Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, November 10th, 2025 - 63 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
He was dismissed on day two of a new job. The reason: Choices he made 33 years earlier | Stuff
Sensationalism aside, it’s wild that we live in a country where people are still punished decades later for serious offences like checks notes possessing cannabis, drink driving, or petty burglary. All while sportspeople, “businessmen,” rapists, and paedophiles get name suppression or a quick return to public life to protect their reputations.
If we accept that people should do the time, we have to accept that once they’re out, they’re done. Otherwise, we’re not running a justice system; we’re running an industrial-scale poverty factory.
When we care more about the wellbeing of a “hard-working” tax cheat than a builder, salesperson, or auto-electrician with a dodgy past, we lose the right to call ourselves a just or fair society.
There is no class system in NZ right?
And we are quite a brutal society. We like to think we give people a fair go, but institutionally people get punished all the time, and there's a hard core of sentiment in NZ society that supports that.
I don't know how much is who we are and how much has been neoliberal social engineering.
I didn't read all the stories. I am curious why the Clean Slate Act amendments didn't go through in 2023. Before or after the election.
I think at our heart we’re still a rough, frontier society, and very much in our adolescence. Like any teenager, we’re in that rebellious phase: smug, obnoxious, a bit self-absorbed.
But I do think that core sense of justice and fairness is still there. We just need to find better ways to tap into it; to speak to it in ways that energise and elevate people beyond the neoliberal demand that we only care about “us" and "ours.”
In terms of prison reform, I think that conversation starts with updating the Clean Slate Act. It’s hard to justify punishing people long after they’ve served their time. And I suspect the electorate would be more open to that discussion than we often assume if it were framed around justice, fairness, and giving everyone a fair go.
Seconding that we are a very brutal, and punitive society, up there with the US, just shorter sentences. Scary to know we have death-penalty proponents in this country.
I am curious why the Clean Slate Act amendments didn't go through in 2023. Before or after the election.
That's one I missed at the time, and being clean-slated myself for a minor conviction over 30 years ago (most other countries it would've fallen under diminished responsibility, but we still don't have that defence) I know how important it is. My guess is, the politicians were thinking about how many votes it might cost them, as per norm.
I think that the Privacy Act, computers and the internet are generally a net positive for society, but this is one unintended consequence of the intersection of them. I highly support better Clean Slate legislation, and also better immigration rules since potentially unrealistic character requirements is one reason to refuse to hire NZers.
Can you please explain that some more?
Accredited Employer Work Visa (what most people are referring to when they use the term 'work visa') applications require a Job Check token (apart from roles on the Green lists). To be granted a Job Check token, the accredited employer must undertake labour market testing, which includes engaging with W&I and advertising the role(s) externally (Seek etc are common options).
If NZers apply for a role through this process and are not offered it, the employer will not be granted Job Check token unless the reasons for not hiring the NZers meet the immigration instructions. The main reasons are that the NZers are not available e.g. reject the offer or can't start for months, or are not "qualified to take up the work on offer" or can't "be readily trained to take up the work on offer" (to quote immigration instructions WA3.30.5 and WA3.30.10 respectively). (NB: The numbering that follows has been formatted differently by this site but the structure is correct.) The definitions of those terms for immigration purposes:
Operational Manual – Immigration New Zealand. Issue Date: 3 November 2025Operational Manual – Immigration New Zealand. Issue Date: 22 August 2016
As it says, need to be able to pass criminal checks if required. Having not stated what "if required" means, it will be as required by the employer so largely at their discretion. Sometimes that makes sense e.g. driving convictions for someone who will be driving a company car which means they would not be covered by insurance. Sometimes it makes no real sense e.g. driving convictions for someone who won't be using a company car.
I 100% don't support name suppression (unless this is solely requested by the victim concerned). I don't care what your position in life is – publicity about crimes you've been convicted of, is part of the consequence of conviction.
However, I do support retention of publicly available serious convictions. AND a serious restriction of their 'right' to change their name.
We have too many instances of serial fraudsters – continuing to scam people decades after their initial conviction. Or pedophiles arguing for name suppression – when it is absolutely in the community interest that they be clearly identified (just look at the recidivism rate, for an explanation why).
And that’s a fair position to take.
But how do we account for the fact that a) it can lead to people being ostracised and suffering serious consequences long after their sentence ends, and b) those aftereffects often fall hardest on people from poorer backgrounds?
The point of imprisonment is supposed to be punishment for the crime. But once that’s done, instead of allowing people to move on, we often make it nearly impossible for them to become productive, fulfilled members of society.
It’s a bit like beating your child because they drew on the walls (a common occurrence with my ahem… artistically inspired 2 year old). And then refusing to love them for the rest of your life.
That's more something that society needs to deal with – and most people and most employers can do so.
What I particularly object to, is wealthy people (almost universally men) – get to play the ‘impact’ card at sentencing, and get name suppression. While this is effectively unavailable to most convicted criminals.
The first example in the article linked – showed that. The guy who was fired, then disclosed his convictions to the next employer – and was hired.
I suspect that the first employer was less concerned over the convictions, than over the failure to declare them, and therefore the concern over what else had failed to be declared….
However, automatically suppressing all convictions resulting in imprisonment has negative consequences, as well.
I really, really do want to know if someone that I'm planning on employing as an ECE worker has a conviction for child abuse or family violence – even if it was 20 years ago; or if someone has dishonesty convictions, when I'm planning on offering them a finance role.
On the individual side of things – if you're entering a new relationship with a partner, it really is relevant that they have a criminal conviction for family violence.
I'd also point out that there are plenty of people who don't have convictions, who are struggling to find work ATM. The woman in the article who had had no response to 6 applications to work at a supermarket, is nothing uncommon – where there are people on social media pages who have this happen 100 times or more.
You might get further with arguing, specifically in relation to drugs – that after 20 years (open to discussion over the time period) of no further convictions, that these should be covered by the clean slate legislation.
So, just to be clear: you’re arguing that people who’ve committed crimes are permanently less morally worthy than everyone else? That no matter how long ago the offence, or what they’ve done since, they should keep paying forever?
Or is it that their right to work only kicks in once every spotless citizen already has a job?
Weird stance for someone who thinks of themselves as progressive, but OK. Whatevs.
One of the big problems with the Clean Slate Act is that it’s already confusing as hell. People genuinely don’t know what they’re supposed to declare. And refusing to declare a clean-slated conviction isn’t supposed to matter anyway. That’s literally the point.
But it’s good to know you think people should be punished indefinitely, just in case they haven’t suffered enough, or might one day inconvenience the rest of us.
Because yeah, it’s a real shame human beings have absolutely no capacity for self-reflection or change. right?
Might as well keep them locked up forever and save ourselves the heartache of pretending to believe in rehabilitation. Out of sight, out of mind. Problem solved.
Don’t get me wrong. I too believe in a strong justice system. But also that for 99.9% of people, when you’re out, you’re done.
I’d rather accept the occasional reoffender slipping through than keep punishing innocent people trying to rebuild their lives.
Goodness. I'm arguing that a serious criminal history is a relevant factor – both personally and professionally.
Why should someone with an ongoing history of criminal dishonesty be protected every time s/he completes their sentence? Don't you think that the community has a right to know?
Of course, a recent or ongoing history of offending is relevant. Not even I’m arguing that serious or repeated crimes should be hidden. Especially where there’s a genuine risk to others.
But that’s very different from saying any conviction, no matter how old, should follow someone forever. Or that the bar for labelling people as repeat or serious offenders shouldn't be fairly high.
At some point, the label “criminal” stops describing who a person is, and starts describing what society refuses to let them stop being.
Yes, people may have the right to know. But ex-offenders also have the right to rebuild their lives: to work, pay taxes, raise their families, and take their place in the community again. That’s what rehabilitation is supposed to mean.
How we balance those two rights says a great deal about who we are as a society. And the important thing is that they are balanced. Because at the end of the day, ex-offenders have the same rights as you, me, or anybody else.
In fact, they are you or me or anyone else. There but for the grace of God go we.
Your initial point was
You've now changed to
Do you want to propose what the sunset period for folding historic imprisonments into the Clean Slate legislation should be? Or what categories of crimes should be eligible?
Well, as someone who ran the Greens' justice policy process for several years, I see natural justice as being a principle upon which to agree with both of you. I agree with a communal right to know about crims who repeat their crimes out of habit, plus I agree with a rehabilitated offender's right to privacy. I see no reason sensible rules can't be used to incorporate both into the system if they aren't already. If the problems are due to poor judges and probation admin screw-ups, then the right way to ensure those last forever is to put either National or Labour into govt…
I don't think that's the problem though. It's much more fundamental than that.
No problem – just change your name by doing a statutory declaration that you have changed your gender. That is it – everything vanishes, and if anybody uses your real name – you can have them prosecuted for "deadnaming".
I agree, that name changes (with or without a gender change) is a significant issue. And women are the ones who are historically, and statistically most at risk of sexual predators.
An Australian case gives an example. Gable Tostee, who was tried and not convicted of manslaughter for the death of his Tinder date Warriena Wright (he shut her on a balcony and she subsequently fell to her death trying to escape).
Tostee subsequently changed his name to the must less memorable (and searchable) Eric Thomas.
You would think that women – who potentially might be dating Tostee might have a legitimate reason to be easily able to find his new identity /sarc/
But no, Tostee/Thomas has complained of harassment after his new identity and Tinder profile was published.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-01/gable-tostee-makes-harassment-complaint-after-feminists-warning/11655438
And, yes, Tostee/Thomas has committed subsequent domestic violence incidents….
https://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/courts-law/man-acquitted-over-tinder-dates-balcony-death-claims-sex-discrimination-after-being-banned-by-star-over-alleged-strangulation-incident/news-story/060f83a1467cf3aeeef116009c93cfa5
I think that all of these would be covered by the existing clean slate legislation.
The serious crimes actually referenced in the article, which resulted in imprisonment: burglary, arson, unlawful possession of a firearm, importing class A drugs (meth), assault, carrying a weapon, shooting at someone & trying to blow up their car.
The fact that those people were also convicted of minor crimes, at the same time, is pretty much irrelevant. They didn't go to jail for the minor crimes, but for the major ones.
Of course Watson did the dirty on Rosalind Franklin.
https://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2018/05/18/james-watson-in-his-own-words/
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jun/23/sexism-in-science-did-watson-and-crick-really-steal-rosalind-franklins-data
Yes, the answer to "what did Watson and Crick discover" was always "Rosalind Franklin's notes".
You do have to wonder how things might have panned out had Ms Franklin lived out an average lifespan. The Nobel can't be awarded among more than three joint recipients, and oh dear, there'd have been four contenders for that particular one. One suspects the usual biases common at the time would have influenced the Foundation's assessments and the final result.
Our humourless leader, Christopher Bucket, remains bent on keeping up appearances 🙁
We all kick the bucket in the end.
Isn't it funny after the "kick the poor homeless people out of the city", "cold-hearted" Luxon last week, we get "Luxon 'would not take no for an answer' gifting a child's bike to police" story on Monday. Let's be honest a rock in the antarctic has more empathy than our PM, no matter how much spin the NZ billionaire media comes up with.
You couldn't make this shit up:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/wellington/police-gifts-register-shows-alcohol-cash-and-prime-minister-christopher-luxons-childs-bike-donated-to-cops/V7RI4QUIK5GN3NDU7P6J3NWEVQ/
lol
.
@explaintrade.com
Musk: "Mandani is a charismatic swindler."
Rogan, pulling off his mask to reveal @ichotiner.bsky.social: "What else has he done that makes him a swindler?"
Musk: <complete meltdown>
blueskyvideo
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:m4t4prusopnk4wjt4ehg22q4/post/3m54jheth4s2h
can anyone access this page?
https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/bills-and-laws/proposed-members-bills/criminal-records-clean-slate-additional-eligibility-amendment-bill-tangi-utikere/
I'm getting this,
https://web.archive.org/web/20230209230126/https://parliament.nz/en/pb/bills-and-laws/proposed-members-bills/criminal-records-clean-slate-additional-eligibility-amendment-bill-tangi-utikere/
https://web.archive.org/web/20230209234812/https://www.parliament.nz/media/9964/criminal-records-clean-slate-additional-eligibility-amendment-bill.pdf
Some good news: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/11/07/climate/solar-wind-renewables-transition-global-pakistan-hungary-chile
The solar graphs for various countries show China/India/USA as laggards. Interesting that the growth surges show as countable peaks: 1 each year (presumably summer).
Our Prime Minister had three (3) policemen involved in clearing rubbish out of his garage.
Luxon will be asking the army to do his lawns and the airforce to iron his nickers!
Rebels evicted, Bomber explains why:
I guess we ought to reserve judgment until the rebels explain why they rebelled, huh?
I'm now getting a security risk message for that TDB link.
I use Firefox too & I just went back to TDB to see if it happened to me but it didn't – went straight in as usual. I go online with my desktop (never with smartphone).
I usually use desktop, as today. Went straight to TDB with Opera browser and got this –
That laptop has Windows 11 OS. I could access the site earlier today, but not view posts from the last few days.
Also earlier today, I tried the above TDB post link on my older laptop with Lubuntu/Linux OS and got the message about my PC operating system not trusting TDB.
It might be a sign that TDB’s site has been compromised, but the far more likely explanation, especially for a one-man-band operation, is that the site’s SSL certificate has expired or hasn’t been renewed properly.
That’s what usually triggers this kind of browser warning.
It happens depressingly often, even in big organisations with all the monitoring tools in the world.I’ve even been caught out by it myself a few times.
Good news is that it’s a pretty quick fix once Bomber (or whoever manages the hosting) renews and reapplies the certificate.
Thanks. At the moment I'm getting a server default page for TDB website address, saying that website doesn't exist.
I got caught by that twice here, and a number of times with other sites or processes. Usually happens when an automatic procedure had something shift underneath it.These days I tend to trust EFF’s certbot and Lets Encrypt to do it correctly and frequently.
If plotting a coup were grounds for expulsion, half of Parliament would’ve been gone by now.
The real issue isn’t ambition: it’s incompetence. Doing it so badly that you kneecap your own movement, just as TPM was poised to matter in 2026, is unforgivable.
Who gives a damn. They are a waste of time taking $180,000 of taxpayer money a year. They should resign from Parliament and go do something useful.
I suspect that nepotism is the problem. You often find the same thing in family businesses.
Decisions are made by a related group that becomes authoritarian and manipulative when challenged. When you realise that you can't make a meaningful contribution to an organisation you either leave or compromise or get sacked.
I'm sad, but not entirely surprised by what has transpired with Te Pati Maori over the last few months. Here is the RNZ article https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/578378/te-pati-maori-expels-takuta-ferris-and-mariameno-kapa-kingi. The last sentence has me thinking; pot calling the kettle black, or am I barking up the wrong tree – 'Tamihere accused them of plotting a coup against the co-leaders and said their behaviour was based on "greed, avarice and entitlement".'
Any contentious issue which results in a decision "without opposition" – is plainly going to be a biased one.
I seriously doubt that the outcome is constitutional in any way.
However, it's probably pointless to litigate. The divide seems to be unbridgeable.
Better for all concerned to accept the reality – of at least two Maori Parties in Parliament – and decide how to work together.
My suspicion is that the bitterness expressed on both sides is going to make this very difficult. Not to mention the personalities. Tamihere (who has been a prime mover in this) has never been known for moderation, compromise and diplomacy.
This commentator has a nifty turn of phrase: "For months after Kamala Harris’s loss, you could practically hear the wind whistling through the think tanks."
That's a good question, raising the prospect of the enemy within. Should the dems become progressive, or stick with faking it? Are there really 5 strands to their rope, and are they ties that bind effectively? Gav is likely to be a shoo-in for '28, but I'd like to see him engage with their biodiversity and frame it intelligently. Are there really such things as left-wing think-tanks that the wind whistled through? Was Sue Bradford hallucinating, and is she still on that unicorn hunt?
Essentially the strategy Labour has used here. They seemed very close to dead from the shoulders up in their last term in govt, so the play will seem familiar to voters.
Always reassuring when the smart people finally start agreeing with me 😀
Might have to rebrand myself as Res Persuāsiōnis at this rate.
The Arrowtown papacy begins:
Te Pāti Māori expels Mariameno Kapa-Kingi and Tākuta Ferris | Stuff
Hopefully it takes less than 70 years to stitch the two halves of TPM back together. Or that they don't try for a big reconciliation and end up with a third.
I sincerely trust the PTB are not under estimating the threat this poses and not taking a penny pinching approach.
Or leaving it to NGOs or community volunteer groups.
This poses a direct threat to our economy. And… Shane Jones is in charge…
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/asian-hornet-threat-northland-beekeeper-urges-buffer-zones-to-stop-spread/H25AFUVDHJCHPCQHXUUAO5M2JE/
Response so far has been less than what's needed, its pretty clear at least one nest survived through winter so there will likely have been around 100 Queens produced which will be out building more nests. Currently a number of community volunteers are out placing traps, Ideally we'll find some more males as you can add a very small tracker to them to find nests. Very doable to eradicate them but needs a big push now.
how many jobs were lost at the relevant departments since National gained power?
Here's something from Farmers Weekly,
"Biosecurity faces the biggest impact of pending job losses at the Ministry for Primary Industries with a net loss of 131 roles, according to the Public Service Association.
The union said other hard-hit sections are agriculture and investment services with a net loss of 80, policy and trade 52, NZ Forest Service 27 and Māori partnerships and investment 14.
This follows news that the MPI has started consulting staff on proposals that will see 384 jobs lost as it aims to trim its workforce by 9%. Around 40% of those roles are currently vacant and will not be filled."
I don't do Reddit, I've just had a look now and I can see how it could monopolise one's attention.
This from a Fickle Classroom-
"The Manuka, Hort and Ag business lobby should be paying for traps and trapping given how much they jerk off to tax cuts.
They wanted this incursion when they back tax cuts over a well funded public service like MPI.
This surely is peak capitalism. Vote for defunding MPI, to get your tax cuts, and more profit, then get the public to do your dirty work when the wasps come home to nest."
https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1os0orf/if_you_are_in_aucklandhuntly_please_make_a_hornet/
The on-the-ground effort in the suburbs concerned (close to me, so I have a view of what's happening via the community comms channels) – is pretty much on par with the discovery and eradication of Queensland fruit flies (with the notable exception that hornets are a heck of a lot easier to spot – although there are lots of paper wasps being mis-identified)
Traps. Community education. Communication pathways.
There has never been the Biosecurity staff to do a boots-on-the-ground garden to garden search across the whole of the potentially infested area (which also includes very significant tracts of bush – which are inaccessible (both closed for Kauri die-back restrictions, and washed out tracks following the Auckland anniversary floods)
I'm not asking for a boots on the ground response. Kinda obvious that can't happen with the job cuts 18 months ago.
"Biosecurity faces the biggest impact of pending job losses at the Ministry for Primary Industries with a net loss of 131 roles, according to the Public Service Association."
https://www.farmersweekly.co.nz/politics/biosecurity-to-bear-brunt-of-mpi-job-cuts-psa/
I'm talking about the callous, laissez faire, half arsed approach this government has to anything that isn't to their personal, direct benefit.
While we are talking about it, here is something that can be done.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/577661/hornet-invasion-how-to-make-your-own-traps
Sounds about right – the NAct1 CoC is government by the sorted, for the sorted.
Nope. The boots on the ground wasn't an option under the last government, either. And hasn't ever been a realistic option for MPI.
You seem to ignore the point that I was making – the way this outbreak has been handled by MPI is virtually identical to the outbreaks of the Queensland fruit fly (also a significant bio hazard to NZ agriculture) – in the same local area, under the last government.
And, yes. The how to make a trap instruction has been widely shared on the local facebook groups. Of course, it's also resulted in multiple false positives (wasps) being reported.
Just what would you like to see MPI doing – that they are not already doing?
"Just what would you like to see MPI doing – that they are not already doing?"
As a start, increase the amount of traps they have by magnitudes of 100s. Increasing from 100 to 120 is pretty tragic.
They could be utilising school kids and dipping into the recycling and increasing the area covered.
They could also stop with lip service comments like 'doing everything we can..'
So far, none of the traps have caught any hornets – despite being peppered throughout the infested area. I question whether increasing the trap numbers is an effective solution.
So far, hornets are being identified by the community. And then MPI staff go in and eradicate the nests – as well as doing a visual inspection of the surrounding area for common nesting sites.
You might want to take a look at the Biosecurity NZ website – for the actual plan of attack.
https://www.mpi.govt.nz/news/media-releases/biosecurity-new-zealand-expands-hornet-search
Personally, I don't think that adding schoolchildren to the surveillance and eradication mix is a sensible solution. There is no way I'd want my kids anywhere near a hornet infestation. But, you do you.
Citizen science. No reason kids can't be involved, just teach them to do it safely.
No reason that they should be involved, either.
And, just imagine the outrage and headlines, if one of them was attacked by a hornet swarm.
Not something that's a good PR risk for MPI, Biosecurity NZ.
I guess it depends on how serious you think hornets establishing in NZ is. Myself, I think eradication is a very high priority and we should be doing everything we can.
Not sure why you think kids would go near hornet nests if educated about them, as opposed to just finding them in their neighbourhood and kids being kids doing something stupid out of ignorance.
So, if you think that unpaid labour of children is an effective tool – perhaps we should extend it to unpaid labour for the unemployed, or retired people? Surely they too can participate in "citizen science"
Actually, the local community (adults not children) has been stepping up big time in searching for hornets as part of their daily life. So far, 100% of the sightings have been as the result of the community – and then Biosecurity swing in to do the eradication.
And, also the community are 100% certain that they don’t want hornets established next to them. Absolutely NIMBY (in a good way) 🙂
You do? Those traps are a surveillance tool, mostly, not a means to eradicate.
So far, the public seem to be a more effective surveillance option. Perhaps because hornets are so darned large – they're easy to see.
Interesting. Time will tell if these public service cuts save money in the long run, or whether the CoC is beeing ‘penny wise, pound foolish‘, but some Kiwis aren't happy.
https://www.mpi.govt.nz/biosecurity/exotic-pests-and-diseases-in-new-zealand/active-biosecurity-responses-to-pests-and-diseases/yellow-legged-hornet-sightings-in-auckland-in-2025
A friend told me about a Netflix series, "The White House Effect." It is a doco looking at US policies and presidents since about 1977.
Alarmingly, the pitch made by Ronald Reagan to the voters sounds a lot like Luxon's efforts; cut back environmental safeguards to boost business and grow the economy. Nothing new under the sun, I guess.
A scientist's forecast of increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 2020 were accurate, too.