This week in 1985, another new song, and another one from a movie soundtrack, hit Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100”. On July 13, 1985, “A View to a Kill” (video up top) by by the English pop rock band Duran Duran reached number one. The song, which was Number One for two weeks, was the theme song for the James Bond movie of the same name. The song was the only single from the soundtrack album, which, oddly enough, was also called A View to a Kill. Who’d have ever guessed that?
I’m joking, of course: All of them having the same name made marketing much easier—I guess? In 1985, I was mostly unaware of the single, music video, and movie. I’ve never been a fan of 007 movies, and while I’ve seen a couple, Roger Moore’s movies were not among them. Similarly, I was never a fan of Duran Duran, either. Having said all that, I certainly didn’t “hate” either the band or any of the 007 movies—I simply wasn’t into them. As is so often the case in pop culture matters,”Arthur’s Law” applies.
Because I wasn’t a fan of the band, I have no memory of seeing the music video until I went to get the video link for this post. So, um, yeah, it’s certainly a video. Seriously, I have two thoughts. First, I generally prefer music videos that use the artform and don’t just show the band performing the song or are just edited concert footage. In that sense, I give the video big points for being an actual music video. However—to be completely honest—I think the video was really lame, although, I have absolutely no idea what I would’ve thought if I’d seen in 40 years ago. And, anyway, in my long-held opinion, music videos are an artform separate from the song itself. It’s absolutely possible and logical for someone to like one but not the other (and I knew folks back in the day who said they hated all music videos, so there’s that, too).
When I talked about last week’s song, I said that “having mellowed with age and time, my reaction to the song is far less visceral, if still generally negative, though perhaps tinged with a kind of nostalgia that only time—decades?—can permit for something once disliked”. If I remembered this week’s song better, it’d probably be true for this song, too—I find it happens all the time. Things being as they are, the sound of the song is a source of nostalgia for me because it reminds me of pop music in the mid-1980s, and, for me, that’s actually a good thing.
“A View to a Kill” reached Number 6 in Australia, Number One in Canada (Gold), Number 13 in New Zealand, Number 2 in the UK (Silver), and Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100”, and on the Cash Box “Top 100” Chart. The song didn’t receive Certification in the USA.
No chart information for the album A View to a Kill was included in the Wikipedia article linked to up top, but, then, it only had the one single from the album, so it probably didn’t sell well.
This series will return July 27 with the song that hit Number One that week in 1985.
Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1985” series:
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 1 – February 2, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 2 – February 16, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 3 – March 12, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 4 – March 30, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 5 – April 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 6 – May 11, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 7 – May 18, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 8 – June 1, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 9 – June 8, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 10 – June 22, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 11 – July 6, 2025
Sunday, July 13, 2025
Sunny side up
Early last week, I looked at the extended forecast, and saw it was supposed to be rainy until this past Friday. But, we had a run of a few days without rain, so I mowed the lawns on Tuesday—and that went well, fortunately, and on one battery charge.
It was fortunate I mowed the lawns when I did, because the extended forecast kept changing, and the sunny days kept moving farther away. By Friday of last week, the entire week was supposed to be rainy, then by this past Monday we were warned of big storms, especially for the top of the South Island. I decided I wasn’t going anywhere that day.
I started the day by making fried eggs (photo up top). When I shared it on my personal Facebook, I wrote: “My brunch today, the only 'sunny' thing I’ll be seeing today. 🙁”. I then added:
Kirikiriroa-Hamilton is under an Orange rain storm warning, with the potential for very heavy rain and strong winds until the wee hours of the morning. The top of the South Island, however, is under a Red Warning. Basically, an Orange Warning means “be prepared” because storms may be bad, and a Red Warning means “take action” because the storms WILL be bad.The weather Monday was truly awful: Sometimes heavy rain, strong wind gusts, and steady rain even when it wasn’t raining heavily. I definitely made the right choice to stay home that day.
The extended forecast has pushed out next sunny day out again, to one week from today—July 20. There’s like to be sunny periods over the coming week, but rain is predicted for at least part of every day/ So, yay.
I’ve fully embraced my winter adaptations: I run the dishwasher, washer, and dryer only after 10pm whne the power rate drops to the lowest amount. I need to do this because there aren’t enough sunny hours to get free electricity, both because of all the rain we get in winter, and because the daylight hours are still pretty short.
I’ve also felt cold much of the time this winter, more so than I have in many years. I have no idea why, since the daily high temperatures, while cold, aren’t particularly unusual. Maybe all the rain has made things unusually damp?
Still, one does what one must to cope, and for some folks—like me—it requires a bit more effort. Sometimes even something as simple as well-made “sunny side up” fried eggs can help, too. Just another of my winter adaptations.
Monday, July 07, 2025
Walking to… somewhere
When I talked about this back on March 1, I trotted out some statistics from a spreadsheet I made to track my progress (and still use). That’s been quite interesting—to me, anyway.
First, and most obviously, I’ve walked a lot: Over the past six months, I’ve walked a total of 289.44 kilometres—we’ll call it 290km—and the map up top [SOURCE] shows how far I would get if I walked 290k in a straight line from Hamilton. I should point out that, contrary to what many may think, I can’t walk on water, so only the points on land are relevant. Seriously, though, it’s not necessarily possible to walk to some of those places, but if someone far fitter than me attempted it, it wouldn’t take anywhere near six months to walk that far.
The serious point here is that I’ve met my true goal: To walk every single day, with a minimum of at least one kilometre per day. The point here was consistency, not distance or speed, because I wanted to position myself to hopefully maintain flexibility and mobility as long as possible. Basically, I figured that if I started now, I’d have a better chance of achieving that goal before I reach the lifestage at which those are sometimes a problem. And that’s why consistency is what matters most: It keeps my leg muscles used to motion and holding me upright.
Even though consistency was my goal, not distance or speed, both have naturally increased. When I began (actually back in December, but that was before I made the commitment to daily walks), my average pace—the amount of time it takes me to walk one kilometre—was more than 15 minutes. Now, it’s usually under 12 minutes—in fact, my average pace per kilometre is around 2.5 minutes faster now, which means I can walk farther in the same amount of time, and that matters a lot.
I’ve discovered that I have what I’ve dubbed my “boredom barrier”. A 15-minute walk is usually no problem, but by 20 minutes I’m starting to get over it, and at around 30 minutes, I’m thoroughly bored. This was a problem for maintaining my commitment.
I got around this at first through sheer stubbornness: I refused to stop until and unless I’d covered one kilometre. But, as my pace increased, I could cover, say, 1.35km in fifteen minutes, and that meant it was relatively easy for me to get myself to do 1.5km, since it would only take a few minutes longer. Then, if I managed 1.5 kilometres, it was maybe another 6 minutes-ish to get to 2 kilometres, and that now happens more and more often these days. It turns out I can re-set my “boredom barrier”—when I really want to, anyway. More often than not I get myself to the point where that’s possible by focusing on thinking about a specific thing (like, say, a project, maybe a blog post). That makes the time seem go faster.
While consistency was my goal, I was aware that all this walking would strengthen my leg muscles, too. Over time, they felt stronger, and I found I was able to do things I wasn’t always able to do, like standing on one leg without wobbling. Oddly enough, I seldom have any reason to stand on one leg, but I can do it, dammit! The real point is that my muscles are stronger, even my bum—I mean, not the envy of any male model (or maybe especially a male “model”—“actor”?), but a change I was able to notice. In other words, it seems there really are perks to exercise.
I added another thing over the past couple months: I’m using small dumbbells to strengthen by arms and shoulders. That’s also about flexibility. Of course, but better upper body strength will help me with many, many projects in the coming years, and that gets at what led me to start all this in the first place.
In December of last year, I realised I was struggling with physical tasks, like mowing the lawns, and it’s also the main reason I couldn’t bring myself to do the hard work that I needed to do to tame the gardens: I wasn’t physically up to the challenge. I was beginning to think about how I probably needed to start hiring people to do things I felt I could no longer do, and that was deeply depressing. But then I remembered something I’d said back in 2019, which I mentioned in a 2020 blog post: “I’m too young to feel this old”. However, I knew I’d remembered that around four and a half years after I first said it, and I wasn’t sure whether it was actually still true.
My breakthrough moment was when I thought to myself, “but what if I really am still too young to feel so old?” I then wondered if becoming fitter would allow me to do more physical stuff, but I also knew that even if it didn’t, it would at least help me with flexibility and mobility in the years to come. And with that my crusade was born.
It’s still too early to know how much more physical stuff, if any, I’ll be able to do, but I really do feel stronger, something I feel most when I’m walking around in daily life (not part of a workout), and that makes me happy. Six months from now, I should have a much better idea of how my efforts will lead, and I’m actually excited about that—while being realistic.
When I began this fitness journey six months ago, I wasn’t sure I’d really manage to walk every single day, nor that I’d achieve my goals. The fact I’ve succeeded with both really is a surprise, but it it’s also a source of hope: If I can make a commitment to myself and maintain it for every single day over six months, what else might I be able to do? I’m excited to find out.
Further down the road
Two years ago today, I was literally celebrating the opening of a new (short) road directly connecting my area to the rest of Hamilton. Two years later, I’m still happy the road finally opened—and yet…
In late 2019, when my brother-in-law and I stopped at a realtor open home to check out what’s now my house, the agent told me about the road that would be built “soon”, and how it would have a small commercial area with some shops. It was, in fact, one of the reasons I bought this house.
The fact it actually took three-and-a-half years for the road to finally open isn’t the agent’s fault, obviously, nor did she in any way promise it’d be open any sooner—though she also didn’t stress that the construction hadn’t even started yet, let alone that at the time of the open home it wasn’t even scheduled. In late 2019, we were all blissfully unaware of Covid and all the disruption that would cause to—well, everything, really.
It’s now two years after that road finally opened, and it’s also now some five-and-a-half years since I moved into my house. I’m still glad for the easy connection to anywhere in Hamilton I might want to drive to, and it really has been a huge improvement to the quality of my daily life. But the story stalled yet again.
The commercial area still hasn’t been started, and there haven’t been any signs whatsoever that it’s even a glimmer in a developer’s eye. Meanwhile, traffic has continually become heavier, especially around rush hours (in late afternoon, for example, I sometimes have to wait several minutes for cars to pass through the roundabout at the entrance/exit to my neighbourhood that I use, including to get to that road. That’s because, first, in the two years since the road opened, a lot of new houses have been built in the two developments close to the one I live in, and because people living even further away have realised using the new road is much faster for them, too.
Even with the increased traffic, it’s apparently not enough to attract developers, but there’s more to it. New Zealand’s economy has been in terrible shape for a couple years now, with high interest rates, rising construction costs, and a shortage of tradespeople, many of whom have moved to Australia for better pay and opportunities. Add it all up, and there was no way the commercial area could have been started, let alone finished.
The missing commercial area, then, is disappointing, but not surprising. The same could be said for the fact that this entire part of the city still has no public parks: A large open are for sports is supposed to built between our development and the next one down the road—some day. I’m not a sports person—clearly—but even I can see how having an open area like that would be a good thing. With no public parks, and no benches (aside from a bus shelter), this area is far from pedestrian-friendly, unlike older parts of the city (and in this case, “older” could mean less than ten years older).
Even so, despite the delays in starting to build the commercial area and the public park, the opening of the road has helped us all to drive to the rest of Hamilton much more easily. However, the optimism I shared on my personal Facebook two years ago, that I would “feel a part of the city, not adjacent to it”, didn’t actually happen—I felt able to get to the rest of the city, absolutely, but with so much still not begun, let alone completed (also including the final phase of the development I live in), I still feel at least somewhat set apart from the rest of the city. On the other other hand, I feel far more connected to the rest of the city here than I felt at our last house in Auckland, which is something.
All up, then, the road has definitely made things better for everyone who uses it, maybe me especially. Progress is progress, after all.
In late 2019, when my brother-in-law and I stopped at a realtor open home to check out what’s now my house, the agent told me about the road that would be built “soon”, and how it would have a small commercial area with some shops. It was, in fact, one of the reasons I bought this house.
The fact it actually took three-and-a-half years for the road to finally open isn’t the agent’s fault, obviously, nor did she in any way promise it’d be open any sooner—though she also didn’t stress that the construction hadn’t even started yet, let alone that at the time of the open home it wasn’t even scheduled. In late 2019, we were all blissfully unaware of Covid and all the disruption that would cause to—well, everything, really.
It’s now two years after that road finally opened, and it’s also now some five-and-a-half years since I moved into my house. I’m still glad for the easy connection to anywhere in Hamilton I might want to drive to, and it really has been a huge improvement to the quality of my daily life. But the story stalled yet again.
The commercial area still hasn’t been started, and there haven’t been any signs whatsoever that it’s even a glimmer in a developer’s eye. Meanwhile, traffic has continually become heavier, especially around rush hours (in late afternoon, for example, I sometimes have to wait several minutes for cars to pass through the roundabout at the entrance/exit to my neighbourhood that I use, including to get to that road. That’s because, first, in the two years since the road opened, a lot of new houses have been built in the two developments close to the one I live in, and because people living even further away have realised using the new road is much faster for them, too.
Even with the increased traffic, it’s apparently not enough to attract developers, but there’s more to it. New Zealand’s economy has been in terrible shape for a couple years now, with high interest rates, rising construction costs, and a shortage of tradespeople, many of whom have moved to Australia for better pay and opportunities. Add it all up, and there was no way the commercial area could have been started, let alone finished.
The missing commercial area, then, is disappointing, but not surprising. The same could be said for the fact that this entire part of the city still has no public parks: A large open are for sports is supposed to built between our development and the next one down the road—some day. I’m not a sports person—clearly—but even I can see how having an open area like that would be a good thing. With no public parks, and no benches (aside from a bus shelter), this area is far from pedestrian-friendly, unlike older parts of the city (and in this case, “older” could mean less than ten years older).
Even so, despite the delays in starting to build the commercial area and the public park, the opening of the road has helped us all to drive to the rest of Hamilton much more easily. However, the optimism I shared on my personal Facebook two years ago, that I would “feel a part of the city, not adjacent to it”, didn’t actually happen—I felt able to get to the rest of the city, absolutely, but with so much still not begun, let alone completed (also including the final phase of the development I live in), I still feel at least somewhat set apart from the rest of the city. On the other other hand, I feel far more connected to the rest of the city here than I felt at our last house in Auckland, which is something.
All up, then, the road has definitely made things better for everyone who uses it, maybe me especially. Progress is progress, after all.
Sunday, July 06, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 11
On this week in 1985, another new song hit Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100”. At the end of of Part 10 in this series, I asked about this week’s song, “Will I remember that one?” Well…
40 years ago this week, “Sussudio” (video up top) by the English singer-songwriter Phil Collins. It was Number One for one week. The song was on his third solo studio album album, No Jacket Required. It was the lead single in the UK, and the second single in the USA following "One More Night", which I talked about in Part 4 of this series.
To answer the question I posed at the end of Part 10, yes, I do remember the song: I couldn’t miss it at the time. However, I didn’t like it: To me, it sounded like nonsense, and it turns out I was right: “Sussudio” was originally a nonsense word Collins used as a placeholder, and it stuck. He said the song is about a schoolboy's crush on a girl at school—not that I’d know because I actively tried to ignore the song every time it popped up on the radio or on TV as a music video.
Nowadays, having mellowed with age and time, my reaction to the song is far less visceral, if still generally negative, though perhaps tinged with a kind of nostalgia that only time—decades?—can permit for something once disliked. So, that’s something, I guess.
“Sussudio” reached Number 8 in Australia, Number 10 in Canada, Number 27 in New Zealand (Gold), Number 12 in the UK (Silver), and Number One on the USA’s Billboard, as well as Number 30 on their “Adult Contemporary” chart, Number 4 on their “Dance Club Songs” chart, Number 8 on their “Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs” chart, and Number 10 on their “Mainstream Rock Songs” chart. The song was Certified Gold in the USA.
The album No Jacket Required reached Number One in Australia (Platinum), Canada (Diamond), New Zealand (Platinum), the UK (6x Platinum) as well as Number One on the Billboard 200” (12x Platinum).
This series will return next week, July 13, with another brand new Number One single for that week. We'll see what that one was about.
Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1985” series:
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 1 – February 2, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 2 – February 16, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 3 – March 12, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 4 – March 30, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 5 – April 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 6 – May 11, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 7 – May 18, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 8 – June 1, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 9 – June 8, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 10 – June 22, 2025
40 years ago this week, “Sussudio” (video up top) by the English singer-songwriter Phil Collins. It was Number One for one week. The song was on his third solo studio album album, No Jacket Required. It was the lead single in the UK, and the second single in the USA following "One More Night", which I talked about in Part 4 of this series.
To answer the question I posed at the end of Part 10, yes, I do remember the song: I couldn’t miss it at the time. However, I didn’t like it: To me, it sounded like nonsense, and it turns out I was right: “Sussudio” was originally a nonsense word Collins used as a placeholder, and it stuck. He said the song is about a schoolboy's crush on a girl at school—not that I’d know because I actively tried to ignore the song every time it popped up on the radio or on TV as a music video.
Nowadays, having mellowed with age and time, my reaction to the song is far less visceral, if still generally negative, though perhaps tinged with a kind of nostalgia that only time—decades?—can permit for something once disliked. So, that’s something, I guess.
“Sussudio” reached Number 8 in Australia, Number 10 in Canada, Number 27 in New Zealand (Gold), Number 12 in the UK (Silver), and Number One on the USA’s Billboard, as well as Number 30 on their “Adult Contemporary” chart, Number 4 on their “Dance Club Songs” chart, Number 8 on their “Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs” chart, and Number 10 on their “Mainstream Rock Songs” chart. The song was Certified Gold in the USA.
The album No Jacket Required reached Number One in Australia (Platinum), Canada (Diamond), New Zealand (Platinum), the UK (6x Platinum) as well as Number One on the Billboard 200” (12x Platinum).
This series will return next week, July 13, with another brand new Number One single for that week. We'll see what that one was about.
Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1985” series:
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 1 – February 2, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 2 – February 16, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 3 – March 12, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 4 – March 30, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 5 – April 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 6 – May 11, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 7 – May 18, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 8 – June 1, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 9 – June 8, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 10 – June 22, 2025
A meal built on chance and memory
He taught me to make it very early in our time together, and I made it dozens of times over the years. In his last years he used to say, “you’re the second-best at making it!”, after him, of course. But none of that is why I made it: I was bored.
It was a Friday night, and I wasn’t sure what I wanted for dinner. I thought about ordering pizza, but the only one I like is a premium NZ chain, and kind of expensive, which wouldn’t be a problem if it wasn’t for the fact the quality varies a lot: Sometimes it’s great, other times, well, they were clearly having a bad night. I decided I wasn’t in the mood to throw the dice.
Instead, I thought I should make something I haven’t made in a long time, and CMC was the ideal choice. It wasn’t my best batch, but that was because the tinned mangoes were a bit sour, which happens sometimes. Even so, it was nice, and I was able to use up a bit of chicken I had in the freezer, and it ended up being a good meal for one.
When I was making it, I remembered some of the times I’d made it over the years, and how much Nigel loved it when I did. He also sometimes “complained” about how when he’d visit a sibling for dinner how he’d often “have it served up to me”. In reality, he was pleased that the family loved it, too. In fact, his mum still asks me to make it.
So, I got to have a meal I seldom make for myself—I think it may have been only the second time I’ve done that, though I’ve made it for family several times. I also used up some chicken in the freezer (I’ve been trying to use up stuff in the freezer because it was WAY overstuffed). Even the UHT cream I used was nearing its “best before” date, so that was a bonus (and the sort of thing that would entice me to say to Nigel that “‘best before’ and ‘use by’ are NOT the same thing,” because he thought—or maybe he just pretended he did—that they were the same thing.
And all of that was because I was dissatisfied with my dinner options last night. I ended up with a yummy win.
Saturday, July 05, 2025
Photo memory and realities
This was one of my favourite photos of the kids as they waited for their other daddy to get home from work. All four of them are gone now.After I posted that, I naturally wondered if I’d shared that photo on this blog ten years ago, but I hadn’t at all in all of July 2015. Today, I looked though my stored photos and I found the original, which I took on June 5, exactly a month before I made it my Facebook cover photo. That’s not remotely important—the date I took the photo and the date I made it my FB cover photo were both ten years ago, and the real point wasn’t the date, it was how much things had changed since then.
Around a year and a half after I took this photo, we all moved to the southern edge of the Manukau Harbour, and a little more than a year after that, Leo joined our family. Some nine months later, we lost Bella, seven months after that, we lost their other daddy, nearly a year and a half later, Sunny left us, and Jake around seven months after that. Sometimes even I’m shocked I managed to survive all that loss so close together.
I still have the mat Jake and Sunny are laying on, and the dog rope, too—though no one plays with it anymore. On the other hand, I’ve upgraded my phone several times and my photos have much better resolution now—and the fact that was one of the first things I thought when this photo popped up in my FB “Memories” is an indication of healing (so called…). The fact I remember in detail when each member of our family left us shows that healing from grief isn’t actually a thing: We adapt, we grow around it, we move forward with it, but usually without the searing pain it once produced. I miss them all as much as ever, and I can tell that Leo does, too, but we have each other and some days that’s everything.
The whole thing gave me a chance to underscore the fact that grief never diminishes or ends, instead, we grow around it. I’ve talked about this many times, and I’ll talk about more into the future because I think it’s the biggest thing that people don’t understand about grief, and also what they most need to understand.
Still, the photo I took ten years ago was a great example of what my life was like only a decade ago. I miss that life, everyone I’ve lost. But I’m still here, and so is Leo, and together we continue moving forward. And that’s the way of things.
Thursday, July 03, 2025
The clouds’ silver lining
Winter is not my favourite season, and while I don’t think I’ve mentioned that before, it’s definitely true. Now that we’re in the middle month of our winter, I can reconfirm my dislike of the season. Winter in this part of the country is often cold and rainy, and it seems this year it’s even more true than usual—maybe?
Last week, I wrote about the weather and how I’d felt yucky feeling, and I also mentioned that I’d found out that it had rained less in May than it seemed. Well, MetService reported that June was different in a couple significant ways.
June and July are the coldest months of the year (though very cold days can happen before or after those months), and the high temperatures in June were aligned with historic trends, however, the low was colder than normal. However, it rained a LOT in June. The total for June was 192.2mm (approximately 7.57 inches), as compared to the historic average of 128mm (approximately 5.04 inches)—though in June last year the total was only 79.4mm (approximately 3.13 inches). So, basically, it rained a lot in Hamilton June.
Other parts of New Zealand, especially Auckland and Northland and also the top of the South Island, were hammered with rain. So, sure, it rained a lot in Kirikiriroa-Hamilton in June, but it was much worse in other parts of New Zealand. And yet, even that wasn’t as bad as it wounds.
As result of regular rain since April, New Zealand’s hydro lakes are at unusually high levels, and that means that we won’t have any rolling blackouts this winter, like when we had an unannounced rolling blackout on the coldest night of 2021.
The issue is that when winter begins, the lakes behind the dams are usually low due to low-to-no summer rains, and when the weather turns particularly cold, power use goes up, and if the hyrdo lakes are low, then we can face rolling blackouts as a “last resort.” We were threatened with the possibility of rolling blackouts several times after that infamous 2021 night, but none actually happened. It seems pretty clear it won’t happen this year, and the big storms we’ve had this winter have made sure of that.
So, all the rain we’ve had this year has had a genuine silver lining. There had to be something good about it. But I still hate winter. Have I even mentioned that?
Last week, I wrote about the weather and how I’d felt yucky feeling, and I also mentioned that I’d found out that it had rained less in May than it seemed. Well, MetService reported that June was different in a couple significant ways.
June and July are the coldest months of the year (though very cold days can happen before or after those months), and the high temperatures in June were aligned with historic trends, however, the low was colder than normal. However, it rained a LOT in June. The total for June was 192.2mm (approximately 7.57 inches), as compared to the historic average of 128mm (approximately 5.04 inches)—though in June last year the total was only 79.4mm (approximately 3.13 inches). So, basically, it rained a lot in Hamilton June.
Other parts of New Zealand, especially Auckland and Northland and also the top of the South Island, were hammered with rain. So, sure, it rained a lot in Kirikiriroa-Hamilton in June, but it was much worse in other parts of New Zealand. And yet, even that wasn’t as bad as it wounds.
As result of regular rain since April, New Zealand’s hydro lakes are at unusually high levels, and that means that we won’t have any rolling blackouts this winter, like when we had an unannounced rolling blackout on the coldest night of 2021.
The issue is that when winter begins, the lakes behind the dams are usually low due to low-to-no summer rains, and when the weather turns particularly cold, power use goes up, and if the hyrdo lakes are low, then we can face rolling blackouts as a “last resort.” We were threatened with the possibility of rolling blackouts several times after that infamous 2021 night, but none actually happened. It seems pretty clear it won’t happen this year, and the big storms we’ve had this winter have made sure of that.
So, all the rain we’ve had this year has had a genuine silver lining. There had to be something good about it. But I still hate winter. Have I even mentioned that?
Tuesday, July 01, 2025
Senseless census?
The current New Zealand government announced recently that it’s scrapping New Zealand’s five-yearly census. The government says it’s doing this because of rising costs, which, it thinks, can’t be justified when much of the information the census surveys can be extracted from data collected from various government agencies. Are they right? Or will their focus on cost alone cost New Zealanders in other ways?
In announcing the change, Statistics Minister Shane Reti described the change as being a”sharpened focus on quality economic, population stats”. Beginning in 2030, the new system will end the traditional nationwide census and will adopt a new approach “using administrative data, supported by a smaller annual survey and targeted data collection.” Reti claimed this “will save time and money while delivering more timely insights into New Zealand’s population,” but will it really? I think they’re overlooking the importance of what isn’t collected by anything except the census.
The government plans to use what’s called “administrative data”, which is basically statistics collected by various government agencies every day, things like tax records, education enrolments, health data, and other government data. in fact, Stats NZ uses administrative data for reports between censuses. Also, some of that sort of data is NOT collected by the current census, and so, it’s true that routinely including administrative data will give Parliament and the government of the day a better idea of the state of the country—or, at least, programmes central government manages.
However, the census also collects data no one esle does, including sociological and cultural data, such as, languages spoken in the home, religious affiliation and non-affiliation, and, most recently, sexual orientation and gender identity. Administrative data may sometimes hint at such data, but there’s no reason for them to collect it. To be blunt, it’s not merely about taxation or performance of the economy, so government agencies don’t need, and so, don’t collect such data. This kind of data provides a fuller picture of who, exactly, New Zealanders are, things beyond empoyment, tax, student debt, or any other things government departments collect information on.
Censuses provide the data that helps elected governments to work out not just where government spending is needed, but also WHY the money needs to be spent. Census data also gives local government insights into where new parks, public libraries, and various local improvements will be needed. Basically, getting the fullest, most complete picture of the people helps elected representatives to better represent the people who put them in power, as well as all the people who didn’t for whatever reason, like, for example, because they’re under 18.
Continuing the financial argument, Reti said, “Relying solely on a nationwide census day is no longer financially viable. In 2013, the census cost $104 million. In 2023, costs had risen astronomically to $325 million and the next was expected to come in at $400 million over five years [emphasis added]. I have absolutely no idea what that “over five years” thing means, and neither the press release nor media coverage have explained it—at all. Speaking of unexplained things, the announcement says that the census will end in 2030, but the next census was due to be in 2028—two years before the announced end of the census, so what’s going on? Are we not doing the 2028 census? If not, why isn’t the end date 2028 instead of 2030? The press release doesn’t say, but I saw a journalist’s comment (sadly, I didn’t bookmark it…) that we may have done our last census. Does the current government know what's up?
Still, despite Reti’s focus on cost alone, and even ignoring his weird, unexplained conflicting timeline, he was correct about one thing when he said, “successive censuses have been beset with issues or failed to meet expectations.” Absolutely true. It’s also absolutely true that we don’t know if the current government ever explored ways to improve the census rather than killing it off, because they don’t seem to have ever mentioned doing that, or having decided not to do that.
I have huge concerns about whether any of the data after the census ends will be complete, or even as useful. Stats NZ is the agency that currently conducts the census and will presumably collate the administrative data and the results from the “smaller annual survey and targeted data collection” the current government claims will fill in the missing data from the cancelled census. Will Stats NZ actually even be ABLE to get useful information about the needs of minority and vulnerable communities through the those planned targeted special surveys? Asking people who already mistrust government to do the census is a huge ask right now, but getting them to do a special survey most people don’t get asked to do sounds like it’s destined to fail. In fact, this non-compliance could make the “errors” in recent censuses seem very minor.
Conservative governments always look to cut costs, and so, services provided by government. In general, those who are obsessed with the cost of everything seldom understand the true value of anything. The current coalition government has the numbers to push through the required legislation, though if they lose the 2026 election, the new government could repeal the changes—or, not. That, too, is unknown territory.
To me, this issue isn’t merely about money, but also about the quality of the data, and I’m not convinced that what the current government is proposing with provide quality data that elected representatives in Parliament and local government alike need. As a middle ground, it seems to me that switching to a decennial census (like the USA has) could allow the collection of census data to periodically correct the data collected by other means, while still saving money. Maybe in time, as systems improve, the census wouldn’t be needed, but I’m not convinced that time is now.
Word nerd footnote: The formal term for a census conducted once every five years is to call it a “quinquennial census”. I can't remember ever hearing anyone using the term quinquennial, either for that or to refer to something that last five years (its other meaning). But I avoided using it in this post—until this footnote.
In announcing the change, Statistics Minister Shane Reti described the change as being a”sharpened focus on quality economic, population stats”. Beginning in 2030, the new system will end the traditional nationwide census and will adopt a new approach “using administrative data, supported by a smaller annual survey and targeted data collection.” Reti claimed this “will save time and money while delivering more timely insights into New Zealand’s population,” but will it really? I think they’re overlooking the importance of what isn’t collected by anything except the census.
The government plans to use what’s called “administrative data”, which is basically statistics collected by various government agencies every day, things like tax records, education enrolments, health data, and other government data. in fact, Stats NZ uses administrative data for reports between censuses. Also, some of that sort of data is NOT collected by the current census, and so, it’s true that routinely including administrative data will give Parliament and the government of the day a better idea of the state of the country—or, at least, programmes central government manages.
However, the census also collects data no one esle does, including sociological and cultural data, such as, languages spoken in the home, religious affiliation and non-affiliation, and, most recently, sexual orientation and gender identity. Administrative data may sometimes hint at such data, but there’s no reason for them to collect it. To be blunt, it’s not merely about taxation or performance of the economy, so government agencies don’t need, and so, don’t collect such data. This kind of data provides a fuller picture of who, exactly, New Zealanders are, things beyond empoyment, tax, student debt, or any other things government departments collect information on.
Censuses provide the data that helps elected governments to work out not just where government spending is needed, but also WHY the money needs to be spent. Census data also gives local government insights into where new parks, public libraries, and various local improvements will be needed. Basically, getting the fullest, most complete picture of the people helps elected representatives to better represent the people who put them in power, as well as all the people who didn’t for whatever reason, like, for example, because they’re under 18.
Continuing the financial argument, Reti said, “Relying solely on a nationwide census day is no longer financially viable. In 2013, the census cost $104 million. In 2023, costs had risen astronomically to $325 million and the next was expected to come in at $400 million over five years [emphasis added]. I have absolutely no idea what that “over five years” thing means, and neither the press release nor media coverage have explained it—at all. Speaking of unexplained things, the announcement says that the census will end in 2030, but the next census was due to be in 2028—two years before the announced end of the census, so what’s going on? Are we not doing the 2028 census? If not, why isn’t the end date 2028 instead of 2030? The press release doesn’t say, but I saw a journalist’s comment (sadly, I didn’t bookmark it…) that we may have done our last census. Does the current government know what's up?
Still, despite Reti’s focus on cost alone, and even ignoring his weird, unexplained conflicting timeline, he was correct about one thing when he said, “successive censuses have been beset with issues or failed to meet expectations.” Absolutely true. It’s also absolutely true that we don’t know if the current government ever explored ways to improve the census rather than killing it off, because they don’t seem to have ever mentioned doing that, or having decided not to do that.
I have huge concerns about whether any of the data after the census ends will be complete, or even as useful. Stats NZ is the agency that currently conducts the census and will presumably collate the administrative data and the results from the “smaller annual survey and targeted data collection” the current government claims will fill in the missing data from the cancelled census. Will Stats NZ actually even be ABLE to get useful information about the needs of minority and vulnerable communities through the those planned targeted special surveys? Asking people who already mistrust government to do the census is a huge ask right now, but getting them to do a special survey most people don’t get asked to do sounds like it’s destined to fail. In fact, this non-compliance could make the “errors” in recent censuses seem very minor.
Conservative governments always look to cut costs, and so, services provided by government. In general, those who are obsessed with the cost of everything seldom understand the true value of anything. The current coalition government has the numbers to push through the required legislation, though if they lose the 2026 election, the new government could repeal the changes—or, not. That, too, is unknown territory.
To me, this issue isn’t merely about money, but also about the quality of the data, and I’m not convinced that what the current government is proposing with provide quality data that elected representatives in Parliament and local government alike need. As a middle ground, it seems to me that switching to a decennial census (like the USA has) could allow the collection of census data to periodically correct the data collected by other means, while still saving money. Maybe in time, as systems improve, the census wouldn’t be needed, but I’m not convinced that time is now.
Word nerd footnote: The formal term for a census conducted once every five years is to call it a “quinquennial census”. I can't remember ever hearing anyone using the term quinquennial, either for that or to refer to something that last five years (its other meaning). But I avoided using it in this post—until this footnote.
Wednesday, June 25, 2025
Cereal selection
I have cereal for breakfast several times a week, something I’ve done since childhood. Several years ago, I bought Kellogg’s All-Bran cereal because I wanted to make some bran muffins for Nigel and me. I also had it as cereal because it is a good source of fibre, something that’s important, among other reasons, because it helps control cholesterol.
At some point, I started mixing it with lemon yoghurt and sliced banana, and I really liked it. In more recent years, I started to have the company’s All-Bran Flakes for variety, and sometimes, especially in winter, I had porridge (what in my corner of the USA was called “oatmeal”). The main consistent menu item was the All-Bran, though I had to give up on bananas when my blood pressure medication was changed to one that’s potassium-based (I’m supposed to be careful about potassium, apparently).
A long time ago, I learned that the fibre in my cereal is considered a “prebiotic” which feeds gut bacteria. The live cultures in the yoghurt, are probiotics, of course, which provide good gut bacteria, though somewhat different than the ones that normally live there (the ones in yoghurt generally help with digesting dairy, but they also assist the fibre in helping to keep one's “shipping department” to, um, empty…).
I genuinely liked the cereal, especially when combined with the lemon yoghurt, but it wasn’t perfect. For one thing, if I had it in milk instead of yoghurt it turned mushy pretty quickly. Also, a box seemed pretty expensive, especially as prices started rising, though I bought it anway.
A couple months ago, I was shopping at Woolworths and noticed they had an own-brand cereal that was similar to All-Bran, called “High Fibre Bran”. I was interested because the own-brand was $2.30 a box cheaper, which ain’t nothing. So, I decided to give it a try.
The first thing I noticed was that the box says “Delicious & Crunchy”, and when I tried it, I immediately agreed on the second part of the slogan: It was very crunchy. I tried it with milk, too, to see if it got soggy like All-Bran, and it didn’t. It’s the first part of the description I didn’t agree with: I did not find it “delicious”.
There’s an irony here: Many people I know personally have screwed up their faces at the mere mention of All-Bran, declaring, "it tastes like cardboard", which made me wonder how they knew that. As it turned out, once I tried the Woolworth’s cereal, I understood: It’s not necessary to actually taste cardboard to get the sense that something must tastes like cardboard would. To me, the High Fibre Bran was exactly like that. However: Just as I like All-Bran, which many people I know don’t like, it’s logical that other folks may love it. To each their own.
I finally ran out of the Woolworths cereal over the weekend and resumed having All-Bran. It turns out, though, they really are quite different.
Both cereals are made in Australia, presumably using some Australian ingredients, but their nutritional profiles are different. To compare products fairly, I never look at the nutritional information per “serving”, but rather per 100g. Since most values are expressed as weight in grams per 100g, that can give us a good idea of what percentage of the product is sugar, fat, etc.
Here’s how the two compare (information comes from their nutrition labels, and was correct at the time I was doing this test). Since they’re both “high fibre” cereals, I’ll start there: My regular brand, All-Bran (“AB”) has 28g of dietary fibre per 100g, and High Fibre Cereal (“HFC”) had a whopping 42.1g per 100g. Another thing I always look at is sugars, and AB has 15.7g of sugars, while HFC has 13.4g. I carefully watch sodium because of my specific health issues, and AB has 330mg of sodium, and HFC has 300mg. While I don’t personally pay that much attention to fat content, AB had total fat content of 3.6g, and HFC had 2.6g of total fat.
The bottom line for me is that High Fibre Cereal was better than All-Bran in all the things I monitor, however, the difference wasn’t necessarily huge, though, for me, the sodium difference is pretty significant. There’s also obviously a very big difference in dietary fibre, but I’m not certain I need that much fibre. Even so, I think it’s safe to say the name of their cereal, “High Fibre Bran”, is fully justified.
Cost was another motivator when I tried it, because All-Bran was $7.79 for a 530g box. The High Fibre Cereal was $5.50 for a 500g box. If High Fibre Cereal was sold in a 530g box, and the unit price didn’t change, it’d be $5.83, still around $2 a box cheaper than All-Bran.
Neither the difference in their nutritional profiles nor the different prices matters if I don’t like the cereal with the better profile and lower price. Facts. So, while the Woolworths own-brand has a better nutritional profile and costs less, I like All-Bran much better and I’ll stick with it. It’s only part of my weekly breakfast menu, anyway.
This was one of the rare times when I tried a new (to me) product not because I didn’t like my normal brand, but because I was curious if I’d like a similar alternative. Now I know. On to the next experiment!
Important Note: The names of brands/products/companies listed in this post are all registered trademarks, and are used here for purposes of description and clarity. No company or entity provided any support or payment for this blog post, and all products were purchased by me at normal consumer prices. So, the opinions I expressed are my own genuinely held opinions, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the manufacturers, any retailer, or any known human being, alive or dead, real or corporate. Just so we’re clear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)