RAINBOW WARRIOR REFEREE

Referee Alain Rolland single-handedly sunk the honour of the Rugby World Cup last night. Rolland showed Welsh skipper Sam Warburton a red card following a spear tackle on French wing Vincent Clerc in the 18th minute of the game. The tackle itself did not appear to be carried out with malicious intent. It did not result in any injury to Clerc. And, it was not at the high end of such infringements where a player would be deliberately driven into the ground. Rolland, for a second time in the tournament showed himself to be an officious spoiler with a prejudice in favour of France. The French winger’s reaction was to grovel on the ground, milking the moment with an Oscar winning performance. The act of a cheat. In the France - All Black pool game, Rolland distracted the All Blacks with a little chat on rule interpretation allowing the French to skulk over the try line unopposed. He, clearly, does not understand the spirit of Rugby or any other sport. Rolland’s father is French and he speaks the language fluently. This apparently, made him a good choice of “neutral” ref for the French games. IRB logic defeats me, Wales and belief itself. I don’t recall seeing anything so contemptible since the French Secret Service came here to bomb a peace ship. If any glory can be salvaged from such a display it all goes to Wales who played on valiantly without their young skipper. Of shame there is plenty, for Alain Rolland and his French friends.

Update: There is a Ban Alain Rolland from officiating Rugby ever again!!! facebook page with more than 1500 members already.

I LOVE NEW ZEALAND

A friend of Lambcut's was in the National Bank branch that is nearest the Parliament end of Lambton Quay, today. Bill English happened to be there too. Apparently, our Deputy Prime Minister fronted up to the teller, as one does, regarding whatever transaction he had in mind. The teller asked him for ID. I love New Zealand.

ALL BUBBLES NO FIZZ

The courageous Whaleoil was challenged by Trevor Mallard to a cycle Race and the rest, as they say is history. Despite Whale training hard - Mallard won.

We said we would put the magnum of Bubbles we were originally given as the consolation prize in the veuve competition up for the winner - we thought that Whale would win - he didnt. Cactus was happy to put up $1000.

She will be feeling the loss much more keenly than us.

So today a perky little Lambcut delivered a very big bottle of Veuve clicquot to the Duck at Parliament.

It was delivered with a note -

"Congrats on your win - Savour the Veuve now. Doubt if you will be celebrating much come November "- From the team at Roarprawn.

BUGGER THE APPLES, WHAT ABOUT THE BOFFINS?

Australia has finally cleared New Zealand apples for export ending a 90 year trade battle. But, (and you heard it first here), sources have revealed to us that the Australian Government is considering excluding New Zealanders and other foreign boffins and bureaucrats from government job opportunities in Canberra.

JUDGING ALONE NOT REAL JUSTICE?

Stuff reports on the Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill which “aims to reduce the number of jury trials by raising the threshold from offences punishable by three months' jail, to those punishable by three years”. The headline reads, “Judging Alone Not Real Justice”. I don’t think so.

There are two basic categories of offences and a third that is a hybrid of the first two.



1. Summary Offences – the smaller stuff like: dangerous driving, breach of periodic detention, cannabis supply.
2. Indictable Offences – the big stuff like: rape, murder, arson, supply of class A drugs
3. The hybrid – Summary Offences triable indictably: covering crimes in between.

A Summary Offence means the accused is heard by a judge alone (as opposed to a judge and jury) in the District Court. The hybrid, the Summary Offence triable indictably, means the accused may elect trial by jury. An Indictable Offence means trial by jury for the accused.

I am a lawyer by training. Let me tell you if I was charged with a summary offence triable indictably, and I was innocent, I would definitely elect to have my case heard by a judge alone. If I were guilty I would choose trial by jury. There will be a wealth of precious academic comment from the legal community supporting trial by jury, but, I would wager most lawyers would elect to do the same as me in practice.

Draw your own conclusion.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS NOT A RIGHT MERELY TO MAKE NOISE

This post follows an exchange of comment on facebook between a science based techie, a journalist and me. The techie starts, “Problem with journalism investigating science is that they erroneously believe in balance. That gives nutjobs like Monckton a voice”. After some discussion about presenting a balanced view, the journalist commented, “When thousands of people are interested in what the alleged quack has to say, that constitutes public interest. Right or wrong. Money? Wish it didn't matter but it does. But in this instance, public interest and money aren't necessarily intrinsic. Part of journalism/media's role is to inform people. If they are asking questions then they deserve some answers. It's not so very complicated or dark - just a mirror of society”.

I wondered to myself if any law or ethics are currently taught to our young ladies and gentlemen of the fourth estate. If journalists want to present a “balanced” view then they need to let the public compare apples with apples. Scientists by definition carry out their work according to established methodologies. Any results are then subject to the rigor of peer review. Balance in science journalism would be putting one scientist up against another. Put the loop quantum gravity proponent up against the string theorist. If journalists merely want to generate revenue by presenting outrageous opinion, then interview the creationist alongside the lady who thinks it’s turtles all the way down. Don’t mix them up. The first two are scientists, the second two are not.

The problem with poor standards of journalism in relation to science is the harm misinformation perpetrates. Quackery and pseudo science affect the public’s understanding of, inter alia, vaccination, cancer treatments and earth and climate science. Thoughtless dissemination of minority non-science based views can and does cost lives. By all means let lunatics have their say on their own page or on a soap box in Hyde Park. But, the constraints of quality journalism outweigh the public’s desire for ready access to odd-ball opinion through mainstream media, and, the right of mainstream media to generate revenue without constraint. Freedom of speech is not and never has been undelimited in any society, and, it is certainly not the right merely to make noise. Like all rights it comes with responsibilities. In this case, responsible journalism.

RIGHT NOW ON AN ISLAND FAR, FAR AWAY....

New Zealand’s mint has produced coins for Niue featuring Star Wars characters including Yoda, Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker on one side and the Queen on the other. With a population of 2000, the tiny hurricane prone island nation is trying to add to its revenue by attracting the interest of international Star Wars fans and coin collectors. May the force be with them.

NEVER MIND THE QUALITY, FEEL THE WIDTH

Duke Nukem spied Graham Henry in Lambton Quay today, carefully feeling the quality or perhaps the width of an All Black jersey on display outside a sports shop. The Duke said, “Never mind the quality, he is feeling the price”. In fact, the New Zealand Rugby Union backed Adidas over the price of the All Black jersey. On the other hand, Prime Minister John Key called the situation "a shame". His advice to Adidas was, "I've always found once you're in a hole you should stop digging."

Finance 101

We like this from American financial author Dave Ramsey, "If the US Government was a family, they would be making $58,000 a year, they spend $75,000 a year, and are $327,000 in credit card debt. They are currently proposing BIG spending cuts to reduce their spending to $72,000 a year. These are the actual proportions of the federal budget and debt, reduced to a level that we can understand."

Hat tip to David Bisman.

PACIFIC STINKS

This morning’s Dom report of 160 passengers allegedly wrongfully detained in Wellington airport by Pacific Blue is a shocker. The same situation occured on a Qantas flight I was on from Deli a few years ago. Let me tell you, I have never flown Qantas again. Adding insult to injury to affected passengers, they only detained those in economy class. Fortunately, I was flying business class on that occasion but was horrified on behalf of my fellow travellers. The poor buggers looked and smelt like the living dead when we were finally all herded onto an available plane the next day. I understand India has tidied up its act in recent times with regard to its treatment and processing of travellers. New Zealand appears to be going backward. It’s unacceptable in an OECD country so dependent on its tourist industry. Pacific Blue appears to regard its passengers as cattle. An airline to be avoided. And, where were Wellington Airport's staff and systems.

MAKING MOVIES - by MED

The Ministry of Economic Development has now, seemingly, ventured into the business of movie making. It’s made a little movie, apparently aimed at private industry, about how to tender on GETS, the Government Electronic Tendering System. Michael Osborne, Senior Procurement Analyst features in the little movie. He has the screen presence of a radish. The little movie, embedded here for your viewing convenience, is deathly boring, is aimed at a very low level, and is unlikely to circulate widely on that basis. In any event, the same information should be on the GETS website, in text, without the expense to taxpayers of MED’s rather uninspiring movie efforts. Tendering through GETS is an onerous, time consuming and complex task at the best of times. If you need to view a How To video you are excessively unlikely to have the capacity to win a government tender. Perhaps MED would be better to make a movie on the efficient use of taxpayer funding.

The Arbitrary Vector

When I was in the Middle East I asked my Arab friends why they do not do more to control their terrorists. They looked thoroughly pissed off and asked why we in the West do not do more to control our criminals. It’s a fair point and one I had not pondered until then. We don’t know yet if Norway’s gunman is a lunatic, a criminal or a terrorist. And, it won’t matter to his victims how we define him. What we do know is that efforts to control such horrors are Sisyphean by nature. How do you find a solution to an arbitrary vector with no boundary conditions specified.

BURQAS ON BUSES

New Zealanders don’t know a burqa from niqab and hijab. A burqa covers the whole body, Afghani style. Niqab is the eye slit jobby and hijab covers only the hair and neck. I have worn hijab myself along with jeans and an ordinary shirt. It’s no different than a light hat and scarf. Young Palestinian girls dressed me up in it for a bit of fun and I wanted to know what it felt like. I wore it round for half a day in the refugee camp where I was staying. It certainly blended you into the crowd and it was not uncomfortable. I went jogging first, then walked down to the beach and visited the graveyard near the beach. Nobody took a blind bit of notice of me. That had not been the case the day before, when I wandered around the camp without Hijab. The camp has a population of around 30,000. You can’t get in without a permit. The Lebanese army guard the entrance at an initial checkpoint. The PLA guard a secondary checkpoint. Everyone knows everyone, at least by sight. Without Hijab I was a stranger and was immediately recognised as such. Hijab gave me anonymity. It can look very pretty. I attended a wedding near Tripoli in Northern Lebanon – not Tripoli in Libya. The women looked fabulous. Palestinians take wedding cakes very seriously – see the photo. I was told the Quran directs that men and women dress modestly. They told me there was nothing in the Quran that dictated burqa or niqab. And, I never saw anyone in Lebanon wearing niqab or burqa. We do not ordinarily allow people here to enter banks, courts and various other forums with their faces covered, and quite rightly too. If I went to Saudi Arabia (friend of the US) or Iran (enemy of the US) I would have to wear what their law directs on pain of serious punishment. I recommend that Muslim women here respect our law and our culture. Hijab is quite enough. It identifies you as Muslim, it is modest and it adequately fulfils any constraints that might be inferred from the direction of the Quran.

30th ANNIVERSARY OF THE SPRINGBOK TOUR

July, thirty years ago the Springboks came to New Zealand. My then husband and I had a sheep and cattle farm in the Takitimu Mountains in Northern Southland. That’s the heartland. You can’t get anymore heartland than Northern Southland. People there were, and still are, rugby mad, me included. To me, the whole sad mess was never about the rugby. It was all about other things: ignorance, paucity of mind and poverty of spirit. The average age of the farming population then, before the southern dairy boom, was quite high, around 45 I guess. And archconservative. I did not support the Springbok tour. As far as I knew, I was in a minority of one. I was physically attacked in the pub by a six foot, thirty-something, Christ's College educated neighbour for voicing my support for the ANC and their request that the tour be cancelled. Let me tell you, money and a privileged education are no guarantee of an open mind. If there is anything more repellent in this world than a hick with money and influence, I don’t want to know what it is. With hindsight it was foolhardy to voice such views in such a time and place, but, I was 18 in 1981. My husband brought members of the Red Squad to our house to drink beer and revel in their tales of brutality. I was forced to feed them, serve them beer and suffer their pumped up contempt for people with views like mine. It was humiliating. Taking a stand against the Springbok tour damaged me socially. I paid a price for it locally for most of my twenties. I was pleased when we left the district in my thirties for a new farm near Gore. Don’t laugh. Gore is a good place to live. Some of the best people I know live in Gore. But that’s another story.

With the 30^th anniversary of the Springbok tour there will undoubtedly be a rehashing of events. I hope it doesn’t spoil the rugby again. I expect there are hundreds of stories like mine. Stories of the damage the tour did to us. We grew up then and we shouldn’t forget it. But, I hope with all my heart that the Crusaders win the Super 15. It’ll be great for Christchurch. Great for us all.