Open mike 18/05/2012

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, May 18th, 2012 - 205 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

205 comments on “Open mike 18/05/2012 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Bored 1
    18 May 2012 at 7:11 am

    When is Labour going to debate economic policy publically? Why has Cunliffe been effectively muzzled? Does Labour think that just being fairer and better managemrs than National is enough?

    I’m waiting (and running out of patience, getting very bored).

    • tc 1.1
      18 May 2012 at 7:24 am

      I’m not holding my breath on that one. Labour caucus have shown in their choice of new leadership team they’re more interested in themselves staying in their troughs than NZ.

      This is a steady as she goes rather than do what it takes party with the team chosen and it’s working out just fine for the govt.

      Change was clearly needed in direction and approach whereas mallard and crew represent more of the same.

      • muzza 1.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 7:38 am

        Even the less cogent of political watchers, must now be starting to think to themselves that there is something very wrong with our “democracy”…

        There is a deliberate strategy going on inside the so called “opposition”, and its not the lets wait to see NACT implode…that will happen anyway, its a certainty, at which time the idiot public will vote again, for yet another moving of the deck cahirs on the NZ Titanic!

        Thanks all those who stand back, say or do nothing of value other than vote sometimes or waste enery on blog sites and talkback…

        Thanks for being party to the crime, have fun telling your kids and grandkids that you got sidetracked clinging to hope that all the governmnets actions were just an accident, or poor policy, perhaps a little bit corrupt. Thanks for not factoring in that governments have access to the most up to date “research” (read, failed exported US/UK policy), and for referring to the govt of any given day as stupid, or nanny state. They might act stupid, but they are not stupid, they are executing a strategy in front of your face, and while people debate the ins or outs of gay marriage and other diversions, this country is being taken away, and your kids wont have anywhere else to go, because the rest of the world is heading in the same direction, so thinking they will be able to head abroad to find a life is becoming less likely each day. Just keep thinking its all just the way it is, and that you have no real power, thats what the system wants!

        Better hope that the Greeks and co do the hard work for us, because at least they seem to understand whats at stake!

        Edit: TC, not aimed at you, it just seemed to fit off your post

        • Carol 1.1.1.1
          18 May 2012 at 7:47 am

          And when are (some?, one or two?) Labour MPs going to turn their backs on the same corrupt, cronyist, suck-up-to-the-wealthy system that is promoted and maintained by right wing politics. Shane Jones, bye-bye!

          Time for a complete change by mainstream left wing politics!

          • muzza 1.1.1.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 8:51 am

            Absolutely Carol. Anyone who supports the current system, red or blue, is no better than a football hooligan, whose “support” of their team is a mockery to the game!

        • tc 1.1.1.2
          18 May 2012 at 8:53 am

          None taken Muzza I despair at the apathy of voters and dumbing down our MSM have allowed to occur by not doing their jobs and following the diversions carefully laid out by a well funded CT advised NACT spin machine that they have become an integral part of.

          Shearer is the wrong choice, the results already appear to show that. Cunliffe has the drive, presentation and fire in the belly required to drag Labour into the territory required to take power as a major party.

        • John72 1.1.1.3
          18 May 2012 at 8:53 am

          muzza, congratulations. So much more explicit than most. I hope you are not embarrassed by my support.

          • muzza 1.1.1.3.1
            18 May 2012 at 10:50 am

            J72, no not at all. people are entitled to have views and opinions on various issues, and in many cases they will find common ground, and in others not.

            The system thrives on making sure that people are not able to find common ground, and are at eachother in as many ways as possible..

            Once people unite with eachother against the root causes of inequality etc, then perhaps we have a chance to make meaningful change, otherwise not!

            TC – Shearer was always the wrong choice, I’m sure people can look at it as simply a way to allow the govt an underchallenged environment. Look at what we have had, I challenge any of you Labour stooges to say otherwise. The strategy is deliberate, its as simple as that!

      • just saying 1.1.2
        18 May 2012 at 8:49 am

        The footage of ‘Campbell Live’ with the piece about Shearer’s “profile problems” is available at on-demand at tv3. I’ll put up a link when it is available as a stand-alone piece. It comes on between a two thirds and three quarters of the way through the programme.

        I’ll say just one thing. If anyone thinks that doing a tour of a factory accompanied by the top brass in their best suits doing awkward meet and greets with the workers, could be described as talking with real people and finding out what they’re thinking, they are delusional. If anyone sees any point to his touring the country doing this kind of “minor royalty” gig, I’d sincerely like to know what it is.

        I’m thinking of inviting Shearer to share my best curried sausages with a few of my friends and I. I’m sure he would make time for us like he did the fat-cats from Sky

        • Carol 1.1.2.1
          18 May 2012 at 8:54 am

          I saw that CL Shearer piece last night and was underwhelmed. Shearer playing guitar to school kids? Really? What is Fran Mold thinking? She did some good reports when working for TV3, but trying to make Shearer memorable as a personality is playing the neoliberal game of image over substance.

          Time for some real left wing substance in the media – that would be a game-changer!

          • Jackal 1.1.2.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 9:02 am

            It’s all designed to make politicians seems like humans, when in fact it’s the degrees to which they are inhumane that we have to worry about.

            At least Shearer isn’t using it for therapy: John Key confides in primary school students

            “My dad died when I was about six,” Key told them.

            “I don’t have a lot of memories of him. It’s pretty tough.”

            Quizzed on his hardest moment as prime minister, Key said sending the Special Air Service back to Afghanistan in 2009 had been difficult.

            “It was a hostile, dangerous environment and two guys died. I had to take responsibility for that.”

            Key said he had suffered a few embarrassing moments during his terms in Parliament.

            “I once fell off stage and broke my elbow in three places. That was a pretty stupid thing to do,” he said.

            • TheContrarian 1.1.2.1.1.1
              18 May 2012 at 9:21 am

              Hey buddy 🙂
              I enjoyed your latest blog piece. Particularly the straw-man argument and the linked video where the police officer in charge states 3 pairs of glasses were stolen…3.
              Hilarious.

              • Jackal …
                18 May 2012 at 11:47 am

                You can believe what the Asst Comm Dave Cliff said or you can believe what the Police reported on the their website… either way I think such discrepancies in the Police account make the whole secretive affair look dodgy as.

                By straw-man argument are you referring to the excuse given by police that the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act means the fingerprints are inadmissible… when it doesn’t say any such thing? Please, be my guest and point out where the act supports their claims Contrarian? I would enjoy that.

            • insider 1.1.2.1.1.2
              18 May 2012 at 9:26 am

              what you don’t get is that those seemingly natural answers to kids questions are what is driving Key’s popularity. You see spin and carefully manufactured answers. Most just see honest responses and like his comfort and willingness to talk with kids. Helen Clark was apparantly much the same, although slightly different when in front of the media.

              • felix …
                18 May 2012 at 10:04 am

                Nah, not “most”. Less than half and falling.

                “Most” aren’t buying it at all anymore.

                • Enough is Enough …
                  18 May 2012 at 10:47 am

                  Less than 25% of New Zealanders actually voted for Key and his mob. Has there ever been a more illegitimate governemnt.

                  That percentage decreases if you count the million odd kiwis that are entitled to vote but are living outside this country. Those good kiwis that have been driven out of here by Key. Economic refugees that had no hope of getting out of poverty in this country because of the policies that Key has implemented.

                  • TheContrarian …
                    18 May 2012 at 11:31 am

                    “Less than 25% of New Zealanders actually voted for Key and his mob. Has there ever been a more illegitimate governemnt.”

                    This is a legitimate government, mandated in a general election and accepted by the governor general. If this wasn’t a legitimate the opposition would be all over it. 
                    Focusing on this non-issue is a waste of time when there are far more important issues to focus on.

                    • Jackal …
                      18 May 2012 at 12:21 pm

                      The publics participation in general elections isn’t an important topic… while the amount of sunglasses somebody stole is? Oh contraire my little troll!

                    • Enough is Enough …
                      18 May 2012 at 2:15 pm

                      I stand by that comment

                      They aren’t an illegal government but they are without a doubt illegitimate.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      18 May 2012 at 2:40 pm

                      Lets look at this then:

                      2011: National wins governence with 48% of the vote from a voter turnout of 73.83%.
                      Enough is Enough states this is illegitimate
                       
                      2002: Labour wins governance 41% of the vote from a voter turnout of 72.5%
                      Therefore, using your logic, Enough is Enough, the 2002 election should have also brought in an  illegitimate government.

                      If not, why not? 

                    • Pete George …
                      18 May 2012 at 2:43 pm

                      EiE: They aren’t an illegal government but they are without a doubt illegitimate.

                      In your view when was our last “legitimate” government?

                    • Enough is Enough …
                      18 May 2012 at 2:51 pm

                      ohh the old game of “but he did it to in 2002”. come on grow up.

                      Lets have a look at the Facts

                      1 million kiwis stayed at home on polling day. They did not vote for this mob.
                      1 million kiwis voted by getting on planes and getting the fuck out of this coutry run by John Key.
                      1 Act memeber came in the back door left open by John Key against the wishes of 99% of those that did vote in New Zealand.

                      Less than 20% of New Zealanders voted for John Key’s mob.

                      No more lets look over there distractions. These are the facts.

                      You right leening people are so stupid

                    • TheContrarian …
                      18 May 2012 at 3:09 pm

                      Nonetheless, this government is both legal and legitimate in the same way all previous elections were.

                      1 million kiwis stayed at home on polling day. They did not vote for this mob (neither did the 1 million who stayed home in 2002 – they didn’t vote labour)

                      1 million kiwis voted by getting on planes and getting the fuck out of this coutry run by John Key. (irrelevant – votes are not counted at the immigration desk)

                      1 Act memeber came in the back door left open by John Key against the wishes of 99% of those that did vote in New Zealand. (this is due to  MMP – if you have a problem with it I suggest making a submission on it )

                       

                    • Bob …
                      19 May 2012 at 2:52 am

                      Enough is enough, by that logic, only about 10% of the population voted for NZ’s largest left wing party! And that is enough to be 1 seat away from potentially forming a Government? MMP at its worst.

                    • Jackal …
                      19 May 2012 at 5:47 pm

                      I think you’re largely missing the point Bob. If a political party is elected by less than 25% of the population, but then goes against what the majority of the public wants, that’s not democracy. That is the few impacting on the many ie a dictatorship, and is the antithesis of what MMP is all about.

          • Olwyn 1.1.2.1.2
            18 May 2012 at 9:15 am

            I thought the same thing Carol. Impressions by themselves mean bugger all under the present conditions. And as to his visit to the AFFCO workers, while it is perhaps better to visit them than not, it does not mean much so long as he avoids stating and defending a position. Is it true, for example, that the leadership team is taking Labour to the right, as looks to be the case? If not, deny it without equivocation. If true, state it, let us know the kind of policy it entails, and try to defend it. As it stands it looks as if Shearer’s response to the leak about Cunliffe is to “cover the left flank” by visiting the AFFCO workers, while continuing to evade the real question.

            • ianmac 1.1.2.1.2.1
              18 May 2012 at 9:47 am

              At a Boxing match Round 1 and some of you would be screaming at your Favoured One, “Kill him! Waddaya waiting for? Kill him you lazy incompetent bugger!” Meanwhile the Favoured One works away at his carefully planned strategy. Select your target. Wait for the right opening. And wait for Round 3 or 4.
              Me? I would credit the Favoured One credit for having a plan and and the skills and it is not to rush in just because the pseudo supporters want instant blood. Go Mr Shearer!

              • Carol …
                18 May 2012 at 10:03 am

                I’m not sure that such a macho analogy as boxing is appropriate here, but I’ll stick with it for the moment…..

                It looks to me like Shearer isn’t even in the ring, battling the real issues. He just seems to be shadow boxing in the gym.

              • Olwyn …
                18 May 2012 at 10:16 am

                ianmac: your analogy sidesteps the worrying issue, which is not the matter of drawing blood in the house. To extend your analogy, the worry is whether or not the great new contender is in fact another member of Don King’s stable, committed to strategies that reflect that allegiance. One hopes not, but the silencing of Cunliffe along with the reticence on position gives one pause.

                • Herodotus …
                  18 May 2012 at 11:22 am

                  Problem is that as mentioned above Labour is as much at fault as National. Yet some here (especially loyalist to Labour – Green follows excluded) close their eyes to the damage that Labour caused in “Playing the game” e.g. Housing affordability issues, tax rorts and the accounting corruption to allow statements “under Lab NZ had a Nil debt”. Fools who perpetuated this fallacy.
                  And to the average person (Who cannot be bothered to vote) there is no improvement in the workers long term outlook.
                  Nationals philosophy that they are adhering to is not what will be beneficial to the country- yet Labours failure to get involved (more important are the Little, Mallard feeding the side tracking issues) just adds to the appearance that possession power is everything and the people/voter can get stuffed as they don’t count.

                  • Descendant Of Smith …
                    18 May 2012 at 11:51 pm

                    Labour offers nothing to the poor or the workers in this country. It makes no difference whether Shearer of Cunliffe or Goff is in charge.

                    They offer zero, nothing, nada, zip.

                    That they are not quite as bad as National is hardly a selling point.

                    If they offered anything they would be saying loudly and clearly we will increase taxes, we will increase the minimum wage, we will increase benefits, we will re-instate time and a half after 8 hours work a day, we will make salaries a minimum of 120% of the minimum wage, we will allow workers to go on strike for more than just an expired agreement, we will get rid of GST, we will bring back in centralised wage bargaining so employers have to compete on product and service – not on paying workers less, we will build state housing and the state will employ those who build the state housing directly, we will combine our power companies back into one government owned company and get rid of all those layers of management and fake competition, we will kick Jenny Shipley off every government board she is on find out what this valuable advice that she has been giving Christchurch, we will publicly list those people who invested in SCF in the weeks up to the bailout who got taxpayers money – the tax payer has a right to know who benefited from the tax payers largesse, we will remove funding to private and religious schools and only fund secular education.

                    That’s a start.

                    Does Labour stand for anything of those things – hardly. Bloody right wing party just like National.

              • Vicky32 …
                18 May 2012 at 5:41 pm

                Go Mr Shearer!

                Absolutely! I get the impression  that some people here (and not just the RWNJs) would not be happy with Shearer even if he had himself whipped through the streets in order to prove his devotion to Labour! 
                You note that Talleys spit the dummy because he didn’t talk to them? Who would Key have talked to? I rest my case.

    • Socialist Paddy 1.2
      18 May 2012 at 8:08 am

      Yeah when discussing economic issues publicly is considered to be “disloyal to the leadership” there is something seriously wrong with the party. And the leadership.

      • Pete George 1.2.1
        18 May 2012 at 8:14 am

        He wasn’t just “discussing economic issues, he was proposing a quite different direction for Labour to it’s current apparent positioning.

        If Labour get dragged leftward it will please a few commenters here, but will pitch them into a crowded part of the spectrum, and won’t attract back many lost voters in the centre.

        • Socialist Paddy 1.2.1.1
          18 May 2012 at 8:20 am

          Labour’s problem at the last election was not that some swinging voters in the middle did not swing back, it was that a million ordinary Kiwis did not see a reason to vote. Labour needs passionate dedicated leadership and a clear alternative approach to economics to persuade these people that it is in their interests to vote.

          Being a slightly paler shade of blue will not do it. 

          • Bored 1.2.1.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 8:30 am

            TC, SP, Muz, Carol, thanks for replies, I posed the same question yesterday and it got lost in the gay marriage debate. What that said to me was that we were too easily distracted by minutae and losing sight of the real issue.

            For my part I am going to hassle the shit out of Labour MPs, every opportunity. Our democracy is broken, it is “owned”. The only way we are going to take back our democratic power is to pose a valid alternative to the status quo, which is why I am so pissed off Cunliffe has been muzzled.

            • muzza 1.2.1.1.1.1
              18 May 2012 at 9:01 am

              Yeah its broken alright – people have to get onto their local politicians, write letters go see them, get involved anyway you can, but do it directly!

              Sitting back and whining online, is just a waste of time, and being sidetracked by fluff is for the simple! Spending energy commentating about the fluff, idiotic, that’s for the MSM, leave them to it!

              As for Cunnliffe, I’m not so sure you know, because if he is really worth his salt, he would just cut loose IMO. The time for adhering to “protocol” is finished, just like this country is finished if people keep “hoping” that the system will right itself.

              If you’re in politics you either love your country, and you do anything you can to assist, or you don’t and thus are compromised

              • Uturn …
                18 May 2012 at 12:01 pm

                What is difficult to reconcile, is the plea to get involved in a corrupted political system. One man cannot make difference using the same system that corrupted everyone before him. It would be like people were holding out for a hero or messiah. The Shearer/Cunliffe thing is a waste of time. Neither are Left, or “the answer” to the problem NZ has, and being “Left” in itself is not the answer either.

                Militant Communism never took hold in NZ, in part due to the birth of the Labour Party and the closest you’ll get to the ghost of communism is within some unions or the Socialist Worker of Aotearoa. Just the other night, one of the most well known participants in HART – another organisation with a communist spirit – John Minto, was crossing his fingers publicly saying that joining Mana was either the smartest or worst thing he’s ever done. The thing most people either forget, or don’t know about communism, is that they are philosophically, “anti-political” as far as our style of politics goes. At base, communists are spokespeople for those with no social power/influence. They have few policies or agendas other than those of the immediate needs of people, because the whole point is for people to rule as a collective, rather than under the divisive and ineffective property/money hierarchies we all think are “normal” today. John Minto knows this and said he remains reluctant about giving up the ability to speak freely by joining an organised political party. How often do you hear people complaining that no politician or party listens to the people?

                If the system is broken, then leave it be, don’t get involved in it and certainly do not vote and in doing so, uphold it. From all reports, the coming trouble is unavoidable. Financial problems beyond average man’s control; a concerted effort by our New Rich to oppress poor. History proves these things are doomed to failure – the whole oppression thing, by whatever means – but people still try, god bless ’em.

                There are more important things to do than vote. As I see it, the best defence is to give up the traps of our economic and political system and enter into dialogue with the least influential people – the sidelined and the oppressed. The dominant collective perspective, “the system”, is increasing its pace to leave people behind and the idea that sidelined people are inferior has no basis; whether the measure is economic or philosophical. In fact, strategically it is a gross failure. Is the whole 1% thing not clear enough? One Percent, what is that, roughly 40,000 people living with more than enough. The rest – some 3,960,000 people – in various degrees of shortfall, conflict or poverty? I’m sorry, why exactly would I vote to participate in this system? And tell me again how a number that I assume includes armed forces and police – an army of much less than 40,000 – clearly poorly led and strategically incompetent, can hold back almost 4 million people whose will is sure? It would be like the US sending a single regular army division into Afghanistan, hoping for victory. Generals the world over must be turning in their graves. But it needn’t get that far, and won’t. The reality is clear already.

                This is why talking about things like gay marriage is not a distraction, but a necessity. No one left behind. Not gays, not immigrants, not maori, not those in palliative care and their caregivers, not those looking after intellectually of physically handicapped, not low income parents, not solo mums, no one. Get it? No one. Everyone has a say, with a view to inclusion. Discussing social issues only becomes a “distraction” when we try to hold two opposing concepts at once: one an important and timeless social issue, the other a divisive expression of current ideology. So beginning a process to an inclusive society by, for example, discussing the ideas and concepts around gay marriage, supports a society that will exist now and after any financial collapse. Gays aren’t going away just because the banks close. They were here before banks. Just as Africans and Jews were. They won’t be saying to themselves, “Oh shit, no money, oh well I guess I can’t make a commitment to a partner anymore.”. Their single most publicised problem seems to have been them thinking, “Oh shit, society wants me gone really badly, better live under a serious case of repression” and cue all sorts of associated symptoms. That’s the story for everyone and anyone who has limited social power, regardless of orientation, race or whereabouts – have you not noticed? Instead of bringing the wealth of the inner person into the outside environment, and letting those things benefit society and the individual constructively, our collective beliefs have made a business of limiting our understanding of life and the world to turning materials into money and power. Using this outlook, the world gets smaller and more dangerous, people limit the potential of their intelligence and start to hide away, behind fences, taupe concrete walls and automatic gates.

                When a person or organisation wants to start a beneficial process, but uses it to reinforce a social harm, then it becomes a distraction. It being a distraction does not mean that the issue is wrong, or a luxury, the issue is a distraction to the harm inherent in the way the issue was offered. We have ideas like contraception, but tagged onto who we can force it onto to further our financial oppressions. We are offered ideas about including gays completely, but the only reason it’s brought up is to take attention away from asset sales that undermine short term social stability, or parliamentary corruption. So if this is the way politics is now, forget politics, forget voting and forget the system. Re-organise yourself around something that matters, and as far as I can see, the only thing that matters is the connection between people. If the people are fighting or insecure, imbalances and inequalities form and they cannot be fed. More or less food is irrelevant. The Farmer on his land cannot afford to fear the hordes descending for food when supply is restricted. He’d be better off making changes right now. Because he can’t stop the inevitable. And the hordes thinking that they can just roll through the countryside like locusts, but without any provision for sustainable food supply or social arrangements will soon run out of the immediate and suffer avoidable loses. If the fighting and jockeying for dominance continues, people cannot find solutions or understand their problems or rule themselves. They will be victim to opportunists and manipulators.

                Politics stems from a basic social agreement and that agreement has always remained with the collective. In its simplest form, it is between two people who monetarily become peers – not one up one down, not law passed down from on high. Even the major religions of the world have a god who creates man to give him the choice of good or bad, to know god, or not. God needs man, yet gives him a choice to submit. So who exactly are these politicians that demand we need them and must submit without choice? SunTzu, writing the Art of War, tells us to control the enemies’ movements. When you want him to stay put, show him the potential harm. When you want him to move, seize his most wanted asset. And what assets do our politicians covet the most? Power generators? Schools? Land? The crushed cars of boy racers? Nope. Their anxious demands reveal the greatest asset in NZ: it’s us. Their anxious demands reveal they have no more care for us than a horny boyfriend pestering a girl for sex. Remove support for these abusers and their systems. Don’t vote, don’t participate, control the enemy. We can’t lose. None of the major parties offer a difference, so who cares if one or the other win a total nationwide vote of one or one hundred?

                Start simple, with your neighbour, family and friends and live your life in community. What will come will come and if you have human connection outside of money, if you understand each other and give each other basic respect; if you commit to working through the dark nature of humanity as it appears as well as enjoying the good; if you commit to tackle the apparent void and anxiety outside of financial connections; you’ll live or die as well as anyone in history ever has. If it seems too sedate, if it seems like nothing is happening, check your vanity and try including people you wouldn’t usually meet. If you want a fight, a really serious one, try fighting your own ignorance. If you win, together and finally, against those things that divide and destroy, it will be a future worth living. So what will it be? Keep voting, or start living as a human?

                • Herodotus …
                  18 May 2012 at 1:03 pm

                  By not participating are we not then becoming what politicians want APATHY. I am sure with all the dumbing down of politics (remove the ability for indepth analysis and critical review and replaced with celebrity politics with Women’s mags and fluffy TV appearances) that there is a desire of removing the public from politics for all but 1 day in 3 years, and in reality we have no ability to change anything just where a few privileged sit in parliament. The voter or the country does not benefits – just a few who sold their votes for undelivered promises.

                  • Bored …
                    18 May 2012 at 1:46 pm

                    Not sure how to respond to apathy in politics..UTurns article probably needs to be a story in its own right, fascinating perspective. One concept that makes sense is the standing aside bit: reading Greer (the Archdruidreport) today he noted the need for example to be taken when moving to a protest position. The contention is that you cannot effect change unless you live it…i.e. climate change, you must not only demand legislative action, but your own living actions must pre-empt it, (like self diminution of your carbon footprint).

                    Non participation in the current political process and concurrently actively demanding a move to a process you practice is very powerful, it will challenge the status quo far more than chardonnay socialism.

                    • Carol …
                      18 May 2012 at 3:19 pm

                      Non participation in the current political process and concurrently actively demanding a move to a process you practice is very powerful, it will challenge the status quo far more than chardonnay socialism.

                      Sounds a lot to me like the hippy ethos that I bought into back then…. and look what happened after that?

                      Now I think how you live is only part of the strategy. The multitude need to find ways to tackle the power of the elites head-on… maybe as the occupy movement is doing?

                  • Uturn …
                    18 May 2012 at 3:16 pm

                    It isn’t apathy, because there is strategy. The people refuse to give consent to hierachial rule and return to their own concerns and power base – those connections that last, between each other. If you think that is easy, give it try. The easy bit is not voting; all you have to do is not turn up to the polls and go about your life as normal. The hard bit is knowing from that point onward you must engage with people, constructively, socially. It might start with a nod and wave, or a borrowed wheel barrow or a looking after someones kids for an hour, but pretty soon you’ll have to tackle up close and personal disagreements and differences in values and personal viewpoints and there will be no escape. You have to go forward together, because the alternative is clear, getting dragged out of a comfortable insulated life when excess of funds meant problems could be defered or ignored and into real serious life with people. It’s like pressing the political reset button.

                    Then the next part comes: the threats and attacks of the polticians no one wants, but law says have legal rule. Stuff them. They will only try to isolate and persecute the weakest parts of society, turning people against each other with compromises and bribes of self interest; seeking out greed and hate, to inflame. By that, they will expose their true natures. But hey, lets not be too morbid, maybe they will see the light and wholesale change to our system will be voluntarily offered. No point ruling out hope. If it’s offered, there can still be no turning back, no loss of intent just because a rush of a minor improvement after so many loses makes us think the problem is solved.

                    Apathy it is not. It’s a gentle route into some seriously hard work, but not the kind of hard work where an overlord stands behind you and pushes you to exhaustion then takes all the rewards. Rest is an integral part of working. There is no natural law that says you must exceed your abilities and limits, but it will be obvious that stagnation and delay of what is necessary will come at a cost. People will have to move forward together, the least able helped along by the more able and the gains they make will be real and solid because they were hard won. Each step will be known in retrospect, the why will be obvious, the when and how clear, the future always an opportunity for improvements.

                • John72 …
                  18 May 2012 at 3:44 pm

                  Uturn, I like most of you post. The difference between “not voting” and apathy seems to be the only weak link. One alternative is to ask our leaders to lead by example. They are cutting jobs continually on the grounds of recession but surely if the economy is that tight, they could set an example and take a pay cut. (50% ++) The money would do little for the economy but a disply of sincerity would be without value. Actions speak louder than words.
                  Show that they are sincere and care about the country. Lead by example has always been a golden rule.
                  Apparently, Greece, Spain, Italy etc. have problems worse than the recession of the 1930’s, yet when Germany asked Greece to accept austerity changes the population threw out the Greek government. Did the population know what it was doing? I suggest that it was an emotional reaction to a poorly presented austery move. The leaders were not going to suffer but they wanted the worker to. That is the way it was presented by the media. This seems too simplistic. The leaders of Greece, a land of great thinkers, must be able to manipulate the voters more elegantly than that. Perhaps the government wanted to be thrown out.
                  I have stocked up on flour, preserved fruit, dry firewood and a road worthy bike. Must get some candles. The back lawn would make a nice addition to the vegetable garden. Will not have time to watch TV.
                  Do not say “It can not happen to me.” The Great War (WW1) was supposed to be “The war to end all war.”

                • Bill …
                  18 May 2012 at 8:32 pm

                  @ Uturn. Why not take the two minutes to vote? Just don’t expect much to come from it. And no need to spend time dissecting the policy of this party and that party – we know roughly where they stand and know that the more right the party is the more inimical to our wellbeing it’s policies will be. So vote against them.

                  And for the other 364 days, 23 hours and 58 minutes, do something worthwhile. That could be the sort of stuff you already wrote. But one thing was missing.

                  It’s not the politicians who sit above and over society determining it’s direction and focus. Politicians serve economic interests and those economic interests ultimately shape everything from parliamentary politics on down.

                  So what?

                  The competitive economy determines the shape or culture of our workplaces (dictatorial). It determines who has access to what resources and who can exploit them. (The economically powerful). It also determines where the things that are produced through the exploitation of resources get allocated. (That’s something which, again we have no say over… beyond pitifully offering up the dollars and cents from our exploitation to get a piece of that ‘dream pie’). And because it is about defending entrenched power, the competitive economy is produces a culture that is frighteningly conservative. (Oil today, oil tomorrow and oil for ever…until the power runs out)

                  How to counter that?

                  Insist at every juncture on a move towards democracy. In the workplace, in any place, in every place. On every issue and decision that we are afforded any input, keep pushing the envelope.

                  That has to go alongside your appeal for building connections and behaving decently because the market and the power it wields will happily ride rough shod over your decency and (figuratively) your dead body without even noticing.

                  • Puddleglum …
                    18 May 2012 at 9:11 pm

                    That’s hitting the nail on the head, Bill.

                    As Tony Benn said, the most ‘subversive’ idea – and therefore the one always guarded against by the powerful – is not socialism, communism, capitalism, liberalism, etc. it’s democracy.

                    In the modern context, the subversive nature of democracy can be put quite simply: The more decisions get determined through democracy, the less they get determined through the market.

                    The battle, then, is between people and the machine – which in our case is the technical machine of the competitive, market economy. For all of our sakes, the machine must lose – it only has its own interests at heart, not ours.

                    The difficulty is having the skill to generate (and to recognise) democracy, as opposed to its various impersonators. 

                • Puddleglum …
                  18 May 2012 at 9:59 pm

                  “Keep voting, or start living as a human?”

                  I think I’d put it more like this “Keep [thinking that] voting [on its own will result in the substantive change needed], or start living [together] as human[s]?”

                  I don’t think voting is a problem in the sense of it being an act of ‘collaboration’ with the enemy. One of the reasons that universal suffrage has been so roundly resisted by those with property and power over the centuries is that it at least has the potential to ruffle the elite’s feathers.

                  Of course, elites are adaptable and will use their power to subvert a system of voting as much as any of the other systems and arrangements fought for by people to gain more control over their destiny.

                  I see no reason why the vote should not be used as one of the many levers available to make the ground more amenable for the sorts of changes you wish for.

                  It isn’t the most important lever, of course. But it is one and given how little effort it takes I can’t see why someone who wanted change wouldn’t make use of it. A strategy of not voting only makes sense if it is part of a deliberate, widespread, organised public boycott to deligitimise the actions of any government that ends up getting elected.

                  Otherwise, the net effect is to make invisible the ‘non-voting’ of the non-voters (they don’t even get calculated in the ‘party percentages’ in our MMP elections – i.e., we don’t have a third of Parliament’s seats sitting empty and, in effect, preventing a government forming a majority).

          • Olwyn 1.2.1.1.2
            18 May 2012 at 8:36 am

            Furthermore, what is being sold to us as centrism is not centrism in the strictest sense. Cunliffe’s speech was in fact quite centrist by any standard in which words mean what they say. Centrism increasingly means continuing to play the same vicious game but insisting on a few minor concessions that do not inconvenience our financial masters.

          • Pete George 1.2.1.1.3
            18 May 2012 at 9:03 am

            it was that a million ordinary Kiwis did not see a reason to vote.

            And if they did see a reason to vote who would they have voted for? Non-voters aren’t to blame for Labour’s (and other parties) poor vote, a significant proportion of people deliberately don’t vote becasue they don’t like anything that’s on offer.

            The Labour Mallardy is not attractive to votesrs, it turns many people off politics.

            To improve voter turnout there needs to be an improvement in political behaviour and what parties offer to the voters – and that’s not overgrown kids with back alley behaviour.

            • Socialist Paddy 1.2.1.1.3.1
              18 May 2012 at 10:09 am

              Pete it has nothing to do with “political behaviour”.
               
              People are hurting. They are losing their jobs. Kids are developing third world diseases. The schools are being screwed over and the unions and working conditions are getting a battering.
               
              People do not give a shyte about someone not being very nice to someone else or about MPs playing political games with themselves. They care only about those basic issues. 
               
              They want to see someone take this Government on. They don’t give a toss about beltway games.

            • felix 1.2.1.1.3.2
              18 May 2012 at 10:11 am

              Yeah maybe, maybe not. All we know for sure is that a whole lot of people who usually vote Labour decided not to vote at all.

              Maybe you’ve seen some other polling that shows they stayed away because ‘Mallard was mean to John Key’s BFFs’ or some such bullshit, but you’d be the only one.

              Until you do come up with some way to show that such trivial side-show beltway issues are of any interest to the million or so ex-labour voters who stayed home, I think it’s far more sensible to assume the obvious.

              Edit: snap SP

            • Descendant Of Smith 1.2.1.1.3.3
              19 May 2012 at 10:36 pm

              Let’s not forget however that some people didn’t vote because this government took that right away:

              http://www.3news.co.nz/Bill-passes-banning-prisoners-from-voting/tabid/423/articleID/190034/Default.aspx

          • prism 1.2.1.1.4
            18 May 2012 at 6:08 pm

            Socialist Paddy Absolutely. But how far on the socialist line are you?

        • Bored 1.2.1.2
          18 May 2012 at 8:36 am

          Pete the centre is the kiss of death for Labour and for the progressively impoverished citizens who claim to be “centre..middle class”. Its where faux leftists like the formerly Labour Peter Dunne reside. You had better hope the million non voting Kiwis dont catch on, it is pretty obvious to me they have rejected the “centrist” (read neo lib rightist) status quo as not worth voting for, and the so called “left” represent just another pack of “centrist” ciphers to them.

  2. Pete George 2
    18 May 2012 at 7:20 am

    Sean Davison has written a letter to the editor of ODT, repeating that it’s a time to talk (about death and euthanasia), and thinks it’s also time for a law change.

    Time to talk about dying

    One of the main reasons to publish was to open the public’s eyes to the issues surrounding the deaths of our loved ones and encourage debate on a change in the law. Society is now embracing issues that have previously been uncomfortable to deal with such as sexuality, homosexuality, contraception, Aids, abortion and drug abuse.

    I believe we are now ready to discuss the complex issues around death and dying. By openly discussing these issues, it also helps prepare us for death and may make us less afraid. Death is something we all must face.

    I believe there is public support for a law change and I hope our politicians will take notice. New Zealand has led the world in social and cultural reform. Now I believe we are ready to lead the world in dealing with this complex issue.

    And I’m continuing to collate news, links and discussions on Euthanasia here.

    There are currently 56 proposed Member’s Bills, but Maryan Street’s End of Life Choice Bill isn’t on the list yet.

  3. mickysavage 3
    18 May 2012 at 8:29 am

    I took the anti privatisation petition to Waitakere Court yesterday and asked a few legal colleagues to sign.  The response was really good.  Twenty people signed without hesitation and a few took forms away to get other signatures.  If a bunch of middle class lawyers are so opposed to the policy this Government is in trouble on the issue.
     
    Can I suggest all good standardistas do the same.  Keep a form with you and poke it under peoples noses.  You will be pleasantly surprised with the response.

  4. travellerev 4
    18 May 2012 at 8:34 am

    I reckon Johnny “derivatives” Key must be shitting himself right about now. What with continued bank runs in Spain and Greece and soon to be in Ireland and Italy which will result in the collapse of the entire financial system.

    • Bored 4.1
      18 May 2012 at 8:47 am

      Dont bet on a collapse…the banksters can always “create” cash by fractional banking…they would rather hyper inflate the debt loaded economies than forgive any debt. The whole game is the financial enslavement of all but the 1%, the same game has been playing out since the creation of “debt” 000s years ago . Remember the Great Depression did not kill capitalism, finance or the ruling elites, they survive financial collapses well.

      What is more likely to happen is that the bulk of the people will be faced with what they percieve as a threat to their very existence. if the food supply were to be disrupted as is very possible there will be trouble. In France a failed harvest tipped the country into revolution, as did hunger in Russia. People faced with starvation tend to see things as life and death and take extreme measures. What our tipping point looks like I dont know but I suspect that when little pleasures such as IPODs and the internet get rare, the EFTPOS has no cash for you and you cant get hold of a can of beans it is going to get very personal. And when the unemployed young can see no future look out for trouble as false prophets point fingers.

      • travellerev 4.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 8:57 am

        It is the hyperinflation which will collapse the system. I think that too many people are beginning to wake up to the bankster scam and yes it is the 99% who will suffer and it will be Mad Max. I never said I was looking forward to the collapse did I? In fact I dread the next foreseeable future.

      • Tiger Mountain 4.1.2
        18 May 2012 at 9:17 am

        Yes the “tipping point” for Aotearoa is most interesting. It is all about ownership and control really because this country has huge infrastructure and natural resources and the population of a Tokyo suburb. They just aren’t shared around.

        The post colonial dynamic, farming/small business sector and the punitive psychology of around 40% of kiwis have always been a retarding factor on class struggle. Not to mention years of neo liberalism.

        A family friend has a successful rural business with a huge turnover, but with running costs removed it really just pays them a wage. The owners greatest fear is that in a crisis, zombie like, the citizens of nearby Whangarei will appear en mass to pillage his idyllic spread. And really that is the mentality of the 1% ers. Any self respecting lefties job is to make their fears a reality.

        But I take Eve’s point about “Mad Max”, there may well be a nasty futurist “Blade Runner” type scenario rather than a left revolutionary transition.

        • s y d 4.1.2.1
          18 May 2012 at 10:09 am

          you know I always felt the best imagining of what is in store was “children of men”…really a movie about immigration and trying to protect the idyllic spread from the zombie hordes…(read refugees of all types)…NZ will be a lifeboat of sorts, with nowhere near enough seats…question is, who will be first to start prising off the drowning peoples fingers to keep from all going under….well worth watching again for the terrible slow decline

      • Carol 4.1.3
        18 May 2012 at 9:27 am

        It sounds close to the tipping point in Greece right now, with unemployment at 25% (as reported by Aljazeera on TV this morning), and people taking their money from the banks and putting it under the mattress. And with money being taken from banks in southern Europe and put in northern European banks, there could follow the rest of southern Europe and open north-south conflict.

        • travellerev 4.1.3.1
          18 May 2012 at 9:45 am

          We’re well past the tipping point for all of Europe. bank runs are contagious. We are past the second day of the Greek bank run, Spain is now in a full on bank run and both countries have either the whole country or their banks down graded.

          If the Greek government decided on a bank holiday or a limited access to peoples funds there is going to be blood in the streets. Expect Italy and Ireland to follow in the Baking crisis.

          • higherstandard 4.1.3.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 9:54 am

            The pastries, won’t anyone think of the pastries !

            • travellerev 4.1.3.1.1.1
              18 May 2012 at 10:16 am

              Lol, That would be banking crisis. Thanks for pointing my typo out. God forbid people like you would actually believe it was a baking crisis.

            • Tiger Mountain 4.1.3.1.1.2
              18 May 2012 at 10:18 am

              Dyslexics of the world Untie! etc.

              But anyone who follows this stuff realises serious shit is about to go down in Europe. Bare cupboards, uncooperative ATMs, utilities turned off, what would you do?

              I live at the beach with rain water tanks, a garden and some opportunity to gather shell and other fish, but a societal breakdown is scary stuff nonetheless. Civil Defence in the Far North has estimated just a three day supply exists at local Pak n ’Saves and such like. But imagine Howick or Wadestown.

              The 1%ers have to be dealt to sooner rather than later. OOoo thats socialism! Damn right it is. The alternative is what Eve and others, and me too, are concerned about.

              • True Freedom is Self-Governance …
                18 May 2012 at 10:35 am

                “The 1%ers have to be dealt to sooner rather than later.”

                And what better ‘revenge’ to exact on people who are self-centred than to relieve them of their ‘hard-earned’ wealth and then change the rules of the game so everyone has a fair go. Being forced to be on an equal footing with their fellow humans would be worse than torture or a violent revolution for people who follow the greed creed.

                • Tiger Mountain …
                  18 May 2012 at 11:00 am

                  Not quite sure where you are coming from TFISG, your framing gives a hint though, my comments are not about ‘revenge’, more about survival and a reasonable life.

                  • True Freedom is Self-Governance …
                    18 May 2012 at 11:09 am

                    That’s why I used quote marks for the word revenge. Revenge isn’t in my nature but it is the best word that I could think of that fits, as in ‘success is the best revenge’. My point is that the best way to deal with the 1% is to make them share, which I think would be very hard for them to do.

              • Half Crown Millionare …
                18 May 2012 at 1:59 pm

                Dyslexics of the world Untie! etc.

                I like that, lets try and bring a bit of humour into this very frightening situation.

                This is nothing to do with the discussion but I feel it could bring a bit of lite relief. TM’s comment reminded me of the following.
                Many year’s ago the then conservative party in Britain elected a new PM who’s name was Lord Home, we were informed that his name was pronounced Hume. David Frost on his show suggested if we were going to pronounce O’s as U’s then we can pronounce U’s as O’s and suggested that the following sentence could be read one of two ways.

                Lord Home was in bed with flu, or Lord Hume was in bed with Flo.

          • True Freedom is Self-Governance 4.1.3.1.2
            18 May 2012 at 10:23 am

            LOL!! Never mind getting your money out of the bank, stock up on flour.

          • ianmac 4.1.3.1.3
            18 May 2012 at 10:51 am

            We have great dependence on Tourism. So does Greece. If Greece fails -(out of Euro, formally in Recession, defaulted etc,) what effect does that have on those who had planned on Touring Greece. Is it better or worse for them? Would the Greek citizen benefit from the tourist? (Whatever it is will be reflected in NZ?)

  6. insider 6
    18 May 2012 at 9:37 am

    Bill Liu is a fine upstanding NZ citizen. He must be, Shane Jones made him so.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/6943391/Tycoon-boasted-of-his-MP-mates

    • Socialist Paddy 6.1
      18 May 2012 at 11:33 am

      Hey insider did you and Jimmie get the same instruction to publish the same Stuff article about Shane Jones?
       
      Your comments are three minutes apart and both refer to the same article.
       
      Are you members of a secret club with handshakes and a clubhouse and stuff?

  7. Jimmie 7
    18 May 2012 at 9:40 am

    I wonder if Shane Jones had a good nights sleep last night??

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/6943391/Tycoon-boasted-of-his-MP-mates

    I would think that by the time this court case is over there may be a little more of the stinky stuff over 1 or 2 Labour MP’s.

    I hope Shearer see’s this as an opportunity to give a little ‘jump before you’re pushed’ advice to the MP’s involved and bring in a couple of fresh faces.

    • Socialist Paddy 7.1
      18 May 2012 at 11:32 am

      Hey Jimmy did you and insider get the same instruction to publish the same Stuff article about Shane Jones?
       
      Your comments are three minutes apart and both refer to the same article.
       
      Are you members of a secret club with handshakes and a clubhouse and stuff?

      • Carol 7.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 11:35 am

        Yes, and they are a little slow off the mark – I already expressed my views on Jones (having read that article) above at 7.45am this morning…. looks like the two posters above were waiting for their instructions.

        • insider 7.1.1.1
          18 May 2012 at 11:50 am

          We just did it to induce paranoia into the left

        • Jackal 7.1.1.2
          18 May 2012 at 7:40 pm

          What I don’t understand re Shane Jones is that none of the rightwing bloggers have written about it, while the leftwing bloggers have. I guess that just goes to show the leftwing is more concerned with accountability in general.

      • Jimmie 7.1.2
        18 May 2012 at 7:21 pm

        Do you stutter? Or do you just love the copy and paste function on your keyboard?

        • Socialist Paddy 7.1.2.1
          18 May 2012 at 11:09 pm

          Do you masturbate?  Or do you just come onto this site to take the piss?

          But to be frank if Jones has stuffed up he needs to be gone.  The left needs to concentrate on real issues like poverty, third world illnesses, unemployment, the undermining of the trade union movement and workers rights.  If Jones has deflected attention from these issues he needs to go.

  8. Jackal 8
    18 May 2012 at 10:08 am

    Your country needs you

    If TVNZ7 gets pulled, New Zealand will have lost 1/3 of the free to air network. You can help save our public broadcasting service…

    Please sign the Save TVNZ 7 Online Petition.

    • TheContrarian 8.1
      18 May 2012 at 10:17 am

      ummm, what are you talking about? 1/3 of the free to air network?
      Are you sure?

      • Jackal 8.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 11:36 am

        You tell me… how many channels have we lost so far Contrarian?

        • TheContrarian 8.1.1.1
          18 May 2012 at 11:41 am

          Don’t change the subject.

          You say: If TVNZ7 gets pulled, New Zealand will have lost 1/3 of the free to air network. 
           
          Are you sure? 

          • Jackal 8.1.1.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 11:50 am

            I’m not changing the subject. Do you know how many channels have been canned since National gained power in 2008 Contrarian? It’s a simple question.

            • TheContrarian 8.1.1.1.1.1
              18 May 2012 at 11:54 am

              Sorry, you are obfuscating. We are talking about this specific comment.

              “If TVNZ7 gets pulled, New Zealand will have lost 1/3 of the free to air network.”
              Are you sure?    

              • Jackal …
                18 May 2012 at 12:03 pm

                Yes! By my calculation New Zealand will have lost 33% of its free to air network if TVNZ gets pulled. If you think otherwise, surely you would know what channels have already been lost?

                • TheContrarian …
                  18 May 2012 at 12:10 pm

                  How did you come to that conclusion?

                  NZ currently has 17 free to air channels including TVNZ 7. If TVNZ 7 gets pulled you lose 1/17th which is a loss of about 6%.

                  Not 33% 

                  (Note this is total free to air – some regions will differ and some types of freeview differ i.e UHF vs. Satellite)

                  • Jackal …
                    18 May 2012 at 12:17 pm

                    So you don’t know how many channels have already been lost then? I’m talking about the free to air network, not just TVNZ 7 Contrarian.

                  • Carol …
                    18 May 2012 at 5:13 pm

                    Never mind the width, feel the (lack of) quality.

                    I have freeview terrestrial and never could get SBS. But with TVNZ7 and Stratos gone, there’s not a lot of quality public service broadcasting left for me.

                    Choice, U etc… I never watch. And there’s some Chinese channels in a language I don’t understand. It seems the current strategy is to axe the quality English-language news, information & current affairs channels, and fill the channel slots up with low level dross.

                    Now the only benefit to me of my freeview box is some better reception of Maori TV, Prime and TV One. TV3+1 has some use, and parliament TV is a plus.

                  • Vicky32 …
                    18 May 2012 at 6:02 pm

                    NZ currently has 17 free to air channels including TVNZ 7. If TVNZ 7 gets pulled you lose 1/17th which is a loss of about 6%.

                    That’s utter bollices! There are not 17 at all. I can get only free to air, and by that I mean genuinely free-to-air, no need to buy any expensive Freeview boxes etc.. and I can assure you that there are 3 networks, TV1/2, TV3/4 and Prime. That’s all.

                • Pete George …
                  18 May 2012 at 12:20 pm

                  Do you have a crazy calculator?

                  TVNZ7 is nothing like 1/3 of our free-to-air television.

              • Te Reo Putake …
                18 May 2012 at 12:03 pm

                So you don’t know the answer to the Jackal’s question? I guess you are just picking a fight to prove your credentials as a pedant and a bore. How very conservative you are, TC.

                • TheContrarian …
                  18 May 2012 at 12:11 pm

                  hey buddy, how’s it going? 

                  • Te Reo Putake …
                    18 May 2012 at 12:21 pm

                    Doing bettter than you, thanks. Have a look at the number of TVNZ channels that have a dedicated news service. Then remove TVNZ 7. You are going to find yourself with 66% of the previous figure. Then, when the penny drops, go and sign the petition.

                  • Vicky32 …
                    18 May 2012 at 6:10 pm

                    So if there are currently 17 channels, we recently lost 4 “SBS one and two, and another two channels when they pulled Stratos Television”

                    However, there are not 17 channels! Not for the ordinary poor person, that is… How does one get Maori TV, Stratos, TVNZ7 etc? I can’t…

                • Pete George …
                  18 May 2012 at 12:21 pm

                  Jackal doesn’t have an answer to Jackal’s question that makes any sense.

                  • Jackal …
                    18 May 2012 at 12:31 pm

                    I was interested to know if the Contrarian had a clue about what he was basing his question on. He doesn’t. You might not be aware that New Zealand’s free to air network recently lost SBS one and two, and another two channels when they pulled Stratos Television. I haven’t included repeater channels in the calculation.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      18 May 2012 at 12:41 pm

                      So if there are currently 17 channels, we recently lost 4 “SBS one and two, and another two channels when they pulled Stratos Television”
                      That equals 21.

                      21 – 5 = 15 (5 being the SBS one and two, and another two channels when they pulled Stratos Television and TVNZ 7).
                      23.8%. And SBS can STILL be found for free via satellite and is in fact an Australian channel and hasn’t been “pulled” so that lowers the % even more.

                    • Jackal …
                      18 May 2012 at 1:08 pm

                      SBS was using the Optus D1 service satellite, which meant we could receive those channels here on our freeview network. That is no longer the case.

                      I’m not sure where you gained your 17 channels figure from, as there is no freeview system that receives all of the channels? We have lost five other channels not four, learn to read properly please. As previously stated, I haven’t included repeater channels in the calculation.

                      Can you explain how SBS can still be found for free via satellite?

                    • Jackal …
                      18 May 2012 at 2:51 pm

                      No answer eh! I guess you’re arguing from a lack of knowledge again… but what else is new?

                      Just to clarify how I reached 33% reduction in the free to air network…

                      The current amount of channels New Zealander’s are able to receive free to air from Analogue, UHF or Freeview receivers equates to an average of 11.6 channels per receiver (You don’t count the red boxes Contrarian).

                      Rounded up to account for people with multiple receivers = 12.

                      Amount of channels already lost 5 + 12 = 17. % change from 17 to 12 = 29.4%

                      Include the loss of TVNZ7 = 6 + 11 = 17. % change from 17 to 11 = 35.3%

                      I rounded this down to 33% to equate for variables such as regional broadcasting. I did not include SBS HD or TV3+1 as these are already broadcast.

                      It’s not a perfect equation, but it does show that New Zealand’s free to air broadcasting network is looking decidedly the worse for wear since National took over.

                  • TheContrarian …
                    18 May 2012 at 2:44 pm

                    17 free to air channels covers regional channels as well, and takes into account all availble channels from the different free to air formats (i.e. UHF vs satellite etc)
                    I am getting conflicting stories on SBS and have never seen it myself so we’ll say that it is gone. However considering it was an Australian channel does it really get included as a New Zealand free to air channel?

                    • Jackal …
                      18 May 2012 at 2:55 pm

                      It was free to air, so of course you count it. Here’s an article on the matter: Bang goes another public service TV channel

                      You might argue that SBS wasn’t widely viewed, but neither is Parliament TV for instance… so stop nitpicking!

                    • TheContrarian …
                      18 May 2012 at 3:04 pm

                      So if you add in a few considerations like losing Australian TV channels which, as your linked article states, was only view-able by modification and was only because the satellite happened to pointing towards Tasmania and we could hijack it and we lost it due to Optus tinkering with its broadcast (i.e. nothing to do with the NZ government). And also averaging the amount of channels people receive as opposed to the actual number of free channels available then you have a case but a very very weak one because there are more than 11 free TV channels and SBS wasn’t technically a NZ free to air broadcast.

                    • Jackal …
                      18 May 2012 at 3:25 pm

                      So what’s more important Contrarian, the amount of channels being broadcast or the amount of channels people can receive through free to air broadcasting?

                      The modification Beatson is talking about is simply getting your set top box to search all available channels, something most installers already do.

                      You state:

                      The satellite happened to pointing towards Tasmania and we could hijack it and we lost it due to Optus tinkering with its broadcast (i.e. nothing to do with the NZ government).

                      However David Beatson wrote:

                      The Optus D1 satellite is no longer delivering SBS to New Zealand. There’s some speculation that a Kiwi broadcaster could have nobbled the SBS fruit fly, but SBS was scheduled to switch its Tasmanian transmission to another satellite early next year anyway.

                      Anyway, I have better things to do than bandy words with a witless fool.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      18 May 2012 at 3:30 pm

                      Its still a very very weird practice to include an Australian Channel which wasn’t part of the NZ free to air package into your calculations. Weak dude, very weak

                    • Jackal …
                      20 May 2012 at 12:45 pm

                      My word… what complete argument fail by the Contrarian. Firstly he questions the 1/3 figure, obviously intent on picking a fight based on his ignorance.

                      Then he claims that channels people cannot even receive should be included in the calculation and that I was only talking about the loss of TVNZ7, which to anybody with even half a brain is obviously not the case.

                      So after providing the calculation again, the Contrarian starts clasping at straws by claiming that SBS wasn’t even a part of New Zealand’s Freeview network, when in fact it was advertised within New Zealand as part of the deal.

                      Clearly the several years he spent studying politics was several too few.

  9. weka 9
    18 May 2012 at 10:08 am

    Anyone know what happened to the Wellington People’s Centre?

    • freedom 9.2
      18 May 2012 at 12:21 pm

      I passed by a couple of weeks ago and was surprised to see the Luke’s Lane premises boarded up. I suspect the current re-locations and separation of services is a last breath gambit for survival after its well used high functioning and centrally located premises met the same demise as most useful low wage/community services. Namely the financial throttling from council and government funding as its essential costs skyrocketed and it struggled against the psychotic death grip of profit junkies. That and the ongoing [global insurance scam] edicts for unrealistic earthquake strengthening.

      • weka 9.2.1
        19 May 2012 at 10:05 am

        Yeah, that’s what I was guessing. Except for the earthquake bit, hadn’t thought of that.

  10. higherstandard 10
    18 May 2012 at 10:38 am

    Very cool can I have one for XMAS please.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/6944554/The-New-Zealand-book-of-life

    • ianmac 10.1
      18 May 2012 at 10:55 am

      You’re right HS. Magnificent. If I didn’t know better I would almost believe in religion.

  11. Te Reo Putake 11
    18 May 2012 at 11:04 am

    Mate of mine has just bumped into the PM in Feilding. Handily, she had a copy of the asset sales petition with her and she asked Key to sign. Didn’t get a positive response!

    • deuto 11.1
      18 May 2012 at 11:22 am

      Would love to have seen that! Good on her!

    • Vicky32 11.2
      18 May 2012 at 6:13 pm

      Handily, she had a copy of the asset sales petition with her and she asked Key to sign.

      Clever woman! Wow… 🙂

      • Te Reo Putake 11.2.1
        18 May 2012 at 6:34 pm

        That’s how we are gonna win it, V! If we all just carry a copy around and when the opportunity arises to get a signature … not Key’s obviously, but real people’s, we’ll get the numbers in no time.

  12. Tiger Mountain 12
    18 May 2012 at 11:10 am

    Torys don’t like it up ’em it seems. Keep the heat on.

  13. Jackal 13
    18 May 2012 at 11:25 am

    Shane Jones for the chop?

    If Labour wants to see the same growth in support they must have the same principles as those adhered to by the Greens…

    • Te Reo Putake 13.1
      18 May 2012 at 11:43 am

      Your article is a bit lacking in two aspects, Jackal. One, what you think Labour should do about it and two, what the reference to the Greens means.
       
      For mine, I think Labour can’t do a damn thing about it. He’s not a minister anymore, so other than a reprimand behind closed doors, that’s it, really.

      • Jackal 13.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 11:53 am

        The reference to the Greens is that they have not had any similar cases (that I’m aware of) where their standards can be questioned. It would truly be a pity if there was nothing Labour could do if the Fairfax article proves to be factual.

        • insider 13.1.1.1
          18 May 2012 at 12:35 pm

          they’ve never been in power to do anything

          • Jackal 13.1.1.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 6:31 pm

            Tell that to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises:

            What I am able to say is that certainly as a Minister in the National Government this Minister has been part of the team that has overseen the creation of nine new reserves in 3 years, which seems to be a pretty good record against 17 reserves in 9 years under the Labour-Green Governments.

            Tony Ryal – 10 May 2012

            • John72 13.1.1.1.1.1
              18 May 2012 at 7:26 pm

              How big was each reserve?

              • Jackal …
                18 May 2012 at 9:29 pm

                Labour did indeed create 17 marine reserves during their governance consisting of 515,802.24 ha.*

                In comparison it appears that National has only proposed 5 new marine reserves consisting of 17,528 ha combined. Some of these may have been legislated for… but as far as I can tell they haven’t.

                The so-called Bluegreens had also announced in January 2011 3 new marine reserve, but I don’t think they disclosed where or how big these reserves are.

                So who is more dedicated to creating new tourism dollars by increasing the conservation estate? I think this RadioNZ article from 9 May sums up the answer best:

                Judge orders minister to reconsider marine reserve

                The High Court has quashed a ministerial decision to decline an application for a marine reserve in Akaroa Harbour. In a decision released by Justice Christian Whata, the court has ruled in favour of an appeal by the Akaroa Marine Protection Society.

                * Refer to links to find out the size of individual reserves.

    • Herodotus 13.2
      18 May 2012 at 11:50 am

      Must everything that those on the treasury benches do be mirrored by Labour or vice versa ?
      All we will see is the duplicity of Labour is in handling internal issues as National & Act.
      And the game of politics is played on and the country suffers because of it. 🙁

  14. Dave Kennedy 14
    18 May 2012 at 11:59 am

    Another example of where cost cutting and austerity measures discriminates against another group within our society. Appalling!
    http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/yellow-pages-accessibility.html

    • Draco T Bastard 14.1
      18 May 2012 at 3:35 pm

      I’m going to have to admit that I’d prefer that telephone books weren’t printed at all as they’re just a waste of resources.

      • prism 14.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 6:20 pm

        They serve a practical and useful purpose DTB. Have you ever tried to lift a carton filled with glossy fancy house and garden books, gourmand’s cookery magazines or even the glossy women’s magazines telling other women about Spices boniness, the mole on the end of Tom’s toe, the secret baby that is showing itself in this side shot of pansy blah blah. This dreadful drivel is demoralising to the dopes who pant after women who have self- respect and respect for other women, even celebrities those driven bell-wethers.

      • Vicky32 14.1.2
        18 May 2012 at 6:25 pm

        I’m going to have to admit that I’d prefer that telephone books weren’t printed at all as they’re just a waste of resources.

        So, what alternative would you like? It costs to phone directory services, and not everyone can afford to go online when they want to look something up. Grr… greens annoy me so much sometimes! Champagne greens! Be realistic please, mate.

        • Draco T Bastard 14.1.2.1
          18 May 2012 at 7:37 pm

          I’m being realistic, maintaining paper books isn’t. Everybody should be able to afford to go online/have a PC as having both is essential to modern society.

          Don’t think I’ve had Champagne in about 20 years.

          • Dave Kennedy 14.1.2.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 8:10 pm

            Draco, there are a large number of New Zealanders who are elderly and don’t own a computer, are you going to deny them a telephone book that they can read without having to use a magnifying glass? You heartless Bastard 😉

            • Vicky32 14.1.2.1.1.1
              18 May 2012 at 9:07 pm

              Draco, there are a large number of New Zealanders who are elderly and don’t own a computer, are you going to deny them a telephone book that they can read without having to use a magnifying glass? You heartless Bastard

              Dave you may think you’re being funny, but you are really not. In fact you come across as a bit of a prat.
              I am not elderly, but I do have seriously bad vision, and I can’t read the verdammde thing even with a magnifying glass! So, for me it’s directory service despite the cost, or my memory. No new firm will ever get my business! 😛

              • Draco T Bastard …
                18 May 2012 at 9:17 pm

                So, for me it’s directory service despite the cost, or my memory.

                You’re online with a PC that can alter the size of the text. Reading the Yellow Pages shouldn’t be a problem that you have.

                • Vicky32 …
                  18 May 2012 at 9:28 pm

                  You’re online with a PC that can alter the size of the text.

                  You’re like a 10 month old with a toy he just won’t give up, aren’t you? Yes, currently I am online with a PC that can alter the size of the text. But when I want to phone anyone or anything, I am never online… ever hear of dial up? 😀 Does it really hurt that much to admit that you spoke without thinking that other peoples’ lives might be different from yours?

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    18 May 2012 at 9:56 pm

                    Does it really hurt that much to admit that you spoke without thinking that other peoples’ lives might be different from yours?

                    Why should I admit to something I didn’t do? I even considered people who can’t use PCs at all and still decided that it just wasn’t worth printing phone books.

                    But when I want to phone anyone or anything, I am never online
 ever hear of dial up?

                    Ever hear of the ability to find the number, disconnect from the internet and then make the call?

                    BTW, I doubt there’s a lot of difference between $75/month for phone and broadband and what you’re paying now for phone and dial-up. At a guestimate I’d say that it’s between $10 and $15 (I wasn’t able to find a price for a phone line without broadband even on Telecom’s website).

                    • Carol …
                      18 May 2012 at 10:06 pm

                      http://www.vodafone.co.nz/internet/dial-up/

                      Dial up with home phone

                      $10.45 per
                      month

                      When bundled with Vodafone fixed line home phone & calling.

                      That’s on top of about $45.00 per month for the phone – so about $55.00 per month.

                      For someone on a low income, that’s about $20.00 per month less than broadband – quite a difference.

                    • Vicky32 …
                      18 May 2012 at 10:16 pm

                      BTW, I doubt there’s a lot of difference between $75/month for phone and broadband and what you’re paying now for phone and dial-up

                      Yeah, well you’d be wrong there, as I pay $42.00 a month for my phone and 10.00 a month for dialup. The difference is $23.00, and to you, that’s nothing. However, as I am on an unemployment benefit of $204.00 a week, that $23 might well be necessary for other things.. 
                      ATM, I am lucky. My son is paying for me to have broadband on a Vodafone mobile connection. It costs him $85.00 a month, and I am not happy at all about my son paying for something that I ought to be able to afford, if I could just get a stenching job!
                      Kids shouldn’t pay for their parents, it should be the other way around.
                      Oh, and you try faffing around getting out and booting up the computer, looking up a number, disconnecting, phoning etc. You greenies are all so keen on being prescriptive, telling everyone else what extra trouble they must go to, to appease your delicate sensitivities…
                       

                    • Te Reo Putake …
                      18 May 2012 at 10:31 pm

                      Whoah! Why don’t you ask your son to pay the extra $23 to move your current plan to broadband and save the $62 per month?

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      18 May 2012 at 11:31 pm

                      Yeah, I was guessing at how much a standard phone line costs. Last time I had one was 6/7 years ago @$45/month and I figured that inflation would have put it above $50/month by now.

                      You greenies are all so keen on being prescriptive, telling everyone else what extra trouble they must go to, to appease your delicate sensitivities


                      Printing books is bad economics as it uses up resources that could be put to better use. Especially short term books like phone directories. Yes, it has an ecological aspect as well but, then, the environment is the basis of the economy.

                    • prism …
                      20 May 2012 at 10:53 am

                      If we’re thinking of cheap communication, a cheap cellphone and a phone book are a good combination. You save money by first looking up the info in the book and only use the cellphone features when wanting to make the call. Cost saving and modern and lots of people have to watch their cellphone use because of lack of dosh.

                      And we don’t want to be totally dependent on computers driven by electricity batteries or solar, the more dependent we are on advanced technology the less we know how to self-manage and be capable without expensive props.

              • Dave Kennedy …
                18 May 2012 at 10:08 pm

                Vicky, I may have come across as flippant but I intended no ill will against the vision impaired. You may not be able to read the telephone book under any circumstances but there are many others who could, if only it used a reasonable sized text. In this technological age many younger people will probably not use the book, therefore the most likely users would be older and yet the print is too small for them. It seems illogical. If they really wanted to save money they could easily just give people a choice of having one or not.

                • Vicky32 …
                  18 May 2012 at 10:33 pm

                  but I intended no ill will against the vision impaired.

                  I am glad to hear it! 🙂
                  I did use the book in previous years, which is why I am so annoyed at the present ones, especially as they’ve been very illogically split with the ghastly Localist taking over a lot of functions, it’s just not logically organised at all!
                  It’s just so much easier for someone of any age to use a handy book, than faff around with their computer – although someone with a netbook or a smartphone would probably not find it so much trouble. (My sister embarassed herself greatly by asking google about the spelling of some word or other, because she couldn’t find her dictionary! Her kids were laughing at her for months…)

                  • John72 …
                    18 May 2012 at 11:32 pm

                    Vicky32, yes, I have to use a magnifying glass at night. If a telephone book was an optional extra, how many would stand up and be counted?

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    19 May 2012 at 12:17 am

                    (My sister embarassed herself greatly by asking google about the spelling of some word or other, because she couldn’t find her dictionary! Her kids were laughing at her for months
)

                    Were the kids laughing because she used Google or because she still had a book form dictionary?

                    Online dictionaries and thesauruses are awesome. I use them daily.

                    • Vicky32 …
                      19 May 2012 at 1:20 am

                      Were the kids laughing because she used Google or because she still had a book form dictionary?

                      Because she faffed around starting up the computer, logging on, connecting, wasting money when the paper dictionary was under a pile on the kitchen table! My sister, like me is working class – money is to be conserved, not wasted. So, don’t be such a middle class kiddie, DtB!

                      Online dictionaries and thesauruses are awesome. I use them daily.

                      They can be if you’re discerning! Some however, are wildly wrong, especially the American ones which incorporate every error known to high schoolers on the grounds that if an error’s common enough, (i.e., all 16 year old mall rats use it) then it has become correct… I know it’s not PC to say that Americans are lazy and stupid, but hey, can I help it if they’re lazy and stupid?
                      Then there’s the egregiously awful Urban Dictionary. I suppose you know nothing about the controversy my brother in  law alerted me to?
                      http://www.change.org/petitions/urban-dictionary-www-urbandictionary-com-remove-the-racist-definitions-of-the-word-maori?

                    • fatty …
                      19 May 2012 at 2:07 am

                      “Then there’s the egregiously awful Urban Dictionary”

                      The urban dictionary is a joke website, it is not to be taken seriously at all. It is not a dictionary, it is not a source of knowledge, it is nothing more than a joke. It is actually quite witty, funny, and yes – often very offensive. If that site offends you then be careful where you go on the internet.

                      “Because she faffed around starting up the computer, logging on, connecting, wasting money when the paper dictionary was under a pile on the kitchen table! My sister, like me is working class – money is to be conserved, not wasted. So, don’t be such a middle class kiddie”

                      The internet saves me loads of time and money, especially when it comes to using dictionaries/thesauruses…try the thesaurus link DTB posted…the Synonyms: feature is very useful. Don’t worry, those sites are as reliable and accurate as a printed dictionary.
                      I don’t think you can judge a person’s class status by their internet connection. I have a fast 40 gig per month, but I need it for study.
                      I also cannot afford regular meat and veges, have to bike and walk cause the bus costs too much, cannot afford alcohol (even though I’m a student), cannot afford to go to the movies or a gig etc, etc.
                      Actually, if you want to judge a person’s class…ownership of a telephone landline is usually a sign of upperclass. That’s why political polls are skewed towards Nact.

            • Draco T Bastard 14.1.2.1.1.2
              18 May 2012 at 9:08 pm

              Nope, I’d give them all a computer. It’d probably be cheaper than giving them a phone book, it would certainly be cheaper than giving everyone a phone book.

          • Vicky32 14.1.2.1.2
            18 May 2012 at 9:04 pm

            Everybody should be able to afford to go online/have a PC as having both is essential to modern society.

            You think you’re being realistic? Don’t make me laugh! Try telling WINZ what you just said here… My son had a hell of a hard time at High School, because we didn’t have a computer at home – then my brother gave us one, because he was up-grading. Then, when he died, we briefly had two of them, but in the circumstances (the death of my only brother) I’d really rather not have had them!
            Kids can now go online at school, and anyone quick and early enough can go online at their local library, if they can fight their way through the truanting school kids watching rap videos, but how does that help if someone wants to find a plumber at 8 pm? To say ‘everybody should be able to afford’ is  not the same thing as them actually being able to! Please, don’t be such a middle class kiddie…

          • fatty 14.1.2.1.3
            18 May 2012 at 9:28 pm

            “Everybody should be able to afford to go online/have a PC as having both is essential to modern society.”

            DTB is correct, it should be considered a right for all kiwis to have a computer and the internet. To put it in the Lab/Nat ‘third way’ terminology – its a necessary technology to ensure social inclusion. Just as a telephone/radio was 50 years ago, and TV was 30 years ago. The idea behind these technologies as a kind of human right steams from a desire for a unified nation who share experiences together and develop a sense of community. We lost sight of that vision a long time ago.

            Vicky32; you are right, there is no way NZ can currently afford that, but that’s cause we choose not to afford it. Just as we choose to force 300,000 kiwi children to live in poverty.
            LOL @ “school kids watching rap videos”…that’s classic.

            • Vicky32 14.1.2.1.3.1
              18 May 2012 at 9:47 pm

              LOL @ “school kids watching rap videos”
that’s classic.

              Sadly, that’s all that  they do, at ear-splitting volume, despite their headphones, I worry that they’re doing serious damage to their hearing. 
              I did my good deed yesterday, when I went to the library to do some printing from my USB, and sat next to a woman in her late 40s, googling how to cope with a difficult boss. She told me (at length) the whole story, and I urged her to ring the union, and find out what her rights actually are, as from what she said, the boss was more than just difficult – she was completely toxic! Actually, it frightened me how scared this woman was of contacting the union – I had to guess which one would cover her – and assured her that unions did mediation  and not just strikes!

  15. Te Reo Putake 15
    18 May 2012 at 12:24 pm

    Ooooh, that’s racist, that is! It turns out Aussies don’t want to sell the farm to Johnny Foreigner either. Funny that.

    • Jackal 15.1
      18 May 2012 at 12:40 pm

      “More women (78%) disapprove than men (70%)”… chalk one up for woman being smarter than men.

    • insider 15.2
      18 May 2012 at 1:04 pm

      Australians don’t like foreigners…Stop the presses! Never ever thought that.

      Nevertheless more than 11% of Australian farms are overseas owned in total or part, and yet it seems to be doing ok economically and sovereignty wise.

      • Colonial Viper 15.2.1
        20 May 2012 at 10:04 am

        Nevertheless more than 11% of Australian farms are overseas owned in total or part, and yet it seems to be doing ok economically and sovereignty wise.

        The Australian economy also has the benefit of supplicant countries like NZ sending them billions of dollars of receipts, in our case via ANZ, BNZ, National Bank, ASB, Westpac etc.

  16. Chris 16
    18 May 2012 at 1:44 pm

    On watching Firstline Smalley/Shearer she brought up the fact that National always worked as a team with no divisiveness amongst itself. She said it as if that is a good thing.All it shows is that nobody in the National Government is allowed to have their own thoughts, or opinions or any negativity against the Party.They just need to have learnt their lines. I don’t see this as healthy and I agree with Shearer that robust discussion with everyone having an input that will lead to a concensus is what democracy is about.You just need to look at the Nats in Parliament and all they are there for is to be the audience to the sideshow that is key. Cue laughter,cue solemn head nodding, cue “well said” and all the other inconsequential mutterings that they utter,”stuck it to him there old man”Haw haw”
    I am also looking forward to the time when Parliament returns to its roots and debates as adults, treating the debates with the courtesy they should have. None of this nup,dunno,can’t remember and all the third form Beano rubbish that is supposed to pass for answers to perfectly reasonable questions. And, yes I am talking of the gnats.
    Shearer said he will play the ball not the man and I am looking forward to that.

    • OneTrack 16.1
      18 May 2012 at 11:01 pm

      When will the rest of Labour start playing the ball instead of the man? I doubt they know how after this long with it being their default mode. Do they even want to change? Shearer hasn’t made much progress sorting them out so far.

  17. captain hook 17
    18 May 2012 at 2:01 pm

    looks like the littlepeople had their weetbix this morning.
    um…how many can u do?

  18. Fortran 18
    18 May 2012 at 2:25 pm

    Chris

    Remember in Parliament NZ First has only one speaker. Nobody else is allowed.

    • Te Reo Putake 18.1
      18 May 2012 at 2:32 pm

      Rubbish. I watched a NZFer put a question to a Minister the other day. It wasn’t Winnie.

  19. Tiger Mountain 19
    18 May 2012 at 2:47 pm

    Can we have a PFD (Pete free Day) tomorrow, or even a MPD (Minimal Pete day)?

    “Purga-tory”, nice one TRP. How about the Mora-Tory-Um on Bomber Bradbury at RNZ.
    Bring back bomber!

    • Te Reo Putake 19.1
      18 May 2012 at 3:04 pm

      Looks you might get your wish granted over at the Angry Dunne post! Though dollars to donuts Pete will retract his comment because he values his ability to post here higher than his principles.

      • Te Reo Putake 19.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 7:56 pm

        Ha! I got that wrong, (cheers, Eddie!). PG and theConformist were having a wee cry about it on KB earlier on. Pete was reduced to asking for help from the readers. Answer came there none.

  20. muzza 20
    18 May 2012 at 3:07 pm

    Amazing how this blind Chinaman has become such a big deal

    More lies and spin from the AP MSM machine..

    Much destabilisation going on in China currently

  21. captain hook 21
    18 May 2012 at 3:20 pm

    just amazing how shitty the tories get when they get outed for lying.
    thye are like shizophrenic children.
    they beleive their thoughts to be facts.

  22. Pascal's bookie 22
    18 May 2012 at 4:43 pm

    Roy Morgan’s out:

    http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2012/4776/

    Today’s New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows a further drop in support for Prime Minister John Key’s National Party 44.5% (down 2.5% since April 16-29, 2012). Support for Key’s Coalition partners has changed slightly with the Maori Party 1% (down 0.5%), United Future 1% (up 0.5%) and ACT NZ 0% (down 0.5%)

    Support for Labour has risen 1.5% to 30%, Greens are unchanged at 15%, New Zealand First 5.5% (up 0.5%), Mana Party 0.5% (unchanged) and Others 2.5% (up 1%).

    [lprent: added the graphs. ]

    • Te Reo Putake 22.1
      18 May 2012 at 7:24 pm

      Confidence is dropping to an almost record low. It’s the economy, stoopid! And Banksie, obviously.

      • Pascal's bookie 22.1.1
        18 May 2012 at 7:30 pm

        The next one will be interesting. Morgan usually fluctuates, but nat has been down for the last two. Next one will cover the two weeks around the budget…

    • Draco T Bastard 22.2
      18 May 2012 at 8:00 pm

      Wow, don’t you just love that misleading headline:
      NATIONAL (44.5%) LEAD OVER LABOUR (30%) DOWN AGAIN

      • Jackal 22.2.1
        18 May 2012 at 8:12 pm

        I’m still waiting for the one that says ACT party leader confident on 0%.

      • Carol 22.2.2
        18 May 2012 at 8:14 pm

        Where is that misleading headline? Every report I’ve seen has National down & also possibly about Labour being (theoretically) able to form/lead a government.

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10806840

        National support slips further – poll
        New Zealand Herald – ‎3 hours ago‎
        By Adam Bennett Support for John Key’s National Party has fallen 2.5 per cent in the latest Roy Morgan political poll, suggesting a Labour-Greens-NZ First alliance would have the best chance of governing if an election was held today.
        Roy Morgan’s latest Poll

        http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1205/S00286/roy-morgans-latest-poll.htm

        Scoop.co.nz (press release) – ‎3 hours ago‎
        Today’s New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows a further drop in support for Prime Minister John Key’s National Party 44.5% (down 2.5% since April 16-29, 2012). Support for Key’s Coalition partners has changed slightly with the Maori Party 1% (down 0.5%), …

        http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8469771/labour-could-lead-government-poll

        Labour could lead government: Poll
        MSN NZ News – ‎1 hour ago‎
        The Roy Morgan poll released on Friday showed the governing National Party still on top, but its support had gone down 2.5 per cent from the last poll in late April to 44.5 per cent. Labour was up 1.5 per cent to 30 per cent while the Greens were …

        • Draco T Bastard 22.2.2.1
          18 May 2012 at 9:22 pm

          Where is that misleading headline?

          I quoted it, it’s the one from Roy Morgan itself and implies that Labour is down in the polls when they’re actually up.

          • Carol 22.2.2.1.1
            18 May 2012 at 9:49 pm

            Oh, it’s a badly phrased headline. I think it is meant to say that National’s lead over Labour is down, while also stating that the poll indicates a possible Labour-led government. it says:

            NATIONAL (44.5%) LEAD OVER LABOUR (30%) DOWN AGAIN
            LABOUR, GREENS & NZ FIRST WITH MAJORITY OF VOTE (50.5%)

            The insertion of the percentages confuses the headline intent, I think.

  23. Tiger Mountain 23
    18 May 2012 at 5:05 pm

    ever since I viewed the movie “Animal House” as youngster, “zero point zero” (0.0) always brings a smile.

  24. Georgecom 24
    18 May 2012 at 5:59 pm

    Operation Ohariu

    Make it as difficult for Dunne as possible to continue supporting asset sales:

    http://www.labour.org.nz/operation-ohariu

    On the 26th and 27th of May, in conjunction with People’s Power Ohariu, we’re going to send Peter Dunne a message. We need your help to do it.

    Dunne holds the casting vote on asset sales – that’s how thin National’s majority is. The people of Ohariu can make a difference by sending their MP a message.

    We need as many helpers as we can get to turn up to Ohariu, disperse in our numbers throughout the Ohariu electorate to get signatures on the Keep Our Assets petition.

    Four shifts, two days, and 24,000 signatures.

  25. Vicky32 25
    18 May 2012 at 6:19 pm

    NZ’s only residential school for intellectually handicapped girls is to be closed. Parents are distraught. Typical NACTM!

  26. John72 26
    18 May 2012 at 7:48 pm

    Austerity in Europe. Earlier today I suggested that politicians would increase their cedibility by accepting a personal pay cut. In this evenings TV news, some French politicans are taking a 30% cut!Ask and it will be given. (Mathew 7:7)
    Dripping water wears away the hardest stone. Petitions ref. assett sales might win.

  27. Vicky32 27
    19 May 2012 at 2:31 am

    The urban dictionary is a joke website, it is not to be taken seriously at all. It is not a dictionary, it is not a source of knowledge, it is nothing more than a joke. It is actually quite witty, funny, and yes – often very offensive. If that site offends you then be careful where you go on the internet.

    Fatty, did you actually follow the link? Because if you did, how on earth can you accuse me of being naively offended by a joke? It’s about egregious racism, that has actually been reported to Race Relations by a friend of mine who doesn’t think it’s very bloody funny at all…
    Your comment about landlines is truly asinine. I have a mobile to talk to my son and him only. Mobile calls are far too expensive without the Best Mates. I always use my landline for making calls, and my neighbours – state house/bennys like me, are the same. 
    Landlines are cheap. Mobiles are expensive, unless you confine yourself to texting!

  28. Too Funny 28
    19 May 2012 at 11:58 am

    ha ha ha

    The nastiest person on the Internet is an Adulterer, an admission from one of his friends

    http://wonderfulnow.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/one-more-thing-before-i-go.html