if the personal friend who paid personally is one of the owners of said company just where does the line of demarcation land?
It's not clear-cut in the other direction - quite possible for someone to pay personally for something they expect the business they own to benefit from. But if it was paid for by the company, ie through the company accounts, it's a business dinner (or they are defrauding their company).
I would guess Oravida paid.
Here's where it makes a difference: if it's a personal dinner, ie genuinely a social gathering, it's not the sort of thing that should be put on the company credit card. That goes for whoever you work for- university, company, kohanga reo. A 'private' dinner is properly paid for by private individuals.
The company/employers credit card quite properly comes out on some such occasions, because schmoozing can be a genuine business objective. The expense can (rightly) be called a business expense on the account sheet.
If Ms Collins' friends paid personally, it confirms her claim that it was a personal and private gathering. Perhaps unwise, but at least a little harder to call a conflict of interest.
If the company picked up the tab, it's a different story.
we have being sliding down the rankings for the last twenty years
All the way down to this?
Key findings of PISA 2006
Of the 57 countries participating in PISA 2006, no more than 5 countries achieved a result that was significantly better than New Zealand’s 15-year-olds in scientific literacy (2 countries), mathematical literacy (5 countries) and reading literacy (3 countries).
New Zealand and Finland achieved the largest proportion of students performing at the highest level of scientific literacy.
Wish we were still sliding in that direction.
Nobody I’ve ever heard with any clue has ever said things were all rosy in NZ education – or that it’s equally good across the board, or that there are no bad teachers, or schools with poor staff culture – and especially noone denying there are kids in the ‘long tail’ who are not getting a fair chance to learn.
But the same stupid blind managerialism that fails and fails and fails isn’t the answer. (It’s everywhere. Brought into health in the 90’s it was only dialled back a notch at the Canterbury DHB when surgeons and nurses combined to fight, there was a protracted battle, only settled when a Govt commissioned report by Robyn Stent found 4 deaths directly attributable to bad management decisions. 4 deaths directly attributable no clear idea how many others might have been “adversely affected”. It’s hard to dismiss death as a rounding error.)
It fails because it assumes cost-accountancy and ‘efficiencies’ derived from second-rate business mangers always trump the collective experience of professionals – who are concerned with things like health and education, not performance pay, bonuses, cost-trimming and robotic worker output.
Health should be run by health professionals. Education should be run by teachers.
For some more words of wisdom about performance-based pay for teachers, my friend wrote this some two years ago.
in a similar vein this worth reading (not sure who Steve McCabe is, but I don't *think* he's the baby-faced guitar-slinger who fronts the Axmen.)
Brilliant, Jolissa, And what you describe is *extremely* infuriating. Destroying what you don't- can't won't- understand is vandalism. That's what I see - combined with concern-troll murmurs of 'killing them with low expectations.'
Hope Chris Hipkins really get's his teeth into this.
In terms of energy efficiency they should probably tackle it in biggest bites first – solar panels aren’t at the top of that list. Better subsidization for heat pumps is probably next
The US has been putting in the panels.
s that the same Labor/Greens that denied Maori there legal ownership of the seabed and foreshore.
Pretty sure the Greens didn't vote for that piece of ... dumb. Is 2014's Labour the same Labour as 2004's?
I hope not.
Yeah. But you don’t need history to work out a meltdown between Labour and the Greens in government would be a major betrayal of both’s voters, sink the careers of their leaders, and could make both parties unelectable for a decade.
No guarantee it won’t happen, but very powerful incentives to make it work.
With no idea of the personalities and policies involved in Taz, or how it unfolded, I’m just unable to comment. But it’s a fairly rural state of half a million. In my probably ignorant stereotype, it’s a West Coast sort’ve electorate – with rural elements, miners and foresters, and a good dose of hippies and “alternatives”.
Ie- not the same profile as NZ.
Totally off topic: I’m dead keen to go to Dark MOFO. Anyone been?
both parties here seem to express a lot of the same level of emotions and thoughts about similar issues in a proven context. Historically they ultimately tore each other to pieces in Tasmania.
Well that’s handed NZ to National for another 6-9 years.
But … as someone who’s voted both Green and Labour, and will contemplate both this time, I see a much larger set of shared values, esp around ‘social justice’ issues, but expanding to the Treaty the environment and the economy. The similarities seem far more important than the differences, which may be why they both feel an occasional need to snipe and carve out niche positions to differentiate themselves.
Of course they could tear each other to pieces. Families fight, politicians have egos, it can get vicious. The left has a tradition of factional fighting, yada yada.
But if they do, their leaders – Cunliffe, Norman, Turei – know damn well they’ll be on the political scrap-heap doublequick, and no redemption. If they don’t have the sense and maturity to work well together, they don’t deserve to govern.
Fingers crossed it’s not as bad as predicted, although then it’d be worry wasted, so no winners :(
I blame the Governors Bay Community Assoc for scheduling the community fete on Sunday 16th. They have a track record for picking bad weather, but never this bad.
Also: ECan can shove their regulatory powers up their own log-burners. When we get to vote, you get to regulate. Legal power maybe but no moral power. at. all.