I am sure the Families Commission can defend itself. I am sure it can give specific details of the economic and social benefits from the government’s $28m investment during the commission’s first four years, just like the government will, in due course, be able to tell us what it expects the rate of return to be on its investment in KiwiRail. Once the Families Commission has given John Key and the wider public all the necesssary information, I have no doubt that its future will be secure under a National Government.

If a good mate of yours bought a new jumper and thought he looked great in it, but everyone else thought he looked like a fashion reject, would you have the heart to tell him? Yeah, it’s kind of like that.

I can’t speak for everyone, but I thought this site was far more interesting when people actually debated policy instead of post after post after post of someoneones wearing that same horrible jumper.

We’re embarassed for you, lprent.

[lprent: Good to have your vote on continuing to look at C/T. We always value your opinion.
The policy vacuum from the Nats reduces the writers ability to discuss it. We've been through everyone else.]

However, before I could make up my mind about keeping the Families Commission or dropping it I’d want to know how much the Families Commissions budget is. If it’s excessive and the output is minimal then I would suggest that the money would be better spent by distributing it to agencies that are set up to look after those areas already – for example the Womens Refuge. Most advertising agencies look after clients like the Womens Refuge on a pro-bono basis but if the Womens refuge had more money to spend on media placement then you could argue they would get a better result for less money.

Rather then making this a political football, I’d rather see a discussion based around “could the families commission money be better spent elsewhere to get a better result”

However if the Families Commission is not a huge drain on the taxpayer and the results it achieves are good then I agree with Russell Brown, let it be.

There’s certainly other government agencies that should feel the chop before the Families Commission. Youth Affairs has always been a joke and I think Youth Affairs money is much better spent by giving it to the charity organisations already set up to look after youth problems.

I disagree with Dancer about the “best days work you’ve ever done” campaign though. People that love their families don’t need to be told that and people that don’t care about their families wouldn’t give a toss. That money could have definitely been better spent elsewhere – even if it was only used to build four new houses for low income families.

Like an experienced professional I guess

Others did; Veitch didn’t. Generally speaking, sports coverage doesn’t focus on matters of player conduct except inasmuch as it might affect their selection or a team’s chances, so this is not surprising for the Radio Sport side of things. In One News copverage the issue was treated as news, not as sport, so Veitch wasn’t involved there.

L

FFS – we need to take some personal responsibility for our society.

Some people need to be informed of their responsibilities. This is why the ‘It’s not OK’ campaign is working. People previously didn’t think that a child being abused was their responsibility but now that they’re aware that it is they’re doing something about it.

Interesting question (to which I have no answer): How did Tony Veitch cover the Sitiveni Sivivatu wife-beating incident? Hmmmmmmm.

ps: i mean that from a “nzh is generally sub par” angle, not a “nzh is a tool of the vast right wing conspiracy” angle