Posts tagged NZ Herald


Give the judge (and the bus driver) a medal I say!


Today the NZ Herald reported how a judge threw out an assault charge against a bus driver who was protecting a school girl from a bully, and then the judge had the bully taken to the cells by the police to teach him a lesson.

Well done to Gore District Court, Judge Kevin Phillips I say!  Give him a medal!  And one to the Bus Driver while you are at it.

Jim McCorkindale, 70, of Gore in Southland, told the Weekend Herald that while dropping off children last July, he saw two boys pulling the hair of a girl and got out of his driver’s seat to try to stop it.

“I went over and touched the boy on the arm to attract his attention, and that was the assault.”

When the boy did not respond to being told to stop, “I threatened to hit him in the ribs, and he flinched and let the kid’s hair go to protect his ribs”, Mr McCorkindale said.  “But I never touched him again.”

The boy had continued misbehaving after Mr McCorkindale returned to his seat.

Children on the bus called the police and he found officers waiting to talk to him when he finished his run.

When police rejected the option of diversion, Mr McCorkindale received a court summons.

Well done for using COMMON SENSE – something clearly missing with the police in this case.  What I would like to see here is an investigation as to why the driver was even charged.  Waste of tax payer resources, and also massive over reaction!

This is an example of why so many wanted changes made to the relatively recent changes to S59 of the crimes act (and the resultant referendum, and follow up)- that were DESIGNED to protect children from child abuse, but in my view (and clearly shown in this case) had the danger of criminalising normal corrective behavior.    MP John Boscawen’s had an excellent private members bill proposing that parents (and those in the position of parents) can, quote, use reasonable force to correct their children’s behaviour. Unfortunately it was likely to be voted down, and never got to the select committee to enable public input.

Black and White Version: Well done to the judge and the bus driver.  Boo hiss to the Police (in this case).

Update: Seams that everyone I can find in the blogosphere agrees!

  • WhaleOil
  • Mandm
  • Kiwiblog (although DPF thinks he should get a promotion, not a medal – and I think he has a better idea that I do!)
  • Beretta (and everyone else I can find).

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon


Andrew Little and the EPMU union WAY out of touch on AirNZ’s stance


Today, through the NZ Herald, Andrew Little, secretary of the Engineering, Printing & Manufacturing Union (EPMU) (and president of the Labour Party) attacked AirNZ’s stance on drink driving of it’s staff, and so called”Grubby Deals” in obtaining info from the Police.

Let’s be clear here (black and white even?): I think if AirNZ has a zero tolerance for drink driving, and a person is caught drink driving then AirNZ not only has the right to, but SHOULD take action.  Health and safety is FAR more important that nanny state “privacy considerations”.  Get real Andrew Little!  The public would have VERY little sympathy for your stance.  In this case AirNZ are disputing the facts, so it’s not even clear what they do info-swap:

Mr Fyfe retorted to the police in a letter he made public that the claims were unsubstantiated.

I for one would even go so far to say that if police pull over a pilot and they are over the limit and they are on the way to work they MUST advise the airline, or else we end up with issues like this that happened in the UK, and again here. (Remember the threshold for pilots is ZERO, many airlines have a “no drinking 12 hours before flying rule).

UPDATE: Seams AirNZ are dammed if you do, and dammed if you don’t here.  This story in the Herald when staff are NOT fired (even when AirNZ can’t identify them) it’s somehow AirNZ’s fault.

Black and White Version: The EPMU is out of touch. Unions should stop defending ALL staff, and stick to those that deserve support.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon

rugby ball

Kiwis show little faith in NZRU – desipte the headline to the contrary!


Today the NZ Herald reported Public show faith in NZRU’s handling of rugby.  However, IMHO, the facts don’t support this.

The Heald’s (Digipoll) own results show:

So 22.8% (more than one in 5) think the NZRU is doing a bad job and a further 15% don’t know.  Less than 2 in 3 kiwis think they are doing a good job (closer to only 3 out of 5).

Ummmm .. not sure what school the reporter went to, but except for political parties (where anything over 50% is darn good), less than 2 out of 3 is APPALLING for the governing body of our national sport.

So for the NZ Herald I question what they regard as poor?  (1 in 2, 1 in 3?)   It appears anything over 50% is good, as I quote from the story:

However, the majority of people say the union is doing a good job.

WHAT? We aren’t taking about a vote for who should be captain, or who should play #8 – these things, at times, can be VERY dividing, with lots of opinions.  This survey was a SIMPLE test of confidence.  In fact the statement “the majority of people say the union is doing a good job” isn’t even correct.  That wasn’t even the question! The question was .. well … read the top of the pie chart (maybe the reporter didn’t?): Do you have FAITH …. (doesn’t mention “good job” anywhere).

The article goes on to quite Stu Wilson (ex All Black) saying:

He said those who are unhappy with the NZRU are likely from the provinces who could be sidelined in the future revamp of the provincial championship.

REALLY? Said who? Oh wait, one person STU WILSON said.  Sheez.  Anyone I spoke to has that has criticised the NZRU has almost without fail mentioned their handling of the Rugby World Cup in 2007 (remember the one we were supposed to WIN?).  That’s probably the BIGGEST issues for rugby and the NZRU in New Zealand and it’s not even mentioned in the article.  Personally I don’t really care about what team plays where in provisional rugby (although I know many do).  But I DO care about our national team (the All Blacks) for our national sport (that’s rugby in case anyone missed it) at least does as well as the possibly can on the world stage. This key issue for many Kiwis has been clearly lost on the reporter, and one could even sarcasticly say lost on the NZRU at times too (like every four years – when we need it!).

For the NZRU I suggest you take this survey as a warning – only a little over 3 in 5 think you’re doing a good job. And, in MY opinion, that’s no where near enough.

Black and White Version: Wake up call for NZRU has been lost by the media who thinks “50% is just fine”.  It’s not. 

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon


Telecos may rip us off at times, but where is the user responsibility?


A NZ Herald headline today was Salesman ‘crippled’ by internet charges.

This was due to what NZ mobile teco’s charge when roaming- $30 per MB in most countries.  So that’s $30,000 per GB – which compares to around $10-$20  per GB if on a plan in NZ (and no, that’s not a mis-print – $30,000 per GB).  (Btw, OZ is one of the few cheaper countries, and ‘only’ $8 or $10 per MB depending if you are on XT ($8) or Voda($10)).

Now I agree with DPF on Kiwiblog here that this is a rip off, but I think some serious points are overlooked in the media analysis: (more…)

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon

web 2.0

NZ Herald web site – mostly good, but what’s with Web 2.0?


I like the NZ Herlald web site.  One of the better news web sites in terms of readability, layout etc.  The stories/news articles aren’t too bad either.

But I just noticed they have a “Web 2.0″ sub-link of their technology section.  That in itself might be OK if the stories they listed there actually WERE web 2.0, but it looks like they just list anything web-like there and use the “2.0″ bit coz it sounds good. For those that don’t know the “2.0″ refers to the interactive nature of web pages (e.g. social networking, wiki-sites, video sites with comments etc), as opposed to the static content of “traditional” web pages.  If you would like to view a more formal definition see the Wikipedia page on it.

Case and point, the headline: Many Kiwis go online to solve health woes (note the “web-2-0″ in the url ).  There is nothing “2.0″ about this.  It’s just people looking up static info on the web.  Sure they MIGHT visit a Wikipedia page in their search, but they might also visit any hundreds of static pages with info.

Black and White Version: Web 2.0 is cool, but misusing “2.0″ isn’t.

PS: This page is web 2.0, since it’s a blog. :-)

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon

Go to Top