You must have been a beautiful baby .... I can see the judges eyes as he handed you the prize ...

It has emerged that the question on a very few lips is "who exactly was the 1.5 millionth Aucklander?"

Was it Emily Van Wonderen (NZ Herald), or in fact, Ramonah Patience Toomalatai (TV3 and others)?

Sources at the MCB (Ministry of Counting Babies) have suggested that the counting systems employed by both NZ Herald and the TV3 are suspect. The MCB says that both Emily and Rahmonah may, or may not be, number 1,500,000 or 1.5x10^6 in mathematicians lingo.

Dr. Ryle Rudebotham of the MCB said that determining number 1.5 million "was a dashed tricky business, what with people entering and leaving the planet on any given day".

Rudebotham said that both babies were calculated according to various, now hideously failed, mathematical models. The "coming and going factor, 3.1N(p)(c-g)exp^1.5pi, was not included in the model," said Rudebotham.

It has also been reported that the Riemann Hypothesis and the zeta function must also be taken into account in the model, even though the Riemann hypothesis has yet to be proved. "The overall  model has similarities with the global warming model", he said.

It has been revealed that a number of babies' mothers and fathers (if they are lucky enough to know who the father is) are putting together lawsuits on behalf of their babies against the NZ Herald and TV3. A classy action suit is proposed. 

Mrs Ethel Myrtle Pottyswipe said, "If my little Cyril is not designated 1.5 million, then I will be all out to conceive a conception 9 months before number 2 million."

Meanwhile sources suggest that the mystery of education (MOE) is suggesting that a baby counting methodology paper be adopted at leading universities.