Saying Sorry Is Hard To Do

The blogosphere is filled with angry people all too willing to smear those they don't agree with as tyrants, corrupt or evil.

A good example of this was a blogger from The Standard, Eddie, who on the strength of a flimsy TV3 story accused Social Development Minister Paula Bennett of corruption and bribery.

The blogger is now backing down, but instead of apologising to Bennett for the disgraceful slur, is now attacking TV3.

Anyone who reads this blog will know what I think about Bennett's policies. But calling someone corrupt is serious.

It's often hard to apologise when the person you've wronged stands for everything you despise.

But allegations of corruption should only be used when there is actual evidence of serious criminal wrongdoing. The TV3 story never met that threshold.

Right Thinking: What To Do With Young People

The latest hard-hitting column from conservative contributor Dr. Frank Shizenhausen

You would have to be a halfwit to think we didn't have a major problem with youth crime in this country.

So why hasn't the Ministry of Justice figured this out?

It really is a disgrace that, despite our streets being overrun by young scallywags, nobody in the Justice Ministry seems to be aware of the fact. Maybe they should come down from their ivory towers and live in the real world for a change.

The Ministry this week issued a report on child and youth offending statistics in New Zealand from 1992 to 2008. The report ought to reveal what everyone knows - that young people are out of control, undisciplined and listening to noisy hip-hop music that turns them into crazed P-driven menaces. Some of them don't even appear able to pull their pants up. There is no more telling sign of a nation's moral decay than when young folk wear their trousers so baggy their underwear is visible to all.

But the statisticians instead try to tell us there is no out-of-control problem, and that the overall picture is not really much worse than it was in 1992. The report claims the following:

• While the numbers apprehended for violent offences has increased, the numbers being apprehended for offences overall declined over the 1995 to 2008 period, especially in the last three years.
• Child and youth apprehension rates for property offences have been steadily declining.
• The rate of young people convicted in the District or High Court generally declined over the 1992 to 2008 period.

The Ministry of Justice has fallen into the classic trap of trying to use actual evidence to disprove an infallible argument. And that today's young people are noisier and more troublesome than those of previous generations is undeniable, because everyone says this is so. How could so many people be wrong? How could Garth McVicar be so wrong? Dammit, we live in a democracy! If the majority of people want young people to be a problem, then the politicians ought to shut up and listen for once.

The moral decay starts in the home. Modern liberal child-raising techniques teach our kids that anything goes, and nobody believes anything any more. So is it any wonder that (despite what those mischievous crime statistics claim) we have an epidemic of youth crime?

It was not always like this. When my generation was growing up we showed respect towards our elders. And if we were out of line they dealt with us firmly. I spent many hours as a young boy being whipped, tied to chairs and beaten with sticks. It was also not uncommon for me to find myself locked in the basement for days at a time with no food, and nothing to drink other than dripping water from the leaky plumbing above my head.

But I didn't let myself get down when they locked me away. Instead, I reflected on what I had done wrong, and I made amends. After a while I even started to enjoy my time in the basement, because I was always finding interesting things down there. Once I even found a box filled with bones. Father said they must be the remains of a cat or dog that had died down there, though when I asked him why the animal had what appeared to be a human skull he started beating me. I learned quickly never to question my parents.

And things were much the same at school. My favourite schoolteacher told me once that he enjoyed beating the sin out of young boys. He told me it was good for the soul and did no real harm. To prove his point he would often take his trousers off and ask me to whip him on the buttocks. He always seemed happier afterwards, as if he had found some inner peace.

So a bit of firm discipline won't harm anyone. Let's start by making young people turn their music down, pull their pants up and cut their hair.  And the occasional beating really wouldn't do them any harm. To this day I find that a vigorous application of leather to skin is the best medicine when I'm feeling troubled.

I say, I feel short of breath just thinking about it. Where did I leave my flail?

Not Political Correctness

Imagine how embarrassed you'd be if this guy was your local representative.

An attempt to stop Kapiti Coast District Council using macrons in local Maori placenames has sparked an outcry at a council meeting.

Councillor Tony Jack put forward a notice of motion that the council refrain from using macrons in the spelling of Kapiti, Otaki or Paekakariki in any council papers, publications, maps or signage. 

Or this guy:

Councillor Peter Ellis described the macrons as "PC gone mad". 

Macrons are used in many languages to assist in the pronunciation of words, and we have no reason to fear their use. The complaint that the use of macrons is political correctness perhaps disguises some unpleasant truths.

New Regulatory Watchdog On The Block

The Government looks like it is moving in the right direction on financial regulation.

New Zealand's rag-tag pack of financial market watchdogs is to be replaced with a "super regulator" by early next year as the Government seeks to restore investor confidence battered by the finance company meltdown and global financial crisis.

Commerce Minister Simon Power last night confirmed the Government had decided to proceed with the implementation of an integrated single regulator, one of the recommendations from the Capital Markets Development Taskforce which reported back last year.

The Capital Markets Development Taskforce highlighted the bewildering range of financial regulatory agencies, and the different powers they have. It is pleasing to see that one of its key recommendations is being adopted. Rationalising these powers into one agency should ensure wrongdoers get what they deserve.

Hopefully the powers of the new regulator will be enhanced, and it is essential that the new agency be adequately funded. For so long as the public's lack of confidence in our capital markets continues to stifle New Zealand's economic performance, no amount of money should be spared.

But this is a good move. Hopefully more of the Taskforce's recommendations will be adopted.

Why The Rush?

It's hard to understand the desperate urgency behind the sudden move to increase the tax on cigarettes and tobacco.

Smoking kills hundreds of people every year, and puts a burden on our health system. So it's reasonable that if people want to smoke they should pay more in tax.

But why sneak this through? Was it to stop people rushing out and stockpiling product? Or was it simply a last minute decision by the Government to give the Maori Party a win? In that case, what has the Maori Party just traded away?

Not everyone voted for the increase:

ACT MP Sir Roger Douglas, one of just four MPs who opposed the rise, called it an attack on the poor.

Isn't it touching that Sir Roger still cares for the poor? Even if his wrecking-ball economic policies most likely drove thousands of stressed and unemployed people towards alcohol and tobacco.

Law Commission Decries Evil Liquor

The Law Commission issued a report on Tuesday on alcohol and the supply of liquor.

The report recommends the tightening of laws concerning the promotion and sale of liquor.

Law Commission head Sir Geoffrey Palmer spoke about a harrowing night he spent with the Wellington constabulary, as police dealt with the mess left by excessive alcohol consumption.

“This was a most sobering and unsettling experience. A good number of young gentlemen appeared to be suffering ill effects from excessive intoxication. The effects of the demon liquor were also most pronounced in the womenfolk. Hard liquor is the enemy of womanly chastity and modesty.

“And in the working classes the effects of drinking gin, ale, porter or ardent spirits are especially disconcerting.”

“It is my considered opinion, having witnessed this display of degeneracy and depravity, that all liquor ought to be prohibited forthwith, save of course for medicinal brandy.”

Reverend Pius Imperatrice, from The Band of Hope Union, yesterday expressed delight at the proposed changes to liquor law.

"Ring the church bells, for the enemy is slain, and righteousness must prevail!" said the Reverend.

"Now let us spread the word and take the Lord's message of moderation and abstinence to the world."

Demand for liquor has always been high among the colonists, but levels of consumption peaked some thirty years ago and have been largely declining since. However, the Premier, Mr Key, has indicated his Government will introduce legislation to curb the evils of excessive inebriation.

"We are a Christian society", said Mr Key. "and some of the behaviour we have seen is unseemly and inappropriate. I will not tolerate the immodest spectacle of young gentlemen causing mischief on the streets and in the saloons, frightening the ladies and startling horses.

"Hard liquor has a place. It belongs in the Cabinet room and anywhere else that my government makes policy on the hoof. Let us keep it where it belongs."

Masses Celebrate World IP Day

Huge crowds gathered around the world to celebrate World Intellectual Property Day on Monday.

The event has gathered momentum in the ten years since it began, and a number of Asian countries now recognise World IP Day as a public holiday.

One of the biggest gatherings was in Washington DC, where up to half a million packed gathered around the Lincoln memorial.

 President Obama addresses the crowd on World IP Day

President Obama roused the crowd with a stirring speech about the importance of patents and robust copyright protection.

The President promised the crowd that he would put IP protection on the top of the US's domestic agenda - ahead of other pressing issues such as healthcare reform and financial market regulation.

"I will not let up until those Americans who seek IP protection can find it, until those businesses that seek capital and credit through innovation can thrive, and until all patent owners can sue the asses off anyone who infringes their rights. That is our ultimate goal. But thanks to the bold and decisive action we've taken since I took office, I can stand here with confidence and say that we have pulled our IP system back from the brink.
“To those who ask whether we have a robust and powerful intellectual property system, I say this: yes we can.”

But the largest crowds were those gathered in Beijing, where millions took to the streets in support of tightening IP protection. Factories across the country, usually devoted to producing cheap counterfeit goods, were closed down as workers rejoiced in the protection that good IP laws provided.

And in Canberra, an unprecedented number of patent and trade mark examiners were awarded membership of the Order of Australia.

Meanwhile, in New York, noted software freedom activist Richard Stallman told a packed audience of software developers that World IP Day was worth celebrating.

“It’s time we took a moment to say a big thank you to the likes of IBM and Microsoft. I’m usually on the case of these corporate bastards, destroying all that is good and great in the world, but today is all about celebrating the framework of legal rights that allow creators and inventors to exploit their work to the exclusion of others.

“Well done to Microsoft and IBM, and other corporate champions of IP protection.”

And While I Was Away Look What Happened

I went away to Adelaide for just under a week, and look what didn't happen.

I didn't look at the Internet once while I was away - not even on my phone. I guess that means I'm just a blogging wannabe.

Nor did I see a single NZ news headline. I had no idea all that stuff happened while I was gone. Oh wait... what stuff?

But after almost a week of reading Adelaide's awful local rag, glancing at the Herald was almost a pleasure. For all its faults it actually still has news in it - sometimes. And the breakfast TV in Australia makes our Sunrise by comparison look like it may have been high culture.

On the other hand, travelling to one of Australia's well-planned cities makes one realise how shambolic our own are. Adelaide is a city of parks, public art, pedestrian precincts, public transport and heritage buildings. Auckland is not.

Anyway, there's no use bemoaning our broken places. Though it would be nice to have a tram system in Auckland.

Finally, I just read the highlights of the Law Commission's report on alcohol. What a bunch of wowsers.

Bye

I am off to Adelaide tomorrow. I am attending a conference, then staying on a couple of extra days to enjoy the food and wine. We're rid of the kids until the middle of next week, and while I will miss them, I may also enjoy lying in bed and not listening to the yowling of children wanting to get up at 5:30am.

Anyway, I'm not a real blogger, because a real blogger (like that nice Mr Farrar) would be madly posting during their trip, and posting pictures of the sights. I shall do none of these things, though if my wife is looking the other way I may be able to sneak a blog post in (posting from the Blackberry could be a challenge, though).

So don't be surprised if things are quiet around here until the middle of next week.

(And another thing - if any of you f***ers are thinking about burgling me while I'm gone, just don't. I'll find you and hurt you if you even think about it. Good luck anyway, because our place is like Fort Knox.)

See you again soon.

Peter Gluckman On Innovation - Updated

I was at an event organised by my firm this afternoon where the Government's chief science adviser, Sir Peter Gluckman, spoke.

His subject was innovation, and he spoke in some detail about our depressing inability to innovate successfully, the poor level of investment in R&D, and some of the negative aspects of our approach to innovation that stifled growth and creativity. Gluckman rattled off a range of statistics to show that within the last 20-30 years we have gone backwards at a frightening rate when compared to countries that we used to match in terms of R&D spending and productivity.

Gluckman is a believer in open innovation - that is, scientists collaborating with others, rather than trying to guard their own patch. This belief underpins the recently announced changes to the CRI sector, which he has had a major role in pushing forward and which are largely positive. The model we currently have sees scientists competing against each other for funding, and this creates all sorts of negative behaviours, such as CRIs only doing research where they can get funding, scientists having difficulty walking away from projects that perhaps aren't going anywhere, and scientists competing rather than working together. It is hoped that allowing CRIs to set their own priorities will diminish some of these behaviours.

One thing Gluckman spoke at length about is the failure by businesses to invest in R&D. Our investment rates, compared with other OECD countries, are woeful, and Gluckman cited a number of reasons for this, such as a serious lack of venture funding, lack of expertise, the "number 8 wire" myth, and anti-intellectual strands within our society. He did not identify any obvious fixes, and did not talk at all about what Government policies could possibly assist to encourage spending in R&D.

Gluckman is a forceful character, and has been known to get under people's skins. But the job needs a strong character, and he's doing a good job of raising awareness within Government of the need to reform our innovation system. There is much more the Government could do, but the CRI sector reforms are generally good ones. I have spoken to a few CRI people over the last couple of days, and most of them think the changes are long overdue and welcome them.

Update: Here is a link to Gluckman's speech.

Who Is Shafting Who? Part 2

I love this:

The Government has come under attack from key support party ACT for signing the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous people.  

Leader Rodney Hide said he was shocked and appalled at the Government signing up to the declaration.  

In a shock speech to Parliament Mr Hide said signing the declaration was a breach of ACT's "no surprises" agreement with the Government and afforded Maori rights and privileges not enjoyed by other New Zealanders.

He accused them of signing the declaration covertly and said it was divisive, which was precisely the reasons former Prime Minister Helen Clark had refused to sign it. Mr Hide then ran out of time before he could finish his speech.

So ACT weren't consulted, McCully seemed to know little about the Declaration when interviewed on the radio today, and Sharples didn't like McCully's reaction.

What a royal cock-up.

Hide will be fuming over Key's decision to put a cap on Government spending. He probably feels obliged to throw his toys around, because he knows that the knives are ready within ACT and if he doesn't protest loudly he may find those knives in his back.

But if Key didn't consult with Hide on this then that suggests a lack of basic management.

Loving it.

Who Is Shafting Who?

If you listened to Murray McCully and Pita Sharples on Morning Report this morning you may have concluded (like me) that National and the Maori Party don't appear capable of communicating with each other in any clear way.

The trip by Sharples to New York to sign up to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was no secret, said McCully. Sharples then said the announcement that New Zealand would sign up to the Declaration had been kept secret.

McCully said a Cabinet minister would today make an announcement today indicating the areas that the Declaration would not apply to. He didn't say who, but it is reasonable to assume this will be Chris Finlayson. Sharples appeared to be taken by surprise when told this by Sean Plunkett.

But he should not have been. Sharples should not be so naive as to believe National would allow New Zealand to sign up to the Declaration without first setting out substantial exceptions.

This is yet another debacle. It would not surprise me to learn Sharples didn't actually have permission to go to New York. He was extremely vague on Morning Report about when the decision to sign up was made.

The alternative is that the Maori Party's been shafted again. The Nats will give them a platform to make themselves feel valued and important, but it will be a platform built on straw. In real terms it will mean nothing.

UK Political leaders Get Up Close And Personal

As the British election headed into its final stages, the party leaders took time to talk to the media about their families, in the hope of connecting with voters on a personal level.

With the Liberal Democrats ahead in some polls, leader Nick Clegg was eager to talk about his children and what they meant to him.

Clegg said he had pursued the leadership of the party because of his family.

"When you come home from a long day and you see their faces, well it makes you realise how important it is to my future. I decided I had to get the f**k away from those little shits."

Clegg said that leadership responsibilities meant he was seldom home. "It's tough on the family, being a politician. But I don't really care, because every moment I spend with them a little part of my soul dies."

Conservative leader David Cameron spoke about his two young children, four year old Nancy, and six year old Arthur.

"It's so important to achieve a proper work-life balance," said Mr Cameron. "Except when your kids are like mine, pure bloody evil."

Cameron spoke about the huge sacrifices his family had made to get him to where he was.

"I used to worry about the long hours I spent at my job, and whether it was fair on the children. But then I looked at the greater good and thought, f**k it, this is a fantastic job and that pair are an ungrateful vicious pack of vipers. Screw them."

"Labour is a family party," said Prime Minister Gordon Brown in his interview. "But that might have to change. If I have to spend another holiday with that awful brood I might do something I regret.

"The most savage going over by the Opposition during Question Time is nothing compared to a spoilt snot-nosed child moaning because she didn't get a pony for Christmas.

"God I hate children. This is all off the record, right?"

In Which I Bestow Praise On A Minister Then Rush Off To Cleanse Myself

This is just a quick post to prove I can appreciate good work, even when it comes from the other side of the political spectrum from that where I most happily reside.

I probably spend too much of my time dissing the Government, but I have to congratulate Steven Joyce for the measures he's announced to tackle the appalling accident rate among young drivers. The measures seem sensible, and now they're in front of us I'm wondering why it took so long for them to be proposed. They all seem bloody obvious.

Federated Farmers say there's no evidence that raising the driving age will reduce the road toll. Their argument makes no sense. Surely people become better drivers as they become more mature. Are they really saying there's no difference in maturity as people get older? In that case, perhaps they ought to be advocating that we have no age limit at all. Of course that would be ridiculous.

Anyway, a grudging well done to Steven Joyce.

Rodney Hide's Failed Marriage Is Not News

Just about every Sunday I scan the papers to see what latest outrage has made it to print. It seems the two main papers are in a race to the gutter.

So I suppose it really ought to surprise nobody that a Sunday newspaper would run a sleazy story about the messy marriage break-up of a political leader.

Or that the person digging up the dirt is Carolyne Meng-Yee.

The story concerns Rodney Hide's divorce, and it features an enraged ex-wife, and a sexologist with advice for both parties.

Meng-Yee is used to digging dirt on people's marriages, so she is in her element. Here is an example of her previous work.

It's no secret that I dislike Rodney Hide's politics. But no political leader deserves to have their private life exposed to the public like this - not unless they've campaigned on "family values", or have made a point of making their perfect family part of the narrative around their leadership. Hide has done neither of these things.

In fact, I can barely think of a single politician in this country for whom such scrutiny would be justified.

At least Meng-Yee can say she was writing for a good cause. I say that because I'm pretty sure that if anyone were to read the following extract to a comatose or vegetative patient, they'd probably wake up screaming "no! the horror! the horror!".

Sexologist Dr Michelle Mars had advice for both sides. She said Jiuan Jiuan should heed the words of Donald Trump's ex-wife Ivana Trump who said: "Never diss your ex-husband, darling - remember that you married him."

And she said Hide "should practise some of the grace he learned on Dancing With the Stars".

Dr Mars appears to have forgotten that Hide dropped his dance partner on her head. Maybe he's just doing the same to his ex-wife - metaphorically, of course.

But even if he is, it's none of our business.

A Year Of Blogging And I May Still Be Alive

Thursday saw something of a milestone, although you may have missed it. You probably wondered what the giant fireworks display was all about, and why the Australian Airforce was doing flying jetplanes in formation over the city.

The occasion was this blog's first birthday.

Okay, so there were no celebrations. In fact, thanks to my busy life (way too busy at work, doing up a house, kids, blogging etc etc), I completely missed the milestone and only realised this morning that a year had passed.

When I started blogging I had no idea what I wanted to say, and I thought it would be a shortlived fad - a couple of posts of "hi it's me", then back to anonymity. What would I write about? It's not that I'm not opinionated. But often my thoughts and opinions aren't properly shaped until I start writing something. Until I started blogging my writing was generally only of the legal type. As a commercial lawyer I spend most of every day either writing, or examining someone else's words. But, outside the legal field, I'd never really been put to the test of writing something topical.

And any blog would have to be about wider events. I could never have done a chatty "look what I've been doing" sort of blog. That kind of thing is best done on Facebook. Which probably explains why I am largely inactive on Facebook. I have a page on Facebook, but only because I want to find out what others (friends, family etc) are up to. Generally I detest smalltalk, and can't be arsed telling people about my largely uninteresting personal life.

And as much as I despise online small-talk, I despise uninformed opinion even more. That's not to say I always get it right. I look back at some of my posts now and cringe, thinking "wow, that was a bad call." But because I'm not a politician I'm allowed to admit I'm wrong occasionally (some would say more than occasionally).

As I developed this blog I realised there was a common thread running through a lot of my posts. The people that rub me up the wrong way are generally the ones who hold positions that fly in the face of all reason and scientific evidence. Conspiracy theorists irritate me (though they also provide endless amusement when they snap back and accuse you of being one of Them), as do climate change deniers, intelligent-design advocates, the religiously deluded (not all religious people - just the crazy ones), anything generally to do with Ian Wishart, Objectivists, anti-capitalists who blame the world's problems on multinationals, the anti-patent crowd (but not necessarily the anti-copyright crowd - that's a more complex issue), anyone who uses the term "socialist" or "antichrist" to describe their enemies, the ACT Party (I'm sure there are some perfectly normal people in the party, but they also have some seriously crazy people in their ranks), the law and order brigade, anyone who blames the US for all of the world's problems, and oh my God I just realised how long this paragraph has become so I'll stop.

Anyway, this is all sounding like chit-chat, which I despise. So, because this is meant to be the celebration of a milestone, I thought I'd recall some of my personal highlights.

Most of my first month or two of blogging output is dross. But then I discovered satire. I wrote this piece about the siege of Jan Molenaar's house in Napier, after being amused by comments in various blogs by people who were demanding the police just go in and shoot the guy.

I got quite worked up about the smacking referendum. Most of what I wrote was ho-hum, but I was quite pleased with this little satire.

I got the idea to write this after going to the zoo and seeing almost all the animals asleep. I'm sure I would write it better today.

I wrote this after a particularly poor All Blacks loss to France. I recalled from my days in the UK how when England lost to anyone it wouldn't matter, because the player ratings of the English players would still be higher than those of the opposition.

I tried home shopping in June, but the Dinner with Michael Laws package went unsold. And in August I had a go at reviewing films (seriously, Rodney Hide looks just like Captain Picard). I also helped John Key to win the Bledisloe Cup in August.

I was in raptures when I discovered Conservapedia in October, and later that month even managed to write something serious on an important milestone of national significance. There was also another milestone of significance reached that month.

I wrote lots of serious stuff for a couple of months about the 2025 Taskforce, legal aid changes and other things, before realising in December I was better off just taking the piss. And I even managed a post about pirates (and nothing to do with copyright infringement either - I targetted Santa for that).

I discovered over summer the horrors of the Wiggles and was addicted. Later in January I tried another film review. In February I wrote what is probably my most-read post. It probably took me ten minutes to write. I've generally found the stuff I slave over for hours goes unnoticed. A few days later I wrote a post about Radio NZ that again took about 15 minutes to write and got a huge number of hits (well, for this site anyway). Both posts were on Facebook.

In March I was busy, with over 80 posts. I quite liked this one, and I got very excited by the news that they were planning to build a new pipe to the US. I was done with the movies, so tried reviewing TV shows. And my guest columnist Dr Frank Shizenhausen was there for the hard-hitting analysis. I was lucky enough to get hold of a copy of National's new communication strategy.

And this month I was abducted and left for dead by a shadowy Government agency.  Obviously I survived that scrape, unless the person writing this is an imposter.

In which case I must be dead. Crap.

To Be Included As A Strike Offence?

Anonymous writes:

My bastard employer has decided that your site is "social networking" and has blocked access. Action like this should be illegal.

Bastards!

They've got it all wrong - this site isn't social networking. Anti-social maybe (I try to say nice things, but it's so hard).

ACTA Draft To Be Released

Some good news on the ACTA negotiations. The participants have promised to release a copy of the draft text on Monday. So now we will finally some transparency in relation to this matter.

It seems that participants have dropped the plan to include a three-strikes filesharing infirngement plan, after heated opposition from many quarters.

And other controversial measures may have gone too.

There is no proposal to oblige ACTA participants to require border authorities to search travellers’ baggage or their personal electronic devices for infringing materials. In addition, ACTA will not address the cross-border transit of legitimate generic medicines.

We'll have to wait until Wednesday to find out what's left.

Friday Random Stuff

Question: Which minor party politician does this guy remind you of?

******

This is a cool graphic (hat tip: Public Address)

It confirms what we all know - recording artists get screwed over by their labels every which way.

Maybe I'll stick to my desk job.

******

It turns out that not everybody in the IT world is against software patents.

NZICT comprises about 80-odd of the biggest IT companies in the country.

Just sayin'.

On The Panel Today

I'm on The Panel today at 4pm on Jim Mora's Afternoons show on Radio NZ.

They keep asking me back! Maybe someone's trying to sabotage Radio NZ from within??

Come To The Dark Side

I'm sorry to continuously post on the software patent issue, but I just found out about this unintentionally hilarious YouTube clip from the New Zealand Open Source Society.

It starts with Peter Harrison, Vice president of NZOSS, reading from a script.

But then the video has a voiceover of extracts from submissions by patent attorney firms A J Park and Baldwins to the Commerce Select Committee. It provides imagery to help the viewer decide what to make of those submissions:

The disclaimer to the video then states:

Note that the use of images of the evil emperor and Dr Evil along with dark forbidding voices are for entertainment value and do not represent an assertion that these companies or their staff are immoral or unethical. That estimation I leave up to the viewer based on their statements.

Hmmm...

It's pretty hard to argue reasonably with people about a topic when they cast you as evil incarnate.

Never mnd that. Whatever my personal views of the people who post this stuff, I won't stoop to their level and issue childish insults. And neither of the IP firms that continue to be maligned by the open source movement have done so either. We may all be evil baby-eating mosters in the pay of greedy blood-sucking multinationals, but on this point we at least have moral high ground.

And I was so tempted to put them on a certain roll of honour...

(If you can't handle watching a video with quite low production values you can read the script of what Harrison is saying here.)

Always Go For The Nuts

It seems the circus is coming to town.

Planning has started for a giant tent to be erected on Queens Wharf for the Rugby World Cup on the site of one of two 98-year-old cargo sheds, both of which will be demolished.

Now every circus needs a big tent. And every good circus needs a clown. In the case of the waterfront debacle we appear to have a large number of clowns.

So after the various rounds of consultation and an architectural competition, they're just going to plough on, knock down two sheds that some people say have historical value*, and put a bloody great tent up.

I'm not a great fan of the Supercity. It's not that the idea doesn't have some benefits. The mad rush to put everything in place, and some of the decisions being made to take infrastructure out of the control of local people, are what alarm me. But if we had a Supercity today I'm sure we'd have at least settled on something other than a temporary tent, and we wouldn't have so many people arguing over what to do, or the constant u-turns.

Well if it be a tent, then let's do it properly. We need a structure that captures the public imagination and will be seen as a masterpiece of design, elegance and engineering.

What about one of these?

The Government keeps giving us opportunities to develop our waterfront, and we keep f**king it up. They must wonder why they bother. Remember the half-billion dollar waterfront stadium they were going to pay for? Then they helped to buy Queens Wharf. Given the grief the Government has got over both efforts, they must wonder why they bothered.

The civic leaders of this city have decided that you shouldn't waste your time looking a gift horse in the mouth. Why not just kick it in the nuts repeatedly instead?

* I don't know if that's true and can't judge for myself, because it's not like anyone can just go down there and take a look - the red fence is always up.

A Wise Master Craftsman Shares His IP Infringement Tips

Cheap knock-offs of the iPad are already showing up in China.

As the blogsite China Hearsay reports, some of the ways Chinese producers of these products claim to avoid infringement are hilarious:

The baldfaced intellectual property infringement is quite entertaining in its own right, but a recent article in Computer Daily News (Chinese) takes the whole story to “laugh out loud” status. The article is a fairly standard rundown of the iPad clone scene, with the addition of an interview with Engineer Huang of the Hong Kong TESO Computer Technology company.

Huang is a very proud engineer and explains that making fakes is not an easy process. One shouldn’t minimize the importance of the exterior design, for example. Huang seems to know his business quite well, not to mention the importance of intellectual property rights. That’s why when he makes a knockoff, he is very careful in the choices he makes.

In the interview, Huang shares some “tricks” of the master Shanzhai craftsman. The bottom line is that you can “borrow” design elements and overall appearance, but the details must be revised. Huang suggests at least seven changes to avoid design infringement. Why seven and not, say, six or eight? No idea. Isn’t this priceless?

It gets better. Some of Huang’s little changes are rather amusing:

1. Although the fake version copies the iPad black border, it adds a thin silver line.

2. The screen size of the fake has been “fine tuned.” One wonders how much is enough here for Huang. 5mm? .5cm?

3. USB and other ports have different locations from the original.

Huang claims that even though at first glance, the clone is 90% identical to the design of the iPad, this is OK because the differences become apparent upon quick examination. I guess whatever helps you sleep at night, Engineer Huang.

This reminds me of the old fallacy that you can avoid copyright infringement if you only copy a certain percentage of someone's work.

(OMG, that's two IP posts in a row. Is the world going mad? Or am I?)

In Defence Of Patents

Why are people suddenly picking on patents?

 

Die, unbeliever, die!

I made the mistake of being drawn into a debate on whether software ought to be patentable. 

I say a mistake, because you don't so much end up having a debate with other people as taking past each other. You may as well be arguing religion with a zealot.

They're in raptures at the moment, after the Commerce Select Committee were persuaded by their arguments that software patents should not be allowed.

Most of the arguments I've heard about why software shouldn't be patentable are based on a fundamental misunderstanding about how the patent system works. It is difficult to argue with someone when they won't take the time to understand patent basics, and when their primary argument against patents appears to be that patents are unnecessary because copyright already protects software. They ask why should software get dual protection? Why is it being treated differently to other forms of innovation?

But it is the anti-software-patent lobby that wants special treatment. Plenty of other inventions or innovations have multiple forms of IP associated with them.

Take the example of a new chair design. It may be possible to get patent protection for the mechanism that allows the chair to recline. The design of the chair itself may be protectable under the Designs Act. If someone copied the chair (at least under New Zealand's unusual industrial copyright laws) they might end up infringing copyright. The packaging the chair comes in may also be subject to either patent or design protection, and there may be copyright in the labelling. And the brand the product is sold under may be trade-marked.

The other argument the open-source lobby uses is that economists have shown that software patents are bad for the industry. If you do a Google search you find a few bits and pieces, but certainly not the flood of evidence showing harm. I'm not aware of any study done in New Zealand, and based on the New Zealand market, showing that software patents are causing harm.

And if software patents cause harm, why does the US (where you can still patent software) have the strongest software industry in the world? Shouldn't patents be killing it?

On the other hand, the current drafting of the Patents Bill may lead to actual economic harm to a number of electronics and component manufacturers. There seems a good chance that the wording of the Bill excludes from patentability embedded software. If that is in fact the correct interpretation, that is going further than the position taken in Europe (the example commonly cited by open source advocates).

And you know the arguments of your opponents are weak when they make a big deal of the fact that the people arguing in favour of software patents also act for the likes of Microsoft and IBM. Never mind the fact there aren't that many patent attorney firms in this country, and that every firm is bound to act for some big international player. How dare someone who understands patent law make a submission on the flaws in the arguments of people who do not! Those firms also file patent applications for plenty of SMEs - you know, the ones who we're told can't afford to use the patent system, and for whom we're told it's not an option. 

You can't patent stupidity

The anti-patent lobby are also crowing over the Myriad Genetics case in the US. If you read the media reports on this case you'll have concluded some daft buggers tried to patent a human gene and got caught out.

It's well-understood under US patent law (and most countries have a similar doctrine) that you can't patent "products of nature". Myriad tried to seek patent protection for isolated genes associated with breast cancer. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation sued the patentee, Myriad Genetics, and won. The judge reversed years of patent law by ruling that the isolated genes were "products of nature" and so could not be patented.

However, it's obvious to most people working in the biotech industry that these isolated genes don't appear in nature.

If this decision stands then a large section of the biotech industry will see its patent portfolios being wiped out. Biotech is already a highly speculative area (your chances of picking a winner are slim), so anything that significantly diminishes the value of that successful result has the potential to adversely affect R&D in medicine and drug development.

It is almost certain that this decision will be appealed, and my guess is it will be reversed.

What they didn't tell you

This was in the Herald the other day.

Innovative businesses should be careful about getting carried away with registering patents and trademarks while still in their start-up phase, say experts of intellectual property law.

Mark Gavin and Simon Martin, partners in Auckland technology and intellectual property (IP) law firm HudsonGavinMartin, said they were not "patent nay-sayers", but enforcing registered IP in the courts could become an expensive and time-consuming business 

Martin said entrepreneurs needed to decide whether or not the money required to legally protect their product could be better invested elsewhere during their business start-up period.

"You need to weigh up what you are going to get, what you are going to protect, and how much it is going to cost," said Martin. "It's a cost-benefit analysis, and in order to do the analysis you've got to be able to work out what you've got compared with the cost of protecting it."

What the partners of HudsonGavinMartin didn't say is that if you don't take steps to protect your IP at the very start of your business, you probably won't get a second chance.

Patent protection only works if you protect before you use. There are some limited exceptions, and grace periods exist in various countries, but the general rule about patents is that if you don't file at least a provisional patent application before you disclose your invention or use it commercially, you lose the ability to protect it later.

It's the same story with your brand. Some countries have a "first to file" rule, meaning the first person to get on the register gets the mark. If you're planning to set up business in one of those countries, it makes sense to file a trade mark application before you start trading. Otherwise some smartarse will file an application for your mark and will then be able to extort money from you. This has happened to a number of New Zealand companies offshore.

So by all means, spend money on your business, but if your core business asset is your IP, then that money you spend will be wasted unless you've first protected your inventions.

About An Airbag

Yet another bully becomes a wimp when someone dishes it back.

Outspoken talkshow host Michael Laws has been dealt a dose of his own medicine, taking heat from his radio colleagues for driving with an unrestrained child.

Fellow Radio Live presenters John Tamihere and Willie Jackson spoke to the Wanganui mayor on-air yesterday after publicity about an $150 instant fine. 

He was pulled over on the Hobson St on-ramp to the Southern Motorway on Sunday with an unbuckled child on the lap of his estranged partner, Leonie Brookhammer.

In February, Mr Laws spoke out against the parents of 10-year-old Blake Fowlie, who was killed on a trail bike near Paeroa, and Federated Farmers.

And Laws clearly knows nothing abut car safety. Only an idiot would put an unrestrained child in the front seat of a car with airbags.

Mr Tamihere asked why he was defending the lack of restraint for the child.

"Well I'm sorry but it wasn't floating around on the seat all by itself," Mr Laws said.

The mother had been holding the child "dear to her", comforting her. 

Mr Tamihere said the unrestrained child would be a missile in an accident, but Mr Laws said the mother had hold of it and airbags would "go up straight away".

"Okay so baby gets squashed to death," said Mr Tamihere.

Michael Laws should know better than to play the victim. If you're going to spend your working life attacking other people, you can't complain when someone throws something back.

And one of his own too.

Et tu, Brute?

"I Like What I'm Hearing"

Attorney General Chris Finlayson has told journalists that the fact only about 20 people turned up to a hui on the foreshore and seabed issue wasn’t a problem.

He said it’s about the quality of the responses, not the quantity.

It seems that the poor turnout was due to a lack of advertising.

If Finlayson is interested only in “quality”, rather than trying to give as many people as possible an opportunity to be heard on the issue, then I have an idea that will save a lot of needless expense.

He could just stay home and give his speech to himself. He could record the speech and then play it back to himself. I’m sure he’d be pleased by what he heard.

A Good Old Fashioned Rant At The Media

Because nobody in the blogosphere's ever done that before...

The last week or two have seen some interesting developments in our media.

The big news last week was the demise of TV3’s Sunrise breakfast show. Everyone seems to have a theory why the show failed, apart from the obvious one (i.e. it really really sucked). If you want lightweight chit-chat TV while you're eating your cornflakes, lots of celebrity stories and lashings of uninformed opinion, why would you switch from TV1’s show? And how many people are watching TV at this time of the morning anyway? Sunrise had to come up with something new (and I’m sorry, but having a dog on the show doesn’t count). It didn’t and now it is dead.

On the radio it is the same story: an established player continuing to dominate the ratings, while the newest player struggles to make an impression.  Newstalk ZB has continued its ratings success, blitzing its rival Radio Live.

I listen occasionally to Radio Live (Maggie Barry’s afternoon show is my preferred option on the car trip home when there’s a boring story on Checkpoint), but there are some shows on that station I would not listen to, even for money (e.g. Michael Laws). Radio Live keeps winning radio awards, but the blend of rabid and reasonable may be part of the problem. I suspect the rabid are already happy where they are (Newstalk ZB, i.e. Leighton Smith, Larry Williams et al), while many of those who prefer presenters who engage their brain before opening their mouth are probably listening to Radio NZ. I don't see how Radio Live are going to find an audience.

It’s all bad news for the print media too. Subscription numbers for all of the main newspapers continue to fall. The Herald has been hit especially hard, and the Sunday papers have taken a beating. This may be in part due to the recessionary times we live in, but this does continue a gradual downwards trend. Anyone who compares the print media with where things were at ten years ago will seen there has been a general decline in quality. This is evident at its most basic level in the sloppy editing and numerous typos you see in the Herald nowadays.

But the downwards subscription trends mean reduced advertising revenue, and that leads to cost cutting. Cost cutting leads to a reduction in quality, which in turn (I suspect) leads to fewer subscriptions. 

Unable to afford proper investigative journalism, the newspapers go for the easy stories. Reporting on crime or car crashes doesn’t take a lot of imagination, and you can get a lot of the meaty stuff from overseas papers.

I don’t know what the future is for the newspapers. If I knew how they could afford the arrest in quality and revenues I’d probably be rich. But the current commercial model does not work.

The quality of our TV news and current affairs is also poor. Political reporting appears to be less about issues of policy and more about catching out individual MPs. Like the ministerial expenses flap,  or Duncan Garner’s obsession with Chris Carter’s travel expenses (Brian Edwards has a hard-hitting post on that particular crusade).

There are still good media out there. Radio NZ National is still excellent, even though the financial squeeze must at some point start affecting the quality of its service. And some of the material on TVNZ 7 is also pretty good. None of those media rely on advertising revenue or ratings for their survival.

Unfortunately, the prospects of our getting more non-commercial networks or media are distant. And so I suspect we just have to just get used to the diminishing quality of our news media. For those of us who are well educated and internet savvy, there are plenty of places where you can find good analysis of policy and events, as long as you have the critical thinking skills necessary to weed out the dross.

But most people don’t have the time, access or critical thinking skills to hunt this stuff out. So their only chance to catch up with the events of the day is to read the newspaper over breakfast, listen to the radio on the way to work, or watch the TV news at night.

In conclusion... actually I have no conclusion to draw, other than that things look bleak, and can only get worse. At least we have our celebrity news to keep us quiet.

Nobody Is To Blame

The directors of failed company Feltex have blamed their accountants for the troubles that beset the company.

Because we all know it’s always someone else’s fault when things go wrong, I’ve put together a list of the top ten responses directors and corporate executives can use when the receivers or the Serious Fraud Office come knocking:

1. The dog ate my financial statements.
2. I’m sorry but I’m too busy to attend the hearing. I’m meeting the architect to go over some critical design features for my Paratai Drive palace.
3. I have no recollection of anything I said or did as a director of that company. But while you’re here, can I interest you in some first ranking debenture securities?
4. I blame the market. Why didn’t it just keep going up?
5. Honestly, how can a man be expected to keep track of every single failed company he’s involved in?
6. Please get off my superyacht, before my lackeys throw you off.
7. I know thousands of elderly investors have lost everything, but I feel their pain. The stress has affected me so profoundly I can only handle three or four games of golf a week. And some of my mistresses are threatening to leave me.
8. This is all the Government's fault. Thanks to excessive regulation it’s impossible for anyone in this country to make an honest dollar. They forced us to lie, cheat and steal.
9. We only failed because we did not succeed.
10. Stop oppressing me. This is just like what happened to Jesus.

Racial Discrimination Has Ended

The new Race Relations Commissioner has announced he will no longer investigate complaints of racism from minority groups.

The new Commissioner, Walter Krank, took up the role last week, after the tragic disappearance of the previous officeholder in a hot air ballooning mishap.

Mr Krank announced the decision at a press conference yesterday.

"There's no longer any need to take action to address inequality or racism," Mr Krank said. "Ethnic minorities have got it sweet."

The decision has enraged ethnic minority support groups. Sonya Grey, of Campaign Against Racism, said the decision by the new Commissioner was bizarre and wrong.

"Racism is all around us. I hear terrible tales of discrimination every day.  How could the Commissioner just refuse to do his job?"

But Krank today repeated his claim that ethnic minorities do not need extra help.

"Seriously? Have you seen how many women those hip-hop stars get? If you watch Kanye or 50 Cent, they're virtually beating the women away.

"Those guys must be getting it all the time. And you want me to feel sorry for them?"

Mr Krank said other races were doing well.

"Look at Tiger Woods. He's part Asian. Hasn't stopped him from chasing some serious tail, has it now? He must have banged just about every cocktail waitress in the US."

Krank laughed off criticism that many ethnic minorities experienced discrimination, and that the lot of many new immigrants to this country was hard.

"Hard?", laughed Mr Krank. "I'll tell you who's hard. Hard and fast. Lewis Hamilton, the Formula One driver. It's a wonder he isn't too exhausted to drive."

Krank said he would now spend his office hours on the Internet. "There's some fantastic stuff online, I tell you," he said. "But you wonder if some of it is actually real."

One Question Too Many

They led me into a spacious room. It was dimly lit, but even in the shadows I could detect the presence of others – yet more of them in those standout orange overalls, just like the two who guided me in. I guessed they were armed, and that they were highly trained. It would not do to cause a fuss.

I remembered the reason why I was here, breathed in, and tried to find some of the courage that had got me to make the phone call. The appointment had been a simple matter to organise, and my past experience in dealing with these people told me that was out of the ordinary. They had allowed me into the very centre of their power, and I was at their mercy.

The Director General sat before me, a tall strongly-built man whose frame took up most of the leather couch he was poised on. He looked nothing like the file pictures I had seen. But then the DG was an elusive man, and few pictures of him actually existed.

“Ah, Mr ----,” he said smoothly, but not rising. He gestured for me to take the seat opposite him.

I offered my hand, then withdrew it quickly as it became clear this man had no intention of offering the most basic of civilities. He kept his hands to himself, but I could see they were small and flabby, unusual for such a big man.

“I understand you have some questions about our operations,” said the DG. As he spoke I detected an accent – was it East European? But his English was crisp and immaculate.

The man placed a monocle over his right eye. His movements drew my gaze to his face, a fleshy face that two cold eyes punctured. I wondered what unspeakable cruelties those eyes had seen. A deep scar gouged his left cheek.

“Yes… yes, thank you for seeing me.” For a man so clinically cruel as the DG, my fear must have been obvious.

“We are often asked questions,” said the DG, “but we so seldom receive visitors. Especially after what those three gentlemen did. Such a shame what happened to them, don’t you think?”

He was referring in a menacing way to the protestors who had been arrested after trespassing onto the Firm’s facility and causing damage to its equipment. I had known the men well and had been pleased at their acquittal. But now the men were dead, victims of a freak boating accident – at least the police were saying it was an accident. Their funeral service had only been last week.

I spoke. “To be honest, I was surprised you agreed to this interview.”

He drummed his fingers across the leather armrest. “I like to surprise people. You see, when one doesn’t quite know what is about to happen to them, it keeps things fresh and interesting.” I jumped in sudden shock as something heavy hit me. I realised in a second it was a cat leaping onto my lap, a lump of fur and claws. It sneered at me in the way all cats seem to (for I am not a cat person, and cats seem to know it), before leaping to the floor and strolling to its master. The DG stroked the animal as he spoke.

“We were not impressed by the response to our press release,” purred the DG. “People continue to ask difficult, awkward questions about our operations. Including you, Mr ----. We thought it was time we had a little chat.”

I shivered involuntarily. The menace in his voice was unmistakable. I pictured the three coffins slowly being lowered to their final resting place. Was I about to join them?

“I… I have some questions I’d like to ask.”

“Naturally.”

I coughed nervously. “Um… you said in your press release, and I quote, 'The claims that the Waihopai station is “a United States spybase in our midst”, contributing to “torture, war, and the use of weapons of mass destruction” and other “unspeakable evil” cannot be left unchallenged’".

“Do you have an actual question, Mr ----?”

“I do. Your release says nothing about what goes on at Waihopai, and yet you ask us to take your word that nothing unsavoury is happening.”

“And why would it be?” His cold eyes bore into me and I dropped my gaze. I noticed the floor beneath me was tiled – huge tiles. The chair I sat on rested in the centre of one of them. “It is not our role to disprove every wild scurrilous accusation levelled at us. If you have evidence of our complicity in some wrongdoing, please produce it.”

I almost mentioned the dead trio. Something about their demise just seemed wrong. The police claimed they had undertaken a thorough investigation. It was tragic accident, they concluded, how the men had been swept away by a freak wave at a time when such peaceful and placid weather conditions prevailed in the harbour that day. I had expressed my doubts about the investigation on my blogsite.

I never knew any of the three men to show an interest in boats. But then did I really know them that well?

“Do you deny providing intelligence information to the United States?” I asked.

“That is classified. But let me explain a few things, Mr ----. You are an educated man. You must surely know that we are in the midst of a great struggle, a struggle to see which ideology will prevail. On the one side we have the relentless and ruthless forces of extremism and intolerance. And on the other we have a way of life that is worth preserving and protecting.”

I felt emboldened, even angered by this man’s sneering mendacity. “And which side are you on?”

I saw a twitch – just for a second – the only sign of emotion or anxiety I detected over the entire interview. It was gone.

The cat drifted from his lap as he straightened. “Mr ----, you will have heard in your line of work of the expression ‘one question too many’. It may be time we terminated this interview.”

"But I've only just started."
 
"Goodbye Mr ----."
 
Only then did I see the control console next to him, built into his chair, and the big red button that his small hands reached for. I screamed, but it was too late. Now I understood why the tiles were so large. I was in the air, plunging downwards in utter darkness in a descent of terror. I knew that I would hit the bottom soon, whatever or wherever the bottom of this abyss might be. And that would be the end.
 
In that moment I understood why they had summoned me. They didn't like people digging about, asking difficult questions. As far as they were concerned I was a nobody – utterly expendable, but still a danger. Who knows what I might stumble on if left to delve? I already knew more than they could guess about their operations, but now that knowledge would go with me to my grave.

They had won. Or so they thought.

(Will our hero survive to write another blogpost? Send me $100 and I'll tell you.)

No Laughing Matter

It is a few months old, but I just read about this Scottish case, courtesy of a New Zealand Law Society email newsletter.

The defendant, Stuart Hunt, has been charged with "laughing in public" (and you thought the dour Scotsman was a stereotype? It's the law, man!). He apparently had an Asbo out on him after various previous anti-social activities on his part.

Under the court order he was forbidden from staring at people, engaging in slow hand claps at the actions of others, waving objects at people, adopting a menacing stance at anyone or laughing at anyone within the jurisdiction of Highlands council. It is the first time someone has been legally ordered not to laugh.

I'm surprised the Government hasn't introduced similar legislation here*. They could finally deal with Trevor Mallard.

Hunt stands accused of breaching this Asbo by driving passed the Lathams’ daughter and laughing at her. He says he didn’t laugh but merely “smiled a bit” and shook his head when she made a manual gesture at him. As the court at which Hunt will be appearing is within the jurisdiction of Highlands council, and he is still subject to the Asbo, he must be hoping that if the prosecutor makes any good jokes he will be able to bite his tongue long enough to avoid the laughter charges against him being racked up, live, during the hearing.

It would be fairly hard to go through life not staring at anyone too. How long does the stare have to be for? And when is clapping slow?

Happily for Hunt, the charge was not proven.

But for the best Asbo ever:

The “no laughing” Asbo isn’t the only odd one to have been issued. In 2005, Kim Sutton, a 23-year old woman from Bath, was banned from throwing herself into the River Avon or “going into any open water in England or Wales”. In 2007, in Clackmannanshire, William Rae was forbidden from shouting or swearing at his television. But the prize for most remarkable Asbo goes to one issued in 2003 to a 15-year old boy from Alnwick, Northumberland. The order demanded that he “must not be seen in public without alcohol” and ordered him “to act in a manner likely to cause harassment, alarm and distress to others”. He dutifully obeyed the order with gusto and so was brought back to court at which point the drafting errors were identified.

* Seriously, I'm surpised nobody from the law and order lobby has argued for Asbos to be introduced here. Or maybe they have and I missed it. Is it just a matter of time?

Another ACTA Leak

Last week Government officials were assuring us that there was no reason to worry about the ACTA negotiations to be conducted in Wellington next week, and that if a treaty was signed it would not lead to major changes in our copyright enforcement laws.

Now the Montreal Gazette reports on further leaked draft ACTA documents that seem to suggest state agencies will have wide-ranging powers.

The draft text provides for enhanced search powers that will allow border security to comb through the PCs and iPods of travellers. And products that could be used to circumvent the digital locks on media will be prohibited.

Also, people who illegally download material over the internet could be disconnected for up to 12 months. That's different to the six-month maximum proposed under the current bill before Parliament.

What stinks about this is not so much the proposed measures themselves, but the secrecy behind the negotiations. Copyright is an area that divides many people, and if we are to sign up to a treaty that will change the way we enforce copyright laws we should have a thorough public debate about the issues first. Once the draft text has been agreed it will be very difficult for our Government to back out.

So why the secrecy?

Whanau Ora Will Save Us

The Whanau Ora Taskforce Report, which sets out options for improving social, education and other support services for families across New Zealand, has been welcomed by the Government.

“I have no idea what this jolly Whanau Ora thing is all about, but it makes Tariana happy,” said acting Prime Minister Bill English.

The Minister Responsible for Whanau Ora, Tariana Turia, explained the approach behind Whanau Ora.
 
“This is all about talking about finding better ways of doing things. It’s about Government agencies working together, just as they do now, but under the name Whanau Ora. Before we didn’t have a name for this approach, but now we do.”

Mr English confirmed that the new approach to labeling the same thing would be of benefit to Maori, because it would make them feel like someone gives a crap about them.

“It’s business as usual here, but we have to make our support parties feel like they are getting something. We’re pissing all over them on the Welfare and Foreshore and Seabed issues, and they keep holding their cup out for a refill. Don’t worry – there’s plenty more.”

Mrs Turia said she was pleased with the work of the Whanau Ora Taskforce.

“We fought long and hard to get this group called a ‘Taskforce’. The Government wanted to call them a ‘working group’, but we put our foot down. This is a victory for Maori.”

Mrs Turia said Whanau Ora was all about establishing processes and methodologies to enable agencies to leverage resources and integrate strategies, and to foster and nurture synergies across various sectors so as to help families in need.

“I don’t have a clue what that means, but they made me a minister. Yeehah!”

Wasting Money

As a lawyer, I'm overjoyed to see that despite our nation's straightened financial circumstances, we may still have spare cash to throw at a petty, vindictive and pointless lawsuit.

The acquitted Waihopai spybase saboteurs have welcomed news the Crown may try to sue them for $1.1 million for the damage done to government property, despite having about $1000 between them.

After today ruling out appealing their acquittal, Solicitor-General David Collins said he would look at suing teacher Adrian Leason, 45, Dominican friar Peter Murnane, 69, and farmer Sam Land, 26, for the damage they caused to the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) base in Marlborough's Waihopai Valley in 2008.

Why? They have no money.

It's a basic rule of civil litigation that you don't issue proceedings unless you have something to gain. Litigating on principle alone is always a dumb idea. Most cases that go to court settle, but they do so because someone has something the other party wants. What does this trio have? And  besides, they don't seem like the settling type.

So let's assume this goes all the way to a full hearing (unless the Crown can get a quick and dirty summary judgment against the trio) and that the Crown wins. Given the high profile of the case, the Crown would probably hire one or more QCs for the case. Before you know it they'll have racked up $100K plus in fees to get a judgment the Crown can't enforce because the defendants have no money.

Does that sound like a sensible use of our money? These three have nothing.

But in breaking news, it turns out we have a shortage of kidney donors. Maybe the Crown thinks the three have something worth taking after all...

A Couple Of Blog Links

Brian Edwards has a provocative post on TV3's Duncan Garner and what appears to be a beat up story on Chris Carter.

I saw the Garner piece in question and almost wrote a furious tirade myself. But I'm glad Edwards did, as (unlike me) he can actually write.

******

I've just started to follow Sciblogs. It has some great stuff, and not all of it is pointy-headed scientist stuff.

A letter to the editor by a Mr Graham Walker of Timaru (he should have used the pseudonym "Disgusted") gets a serve in this post. Great stuff.

We're Already Free, So Why Deregulate?

According to Rodney Hide and the Act Party red tape is crippling New Zealand business.

Now anyone with half a brain knows this to be utterly absurd. Even right wing think tanks know it to be false. And here's the proof. The Heritage Foundation, as conservative a bunch as you'll find anywhere, ranks NZ as fourth in the world in terms of "Economic Freedom".

That's ahead of the US and every European country.

So next time you hear someone from Act going on about the need to deregulate, slap them.

Right Thinking: Pedal Power

More good sense from our conservative contributor Dr. Frank Shizenhausen

I have always admired the American approach to law and order. They sure understand how to deal with scumbags in the US. Like Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who has told prison inmates that if they want to watch TV they must generate the electricity by pedalling stationary bicycles.

But even this approach doesn’t go far enough. Why should prisoners even have access to a television? These remorseless killers and dirtbags shouldn’t need a reward to do the right thing – the reward is in making good the harm done to society.

So let’s get them pedalling, or running on treadmills. Because what we need is for the most dangerous of our prisoners to be fitter, leaner and tougher.

In fact, why are we limiting ourselves to prison power generation? Our electricity sector is in crisis, and the cost of generating and transmitting power continues to climb. This is largely due to too many nanny state interventions, and woolly-headed environmentalists blocking attempts to build more coal power plants. We have enormous amounts of the stuff, but can’t use it because the climate scientist cabal tells us that to do so will increase our carbon emissions. It has probably never occurred to the climate change lobby that the flatulent nonsense they continue to produce is the real threat.

As for global warming, ask any shivering Siberian what he thinks about it. Why does it have to be all bad?

Back to my point. If we can get prisoners creating enough electricity to power TV sets, why not plug the lot of them into the National Grid? Not literally of course, because as entertaining as watching a bunch of killers getting fried would be, the seared flesh might damage or clog critical components of the system.

No, I’m talking about forcing these wrongdoers to contribute electricity back into the National Grid. It will help them to contribute towards the cost of their incarceration, but if we do it right we could end up creating an entirely new electricity model.

Critics will of course point out that we would need an awful lot of prisoners to generate much power. But we can deal with that problem easily. Why don’t we just provide cash incentives to those working in the justice system to ensure the number of prisoners continues to rise? It wouldn’t be that hard to allocate a percentage of a prisoner’s “earnings” (i.e. the money saved by the prisoner’s generation activities) to the police officers, lawyers and judges responsible for jailing him. Pretty soon just about anyone who steps into a courtroom or even looks at a copper will be in jail.

Not only would this ensure an endless supply of human generators, but our streets would be safer.

But this will never happen, because it’s simply impossible in this country to have a mature, grown-up debate about hauling everyone off to prison and forcing them to pedal as if their lives depended on it. You can blame the liberal news media for that. Damn their eyes!

I say, it it me or is the room spinning? Where did I leave my medicine? Nurse!

John's Diary 6-4-10

Here I am again.

Easter was nice, but now people are asking about our shop opening hours. Well I'm a relaxed guy, and that's why I'd like to see Easter trading laws relaxed. But I'm relaxed about when that might happen. I've said we might take a look at these rules, but once we realise that relaxing them will involve debate and confrontation, we may just relax our stance on relaxing the rules. Don't want to spoil my relaxation, after all. LOL!

I'm off on holiday again to visit our US friends this week. My aides tell me it's something to do with nuclear profiteroles. I guess they'll be off the menu then, because there's nothing worse than a bout of the squirts to make a photo opportunity with the President look bad.

But it was time I took a break. The ungrateful proles will bleat.  They seem awfully attached to their conservation land. I'm told by my aides that some of this real estate is quite picturesque (note to self: look at possibility of buying apartment on one of these sites). But Gerry says modern mining operations are surgical and won't cause harm to the environment. Mind you, Gerry also wants to dig postcard sized holes on Eden Park, which if you ask me is a damn silly thing to do. I gave Gerry a piece of my mind when I heard that, I can tell you. You know what he said? He said "John, I'll do the thinking, you just keep waving".

Paula's getting tough on beneficiaries. You go girl! There's nothing more appealing to the voters of this country than someone who's made good off our welfare system depriving others of it. Paula says it's a much needed kick in the pants, and she's more than happy to be the one doing the kicking. Just as well most people on invalids benefits can't fight back. LOL!

She's got a point though.  There are too many unproductive people doing little and getting fat off the effort of others. And not all of them are in my Cabinet.  Anyway, why don't these people just go out and get a job? The fact there are no jobs, or that the jobs that exist have working hours so unfriendly they make it impossible for anyone with a family to work them, is no excuse. They need to try harder! Or at least be quiet and stop whining. They make me look bad.

This leaky homes thing is going to cost the country a lot of money. It turns out that softening building regulation in the 1990s wasn't such a smart thing to do, and that deregulation will now cost the nation billions. I asked Rodney whether that meant his deregulation bill was a bad idea. He explained it to me really well. You see, 1990s deregulation is like '90s pop music. Remember the Macarena, Seal and Michael Bolton? Gee, they sucked! But the modern variety is much slicker. Rodney's red-tape cutting crusade is like a sweet Nickelback guitar solo, or a pumping Miley Cyrus tune. So it's not at all something we'll look back on in five years and wonder what the hell we were doing.

Talking of being down with the kids, you should have seen me at my old school's 50th birthday celebrations over the weekend. I told a story about my old days at Burnside High that made everyone laugh. I can still remember everything about those golden days. It's only at about 1981 that my memory gets fuzzy. LOL!

I'd better go. Have a plane to catch. My mate Barack might even remember me!

Now The Terrorists Are Using Mindpower!

The Terrorists have unleashed a new evil weapon. Its simplicity is terrifying.

A Qantas passenger is being questioned by Singapore police after threatening to bring down a flight with the power of his mind, the ABC reports.

A spokesman for the Australian airline said a passenger was restrained yesterday evening on QF31 - a Sydney to Singapore flight - after behaving in a "threatening and disruptive manner".  

An ABC reporter on the flight said passengers sitting near the man believed he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol or both, and had religious delusions.

The man was restrained in his chair after threatening to use mind power to bring down the plane about five hours into the seven-and-a-half-hour flight, reporter Nick Luchinelli said.

Authorities are right to take this kind of threat seriously. If we let passengers go about thinking willy-nilly about stuff we'll all end up paying the price. Because how can we be sure They won't think bad thoughts?

Many of you will think this is just ridiculous, and that nobody can bring down a plane just by the power of their thoughts. Wrong! The Secret tells us that we create our own universes, and that what we think will become our reality.

So if the person sitting next to you on the plane looks deep in thought (reading a book is a telltale sign), do the right thing. You don't have time to call the cabin attendants, because that will just tip the Evildoer off, and before you know it you'll be in freefall. Grab something heavy (anything will do: a shoe, a bag, a meal tray) and start smashing the Terrorist over the head with it. Don't stop until that deep-in-thought look has gone.

Do it for all the victims of Terrorism. Do it! Do it!*

* Disclaimer: Please don't actually do this. Or if you do, don't say it was my idea. Thank you.

Hoping It Will All Go Away

The biggest news story in the world by far (apart from who Sandra Bullock's husband's been humping) has been the Catholic Church's efforts to deal with the numerous child abuse scandals plaguing it.

This is bad news for the Pope and the hierarchy of the Church, but they've seen off worse scandals, and the institution will survive.

But the confused and disorganised responses to the crisis suggest there is nobody on top of things. The Pope appears to be hoping the whole thing will just blow over. Why else would he stay silent while others stupidly compare the treatment of the Church to anti-semitism, or dismiss the scandal as "idle chatter"?

I don't know whether the Pope has been personally involved in any of the cover-ups. His supporters say he has energetically pursued abusers and tried to drive them out of the Church. But he and the other notables of the Vatican profess to be devoted to God, while continuing to deny what is becoming increasingly obvious - that many of the cover-ups were sanctioned, if not ordered, by those at the top. If these men have sinned they should be falling to their knees and begging forgiveness. Their public countenances suggest they are still in denial, or are just hoping they'll get away with it.

Hardly the behaviour of men who profess a selfless devotion to God.

"Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus have a sword fight"

What happens when a militant atheist clashes with a Christian school counsellor named Darryl?

This does. Read the email exchange if you want a laugh

Here's a taste:

Dear Darryl,

I understand the importance the resurrection story holds in your particular religion. If I too knew some guy that had been killed and placed inside a cave with a rock in front of it and I visited the cave to find the rock moved and his body gone, the only logical assumption would be that he had risen from the dead and is the son of God. Once, my friend Simon was rushed to hospital to have his appendix removed and I visited him the next day to find his bed empty. I immediately sacrificed a goat and burnt a witch in his name but it turned out that he had not had appendicitis, just needed a good poo, and was at home playing Playstation.

If you're like me you'll probably feel sorry for Darryl by the end of it.

(Hat tip: NZ Atheist Bus)

Sunday Random Links

It's Easter, and also the start of the School Holidays. My two aren't yet at school, but I don't imagine the word "holiday" signifies anything for the parents of those who now have a couple of weeks at home to cause mayhem.

We're a secular household, so the time doesn't have any special significance for us. However, the fervour with which the children attacked the chocolate eggs and bunnies this morning was almost religious in nature.

But there's no time to relax around here, even if the children would allow it. There is a mountain of work to do around the house, and I've spent much of the last three days painting, sanding and wallpaper-stripping various parts of our house. I don't even want to look at the lawn.

I've had no time to post anything especially interesting for a couple of days (so you noticed?), but below is a selection of random stuff that I've found.

Sting discovers the War on Drugs really is an epic fail. His music is risible, but at least his heart's in the right place, bless him.

The Catholic Church is being overwhelmed by a child abuse scandal. But apparently it's all the Devil's fault - not the Pope's. So says chief exorcist for the Vatican, Gabriele Amorth. The NY Times' Maureen Dowd has a stinging response to that and various other attempts by churchmen to deflect blame.

Since that fellow Ratzinger is enemy of the moment, is it time we put him on trial? Here's an intriguing argument that the Pope doesn't actually have sovereign immunity and so could be put on trial for the crimes of his organisation.

But if you're one of those outraged at the damage caused to the venerable institution, and just happen to have a law degree, you could become the Pope's go-to lawyer. A degree in canon law would also help. When you start out at law school plenty of people will tell you that you should combine your bog-standard law degree with something else, such as a BA or a Commerce degree. But given the enormous amount of work the Church's lawyers are going to have over the next few years, what with various scandals, maybe the kids should be getting down with some ecclesiastical studies.

On another tack, the Feelers are hitting back at claims their Rugby World Cup song is rubbish. Too bad the  song Right Here Right Now is still rubbish, and that the band rehashing it is not even particularly well regarded. But it's supposedly "only" the promotional anthem.  The article says that the official World Cup song will be The World in Union. See, there is no God.

The Pete Bethune story is now prominent on The Guardian. The Government appears not to be interested in giving Bethune support, and its sympathies would appear to lie with the Japanese. We're already pissing off our most important trading partner with our inexplicable stance on whaling. Great.

Maybe there will something in that lot worth reading.

Another Sunday Paper Making the Headlines

Oh dear God, are we going to go to this family now every time we need a slice of crime victim outrage?

The teenage killer of Liberty Templeman lived in a spacious six-bedroom house during his murder trial, and was regularly visited there by family until a petition by outraged neighbours in the rural Northland street saw him transferred to a police station.

Liberty Templeman's parents, Rebecca and Andrew, were unaware of the special living arrangements for Theo Kriel, 16, until approached by the Sunday Star-Times yesterday. 

I have two problems with this story.

Firstly, we have this thing in New Zealand called the presumption of innocence. It's a dreadfully old-fashioned principle, and I'm sure the law and order mob will do away with it eventually. Anyway, it works like this: you are presumed innocent until found guilty. Kriel was entitled to the benefit of that presumption until he was convicted. 

And the other thing: isn't it creepy that a newspaper would contact the still-grieving family of a murder victim over this just to sell more copy?

There's a term for that - it's called gutter journalism.