats and the media. He is also unrivalled in his ability to spew bilious incoherent nonsense. In this case he doesn't tell us why we should listen to him and not the doctors who actually know what they are talking about. And from whose pockets does Mr Laws draw his mayoral salary? What about his radio salary? And who pays for his opinion pieces? Laws never bothers with the facts. State an opinion loudly enough and it becomes a fact.

One can only imagine the writing process. Laws has probably been listening to himself on the radio, and he is sitting before his word processor, madly typing and getting more and more excited. Suddenly something snaps. How else then to explain this?

It's like medical authorities trying to scare parents not to share beds with their children. Yes, some drunk, drugged insensate mums do roll over and asphyxiate their kids, but most of us don't. This natural bonding process between breast-feeding mum and infant is portrayed as akin to child abuse.

It's hard to imagine a more obnoxious paragraph that this. Never mind that what he says flies in the face of years of research on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. Michael, what exactly has SIDS got to do with the swine flu?

Michael Laws is Kiwiblog with a thesaurus. His enemies are officials, the Left, and verifiable facts. So he appears to have missed the irony in attacking "lazy journos" and the media's "hysterical rubbish".