The Jackal

19 Feb 2020

Mike Hosking contradicts Stats NZ


If you follow politics in New Zealand you've likely noticed that the right wing have been going on and on about the Coalition Government failing to reduce poverty. In fact they’ve been incessantly claiming, in the absence of any conclusive data, that poverty has been getting worse.

Yesterday, NewstalkZB reported:

Mike Hosking: Attacking 'the rich' won't help Labour's anti-poverty pledge 
The numbers simply don’t lie, and the government can’t have it both ways. They can’t argue how well we are doing economically, which we are not any longer, sadly, and then fail to explain why every social indicator they have has exploded. 
They promised to tackle child poverty - they haven’t. 

Unfortunately for the deluded Mike Hosking Statistics NZ also reported yesterday that the number of people living in poverty, along with numerous other social indicators, improved under the Coalition Government.

Four and a half hours before Hosking published his ignorant rant the Minister of Finance, Grant Robertson, reported:

Kiwis better off under Coalition Government 
Stats NZ reported today that average household disposable incomes after housing costs rose 4.9% in 2019. This was the highest rise in four years and came as Stats NZ said average housing costs were unchanged over the year, while wages rose. 
… 
Today’s data also showed: 
  • 46,000 people were lifted out of poverty in 2019 based on moving above the measure of 50% of disposable income after housing costs.
  • The median household disposable income after housing costs has risen 10% over the past two years. In 2017, this measure had fallen 1.8%.

The National Party used to claim that there wasn’t a way to measure the number of people living in poverty. John Key even said that it was easier to count rodents than kids in poverty. But as soon as the right wing lost the 2017 election they and their propagandist mates wouldn’t shut up about it.

Now they will do their best to ignore these statistics clearly showing that the Coalition Government is delivering on their promises. Things like increasing the minimum wage, less unemployment (particularly for Maori) and providing increased hardship assistance to unemployed people are just a few of the changes helping to reduce poverty in New Zealand. There is of course a lot more that can be done, but 46,000 Kiwis lifted out of poverty in just one year is a damn good start.

The audacity of the right wing however to blatantly lie about poverty increasing, when it has in fact reduced significantly, clearly shows that they’re untrustworthy. You simply cannot believe a single word they say, especially old fools like Mike bloody Hosking.

18 Feb 2020

Another fraudulent $100K National Party donation


So the Serious Fraud Office has another secret $100,050 National Party donation before the Courts in a major scandal that looks set to quash any chances Simon Bridges had of winning the 2020 election.

Yesterday, Newsroom reported:

The Serious Fraud Office prosecution of four people over donations to the National Party involves not one but two $100,000 donations - in June 2017 and June 2018 
Court charging documents released to the media by order of Auckland District Court Judge Edwin Paul today show that three of the four defendants - whose names are suppressed ahead of a hearing next week - each face two joint charges of deception over a sum of $100,000 donated to National in 2017 and $100,050 donated to the party in 2018. The maximum penalty if convicted on the charge is seven years' imprisonment. 
The fourth person is charged jointly with the others only over the second $100,050 donation - but also faces one charge of providing misleading information to the SFO.

Of course misleading investigators is also an offence with the maximum penalty imprisonment for one year or a fine not exceeding $15,000.

The SFO describes the offending over the donations in these words: "The defendants adopted a fraudulent device, trick or stratagem whereby the ... donation was split into sums of money less than $15,000 and transferred into bank accounts of eight different people before being paid to, and retained by, the National Party."
For the fourth person's charge of misleading the SFO, the charging document says: "In the course of complying with a requirement ... of the Serious Fraud Act 1990 supplied information knowing it was false or misleading in a material particular." 
The SFO says of that charge that this defendant told investigators a $100,000 sum transferred to their account was a deposit for a building on another person's property - when the money had been intended as a donation to the National Party. Further, in 2019 the defendant created, signed and back-dated a contract to that end, when no real contract for that work existed. The office alleges the made-up contract copied wording from an unrelated contract.

Under the Crimes Act a person convicted of document falsification is liable to imprisonment for a term of up to 5 years or to a maximum fine of $200,000.

However the real kicker here is the charge documentation which indicates that the people being prosecuted were simply following the directions of the current National Party leader, Simon Bridges.

Here’s exactly what Bridges said while talking with Jami-Lee Ross about the secret $100,000 donation from Zhang Yikun.

Jami-Lee Ross: The money’s fine sitting there in the Botany account. I don’t know what your arrangement is with Goodfellow or not, that’s all. 
… 
Simon Bridges: So we need to tell them, I get that. I get that. I’m going to tell him – I think he’ll accept it, I just need to explain to him what it is I want it for.

Apparently Bridges wanted the secret $100,000 to pay for “some more attack ads” on the Government. As a side note, the National Party recently lost an appeal to the Advertising Standards Authority over a Facebook ad that had been ruled misleading.

Uh, unless I get him to come along to, unless I get him to – leave it with me, I might talk to McClay as well, see what he’s got up his sleeve. Cause Peter is going to be at this meeting with me in Wellington, that’s all. If I then brought him after that – good work though man, that’s a lot of money.

So there you have it...Bridges said he would talk to Peter Goodfellow, the President of the National Party, about how best to handle the secret $100,000 donation from Zhang Yikun, a wealthy Chinese businessman who was led to believe that he was paying for another Chinese MP to be instated in the National Party.


However what the other $100,050 hidden donation was paying for is at this stage anybody’s guess? In the absence of Simon Bridges coming clean, we're left to ponder about what exactly another large and secret payment to the National Party was actually purchasing?

There are some clues though. On Q+A last Sunday, Bridges had a disastrous interview where he let slip that if elected National would remove the foreign buyers ban that limits foreigners purchasing property in New Zealand. Perhaps this sort of policy change, which would obviously favour Chinese property investors who have substantial financial backing from their Government, is what the donor purchased with such a large sum of money?


Bridges removing this ban doesn’t make much political sense otherwise. In fact such a change would obviously worsen the housing crisis, a problematic issue that the National Party has been at pains to target in their numerous attack ads against the Labour led Government.

The fact that the unscrupulous National Party once again tried to hide a large donation means it was likely provided to pay for something that the voting public wouldn't accept or in the very least view with distaste. Why else would you attempt to hide such vast amount of money from public scrutiny? Why else would you mislead the SFO about it?

Simon Bridges really should be questioned thoroughly by our mainstream media about this, because he is ultimately responsible. As opposition leader he cannot distance himself from major fraudulent activity in the National Party that appears to be undertaken with his knowledge and consent.

The democratic country of New Zealand, which is apparently the least corrupt in the world, needs to make sure that elected officials act in the best interest of all citizens, not just those who can afford large and secret donations. Public officials being bought by the highest bidder isn’t an acceptable part of our political system, which must be changed to ensure that dishonest politicians who make policy for cash are removed from positions of power quickly and effectively.

Clearly Simon Bridges was directly involved in how at least one of the secret $100K donations were handled. The National Party should therefore be getting ready for a leadership change; otherwise they again risk trying to back somebody who is completely lacking in any semblance of credibility.

15 Feb 2020

NZ mainstream media promotes racism

After cross-examination Jones knew he would lose the defamation case he took against film maker Renae Maihi. That’s why he threw in the towel. The weight of evidence was clearly against the old tycoon with the defense presenting fifty articles to confirm Jones’ racist views.

Being unable to harass somebody into silence with the High Court must be pretty demoralising for a bully used to getting his own way. But it also highlights another far more pressing issue; New Zealand’s mainstream media promotes racism.

The defense successfully argued that Jones’ views expressed in various interviews and articles, particularly his egregious ‘Māori gratitude day' commentary published in the NBR, are in fact racist.

Yesterday, the NZ Herald reported:

Sir Robert Jones abandons defamation case against Renae Maihi 

Sir Robert Jones has dropped his defamation case mid-trial against Renae Maihi, who set up a petition after he wrote an article which suggested Māori should be grateful to Pākehā for existing. 
In a statement provided to the Herald, Jones said he had today "discontinued my proceedings against Maihi", and also understood she intended to take down her petition. 
"I filed these proceedings because I was deeply offended by Maihi's allegations. 
"I am not a racist," he said. 
"I now accept, however, Maihi's offence taking was a sincerely held opinion.

As if someone would present a petition to parliament to strip Jones of his knighthood if their offence taking wasn't a sincerely held opinion. Honestly!

For over five decades New Zealand has had to put up with Jones’ racist rants being widely disseminated. Even though there’s nothing new or significant about what he’s been saying, Jones has had free reign to pontificate about a country and topics he appears to know very little about. In effect he’s been running around lighting the fires of hatred that has assuredly caused people harm.

It’s not just Jones who is to blame though. Many media outlets facilitated his racism through publication. Editors could have easily put a stop to Jones’ animosity towards Maori, but instead idealised him and allowed their syndications to be used as propaganda tools for a privileged bigot! In my opinion these complicit editors need to be moved on.

People power may have won the day, but the bigger battle is getting New Zealand’s mainstream media to halt their prejudicial promotion of racism…and that seemingly unattainable goal might take more than the high court to resolve.

13 Feb 2020

Bob Jones - old racist prick!

So the guy who advocated for public burning and beheading feels offended because someone called him a racist!

Perhaps Bob Jones hasn't heard of the very old saying; Live by the sword, die by the sword?

I mean for someone who often writes opinionated nonsense about Maori; this is a ridiculous case to take and a complete waste of court time.


Yesterday, 1 News reported:

Debate about what constitutes racism as Sir Bob Jones defamation case continues 

Debate about what constitutes racism has been at the centre of day three of Sir Bob Jones’ defamation case in the Hight Court in Wellington. 
Sir Bob, one of the country’s richest people, is suing filmmaker Renae Maihi for defamation, accusing her of calling him a racist, the author of hate speech and saying he was unfit to hold a knighthood. 
Ms Maihi started an online petition in 2018 calling for Sir Bob to be stripped of his knighthood after he wrote a controversial National Business Review column. 
In it, he called for Waitangi Day to be replaced with ‘Māori Gratitude Day’, arguing that without British immigration Māori would not be alive today. The property tycoon said the column was harmless joking and the start of a satirical series about gratitude days.

I’m not sure why 1 News cut Jones’ racist rant short. Here’s a small excerpt of his prejudicial drivel that was published by the National Business Review:

I have in mind a public holiday where Maoris bring us breakfast in bed or weed our gardens, wash & polish our cars & so on, out of gratitude for existing. And if any Maori tries arguing that if he/she didn't have a slight infection of Irish blood or whatever, they might be better for it, the answer is no sunshine."

So just to clarify, Bob Jones wants a return to slavery. It pains me to have to point this out but what Jones is saying isn’t satire. In reality his offensive idea is an attack on indigenous people from all around the world. Only a truly intolerant fool would promote a return to the bad old days of slavery and only an equally racist editor would put such decrepit ideas to print.

But now that someone has called Jones out on his racism, he doesn’t like free speech?

Clearly Renae Maihi was just saying and acting on what everybody else was thinking. Jones is a racist and racists simply shouldn’t be knighted in the first place. If by some idiocy, like the size of their bank accounts, they are knighted and continue to promote bigoted ideas, they should lose their award without any further ceremony.

That’s why at time of writing nearly 90,000 people have signed the Revoke racist "Sir" Bob Jones of his Knighthood petition. Over a thousand people have donated more than $40,000 to help Maihi’s considerable court costs as well.


One thing that racists often do is disregard indigenous people’s rights, culture and identity. Jones does this all the time and should therefore be considered a racist. If he’s not mocking Maori for their circumstances or appearance, he’s belittling Maori culture in some of the most widely read syndications in New Zealand.

Jones knows that the controversy he creates by claiming things like Maori are blackmailing the Crown with the Treaty of Waitangi, which is in fact a signed contract, ensures his articles attain significant readership. He also knows that having his divisive views appear as relevant commentary emboldens other racists.

Acrimonious old fools like Jones shouldn’t be promoted as being relevant. Their hatred simply shouldn't be published in the first place. If they are then it's the publics right to treat them with the contempt they deserve. But until such divisiveness ends New Zealand cannot hope to create a more inclusive and equal society.

4 Feb 2020

Oranga Tamariki must change

If you haven’t watched Newsroom’s video showing Oranga Tamariki staff attempting to uplift a newborn baby yet you should do so. Although it's not the worst case as far as interventions go, it’s certainly not a good look for the Government. Because of this controversy there’s been a plethora of articles written, many discussing the pros and cons of Oranga Tamariki.

However the debate has unfortunately become terribly polarised with many from both sides often resorting to mudslinging instead of participating constructively. Obviously the contentious and fractious nature of the topic matter isn’t very conducive to finding solutions that actually work.

On one side are those who’re outraged at the way Oranga Tamariki operates. Some believe that the failed system continues to be a by-product of colonialism and is committing genocide because of the disproportionate amount of Maori children being uplifted. A number of articles showing just how bad things are have been published, giving rise to people asking for the organisation to be completely overhauled or even shut down.

Of course it’s not only Maori who want things to change. Most of the people working on the front lines treating injured children want to see improvement as well. Many however are generally supportive of Oranga Tamariki’s work. Clearly some intervention to reduce harm and save lives is required because children’s futures are at stake. But everyone can see that the current ambulance at the bottom of the cliff approach really isn’t working.

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Oranga Tamariki review: 'Treatment of Māori women has been inhumane' - Dame Naida Glavish 
A report on Oranga Tamariki has revealed harrowing stories of the removal of Māori babies and is calling for a complete overhaul of the ministry. 
The Māori-led investigation, which started six months ago, is one of five into the ministry and was spearheaded by the Whānau Ora Commissioning agency. 
Official figures released by the Children's Commissioner in January showed Māori babies were five times more likely to end up in state care than non-Māori last year and their rate of urgent entries into state care has doubled since 2010.

It’s no secret that the disproportionate majority of children in the care of the Chief Executive are Maori, giving rise to justified grievances and criticism of the Government. Maori more than most therefore have a vested interest in fixing what is a noticeably broken and often culturally insensitive system.

Dame Naida Glavish, who chaired the governance group overseeing the review, said the report confirmed systemic failure and discrimination. 
"The Crown is not honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi. There's been unprecedented breaches of human rights and the treatment of Māori women has been inhumane." 
"We can clearly see from the volume of evidence and the heavy handed approach inflicted on this whānau that something is so systemically wrong. This entrenched behaviour is plain unjust," Dame Naida said.

Because of the Oranga Tamariki scandal, many have called for increased Iwi based services to keep mothers with their children. Thankfully we’re now seeing a slight move in the right direction. But it’s unlikely that the current Government’s commitment to change will be implemented on a scale required.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said Oranga Tamaraki had needed change and there were signs of progress. 
… 
"To date I think everyone would acknowledge that we did need change. It was only three years ago that Oranga Tamariki was created ... and so it really is still trying to find its feet as an organisation [it] is intended to be. 
"There are signs of what we're wanting to see. For instance we've got strategic partnerships with four iwi, Ngāi Tahu, Ngāpuhi, Waikato-Tainui and Tūhoe." There had also been a 42 percent increase in funding to iwi organisations working with children over the past two years, and a decrease in the number of Māori babies coming into state care, Ardern said.

It should be noted that the current administration is only undoing some of the destructive policy changes implemented by National and not rectifying most of the inherent problems that CYFs had and still does have now that it's operating under a different name and Government.

Children's Minister Tracey Martin said many of the cases in the review predate Oranga Tamariki, and was part of the reason the ministry was formed in the first place. 
She agreed Oranga Tamariki must be more local in its delivery of services, and said that validates the operating model she passed through Cabinet last year. 
Prevention and early intervention is key to actually turning around what has been historical - over decades - terrible outcomes for Māori children. 
"Already Oranga Tamariki has created strategic partnerships with some of the largest iwi in New Zealand.

Instead of owning the problem, the Government seems to have adopted a business as usual approach. Tracey Martin is correct that prevention and early intervention is the key, but the Minister appears to be working harder to close the politically damaging issue down instead of making any required or significant policy changes.

Public acceptance of the status quo and its continued failure to significantly reduce the number of abused children has diminished markedly. Instead of treating the symptoms, the Government must do more to treat the root causes. There are long-term solutions available like significant investment to reduce people's financial hardship and material deprivation. However there appears to be little willingness from both sides of the political spectrum to address the main drivers of domestic violence.

When it comes to an apparent bias against Maori, politicians aren’t gaining much traction with those who see ethnically based prejudices within the justice system inhibiting their societal and economic success. Evidently a societal bias is also leading to an increase of family violence within dysfunctional families. It cannot be emphasised enough that the number one cause of newborn babies being killed by parents is because of financial distress. The Government must therefore look at addressing the bigger picture here.

Along with other inherent biases in the system, studies show that severing the attachment bond increases a person’s likelihood of being detained at her Majesty's pleasure. Children who’re removed from their families are more likely to suffer from a number of negative consequences later in life, including academically. Unfortunately the Government and our Justice System puts little emphasis on these adverse impacts despite them being well documented.

It’s no coincidence that the disproportionate number of Maori children being uplifted by the state also equates to the percentage of Maori in jail. One could even be cynical enough to say that the private prison industry lobbies the Government for increased punitive measures and advocates for the removal of at risk children from their parents because it equates to a steady stream of profitable prisoners. The Government must do more to break this destructive cycle.


Combine the failings of Oranga Tamariki, such as a lack of properly trained staff, high attrition rates and improper vetting processes, with a deficiency of drug rehabilitation and violence reduction programs within communities and it’s little wonder the problem is becoming worse.

Without accredited programs how exactly are parents with children caught in the Chief Executives grasp meant to undertake let alone prove that they've been rehabilitated? The authorities are basically telling mothers, many being victims of domestic violence themselves, to simply change their and their partners behaviour without much if any help to do so.

It’s apparent that the current system, which puts too much emphasis on personal responsibility, is terribly unfair towards Maori and therefore must change if New Zealand is to become a more egalitarian society and consequently a safer place to live in.

1 Feb 2020

200,000 empty houses in New Zealand

I hope we all finally agree that there actually is a housing crisis in New Zealand? Unfortunately the last National led Government largely ignored the problem, with John Key even making things worse by selling thousands of state houses to National’s rich property investor mates.

Of course the housing crisis isn't just about a lack of supply. It’s also fuelled by a low waged economy and disproportionately high rental prices meaning many Kiwis are unable to save for a deposit. In fact a low owner occupancy rate is one of the largest problems facing our great nation. People simply aren’t invested in their communities anymore.

So it’s good to finally see some attention being given to the issue.


Today, NewstalkZB reported:

Empty houses for homeless: 'Phone call from Housing NZ not likely to change owners' minds'

Auckland Council and the Government are looking at alternative options to housing the city's homeless.

Mayor Phil Goff has suggested using so-called ‘ghost houses’ and asking their owners to open them up for housing New Zealand tenants.

Executive Officer of the New Zealand Property Investors Association Andrew King told Heather Du Plessis-Allan a property may be empty for a raft of reasons.

“There are all sorts of reasons why they could be empty. It doesn’t necessarily mean they are going to be available to someone.”

He said he wouldn’t have a clue how many so-called ‘ghost houses’ are out there.

“I don’t think there’s any really good statistics on this.”

The negative effects resulting from these ghost houses, like homelessness, should not be underestimated. It’s obvious a failed market driven housing system that has resulted in many under-utilised assets throughout the country causes many social problems.

But I'm not sure that making requests to tenant ghost houses with homeless people will work. Many of these properties are worth millions of dollars and most speculators won't have a bar of helping out their fellow Kiwis because they think the benefits don't outweigh the risks.

So what is the extent of the problem? Well unlike the homelessness rate there are in fact reasonably good statistics to show how many ghost houses NZ has, which is something Andrew King would know if he bothered to read the news.


Yesterday, Newshub reported:

Push for people to allow homeless to live in empty investment properties

Auckland's housing crisis is now so bad the Mayor wants to try and convince people with empty investment properties to let homeless people live in them.

They're what are known as "ghost-houses" and they're becoming more and more common.

Now there's a push to get homeless people into them due to how limited supply is.

"We're not only having a housing crisis; it's turned into a housing disaster. We're seeing families actually borrowing money to pay the rent," said Bernie Smith from Monte Cecilia Housing Trust.

At the 2018 census, there were nearly 1.9 million dwellings in New Zealand.

Nearly 200,000 of those were unoccupied. The vast majority, nearly 40,000 were in Auckland.

With an average of 2.7 people per household in New Zealand these 191,649 unused properties could house around 517,452 people.

That’s more than half a million Kiwis that could be making better contributions to our economy through increased productivity. Instead, many people are forced to reside in overpriced and substandard housing, which is a drain on our health system not to mention an overall increase to human suffering.

These ghost houses are obviously a drain on our economy and simply limiting a few foreigners from purchasing property and failing to put any substantial downward pressure on house prices through increased supply clearly hasn’t helped to fix the housing crisis to the degree required.

Instead of leaving many thousands of Kiwis to remain the victims of a failed neoliberal ideology, which has resulted in incredibly overpriced housing with significant long-term costs to society, the Government must do more work towards moving people out of unhealthy homes; off park benches and into better more affordable housing. Reducing the number of empty houses would go a long way to achieving this worthy goal.

But unless house prices decline dramatically and over a sustained period of time, the speculators simply won’t relinquish their under-utilised property investments. The perverse incentive for them to simply leave houses unoccupied because the capital value of their properties keeps increasing each year is too strong, and clearly needs to be tackled through some targeted legislation.

Therefore the only option the Government logically has, if it wants to significantly reduce homelessness and find a realistic remedy to the other negative consequences caused by these ghost houses, is a targeted Empty House Levy to incentivise owners to rent or sell their unused properties. Anything less is just lip service.