Written By: - Date published: 1:08 pm, October 15th, 2007 - 51 comments
Categories: national -
Tags: national
Someone just sent me this. It’s an editorial from the Ashburton Guardian on Brian Connell’s firing resignation.
Particularly over matters of Electoral Finance the Nats have sought to position themselves as “defenders of free speech”. Perhaps more accurately: “free speech as long as it’s Brethren speech”. This editorial suggests that the protections the Nats would extend to the extreme religious right might not reach as far as some of their own MPs.
[Brian Connell] didn’t like the party line, spoke out and was tossed out. While Parliament’s debating chamber might frequently become like an out of control classroom, its members like ill disciplined students, the Connell suspension did not follow the school line.
…Brian Connell had a falling out with then party leader Don Brash. He did not abide by the classroom rules and he was suspended. His suspension was infinite. It didn’t matter that the teacher changed & Brash became Key, it didn’t matter that the origins of the original falling out were blurred by time, suspension subtly became expulsion.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
I used to think you guys were paranoid about the EB. Now I know you are! WTF does the Ashburton Guradian editorial have to do with the EB? Are the Exclsive Brethren even mentioned in it? No, and no! Get over it guys – if Labour can’t win the next election with $33b in surpluses over four years, and the EFB enacted, you’re backing the wrong horse. Then again, that’s what I thought about the All Blacks at the RWC – a sure bet……
Not paranoid Inventory2. Just keen that our democratic elections aren’t overrun with buckets of cash from an extreme right wing religious cult.
My point is that National supports free speech only when it suits them. Not in relation to political activism like our petition, and not even within their own ranks when an MP disagrees.
When your party is trying to present a united front and you have one of your MPs slagging anything and everything off, of course you are going to tell him where to leap.
And with your talk about the EB, I think it’s time to invest in some Tin Foil Milliner Co shares.
SM – Way-to-go with the tinfoil hat reference. I don’t like to boast but I’m pretty sure I introduced that to the kiwiblog discourse quite some time ago. Get some new material bro.
Oh dear God, now you’re laying claim to the Tinfoil Hat Brigade reference.
Did you also invent tinfoil itself? What about hats? Obviously there were none around until you were born of course.
Play the ball and not the man.
“free speech as long as it’s Brethren speech”
This is just laughable!! Why would anyone go around protecting just one group’s right to free speech?
Maybe this example from Labour’s front bench? Free speech for all (except those we don’t like!):
Hon Dr Michael Cullen: Will the Minister ensure that the bill is amended so that the Catholic Church’s campaign can proceed, given the facts that thanks to Working for Families this Government has cut child poverty by two-thirds and the National Party opposed the Working for Families package?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY: I will ensure that that takes place, because of course this is the kind of good news that the National Party does not like but that ought to be told right across New Zealand.
And my captcha words were “rambling” and “site”. HOW IRONIC!
Seamonkey – when playing the man is so easy I just gotta do it. I’d quote some shit from hansard outta context right back at you but I can’t be arsed. Just a question, have you actually read the Hollow Men? I mean I know it’s a bit dull for you righties to keep being asked this but really when you harp on the same shit day in day out I can’t be fucked changing my answer just for show. Oh and in response to your odd post on the other thread: “prima facie” only means there’s enough evidence for the police to consider a charge – it translates into “at first appearance” as in “at first appearance it seemed Seamonkey had a point but upon investigation he was talking out his arse” as the term (and the example) implies, the bar for prima facie is set quite low.
So are you saying that my quote above is out of context? So Maharey/Labour are free to include what group is on the naughty or nice list; who gets a present and who gets a lump of coal.
That quote is entirely in context Mr Sod. I would think I could make it sound even worse for Maharey if I were to quote the entire exchange.
The answer for my ownership of the Hollow Men is a ‘noe’. In some cases I wish I could read it, but that would mean that I would some part be handing my hard-earned over to Mr. Hagar. An idea that I find nauseating, considering the emails themselves are not his. Should Don Brash (or the person who stole them) not be getting a cut? =)
By your logic (and by extension the Police’s logic for the Pledge Card rort), “at first appearance” I seem to be talking out my arse, but upon further investigation I am not?
Oh I do enjoy a good interweb debate – mano a mano, retard a retard.
Um in context it was a joke. Y’know like your posting.
Good to see you’re staying on message with the “stolen emails” argument – in the trade that’s called “misdirection” and only suckers fall for it. But if you want to get onto the topic of stolen emails you might want to ask why National took so long to lay a complaint and why they have not be very cooperative with the police. Oh no that’s right we’re talking about the pledge card now, but no charges were ever laid then, Labour paid it back and National used it’s own leader’s fund inappropriately (and still is by the looks of who’s been threatening the standard), oh did I say pledgecard?? I meant the EFB – yeah that’s right the EFB, quick look over there!!!
Bro, the thing with misdirection is it only gets you so far – I’m starting to get the feeling the audience is starting to catch up with your lot and they don’t have any new ideas.
Oh and you can get the hollow men out from the library if you’re so worried about your moral centre.
Seamonkey – the Hollow Men was a great read – if you have a problem with insomnia. As I said a couple of days ago, I knew Hager at high school (Palmerston North Boys’ High), and he was as boring as batshit then – very serious and intense. Obviously the English teachers at PNBHS didn’t have much success with his literary style, although he did take creative writing to new heights – in rather the same manner as creative accounting!
Seamonkey you’re missing my point. I have no problem with the participation of even a nasty group like the Exclusive Brethren – so long as their participation is above board – ‘free speech within the rules’ I guess you might call it. The rules are there not to prevent free speech, but to protect democracy.
If the Brethren campaign for the Nats their spending should be attributed to the Nats.
Re the emails, Don certainly got what was coming his way. He lied to the public and suffered the consequences. Get a library card. Read the book.
I love how the righties have to say ‘oh the Hollow Men, so boring’ its their only defence, its not like they can knock down the evidence it presents, which is all primary sources – emails straight from Digger Don and his mates.
Inv2, SM – if a book is too much for your attention span, I see the play is getting a second season in November (all showings sold out in the first season) – so maybe you could go to that? its only 2 hours. I
ts got plenty of jokes to take the pressure off your brains from all the serious talk. Funny thing is, the ‘jokes’ are real quotes that Don etc wrote in all seriousness but when the actors say them the audience can’t help but laugh.
Hey “bro”,
Thanks for the library tip. I will endeavour to get it out.
Can you answer me this: why did Labour pay the money back if they did no wrong in the first place? And why did the Government pass retrospective validation, at the same time null and voiding a certain lawsuit against them?
You’re getting better R’sod. Playing the ball much more than the man that time. You should be commended.
Nah bro – I play the man’s spin (it’s just with you lot its’ hard to tell where the spin stops and the man begins). I’m assuming they paid it back ‘cos the “pay it back” campaign National ran so hard (which was based on US attack campaign strategies that ironically came from imported smear specialists paid out of National’s leaders fund) got them scared. If it’d been me I would’ve told the Nats to go fuck themselves and spent a bit more time bashing back. But then I’m not a cowardly leftie and anyway it look’s like National’s imported formula is starting to fail them now.
If he upset anyone or made a mistake, Brian Connel deserved a second chance. National’s treatment of Brian Connel is an example of bad employers.
This is a prelude to what National will let bad employers do to those that speak out or don’t tow the company line.
Watch unemployment go up and pay go down if the National Party get into power.
Shane
Yeah right. Did you read the Sunday Star Times yesterday. On the front page (bottom left) was an article about Duvet Days. The quote the management of an IT company. You reckon the idea of flexible work environments will ever catch on with the Unions ?
Burt – Flexible work hours was driven by unions and National voted against it. Go figure.
Burt, you obviously have no idea. Unions are all for flexibility – that’s why they’re supporting flexible working hours legislation. What they oppose is the one-way ‘flexibility’ of the right, which amounts to nothing more than the flexibility for employers to hire and fire staff as they see fit.
With IT companies you’ve got a situation where there’s a desperate skilled labour shortage and bargaining power is a little more even. For the vast majority of workers this is not the case.
Shane, you are typical of a unionist, always complaining about employers, to the point where it drives them oversea’s. Brian Connel has become a liability to the national party, why as employers should they keep him on? Typical socialist tho, very good at demanding more money and complaining, less able to acctually create wealth by starting a bussiness.
Tane
I guess that why Unions want one collective agreement that has the same conditions for all workers.
Just imagine the union implementation of Duvet days…
Tane
You said over on Kiwiblog that you would happily discuss Health and Education with me. Perhaps you could do a post over here so we can get some debate going about it. We can wrap the union/non union concepts into that debate as well. I’m keen.
Burt – you’re wrong. You’ve asked this shit before and you don’t listen to the answers. Fuck off and take your Ritalin.
Too much truth for you Robinsod?
And you never did answer my question about why it would be wrong for National to have more private investment in schools just like Labour have done with Integrated schools.
HIB’s in Upper Hutt has astounding results, St. Marks has astounding results (just 2 examples – there are lots more). All you seem to be saying is that if National want to lift the standard in education then that is a bad thing. Do you actually care about the quality of education or is it only about having Labour in Govt and the rest can go to hell ?
God you’re a bore burt.
1) Collective agreements set minimum standards, they don’t restrict workers and management from coming to mutually beneficial arrangements. In fact, since collective bargaining helps even up the inherent imbalance of power in the employment relationship they actually provide the only way for most workers to meaningfully negotiate better conditions (like duvet days) with their employers.
2) Regarding health and education, yeah we’ll put a post up some time and we’ll argue it. This isn’t that post. You can wait for that post to go up, or you can start your own blog. It’s up to you really.
No Burt – too much dogged obtuse Burt for me. But ok I’ll bite. Integrated schools are not privatised schools they are generally run along a non-secular line and on a not-for-profit basis. They are certainly not a model for privatisation as they often run at a loss (and are kept running income sources such as bequests etc). National has espoused schools for profit and there is a big difference between a school run by a community stakeholder with long historic ties to that community (or a significant religious or cultural sector thereof) and a school run by a business with shareholders to please. Do you get that Burt?
Shane – how naïve are you?
Are we still on that privatising schools argument? I’m not even going to bother seeing who is on what side, I’ll just say my piece.
1. I spent all of my youth in private schooling. It was great.
2. Making public schools private will not make them as good as existing private schools.
3. Keeping public schools public but making them more accountable and worth attending will be more effective. It’s not the style of schooling that’s the problem, it’s the quality.
Nih, i completely agree. we need to lift the quality of our education. spend more on high-calibre teaching staff before any other increased spending
Everyone pause for a Respect Knuckles moment.
The problem we have at the moment is that even a big increase in wages and resourcing is not going to help twenty years of training shortages straight away and so we may just end up with better paid, better resourced teachers in front of forty child classrooms. Hold on, isn’t this tread about National suppressing dissent? I just wish they’d do it the old muldoon way so instead of this lawyers and doublespeak stuff. At least you had a clear idea of what they were up to then.
Robinsod
Yes I get that Robinsod – you know “F” all about Integrated schools and are making shit up about normally running at a loss. The biggest difference that escaped your analysis is that Integrated schools can charge additional fees to manipulate the current Govt funding of 1 teacher per 30 students. Yes 1-30 – That’s fixing health and education Labour style.
I’m sure Tane will post about Health & Education shortly – it’s an issue that is important to all of NZ irrespective of political ideology. On that thread I’ll expand on what I have said further.
Teacher’s College is only three years. If we get started now, it could well be worth it. Not every teacher has to be a genius either, you only need a handful of good teachers per school with the rest being at least adequately taught how to show empathy and support. It comes back to efficient organisation and providing incentives to stay in the job and relocate as required. I’d certainly enjoy teaching in a rural school if the pay was up to it.
Paying teachers more and having higher standards would be an excellent start. Ensuring their safety is the other big thing that can be done right away. I’m not talking security guards, simply not ignoring teachers would be a good plan.
Oh and more opportunities for particularly gifted children and an actual effort to identify them.
Burt – I went to an “integrated school” and it wasn’t making a profit. But that was not my main point – which was (now, have you taken your Ritalin?) that they are not profit geared. That’s not the point of them. They’re about teaching particular values on top of the regular curriculum. If you try to turn public schools private you’re not going to add that culture, you’re going to create businesses in which education itself is seen as an expense to be controlled.
“Collective agreements set minimum standards”
That’s some pretty high minimum standards.
Ok, if we are on education, and following what R’sod said, its interesting how the neoliberal attitude, sell our capital and live on the proceeds, ‘burn the future’ if you will, is still coming back to bite us in so many ways…
insuffiecent infrastructure investment through the 1980s and 1990s – roads, rail, electricity – all a result of moving strategic assets to a for-profit model.
an aging and insufficent skilled workforce in all kinds of areas – teachers, dental nurses (National closed their school ten years ago), even electricity linesmen (there were enough for a while, the privitised power cos didn’t want to take on the cost of educating replacements themselves), etc
tories say we can’t blame the 1990s policies after 8 years of responsible government but that ignores the big lead times needed to make up for all that ‘live for the moment’ government in the 1990s… it takes years just to establish the added training capacity for these skilled professions, and then years to train people up, and you’ve got ten years to make up for.
I agree with Robinsod, you can’t expect to give existing schools a directive to turn a profit. Market forces will take place.
One or two schools will flourish. Most schools will fail to stay open unless they take typical measures and lower costs dramatically.
Schools aren’t something I want to expose to the frivolities of chance and public whim. All schools should be brought up to the best standard they can be, ending this insane rush to get into one or two particular schools every year.