Commander Yvonne Gray was not platform-endorsed for HMNZS Manawanui.
The Court of Inquiry found that key personnel on the bridge (including those involved in the incident) had deficiencies in ship qualifications and platform endorsements. Specifically, reporting on the findings noted that the Commanding Officer was not platform-endorsed for the vessel — a requirement set out in the New Zealand Manual of Navigation.
Mark later told RNZ that his comments were not an attack on women in the Defence Force (which he said he found “appalling”), that Gray had a “strong defence,” and that the focus should be on “the men who made certain decisions.” He framed the ad around NZ First’s preference for meritocracy over DEI.
No. 8 NEWS ZONE (formerly known as MAGA Mike) retweeted
Replying to @NumberEightNews
If Socialist's really cared, they would give away their own money, not ours and work for free.
No. 8 NEWS ZONE (formerly known as MAGA Mike) retweeted
Replying to @NumberEightNews
Accurate.
xitter.cf/chuckdpete/status/2114…
Based.
Replying to @retardocop @NumberEightNews
Typically no. Grocery margins are already thin (1-4%), so dropping profit yields limited shelf-price cuts. Military commissaries achieve ~20-25% savings through scale and subsidies, but civilian public stores often lose money, need ongoing taxpayer support, or close. Broader state control has historically produced shortages and inefficiency more often than sustained lower prices.
Why it might not work well (or could backfire)
Grocery margins are already thin. Typical supermarket net margins are low (often 1–4%). Cutting excess profit does not automatically translate into large shelf-price falls; a large share of the retail price is wholesale cost, logistics, labour, energy, and waste. One analysis of NZ options noted that even substantial margin compression would be only a modest fraction of the final price.Rnz
State-owned retail has a mixed record. US military commissaries deliver real savings (because of scale + no-profit mandate), but civilian municipal grocery experiments in the US have often needed ongoing subsidies, struggled with efficiency, or closed. Large private chains achieve low prices through scale, sophisticated logistics, and constant cost discipline — advantages a new public entity may take years to match.
Forced divestment risks. Previous NZ analysis of break-up options flagged potential loss of economies of scale that could raise distribution costs. Valuation, legal challenges, and disruption are likely. The Greens themselves have not specified how much cheaper KiwiMart prices would actually be.
Australia’s experience. The similar excessive-pricing ban only took effect in July 2026. Early commentary treats it mainly as a deterrent rather than a mechanism guaranteed to produce immediate, measurable price drops; defining and proving “significantly excessive” is the hard part.Smh
Fiscal and opportunity cost. The ~$2.8 billion acquisition/capitalisation (plus the wider multi-billion Affordable Kai package) is real money. If KiwiMart runs at a loss to force lower prices, taxpayers fund the discount. Direct cash transfers or targeted subsidies can sometimes deliver more help per dollar to lower-income households.
Bottom line: Increasing competition in a concentrated market is a reasonable goal and could produce modest price pressure over time. A public chain plus price rules is one possible tool, but it is not a proven, low-risk way to deliver large, sustained reductions. Outcomes would depend heavily on execution (how the stores are run, whether they achieve scale and efficiency, how “reasonable margin” is enforced, and whether suppliers pass through savings). Existing lighter-touch regulation has not fixed the problem; this heavier approach carries higher upside and higher risk of cost, inefficiency, or limited impact.
#MikesMEMEmarathon . #MadeMeSnigger . #32 602
Yes, the claim matches recent Senate Estimates testimony.
On 26 October 2026, during Senate Estimates, Sex Discrimination Commissioner Dr Anna Cody was questioned by Liberal Senator Leah Blyth about Section 7AA of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of breastfeeding).
When asked whether the Australian Human Rights Commission interprets the section as providing breastfeeding discrimination protections to a biological male who identifies as a woman and induces lactation, Cody replied: “Yes, Senator.”
She further stated that such a person “is subject to the same protections as anyone who is breastfeeding,” including (in the Commission’s view) requirements for employers to provide lactation breaks and facilities.News24
Context:
Section 7AA refers specifically to discrimination against “a woman” on the grounds of breastfeeding. The Act’s definitions of “man” and “woman” were removed in 2013.
Cody noted the Commission had reviewed research and held consultations but “did not seek medical advice” before addressing induced lactation in a recent report.
This sits alongside prior related comments by Cody (and the Commission) on how the Act applies to transgender people in areas such as pregnancy protections and single-sex spaces.
























