Not the city, and not the most dramatic, but here's a harbour one -
Why comment the code?
Isn't it a bit like tagging :)
But having heard a programmer mate's diatribe on the subject (he's had to re-work a lot of other people's coding) it's not always obvious why it's wrong. Not that the comments necessarily help - often just make muddy water muddier.
Fair enough for a legal opinion. I think motive should be relevant here but that's still skirting the biggest issue. Which is Jason Eade and the PM's dept's role.
How do you feel about a public servant doing this 'work'? Eade was scooted onto the national party's payroll but I understand much of his time on the 9th floor was as a public servant.
Might be good for NZ’s few large professional services multinationals looking to crack the govt sector in some signatory nations.
I think there might be a few in tertiary education who think it could be their chance to conquer the world. Scary, really.
Hosking reckons a half-million penalty would be ample compensation for an inmate's life. Bet he wouldn't be so chipper if he had stock in the company he claims "must be doing something right". The fabulous market isn't too keen on serco either.
I’ve really enjoyed Charlotte Grimshaw’s short story collections
Ditto - at best, she's sharply observant, mordantly amusing, AND humane.
A few from closer to home.
Also close to home: just finished Jane Higgins ‘Havoc’ – sequel to ‘The Bridge’. Lots to like about both books. It was oddly fitting to find Higgins warmly thanked in the acknowledgements of ‘Roger, Ruth and Me’, which popped up on the reading list in between.
(Thanks for the recommendations of Elena Ferrante – embarking on the first pages of ‘My Brilliant Friend’ and it’s wonderful :)).
Will definitely make a submission - and encourage everyone I know to do so.
But yeah, the CERA form is ballocks. What I would prefer is a chance to 'vote' on prefered options (no mention of 3+ or any others - except perhaps in the linked pdfs).
People (me included) are unlikely to read chapters of CERA's opinion of what the issues and options are before giving an 'informed' opinion.
We know the sort of things we want - we 'shared an idea' three bloody years ago (and it was pretty much ignored.)
It's no wonder business development in central Chch is stalled. CERA don't really know what they want. King Brownlee has definite opinions which he is happy to air, which mostly aren't official rules or requirements, but who knows, they could be, he has the power. The CCC clearly don't want what the CCDU and/or Brownlee want. And they have their own set of rules and requirements.
Who'd want to sink millions into that pit of uncertainty?
Like SERCO the knee jerk talk of incentives and performance goals (and national standards and 'teacher incentives') almost always leads to everything being bent to ticking the right boxes and myopia to the big picture at best; gaming the system or outright fraud at worst.
Neoliberal managerialism -working hard to make things worse :(
the two issues – racist dogwhistles and overseas influence on the Auckland housing crisis – are not mutually exclusive
I’m distinctly uncomfortable here, because this is way too important to just ignore, and I support much more restrictive rules around foreign investment, but still can’t fathom how Labour stuffed things up so badly. It’s completely upsidedown to blame foreign investors for behaving legally in the way investors behave (looking for safety and return on capital.)
The main blame* lies with a govt that refuses to concede there’s a problem, won’t even measure it without great pressure, then only reluctantly and has no plan to deal with it. And blaming the govt is Labour’s main job ffs!!
Yet somehow the PRC investors are the shadowy phone-bidding villains (viz Andrew Little quoted this morning on RNZ), and Joyce is rubbing his hands and crying racism. I can hardly bear to look. Where’s the thunderous denunciation of a govt that’s doing nothing and will barely concede there’s a problem?
* the bigger picture has to do with the global build-up of extreme wealth for the few. there’s a still the sense – as before the gfc – of massive amounts of wealth sloshing around the world looking for safe haven and/or easy profit. what do you do with a huge pile of money? one option is to lend it back to the poor or relatively poor, as certainly happens. but the returns aren’t good and safety means faith in the financial system. buying property is an obvious option. it’s easy to understand; owning property feels safe (when did any nation last nationalise property, or group seriously defy property rights?); and while most countries have restrictions, New Zealand is not only safe and wide open, it offers the possibility of massive tax-free profit. at heart, on top of our ridiculous tax and investment law, this is another negative effect of the political and ethical problem of inequality.