Confused members of nonprofit body Irrigation New Zealand are contacting IrrigationNZ asking if a water tax IS going ahead, following Labour’s announcement on tax plans today.
While Labour’s tax statement is being badged ‘no new taxes this term’ , the water tax is in fact one of five new taxes that will go ahead if Labour wins the next election.
IrrigationNZ is calling on Labour to reconsider their plans.
IrrigationNZ CEO Andrew Curtis said: ‘Labour’s announcement on its tax plans today does nothing to address widespread conerns on a water tax. It seems Labour are still pressing ahead with the tax although their re-issued tax policy is unclear and confusing. There’s still no further detail, no decision on the rate, and no analysis of the impact of this tax on farmers, growers, the public and New Zealand’s economy.’
‘IrrigationNZ has been asking 16 questions about the water tax since it was announced, under the banner Labour: Let’s Answer This [attached]. Today’s announcement provided no more information.’
The proposed water tax deserves more scrutiny and analysis before being introduced. Voters deserve to understand the details and implications of this tax before the election.’
IrrigationNZ does not support a water tax as its proposed because:
It does not apply to all commercial users of water.
It targets certain groups like irrigators which skews the funding and distribution of the tax, meaning it will fail to address some of the country’s most polluted rivers It does nothing to address urban water pollution issues
It is likely to result in unintended consequences, such as more intensive farming to pay for it
It penalises the people who are already cleaning up rivers
The whole announcement was a bit of a clusterwhatsit. The headline was there would be no new taxes until 2020, with the small text underneath containing a disclaimer “with the exception of those we have already committed to”.
So now we still don’t know what the hell Labour is doing.
Good to see them in their usual flight of incompetence. Jacinda needs to get a damehood for talking non-stop and not saying anything for nearly a month. But now that the pressure comes on the usual “talent” are stepping up to do the job, we can all see the “new” Labour party are still the same bunch of clowns.
The last week should be good. It will get nasty…ier still.
Yesterday Labour was forced into a flip-flop over taxes. They’ve promised no new taxes until the after the next election. There are several caveats though.
The first is that the seven taxes they’ve already announce stand…so no new taxes means no new taxes except these ones…
Labour’s undefined tax policies left them vulnerable to National attack ads which warned of seven new taxes or tax hikes. Based on the most recent polls National’s strategy appeared to be working.
Now that Labour has backed down on implementing any previously unannounced taxes in its first term, what’s left of those seven scary taxes?
• Capital Gains Tax • Land tax • Inheritance Tax • Water tax • Income tax • Regional fuel tax • Emission trading scheme
Labour finance spokesman Grant Robertson today kicked the first three into touch further than an Otago full back with the southerly behind him.
Capital gains tax, land tax and inheritance tax – All are politically difficult to sell but Jacinda Ardern had made a “captain’s call” to leave them on the table for its tax working group.
By guaranteeing that none of those working group recommendations will be implemented until 2021, they are effectively gone for his election cycle.
The water tax – Scaring farmers up and down the country – stays. But given farmers aren’t big Labour voters and polls have shown broad urban support that shouldn’t dent Labour’s potential vote.
Income tax – It was always debatable as to whether that should have been on National’s list. Labour has been up front about reversing National’s tax cuts which take effect next April.
But because they’ve already be passed as legislation National says this represents a tax hike. Whether this is legit or semantics is likely to depend on your political leaning.
Regional fuel tax – This stays although its only ever applied to Auckland. Mayor Phil Goff campaigned on this issue but National wouldn’t legislate to let him do it. The money would be used to fund Auckland transport solutions.
Emission trading scheme (ETS) – We’re paying for climate change whether we like it not and both Labour and National have signed up to a global agreement on this. But National has exempted agriculture as an industry of national importance. Labour says it will bring farmers into the ETS by the end of their first term.
Then there is the track record of politicians who have pledged no new taxes.
So, when a politician comes at you and promises that there will be no new taxes or no increases in existing taxes there is a good chance they are lying.
Never trust a politician who is promising no new taxes or no tax increases. They simply cannot be believed.
What needs answering now…is if they’ve cancelled all their new planned taxes, then how are they going to pay for all their promises?
New research has indicated that there may be adverse health effects associated with the use of e-cigarettes. The devices have become wildly popular throughout the world in recent years, in part due to perceptions that they are relatively harmless, or that they help smokers to kick the habit. Globally, the market for e-cigs is set to be worth £25 billion ($33bn)worldwide in less than four years’ time, and £4.45bn ($5.9bn) in the UK alone.
However, research by a team in Sweden has questioned the relative safety of e-cigarettes, with scientists arguing that those containing nicotine may increase the risk of strokes and heart attacks.
Fifteen volunteers who’d never used e-cigarettes before took part in an experiment, with tests revealing an increase in blood pressure, heart rate and arterial stiffness 30 minutes after using them. The test results of those who’d used e-cigarettes without nicotine reported no such effects.
Credit: PA
Dr Magnus Lundback of Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet, a medical university in Stockholm, said: “The number of e-cigarette users has increased dramatically in the last few years. E-cigarettes are regarded by the general public as almost harmless. The industry markets their product as a way to reduce harm and to help people to stop smoking tobacco cigarettes. However, the safety of e-cigarettes is debated, and a growing body of evidence is suggesting several adverse health effects.
“The results are preliminary, but in this study we found there was a significant increase in heart rate and blood pressure in the volunteers who were exposed to e-cigarettes containing nicotine. Arterial stiffness increased around threefold in those who were exposed to nicotine-containing e-cigarettes compared with the nicotine-free group.”
It was noted that the effects of the nicotine-based e-cigarettes were temporary, but the researchers weren’t that through repeated use, it’s possible they could become permanent.
Credit: PA
None of the members of the 2016 experiment were heavy smokers (maximum 10 cigarettes per month) and none had used e-cigarette products before. The arterial stiffness (linked to strokes) found in those who had used nicotine e-cigarettes is also found in regular smokers, though Lundback warned of the dangers chronic use might bear, as well as the reality that cigarette companies have latched onto the perception of e-cigarettes as safer and are making the most of it.
He continued: “The marketing campaigns of the e-cigarette industry target current cigarette smokers and offer a product for smoking cessation. However, several studies question the e-cigarette as a means of smoking cessation, and there is a high risk of double use, where people use both e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes.
“Furthermore, the e-cigarette industry also targets non-smokers, with designs and flavours that appeal to a large crowd, even the very young, and that carry the risk of a lifelong nicotine addiction. The e-cigarette industry is expanding on a global scale. Some calculations suggest that in the USA alone, the e-cigarette industry will surpass the conventional cigarette industry within the next few years.”
IT’S MAORI LANGUAGE WEEK and I’m a supporter of Maori language. I always have been; ever since a Ngai Tahu kaumatua took an interest in my interest in ancient Maori culture sitting there at the Canterbury museum drawing intricate Maori carvings hour after hour into a sketch book on my lap. Te Reo enriches NZ and Maori but I have some things to say about the regime of “correct pronunciation” today of Maori words.
“Correct Maori pronunciation” is a myth!
It’s a modern pakeha construct. There was no Maori centralisation. Even the idea of “New Zealand” (actually “Nova Zelandia” or “Zeland” or “Zeeland” -more correctly we should have been “New Sealand”) was never known as “Ao-te-aroa” -which was only a regional tribal variation of some groups.
Maori assimilated hundreds of pakeha words that they ‘Maori-ised’ (Cook- “Kuki”) as did Europeans who ‘Anglicised’ Maori words (“Mow-ree”). So the dialectical pronunciations by pakeha today of Maori words is simply an identical repeat of Maori processes in language that were varied and disparate in their culture as in ours. Maori in the North and South Islands and on Rakiura (only one of its Maori place names) -even inside each of the islands – had different pronunciations and meanings.
Southern Maori had more vowels and even completely different words for the same things. Ditto Chatham Is. Maori who migrated from the South Is. Christchurch was not known as “Otautahi” which was merely a small place within a huge district that had many other place names related to food gathering: Taumutu Waiora Papanui etc
“Maori” itself means something like “ordinary person” and the varying use of words (as with the ‘rolling r’ of the south or the modern upward pakeha/Maori inflection or “chewy Nu Zulun” dialects in different groupings of New Zealand as characterised by “Lynn of Tawa”) is an inevitable human evolution of the sounds and usages of words never frozen in time. This is true of “Maori language” itself which changed and evolved from Eastern or Western Polynesia (perhaps the Marquesas or the Society Islands or Tahiti or even Fiji, Samoa and Tonga) until it was effectively a different -but understandable- “foreign” language in the same way that sixteenth-century Old English is to New Zealanders today.
And let’s not get started on Australian “English.”
So whether it’s “jandal” (“Japanese Sandal”) or “Kiwifruit” (the Chinese “mihoutao” known during my childhood as the “Chinese gooseberry”) or “Tarrah-naky” for “Tah-ra-naki” or “Rah-mati” for “Rowe-matty” –language is a tide and as fluid as the moana. Let’s not wear concrete gumboots as we slosh about the shallows of awa gathering our cultural kai or taonga as we evolve 21st century New Zealand cultural diversity which includes the rich and deep vein of Maoritanga in all its own diversity
Most of us will lie; sooner or later, for one reason or another. It’s the scale of the lie that matters and Labour are lying: Bigly.
Why would they do that? How would they expect to get away with lying to the public? Well, a certain Austrian fellow once said something on the subject: “In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility…people more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.”
I’ve been hurting myself reading Labour’s Fiscal-Forecast; so you don’t have to. I spotted the small lie soon enough: there seemed to be money for jam, money for tea, money for you and money for me. Money, money, money. Everywhere. But there’s a catch.
The individual amounts glow from the page of the Fi-Fo, but they are meaningless unless applied in context to the total wealth available: the Gross Domestic Product. I found the numbers I wanted innocuously labeled: memo item: nominal Domestic Product, but the projections looked wrong, very wrong. The scale of projected growth in the economy looked unbelievable, unachievable unless gold is found again in Gabriel’s Gully. The average growth in the economy, year-on-year, in Labour’s books was well over 4% — that’s pure nonsense; most economists are projecting less than half of that, some say much less. Here’s the relevant part of the Fi-Fo; I calculated (roughly) the percentage increases and posted them above Labour’s numbers:
And there, in plain sight, is the small fib. Can you see it? It’s the word ‘nominal’.“Nominal” has a precise meaning in economist’s language: It means including inflation. It’s normally expressed as a rate, in percentage terms, rather than applied as whole numbers. The difficulty is: inflation is not wealth creation, it is dilution of money value in the economy. If inflation was wealth Venezuela would be the richest country on earth. To put it in the context of Labour’s propaganda spreadsheet; everybody seems to be getting more money, but what they are getting is worth less.
Going back to numbers in the Fi-Fo, armed with my new understanding of Robbo’s mickey-mousey sums and meaningless riches, is a revelation; several items showing increases in spending under Labour are actually decreases after allowing for Robbo’s hidden and unannounced inflation shenanigans. For instance: After including the shadow-minister’s estimates including inflation over the period of the Fi-Fo (close to 7.5% over the four years projections) “Defense” is in for a caning; the current spend $2286M should increase to $2459M but it doesn’t, Robbo only allocated $2372M for the military. That is, effectively, an $87M decrease in funding, but who cares? That just means there’s less money for flying helicopters into remote valleys and launching attacks on women and children, plus, there’s less for Nicky Hager to fantasise about. Next item: “Law and Order”, should increase from $4435M to $4776M; but it doesn’t—it comes in at $4686, that’s getting close to $100M less for Law and Order funding. ‘So what?’ will be the predictable Labour response on this anomaly; ‘less people will be stealing bread to survive than they were under National, we won’t need as many coppers’.
Then there’s the doozy, and she’s a real beauty I can tell you; “Housing and Community Development”, yes; ‘Housing’ the very subject the opposition and the media (same thing) have bashed National about for over eighteen months, competing with each other to come up with the biggest tear-jerk story, the juiciest Tory monstrosity. Here’s how it works out: Current Spend $2215M should increase with inflation to $2383M, but comes in after Robbo’s calculations at $2357; that’s nearly $30,000,000 less for the hapless homeless. The tear-jerk’s on you; Labour supporters, get yourselves a sleeping bag, a good one.
Now: to the big lie. BIG. BIG. LIE.
The Fi-Fo is replete with impressive graphs and pretty pictures; and we need to talk about one of them. What it purports to show is Grant and Cinda’s clever work. You see; despite the misleading figures they tried to blind us with earlier, the Dynamic Duo still don’t possess enough cash for all the lollies they hope to hand out to their mates, so they’re just going to take it, or withhold it, from ordinary working Kiwi’s, refusing to follow through on National’s tax-cut package. They’ve made no secret of this.
So, here’s the graph; entitled “ADDITIONAL REVENUE”, isn’t it cute? The dark red section is your money—now theirs. The one little bar on the left denotes extra income derived in the current financial year, it’s just a baby cos’ it hasn’t had a full year of sucking your wallet. What’s not to like? It’s nice and even and, really, what sort of meany would deny the helpless and homeless, the wracked and ruined, a mere $2B to help with social evils? That’s about where the bar-graph levels off.
Trouble is: It’s Dishonest. Grant and Cinda didn’t want you to see a truthful bar-graph, and they still don’t want you to see an honest one: The graph says “The figure below sets out the additional sources of revenue… That is untrue: We know it’s untrue. Completely and utterly untrue. Because they plan to take more, much, much more than $2 billion.
The Tooth-fairy is doing a merry-dance, teasing all and sundry about her ‘working group’ and their plans; she’s dancing the maypole to distract you. While it’s important, and we all want to know, what sections of the community will be hit with new levies, and who will be worst off; the thing that is most important is the actual cost. How much extra tax under Socialist-‘Cinda? Think eye-watering, think huge, think about how you’re going to pay 22% more tax within the next four years, because that’s the amount they’re coming for, and we know it’s the amount they seek because it’s right there in Labour’s numbers.
A $17 billion dollars increase! ($16,964,000,000 to be precise)
We will pay, on average, an extra$108 per week tax under Labour to raise the amount necessary to fund Cinda and Grant’s socialist wet-dream. $5660 per year more than now.
To put things in perspective, and show the true scale of Labour’s lies I reproduced the “ADDITIONAL REVENUE” graph from above on an honest, factual basis and it appears below, but be warned; it is scary. It might even break your machine. You may need to turn your screen sideways to see it; such is the magnitude of the lie. It may make you feel sick, so perhaps you could rush to the refrigerator before you view it and grab yourself a glass of milk.
Ladies and Gentlemen…may we never hear the awful words “We won. You lost. Eat that” coming from the lips of Jacinda Ardern and Grant Robertson because, if we do, this is what we get:
Newshub’s latest poll has the National party well in front with Labour 10 points behind.
The real bad news for the left though is that the Greens are below 5% and possibly out of parliament.
The latest Newshub-Reid research poll* shows that National has climbed to 47.3% – an increase of 4% from just over one week ago**. Meanwhile, Labour has shown its first decrease since Jacinda Ardern took over as party leader to sit on 37.8% – a decline of 1.6%.
The results show a potentially devastating turn of events for the Greens as they drop to 4.9% – a further decrease of 1.2% from the last Newshub-Reid research poll. On that result the Greens would miss out on the five per cent threshold and not make it into Parliament. NZ First is also showing a small decline but is currently tracking ahead of the Greens on 6%.
When it comes to preferred Prime Minister, both party leaders are showing an increase but it appears that the leaders’ debates have swung in favour of Bill English. English (33.1%) is recording a 3% increase, and Ardern (31.7%) is showing a 1.8% increase. Winston Peters meanwhile, is down on previous poll results at 6%.
Newshub political editor Patrick Gower said: “These results are dramatic and devastating. A dramatic rise for National to the top of the table, and devastating for the Greens who would be kicked out of Parliament. The overall outlook in the election is still volatile. The vote is extremely volatile.”
Three’s #Decision17 live election coverage will be available on Three and ThreeNOW from 7.00PM, 23rd September. RadioLIVE will also be covering the results throughout the evening with Mark Sainsbury joined in studio by Chris Trotter as well as a line-up of commentators on rotation throughout the night.
Duncan Garner will be hosting the special, joined by Patrick Gower and The Nation host, Lisa Owen.
Garner said: “The polls are as volatile and as unpredictable as the campaign itself. One poll says Labour, the next says National. It’s the most interesting election in decades. No one can call it. Both English and Ardern have campaigned well, but both sides have issues that they’re desperate to either keep quiet or expose in this intense arm wrestle to the end.”
“The minor parties are collapsing and fighting for their very existence. And that, I sense, means some voters are still making up their minds.”
The feedback I am getting is that the polls are harder to pick than a broken nose. They are all over the place.
This poll is but one data point, but going into the last 10 days it provides a boost for National.
Traditionally the two major parties and the Greens slide away in the last two weeks. NZ First rises.
National’s insurance policy is now NZ First, if they slide below a level where they can govern alone.
Labour though is hurting and that can be sheeted home to the lack of detail and the happy face campaign that lacks any substance.
Labour announced their light rail plans to the adoring lefty media luvvies.
They were instantly proclaimed geniuses for proposing light rail down the middle of one of Auckland’ busiest thoroughfares.
Now there is a snag…Labour actually has a $6 billion hole in their funding plans for the rail…and actually want Auckland Council to pay for it, not the government.
Labour is unclear how it will fund a $5 billion plan for modern trams in Auckland, but says Auckland Council will shoulder a “significant” share of the cost.
Labour’s Auckland Issues spokesman Phil Twyford today said he did not know how the costs will be shared between the Government and Auckland Council, except to say council will not pay the majority.
Twyford also did not know whether modern trams, also known as light rail, will sit on the Government or Auckland Council’s balance sheet.
How wonderful. Labour is making spending promises with ratepayer cash. If Labour can’t get simple things like this right then they do not deserve to sit on the treasury benches.
In her first public appearance as Labour leader, Jacinda Ardern promised fast modern trams along two routes from the CBD to the airport and West Auckland within 10 years at a cost of up to $5b. This would be followed by trams to the North Shore.
Labour has promised to fund its Auckland Transport package by a combination of increased expenditure, cancelling or scaling back existing transport projects like the $1.8b east-west road through the city’s industrial belt and giving Auckland Council the ability to set a regional petrol tax.
Twyford said Labour would change the mix and priorities of projects in the city’s 10-year transport plan and spend an extra $2.1b. The overall plan would cost $15b, including the light rail projects to the airport and West Auckland, and had a $6b funding gap, he said.
Twyford said Labour was committed to funding the full $15b programme, but could not say how much Auckland Council would pay towards trams.
“Auckland Council is going to end up contributing a significant amount of that, but probably the smaller amount, not the majority,” said Twyford.
Dishonest as the day is long is Phil Twyford. Labour are hoodwinking people with their own money…that they haven’t stolen yet.
Phil Goff is singing from the same song sheet, wanting to rape ratepayers pockets even more.
It is unclear how the council, which carries the $3.4b City Rail Link on its balance sheet, could absorb another $5b for trams when the council is right up against its debt ceiling, which, if breached could lead to a credit rating downgrade and drive up borrowing costs.
Labour has said a regional fuel tax of 10 cents a litre would raise $160m a year for Auckland Council. The Herald estimates a 10c-a-litre tax would raise $100m a year.
Auckland Mayor Phil Goff said Auckland recognises that we need to have skin in the game.
“We’re prepared to share in the costs of investing in transport infrastructure in our city, but we need government to help us expand the base from which we generate revenue to pay for it,” he said.
Code words for extra taxes.
Goff, the former Labour MP who campaigned during the mayoralty for light rail, said trams to the airport is a priority and the latest ATAP update increases by $700m to $1.2b the money set aside for trams or rapid buses on the isthmus and to the airport.
“I welcome announcements from both parties that central government will contribute a significant share towards Auckland’s transport investment needs.
“I favour road pricing mechanisms rather than general rates increases. That would include options of congestion charging, tolling or a fuel tax to help generate the levels of funding required for transport infrastructure investment in Auckland. We’re also exploring the use of targeted rates and value uplift (higher rates for businesses that benefit from projects).
So, Labour and Phil Goff want to charge road users to fund public transport. How does get stuffed sound.
None of this will end well, costing far more than is promised and delivering far less.
Such is the inherent dishonesty of Labour politicians.
With the Greens polling too low to enter Parliament at all, Labour would be unable to form a coalition government.
In a 121-seat Parliament, National would have 61 seats – a majority. They could form a buffering coalition agreement with ACT, who would bring one seat and/or the Māori Party, who would bring two.
National’s gain in the polls coincides with the week Finance Spokesperson Steven Joyce claimed Labour had an $11.7 billion hole in its fiscal plan. It’s a claim widely debunked by economists, with National unable to find an economist to back it up.
The poll will be devastating for the Green Party, which continues its downward trend, down to 4.9 percent.
That’s just below the 5 percent threshold required for the Greens to enter Parliament without winning an electoral seat.
When questioned by Newshub, National leader Bill English stuck with his current metaphor of choice – a drag race – saying despite the poll, he believed Labour and National were “level pegging”.
“Those numbers are a bit higher than what we’re seeing…. What we see is a drag race between the two big parties,” he said.
“They are going to be choosing National because we can build on the strength that we have, not slow it all down.”
Labour leader Jacinda Ardern said both the Greens and Labour have ruled out an electoral deal to get the Greens over the line.
When asked whether she would rather miss out on power than send a signal for Labour voters to back a Green electoral candidate, Ms Ardern said there has been “real volatility” in the polls and she believed the Greens were polling at a different number.
“Both of us have [ruled out an electoral deal]. We are running our own campaigns locally, and we’re campaigning individually for party vote,” Ms Ardern told Newshub.
The poll has a margin of error of 3.1 percent and was conducted from 6th to 11th September.
This story from the Herald archive was orignally published in June 2017.
Moko Sayviah Rangitoheriri died on August 10 2015 from injuries he received during prolonged abuse and torture. His case shocked, saddened and angered New Zealanders and led to marches in his name against child abuse. His killers were jailed for 17 years with a minimum non-parole period of nine years. Their appeal to have the length of the sentence reduced was rejected in March 2017. This is Moko’s story.
Moko Sayviah Rangitoheriri was killed by those who were meant to be looking after him.
This story contains detailed descriptions of the abuse Moko suffered which could be upsetting. Please take care.
He lay on a resuscitation table.
His eyes were so swollen that the nurse could not lift the lids to check his pupils.
His little body was cold – so cold that devices used for measuring body temperature would not take a reading.
He had bite marks on his face, his tummy was protruding unnaturally and he was covered from head to toe in bruises and abrasions.
The little boy was so badly brutalised that he did not survive. At 10pm on August 10 last year he was pronounced dead.
His name was Moko Rangitoheriri. He was 3 years old.
A post-mortem examination was carried out and established that the Tokoroa toddler died as a result of “multiple blunt force traumas”.
He had lacerations and hemorrhaging deep within his abdomen, historic bruising and damage to his bowel. Combined, that resulted in his bowel rupturing. Fecal matter leaked into Moko’s abdomen, causing septic shock.
His brain was swollen, he had blood clots under his scalp representing numerous injuries inflicted at different times in the lead up to his death.
There was evidence the toddler had been smothered.
His body was a veritable map of torture – Moko had human bite marks, contusions, abrasions, deep bruising, lacerations, patterned injuries on his face, chin, neck, ears, lower lip, gums, eyes, ribs, testes, skin, chest, tummy, shoulder, arms.
Moko was a little boy with a big smile and a lot of life left to live.
But that was taken away from him by David Haerewa and Tania Shailer who deliberately and systematically hurt, tortured and abused Moko. Then, when his little body could take no more, they left him to die.
The beginning of the end
Moko Sayviah Rangitoheriri was born in October 2012 to Nicola Dally-Paki and Jordan Rangitoheriri.
Ms Dally-Paki had a son and daughter before Moko came along. When her youngest boy was very little, her eldest became sick and needed to travel to Auckland for treatment at Starship Hospital.
She couldn’t have the younger kids with her at the hospital so Moko and his sister were left in the care of whanau.
The pair spent time in Hawke’s Bay and then moved in with their mum’s mate in Taupo – Tania Shailer. Ms Dally-Paki met Shailer, then a caregiver at Kohunga Reo, when she was 16.
After Moko died, his mother Nicola Dally-Paki revealed that her 7-year-old daughter had seen much of the abuse meted out to the toddler.
When Shailer took in Moko and his sister she had four kids of her own aged between 2 and 7 and was living with her partner David Haerewa.
A source told the Herald that Haerewa had been in and out of prison “most of his life” but in June 2015 he was “doing really well”.
Shailer was also in a good place, the source said. She’d had problems in the past and turned to a Maori women’s refuge to help her escape a violent life in 2013. They helped her move to Taupo and find a house.
The refuge continued to work with Shailer in 2015.
Social worker Trina Marama said Shailer enrolled Moko’s sister into one of her refuge classes in June 2015. The girl was always well dressed, with a homemade lunch.
Mrs Marama never met Moko but came under fire after his death when a media report implied she had been told by the little girl about the abuse her brother was suffering.
“There were no signs or alarming signs that Moko was being abused,” Mrs Marama told Maori TV’s Native Affairs programme.
Shailer was in regular contact with Ms Dally-Paki until two weeks before Moko’s death.
“Her phone was off and I couldn’t call to talk to him. Those are signs that I should’ve picked up on,” Ms Dally-Paki would later tell TV3’s Story.
Court documents outline what happened in the two months Moko lived with Shailer and Haerewa – the last two months of his life.
For some reason, they began to dislike the little boy and their “animosity” increased.
Haerewa would later tell police that he didn’t like Moko’s “ways” and he was angry that the 3-year-old took him and Shailer “for granted”.
A culture of violence against Moko evolved.
Shailer would punch, kick and slap Moko. On one occasion another child in the house saw her biting the toddler multiple times on his face and arms.
She bit him so hard that his skin would break and he would bleed.
Meanwhile, Haerewa got into a “routine” of picking on Moko. He kicked, slapped, threw and booted the little boy, and sometimes beat him with a jandal.
“He didn’t want Moko around him … didn’t like Moko in his presence and would constantly have him in time out,” the summary said.
Time out for Moko was being put in the bathroom for hours at a time, on his own.
It appears Haerewa abused Moko whenever he could. In a horrid twist, he is not the only child abuser in his family.
He is the uncle of Benny Haerewa, who killed 4-year-old James Whakaruru. James was systematically beaten for several years before the fatal attack in 1999.
Benny Haerewa was convicted of manslaughter and at sentencing it emerged that he had earlier served jail time for beating James when the youngster was just 2 years old.
The killing of Moko
It was around August 5 when the couple started to kill Moko. The abuse escalated to a point of no return.
Shailer stomped repeatedly on Moko’s tummy with “significant force”. Moko groaned, expelling bursts of air as the adult who was supposed to be caring for him brought her foot down – hard – again and again.
After the attack Moko lost control of his bowel.
Haerewa would later tell police that they made Moko sit on paper and plastic because he “kept sh**ting”.
At some point around this time Moko suffered a fatal head injury.
It has not been established who of Shailer and Haerewa dealt the blow but it caused swelling on Moko’s brain and, combined with earlier head injuries and the attack on his abdomen, left the boy with little chance of survival.
By August 6 it was clear little Moko was in trouble.
“As the week progressed he became increasingly unwell. He was defecating spontaneously frequently, unable to control his bowels,” the summary revealed.
His face began to bruise, consistent with a severe head injury, and he was vomiting.
Moko was left in his bedroom all day that Sunday. He begged for water and the first time Haerewa gave him some, but after that his pleas were ignored.
Haerewa kept abusing the boy, despite his obviously deteriorating health.
“In particular he kicked Moko in the lower back after he had defecated, then wiped the faeces in Moko’s face,” the court heard.
“He then washed Moko with such force that he removed scabs from his body. Moko was screaming in pain and Haerewa covered Moko’s mouth to silence him.”
While in the shower Moko fell, and was barely able to stand up.
Haerewa could see the boy was getting worse.
He dried Moko, put him in a nappy and “chucked” him back in his bedroom.
No one did anything to help the little boy.
His breathing was laboured. His tummy was starting to get hard from his undiagnosed internal injuries.
Still, no one did anything to help him.
Shailer left the house and took her own kids to school. She spent the rest of the morning at home with Haerewa and then left the house again just before midday to attend a course.
At 2.20pm she got a ride home with a mate and asked to stop at a pharmacy. There, she tried to buy an EpiPen – a device used for injecting a measured dose or doses of epinephrine.
Most often used for the treatment of anaphylaxis the pens are carried by severe allergy sufferers. Shailer was told that the pens were not stocked but one could be ordered. She declined, and went home.
In the car she told her mate that Moko had “fallen from the woodpile” the day before. He was “okay”, she said.
The friend told Shailer to get the little boy checked at Taupo Hospital in case he had a head injury and offered to drive them there.
Shailer said no.
Just before 3pm she was dropped off at home. She and Haerewa then decided to try and revive Moko.
Shailer gave the boy mouth-to-mouth while Haerewa picked their kids up from school.
At 3pm Shailer picked up the phone and called 111. Four days had now passed since she had stomped on the child.
Moko fell from a wood pile yesterday, she told the operator. He sustained “severe bruising”, but had been okay up until now, she said.
Moko was now “really cold, unconscious, not breathing properly” and his stomach was “really hard”.
Paramedics arrived minutes later to find little Moko lying face down in the hallway.
Shailer was kneeling by his feet.
The paramedic took one look at Moko, his injuries and near-dead condition, scooped the 3-year-old up from the floor and rushed him straight to the emergency department.
Hours later he was dead.
What Moko’s sister saw
After Moko died, his mother revealed that her 7-year-old daughter had seen much of the abuse meted out to the toddler.
“She told me Moko had been locked in the bathroom for two weeks,” Ms Dally-Paki told Story.
“She’d try and stay home from school to try and feed my son because they were starving him.”
The 7-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told Ms Dally-Paki that she had begged Shailer and Haerewa to stop abusing her baby brother.
“She said he was locked in the bathroom for two weeks, and that she tried to use toilet paper to wipe his bleeding eyes.
“She tried everything to save him. She was told to tell the police that she had hurt Moko.”
Ms Dally-Paki’s daughter was not spared from the attacks.
“She said [Shailer] used to punch [her] in the face when she’d smile, and drag her by the hair to get to school.”
“They brainwashed her, they psychologically screwed her, and made her partake in the violence.”
The Herald contacted Ms Dally-Paki and Mr Rangitoheriri for comment ahead of the sentencing of their son’s killers. Neither responded.
Police issued a statement on behalf of the family, who sought privacy during a “very difficult time”.
/arc-anglerfish-syd-prod-nzme.s3.amazonaws.com/public/CCICWI56JFHTLC4EIE4ITWIGBM.jpg)
/arc-anglerfish-syd-prod-nzme.s3.amazonaws.com/public/AME2FOQDPNEQBI3Y347LM6PBQM.jpg)
/arc-anglerfish-syd-prod-nzme.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UMWFUG46E5DXBPCTIVXNOILQ3Q.jpg)