Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

NZ: ICT workers out, taxi drivers in

If you're an ICT worker then things could be looking up.

According to reports, those prepared to up-stakes and jump the ditch to Oz might find themselves doing "very nicely thank you" -- and it's all because of a(nother) looming skills shortage in "The Lucky Country".

However, even if you're not keen to spend your arvos swatting flies from the barby, the Aussie demand for analysts, programmers, etc will still be good news because every Kiwi who heads across the Tasman makes your skills worth more here in GodZone.

And, if other reports are to be believed, that could see smart techies in short supply, with resultant higher salaries and more bargaining power.

Continued...

What a brilliant idea, oh - hang on, it's mine!

It has been reported that the ACC is giving old radar units to various groups who use them to trigger radar detectors in vehicles, apparently reducing the average speed in those areas by 1%-3%.

What a brilliant idea, why didn't I think of that.

Oh, hang on -- I did!, nearly a full two years ago - long before the ACC got in on the act.

It's nice to know that the ACC can use my ideas (even if they thought them up all by themselves) but they can't make even the slightest concession to assisting us by changing an appointment eh?

But enough of the ACC, they are a law unto themselves and answerable to no man.

What about name suppression?

Whale Oil has been fighting a silly battle with the courts over his penchant for breaking suppression laws and I've already commented on the folly of this attempt to poke an angry dog with a sharp stick.

However, the latest case would seem to be a perfect example of double standards in respect to how the suppression law is applied.

I wonder if this kiddy-porn collector were a Maori labourer, whether he and his family would have received the same protection by way of name suppression?

Although it may sound like it, I'm not actually suggesting that this guy ought not to get the suppression he's been given -- after all, it would appear that the main reason for the court's order was to protect his family.

No, my concern is that if he wasn't a "prominent" person then odds are his name would have been splashed all over the papers and TV.

What right does being "prominent" give anyone to receive a lesser punishment than that which would be metered out to someone more unknown?

If we're going to have (and use) name suppression then we must be seen to use it fairly and without prejudice -- which in this latest case is clearly not happening.

When the courts are prepared to suppress a kiddy-porn collector's name on the basis that he has a family then there ought to be blanket suppression for any and all kiddy-porn collectors who have families. If we allow the offender's "prominence" to become a factor in determining the applicability of suppression then we have a two-tier justice system and that sucks.

Have your say.

And yes... the Sci-Tech headlines links are updated again today with some great stories!

Recoverable Proxy

Change Font