Don't know about the UK, but the US recall is probably Gallup's "Do you approve or disapprove of marriage between blacks and whites" 1959- .

That question has been changed over time from referring to "white and colored people" and more recently (1968-1978) "whites and non-whites"; I'm guessing because of these very issues.

" To date Police have not prevented access by any academic under this clause in the agreement."

Except for this one time? Or was the limitation of access for Dr Gilbert from a different clause?

Yes but not only that: the police in the US are not operating in the same frame as those in NZ. The split between US and UK happened before the good Sir Robert Peel developed his principles for an ethical police force. While what we've got is not anywhere near perfect, we've policing by consent; while it's not too far a stretch to say that the US has a gendarmerie.

Thanks Angela, I was about to say that seemed iffy. But I see that you've pointed this out in your final letter: Entities not in the OIA register are deemed to be holding Official Information if they act for/are contracted by entities that are in the register.

No way is the MoH able to push this off because the Needs Assessment and Service Co-ordination Agencies (NASCs) aren't OIA-able. Where they're holding OI, they are.

Not that you should need it, good luck.

BTW: should have said this above. Great post, Nicola. Thanks.

RSNZ members, obviously, but also a lot of those receiving funding through them. Marsden for example has/had this in their contracts as a duty of the contractor:

"Comply with the Royal Society's Code of Professional Standards and Ethics and with other relevant recognised codes relating to the type of research being undertaken"

Don't know about HRC or MBIE/CI funding, but I'd guess not universal at all.

"It does bear noting that National has finally managed a policy proposal there that post-primary teachers, at least, support."
Well anecdotally; primary teachers aren't liking it a whole lot; Lets be cut out of the roles and get told what to do by some "expert" who has no knowledge of how primary education works...awesome. However, I've not seen anything to suggest it's a win with secondary teachers? Guess I'll have to have a look. Cheers

Hi Kieth, late to this but I'll second Ieuan Wickham, IMHO no one in govt is covered in glory here. Sure youth unemployment isnt' at the level of Greece or Spain, but did get kicked by the GFC and has yet to recover.

NEET data only goes to 2011

StatNZ's go out of their way to make it easy (well kinda, still a bit hidden).

Infoshare
> Work income and spending
> Household Labour Force Survey
> Youth Labour Force and Education Status: Seas Adj & Trend Series (Qrtly-Mar/Jun/Sep/Dec)
Select "Not in employment, education or training (NEET)" and/or "NEET Rate" from Observations and you're cooking.

BTW on "HORRIBlE RIGHTWING LIES" can we note the gov line was "woot - Q2 2012 signs of improvement" Latest youth NEET rates show decrease

So now we get "woot - Q1 2013 signs of improvement"".

Come on Stats, this is a little rediculous, pre-GFC had the 2004-2008 NEET rate for 20-24 year olds at a mean of 14%, with the last quarter of 15.9% (2009-date mean 17.3%, and the current est just 1.65 std dev down) it's a little early to pop the champaign. This still represents an excess of 5600 nippers who would've/should've been gainfully employed.

Hi Farmer Green, looks like your referring to comments by Prof. Mike Kelly FRS (Prince Philip Professor of Technology at the Centre for Advanced Photonics and Electronics at the University of Cambridge).

He is indeed a very respected scientist, however he is, notably, not a climate scientist, and there's now a long run of physicists and engineers embarrassing themselves over claims about climate, e.g, Prof. RA Muller and the outcome of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temp project.

Hi Russell, long time reader. You mentioned "Some have even sought to have him sacked from his job at Massey University -- and been given short shrift by vice-chancellor Steve Maharey." Can you give a pointer to where Steve's defense is/was?
I'm struggling to see anything from the VCs and it would be nice if someone had mentioned that Mike (and Uni researchers in general) have an obligation to be a "critic and conscience of society" Ed Act 162(4)(a)(v). Oh, and thanks for covering this..