Which will make govt & the police look as if they're 'getting tough'  on gangs - & it has to be said, that a large-ish group of gang members all wearing their insignia can definitely be daunting  - but you have to wonder how long its going to take the gangs to come up with some sort of alternative.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/35019150...-crackdown

"Police would be given the power to issue dispersal notices, requiring gang members to immediately leave an area. They would then not be allowed to see each other for seven days.
Courts would be able to issue non-consorting orders, "which will stop specified gang offenders from associating or communicating with one another for up to three years", Goldsmith said.
"The law will also be changed to give greater weight to gang membership as an aggravating factor at sentencing, enabling courts to impose more severe punishments."

https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/12/21/analy...ady-exist/

"We also need to ask whether the new anti-gang measures breach fundamental principles such as human rights.
These are part of New Zealand law, through the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and the common law. They also reflect international standards that New Zealand has agreed to respect.
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes proclaiming gang affiliation. There is also the right to associate with others, and to assemble peacefully.
But all of these rights have to be balanced against other interests.
The Bill of Rights Act sums this up by allowing ÔÇ£reasonable limitsÔÇØ that ÔÇ£can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic societyÔÇØ.

Essentially, legislation that restricts rights requires a legitimate purpose. This is usually easy to show. But it is also necessary to consider whether such restrictions work and do so in a way that is proportionate to the breach of rights.


We have an idea what the courts might say. For example, in Morse v Police, the Supreme Court decided burning the New Zealand flag during an Anzac Day parade to protest New Zealand involvement in Afghanistan was not offensive behaviour, because it did not go beyond what people should be expected to tolerate in a democracy.
And in Schubert v Wanganui District Council, the High Court decided the ban on gang patches in all public places in the district went too far; the evidence did not show that something more tailored would have been as effective."

We have water dishes at two of our external doors but I had also noticed our cat drinking from the lotus containers as well so I gave him an ice cream container of water nearby. It's also near a gap in the fence that several neighbours' cats come through from time to time. Our outdoor camera has shown that the number of cats coming through has increased and every one stops for a drink on the way past. I'm not sure that our guy really wants to share, or that he appreciates so many visitors, but it looks like word has got around that there's a free drink to be had.

According to this writer yes it does; but not in the way this govt claims.


https://www.msn.com/en-nz/health/other/y...cf29&ei=35

"Yes, the welfare system does need a ÔÇÿresetÔÇÖ ÔÇô in favour of beneficiaries
OPINION: I have lived in the borderlands between work, study and the benefit all my adult life.
Because of my disability, cerebral palsy, I receive a Supported Living Allowance, or the Invalids Benefit as it was called before.
IÔÇÖve studied for degrees in maths, computer science and theology, and am now working toward a PhD in the latter. At times, I have worked part-time and studied part-time.
Only once have I been on the benefit while neither working nor studying, which coincided with a severe bout of depression 15 years ago.

If I can say one thing about relying on a benefit, itÔÇÖs that the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) does not make it easy for you.
And I fear that this weekÔÇÖs announcement of a ÔÇ£resetÔÇØ of our welfare system, which will see beneficiaries closely monitored and sanctions more readily imposed, will only make things harder.

Last year, I found out that sanctions for beneficiaries were very much already in place. I left the country for three days to attend a conference in Sydney related to my studies, and because IÔÇÖd forgotten to let the MSD know, my wife and I faced a total benefit loss.
This was an honest mistake, and thankfully it was able to be sorted out upon my return to New Zealand. But it was incredibly stressful to go from depending on money to suddenly losing it, and the experience served as a sobering reminder that one slip-up could result in the loss of my livelihood.

In my view, the MSD scales are already weighted in the GovernmentÔÇÖs favour, and tightening up on sanctions will just make a difficult system more unjust.
In announcing the ÔÇÿwelfare resetÔÇÖ, Social Development Minister Louise Upston said that, compared to when Labour came to power in 2017, ÔÇ£70,000 more people are on the Job Seeker benefit at the same time that we've seen a 58 per cent reduction in the use of sanctions.ÔÇØ

The impression this gives is that sanctions are a last resort ÔÇô and that only those ready for work, but not attempting to find work or get training, are being targeted.
But if sanctions are the last resort, it makes no sense that they are the first measure deployed to reduce welfare dependence. The first step that should be taken is to make it easier to transition from the benefit to work or study.

Any responsible person starting a new job will ask what it will do to their weekly income. Good luck working that out if you are on a benefit.
If youÔÇÖre lucky, the information you need to work it out might be buried deep in the MSD website. But then there is often ÔÇÿcase manager discretionÔÇÖ, which clouds things further.



Showing the working should be among the most basic components of what they do.
If the Government wants to help people off benefits, the first step is to make the process to determine how income from work will affect your benefit as streamlined and straightforward as possible.
The second step is to ensure that overall, people are rewarded in their back pocket if they do the mahi to get work ÔÇô and then, crucially, to make sure people are supported at work.
So my message to the Government is simple: If you are serious about getting people into work, clear the pathway through the borderlands between the benefit and work by making the system work for them.
If you donÔÇÖt, then stop putting pressure on beneficiaries who find it too hard or too scary to get work. Perhaps they donÔÇÖt know if they will be better off."

It seems this govt simply cannot wait in their rush to make things worse.


https://www.msn.com/en-nz/health/other/c...9ca1&ei=15

"M─üori health campaigners say the Crown acted in bad faith when a last-minute date change to disestablish Te Aka Whai Ora M─üori Health Authority put their chances of a Waitangi Tribunal inquiry in jeopardy.
Lady Tureiti Moxon and Janice Kuka were granted an urgent claim by the tribunal whether axing the agency went against treaty principles of tino rangatiratanga.
The hearing was previously set to begin on February 29, in recognition of the governmentÔÇÖs plans to bring the legislation in by March 8.
But a memo from Crown lawyers on the night of February 22 alerted claimants the legislation could be tabled in Parliament as soon as Tuesday of next week ÔÇô potentially cutting the hearing off at its knees. If a Bill is before the House, the tribunal is prevented by law from conducting an inquiry into it.
ÔÇ£Notwithstanding the recent events that have impacted Parliament, counsel is instructed that introduction of the Bill could occur as early as 27 February 2024,ÔÇØ wrote Crown Law.
A Friday hearing was assembled quickly to determine whether the claimants could make their case before this new deadline, with Waitangi Tribunal Judge Kaiwhakawaa Damian Stone directing the Crown to give an update on whether the date can be delayed.
ÔÇ£I acknowledge that these matters may be out of the CrownÔÇÖs hands and veer into the political sphere, especially given that the order that Government bills are introduced into the House is determined by the Office of the Leader of the House,ÔÇØ he said.

ÔÇ£However, to enable the Government to have the benefit of the outcomes of the TribunalÔÇÖs inquiry, and any associated findings and recommendations, the Crown may consider deferring the introduction of this legislation until the week ending 8 March 2024.ÔÇØ
Judge Stone said he was concerned the shorter timeframe could negatively impact the hearing process.
ÔÇ£I am concerned that any further effort to truncate the hearing process in order to release a final decision by 27 February 2024 would risk the inquiryÔÇÖs ability to conduct a reasonable and just hearing process.ÔÇØ

ÔÇ£There is no good faith in what the Crown has done,ÔÇØ she said.
ÔÇ£The Crown were asked by the Waitangi Tribunal in its directive as to when they anticipated that the Bill would introduced to Parliament.
ÔÇ£The Crown basically said anytime between now and 8 March, so they didnÔÇÖt indicate it was imminent at all, or give the Tribunal a courtesy heads-up until last night right on the eve of giving evidence due today, when they sent the memo saying that it will be┬áFebruary 27.ÔÇØ

She said there had been no transparency from the Crown despite the tribunal being open in its communication.
ÔÇ£I believe that theyÔÇÖve been very dismissive of the whole claim from day one and they havenÔÇÖt really provided the information that the Waitangi Tribunal have asked for,ÔÇØ she said.
The National-led GovernmentÔÇÖs intention to disestablish Te Aka Whai Ora was outlined in the 100-day plan released by the coalition Government on November 29, 2023. The GovernmentÔÇÖs first 100 days in office ends on March 9, a day after the initial deadline it set itself to axe Te Aka Whai Ora.


ÔÇ£ThereÔÇÖs no justice, thereÔÇÖs no good faith, thereÔÇÖs no transparency,ÔÇØ Moxon said.
ÔÇ£This whole process has engendered distrust in the Government. TheyÔÇÖre just going ahead, irrespective of what anybody else thinks, yet we are their treaty partner, and they need to be reminded of that and shouldnÔÇÖt be just ignored.ÔÇØ

It just seems to go on & on...

https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/02/23/donal...raud-debt/

"Donald Trump could be at risk of losing some of his prized properties if he canÔÇÖt pay his staggering New York civil fraud penalty.
With interest, he owes New York state nearly NZ$732 million ÔÇö and the amount is going up NZ$141,177 each day until the former US president pays.
New York Attorney General Letitia James told ABC News that she will seek to seize some of the former president's assets if he's unable to cover the bill from Judge Arthur Engoron's ruling.
Engoron concluded that Trump lied for years about his wealth as he built the real estate empire that vaulted him to stardom and the White House. Trump denies wrongdoing and has vowed to appeal.
"If he does not have funds to pay off the judgment, then we will seek judgment enforcement mechanisms in court, and we will ask the judge to seize his assets," James, a Democrat, said in an interview with ABC reporter Aaron Katersky.

Trump's ability to pay his mounting legal debts is increasingly murky after back-to-back courtroom losses.

Trump claimed last year that he has about NZ$645 million in cash ÔÇö reserves that would get eaten up by his court penalties.
The rest of his net worth, which he says is several billion dollars, is tied up in golf courses, skyscrapers and other properties, along with investments and other holdings.
Trump's promised appeal is likely to halt collection of his penalty while the process plays out.
Seizing assets is a common legal tactic when a defendant can't access enough cash to pay a civil penalty.
Trump could avoid losing assets to seizure if he has enough cash ÔÇö or is able to free up enough cash ÔÇö to pay his penalty and mounting interest."

This is a real eye opener on what the spike proteins are doing to your body, it appears that these blood clots were appearing even before any of the vaccines were available, but the numbers surged during the rollout of them.
Really makes me wonder what this spike protein does to your body.
Its not actually a "blood" clot at all, but more of a cellular mass made up of misfolded proteins, it appears that in a small percentage of people, the body produces them in the cardiovascular system.
These types of clots have never been reported before in humans.


Also some good advice thats emerged on how to rid them out of your body.
Could be useful for anyone suffering from long covid.


https://youtu.be/CuaMPNGG7Nk

and an updated video to follow

https://youtu.be/djqn4HJWEBs

Unbelievable.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024...ryo-ruling

"Alabama Fertility halts new procedures ÔÇÿdue to the legal riskÔÇÖ after state supreme court says embryos are ÔÇÿextrauterine childrenÔÇÖ
A second Alabama provider announced that it will┬ápause its in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments┬áon Thursday, just days after the┬ástate supreme court ruled┬áin a first-of-its-kind decision that embryos are ÔÇ£extrauterine childrenÔÇØ.

ÔÇ£We have made the impossibly difficult decision to hold new IVF treatments due to the legal risk to our clinic and our embryologists,ÔÇØ Alabama Fertility said in a┬ápost to its Instagram account. ÔÇ£We are contacting patients that will be affected today to find solutions for them and we are working as hard as we can to alert our legislators as to the far-reaching negative impact of this ruling on the women of Alabama.ÔÇØ

The Alabama supreme court ruling stemmed from two wrongful death lawsuits brought against an┬áIVF┬áclinic after several peopleÔÇÖs frozen embryos were accidentally destroyed. The clinic pushed back against the lawsuits, arguing that AlabamaÔÇÖs Wrongful Death of a Minor Act did not apply to frozen embryos, but the state supreme court ruled that the act does indeed apply.

ÔÇ£The central question presented in these consolidated appeals, which involve the death of embryos kept in a cryogenic nursery, is whether the act contains an unwritten exception to that rule for extrauterine children ÔÇô that is, unborn children who are located outside of a biological uterus at the time they are killed,ÔÇØ the Alabama supreme court justice Jay Mitchell wrote. ÔÇ£Under existing black-letter law, the answer to that question is no: the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies to all unborn children, regardless of their location.ÔÇØ
A concurring opinion, written by the Alabama state supreme court chief justice, Tom Parker, repeatedly invoked the Bible. ÔÇ£The principle itself ÔÇô that human life is fundamentally distinct from other forms of life and cannot be taken intentionally without justification ÔÇô has deep roots that reach back to the creation of man ÔÇÿin the image of GodÔÇÖ,ÔÇØ Parker wrote, before citing Genesis 1:27 of the King James edition.

The Alabama ruling has rocked the country. IVF patients and advocates have vigorously opposed the ruling, which they say did not deal with the vast practical implications of legally recognizing frozen embryos as people. Doctors at Alabama Fertility said earlier this week that the ruling threatened to upend several steps of the IVF process.
The decision also cements tenets of so-called ÔÇ£fetal personhoodÔÇØ into Alabama law. Establishing that embryos and fetuses are people, complete with full legal rights and protections, is a long-term goal of many within the anti-abortion movement. Abortion foes are also often opposed to IVF."

A friend thinks when he runs CCleaner it deletes his Solitaire result history.
Is this so?
How can he keep his result history intact, but continue to run CCleaner to clear Cookies etc?
He is on Win-11.
TIA, Peter.

According to this, its a possibility. And a very concerning one,at that. If this lot could find a way to make us all pay to breathe, they would.


https://thestandard.org.nz/get-ready-for...rivatised/

"This week National has passed legislation through Parliament dismantling Three Waters.
I have always struggled to understand its opposition.ÔÇéThe countryÔÇÖs water systems are in very poor shape.ÔÇéFar too many people have been poisoned.ÔÇéThe infrastructure is crumbling before our eyes.ÔÇéIn our major cities water and sewerage pipes that should have been replaced years ago have succumbed to old age and are collapsing at a remarkable rate.ÔÇéAnd there is currently not the faintest hope that the various water systems will be improved to make them resilient to climate change.

But somehow National and its partners persuaded many Kiwis that dealing with these existential threats was a bad thing.
The biggest source of angst and the driver of the anti 3 waters campaign was the possibility that Māori  would be given too many rights over water.
Which ignores the fact that Māori has a significant interest in water.


Even National acknowledges Iwi rights to and interests in water.
But the dogwhistle┬ápossibly Atlas funded campaigns┬áagainst Three Waters worked.ÔÇéIt was assisted by some┬árather expensive litigation┬áby the Water Users Group which was fronted by Stephen Franks and Brigitte Moreton.
ÔÇéI still cannot understand why she was permitted as the lawyer involved to┬ácomment repeatedly on the issue on state owned Radio New Zealand.ÔÇéUltimately the litigation┬áfailed┬ábut politically the damage was done.


The GovernmentÔÇÖs reversal of three waters is the latest example of its activity in cancelling something but having nothing to replace it with.
Simeon BrownÔÇÖs and NationalÔÇÖs alternative proposal is to let Councils sort it out themselves.ÔÇéEssentially sink or swim and some of the smaller local authorities may be doing more sinking than swimming".

Where the hell that time went I've no clue. No mention of the ugliness of some of the buildings, or the tumbleweeds blowing through the almost deserted square...


https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/35018...led-claims


'ItÔÇÖs been 12 years since lawyer Grant Shand first took action against the┬áToka T┼½ Ake Earthquake Commission (EQC)┬áon behalf of Christchurch residents with quake-damaged homes, but heÔÇÖs still frustrated by the process in 2024.

Shand - who is currently working on two class action cases against the EQC - believes the organisation is ÔÇ£back to being very difficult to deal with settled claims.ÔÇØ
He has described a delay in processing all cases 13 years after the quakes as ÔÇ£terribleÔÇØ.
The EQC has refuted that description, pointing out that no homeowners have been waiting 13 years to resolve claims from its scheme and that when old claims are re-opened, the organisation makes it a priority to resolve them ÔÇ£quickly and efficiently.ÔÇØ
ÔÇ£There are still original earthquake claims from 2010/2011 against EQC and insurers. EQC continues to reopen claims,ÔÇØ said Shand.
ÔÇ£EQC is dragging out the claims. There are hundreds of people in┬áthe EQC on-sold programme┬áthat are not yet settled.ÔÇØ


https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/35018...e#cxrecs_s

"Central Christchurch is like a beloved pet recovering from severe fur loss - itÔÇÖs grown back new and glossy, but stubborn bald patches remain.

On the 13th earthquake anniversary, the cityÔÇÖs recovery has delivered fancy new precincts and buildings, walking and cycling paths and play areas, redesigned streets, and a parade of new apartments and townhouses.

Alongside sit vacant sections with weeds, damaged buildings awaiting rescue, and construction projects that seem to drag on."