Note to Media – check your facts.

Written By: - Date published: 12:55 pm, January 29th, 2014 - 202 comments
Categories: labour, Media - Tags: , ,

Sometimes I despair for our media. I mean, the latest parroting of Key’s line on Best Start is the stuff of black comedy.

Apparently Key’s claiming David Cunliffe misled people about eligibility because they don’t get the payment while they also get paid parental leave. And the media are trumpeting it all over the place.

The problem is the so-called hidden information is actually right there on the first page of the factsheet Labour put up on line when policy was announced:

For families receiving Paid Parental Leave, entitlement to the Best Start Payment will commence at the end of the household’s time using Paid Parental Leave.

If that’s a hidden agenda then Labour needs to get a lot more sneaky. Or maybe journlists just need to check the facts before they put Key’s lies to print.

202 comments on “Note to Media – check your facts. ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Lanthanide 1
    29 January 2014 at 12:57 pm

    Reposting my comment 1.1.2 from the “On Best Start” thread:

    “As if it wasn’t very clear yesterday, on Labour’s FAQ Best Start page”

    It might have been very clear on their FAQ. But it was NOT clear from Cunliffe’s speech.

    It would not have taken much to mention it: announce paid parental leave first, then add the $60 payment for those not receiving paid parental leave.

    Simple. But he didn’t do it.

    Yes, the media are way over-reacting, but the point is, Cunliffe gave them an opening.

    I have to say, I myself was slightly surprised when I found out that the $60 only started *after* you came off the 26 weeks paid parental leave. Cunliffe really should have made this clear in his speech.

    Also in follow-up interviews he has literally said you’ll get $60 a week for the first year of your babies life if your household earns under $150k pa, without hinting at any other conditions or qualifications. He said exactly this on Campbell Live’s segment on Monday night – I was specifically noting what he said to see if he’d mention the 26 weeks paid leave or not, and he didn’t.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 1.1
      29 January 2014 at 1:03 pm

      The “point” is that the media are reporting Key’s lie as something other than “Prime Minister caught lying, playing politics”.

      No amount of message tailoring is going to be enough to cut through that level of bias.

      • Lanthanide 1.1.1
        29 January 2014 at 1:06 pm

        Cunliffe has presented the policy on several occasions as being $60 a week while your child is under 1 year of age and you earn less than $150k.

        That’s not actually what the policy is. Key is *not* lying when he says that that is how Cunliffe portrayed it.

        It’s unfortunate that the media are buying into and repeating his message, though.

        • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 1.1.1.1
          29 January 2014 at 1:38 pm

          Labour Party inept at communications, in other news sky found to be blue.

        • weka 1.1.1.2
          29 January 2014 at 2:09 pm

          “It’s unfortunate that the media are buying into and repeating his message, though.”

          Sorry Lanth, but if the media had been doing their fucking job, they would have read the Labour policy document within an hour of his speech and then the rest of the day would have covered the salient points, including things like PPL.

          Look at what happened on ts. We all read/listened to the speech, then read the actual policy and proceeded to discuss it in context. How fucking hard would that be for the media to do as well?

          • Lanthanide 1.1.1.2.1
            29 January 2014 at 2:29 pm

            SPC’s comment below says this:

            “Claire Trevett ‏@CTrevettNZH
            the fact sheets handed out to reporters at the speech were not the fact sheets that contained the PPL bit.”

            • weka 1.1.1.2.1.1
              29 January 2014 at 2:58 pm

              Have you seen a copy and compared it to the one online?

              How hard would it be for journalists to fact check? It looks like Labour may have made a mistake here, but if the media had done their job properly, they wouldn’t now have a story to beat Labour with. Oh wait…

              • greywarbler …
                29 January 2014 at 4:28 pm

                Don’t make excuses weka. It’s not the job of the media to decide Labour’s policy for them, it is Labour’s to explain it TO them, simply as to a little child. No crappy she’ll be right when you launch a policy, or the boat might go down if the holes are under the waterline.

                I have just been reading Terry Pratchett’s Jingo about playing politics in cunning ways. Wish I could have him for PM. Even with a touch of al. (the word that shall not be said) he would do as well as our strategists.

                • weka …
                  29 January 2014 at 6:21 pm

                  Do you think Labour deliberately misled the media/public or do you think they were sloppy and ill-prepared?

                  • greywarbler …
                    29 January 2014 at 6:49 pm

                    I said –
                    1 It’s not the job of the media to decide Labour’s policy.
                    2 It is Labour’s job to explain it to them very clearly.
                    3 It is not enough to be a bit casual about explaining to the media when you
                    launch a policy.
                    4 If the job is done imperfectly the result is likely to be unsuccessful outcomes.
                    5 Labour has to be careful and cunning about their strategies, or they will get out-maneouvred and I have seen good ideas in a book I have read, the author of which could teach them a thing or two.
                    Is that clear enough Weka.

                    • weka …
                      29 January 2014 at 6:56 pm

                      I understood you well enough the first time. Is there a reason you don’t want to answer my question?

                    • greywarbler …
                      29 January 2014 at 7:35 pm

                      Well I didn’t see the necessity for it but if you are playing headmistress of the thread, I will answer exactly so there is no doubt in even the most confused mind.
                      Do you think Labour deliberately misled the media/public or do you think they were sloppy and ill-prepared?

                      I think that Labour was ill-prepared as they did not specify exactly when, to whom and for how long etc that the allowance was to be paid to mothers.
                      So I think that was sloppy to use your word.

                      No I do not believe that Labour deliberately misled the media or public, but David Cunliffe did cause confusion and misunderstanding by not spelling out the exceptions and the entitlements fully, so leaving room for misinformation to be bandied about.

                    • weka …
                      29 January 2014 at 7:37 pm

                      Thanks.

          • alwyn 1.1.1.2.2
            29 January 2014 at 3:30 pm

            Perhaps it would have been a good idea for Cunliffe to have read the policy. Then he would have been able to explain it fully instead of leaving bits out.
            How can he possibly complain if he leaves out things about the scheme and then complains when Key points out that he has done so?

            • weka 1.1.1.2.2.1
              29 January 2014 at 3:49 pm

              Fuck off alwyn. If you think that Cunliffe hasn’t been involved in developing the policy and hasn’t read it, then you’re an imbecile and shouldn’t be commenting here.

              • QoT …
                29 January 2014 at 10:05 pm

                alwyn’s previous line was that Cunliffe wouldn’t even have any input into the speech. Or that there wouldn’t be a speech. alwyn is clearly a deliberate, purposeful derailer.

                • alwyn …
                  31 January 2014 at 9:13 am

                  I gather that Cunliffe has admitted, in the Herald, that he was wrong in what he said in his speech, and blames it on the speechwriter. This is basically an admission that he didn’t understand the policy. It says that I rely on my speechwriter to know what the facts are, and I regurgitate them.
                  After all, we are expected to believe that DC knew the policy detail, read through the draft speech carefully, and never realised that what he was going to say was, at best, misleading and at worst was a flat out lie. “I relied on my speechwriter” is the basis of his defence.
                  I admit I am assuming that he read the speech carefully. It is one of the most important he is ever going to make and I hope he didn’t just pick it up and immediately blurt it out.

      • Tom Gould 1.1.2
        29 January 2014 at 2:02 pm

        Frankly, I am really getting sick and tired of the MSM and the political media in particular behaving like they work for the Key’s 9th floor media spin unit. Any shred of actually ‘journalism’ has been abandoned in the headlong rush to get Key a third term. It is sickening to see how our democracy has been so completely corrupted.

        • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 1.1.2.1
          29 January 2014 at 11:52 pm

          +1 Tom Gould

        • Richard McGrath 1.1.2.2
          31 January 2014 at 11:11 pm

          Interesting that the minute Cunliffe screws up, and the media report it, they are suddenly confirmed as National Party stooges…

          • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 1.1.2.2.1
            31 January 2014 at 11:19 pm

            We’ve been watching the media barely bat an eyelid on JK’s countless screw-ups – the response re Cunliffe’s speech was well over the top in comparison. Please just go back to sleep Richard McGrath

    • ghostwhowalksnz 1.2
      29 January 2014 at 1:05 pm

      Then they would have claimed there was something else that ‘wasnt clear’.

      John Key would have walked into his media office and said

      ‘ Find me more than 6 different problems real of imaginary with First start and make it snappy’

      These will be drip fed out to lazy journos like Gower – and others over the next week

      • Lanthanide 1.2.1
        29 January 2014 at 1:08 pm

        Yes, quite possibly, but I don’t know what else you’d pick on in this policy.

        Let’s be fair here though: missing out on 50% of the claimed $60/week payment is actually quite a big discrepancy.

      • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 1.2.2
        29 January 2014 at 2:08 pm

        It’s not that something “wasn’t clear”. Cunliffe and Labour have been caught out saying things that are simply not true. That’s not a lack of clarity, that’s lying.

        • Lanthanide 1.2.2.1
          29 January 2014 at 2:33 pm

          For someone to be lying, they must have an intent to deceive.

          I don’t believe there was any intent here.

          Cunliffe left out salient, important information, but he didn’t lie.

          • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 1.2.2.1.1
            29 January 2014 at 2:50 pm

            Labour publications on the Internet right now show the baby bonus and parental leave being available to parents simultaneously commencing at birth. The media have reported that. Labour has allowed the media to do so without correction while knowing that it’s not true.

            • KJT 1.2.2.1.1.1
              29 January 2014 at 3:13 pm

              Like you get every detail of a policy in a speech.

              There were more than a few glaring gaps in Key’s education announcement too. Don’t see any media highlighting them.

            • weka 1.2.2.1.1.2
              29 January 2014 at 3:17 pm

              Got a link SHG?

              • alwyn …
                29 January 2014 at 3:47 pm

                There is the press release here

                https://www.labour.org.nz/beststart

                It says “Labour will introduce 26 weeks of Paid Parental Leave, an increase from the current 14 weeks, in line with Sue Moroney’s Member’s Bill”
                and
                “$60 per week for a baby’s first year of life, universal for all family’s earning under $150,000 per year”

                In the press release there are no if’s, no buts and no maybes. “First year of life” and “universal” it says.

                There might be a qualification hidden deep in one of the many documents this one contains links to but I didn’t think you were allowed to put something in bold type and then avoid it by weasel words in the small print are you?
                This isn’t his speech by the way where it is possible to claim that the omission is forgiveable. This is an announcement on the Labour Party’s own website.

                • weka …
                  29 January 2014 at 4:00 pm

                  “There might be a qualification hidden deep in one of the many documents this one contains links to”

                  Ah, another person who hasn’t bothered to look at the policy. It’s not like it is on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of The Leopard”. It’s on the very first page, one click from the page you just read, and that link is right at the bottom of the section on the Best Start payment.

                  I do think Labour have been remiss with this, and it’s not like this is the first time. And if you want to side with disingenuous, egotistical, ethically bankrupt journalists like Gower go ahead. Myself, I prefer to educate myself and make an effort to understand what is going on.

                  • alwyn …
                    29 January 2014 at 4:28 pm

                    Well so it is! I wonder what is in all the other links? Why should I have to check everything rather than rely on the main document? Why can’t I rely on politicians not to prevaricate?

                    I think that, if this release from the Labour party was considered as being an ad, any material that it linked to could fairly be equated to the fine print of the ad, or as a small notice inside the store.
                    The consumer web-site has some material on the Fair Trading Act. It says

                    “Telling a story in fine print at the bottom of the ad, or by way of a small notice inside a store won’t save an ad from breaking the Fair Trading Act. As a general rule, fine print can elaborate on the main selling message but should not be used to contradict it”.

                    I see why the politicians made themselves exempt from the Fair Trading Act. A lot of them would be in very big trouble wouldn’t they?

                    • weka …
                      29 January 2014 at 5:21 pm

                      The policy document IS the main document.

                      They made a mistake alwyn. It’s obvious that they’re not trying to hide anything.

                    • alwyn …
                      29 January 2014 at 5:35 pm

                      Ok. Now if I can just check the rules?

                      When Key makes a slip of the tongue, or there is a typo or a word left out of a document it is because he is lying. This rule applies even when he is clearly telling the truth.

                      When Cunliffe makes a mistake and leaves something out it is only a mistake because we all know that Cunliffe never tries to hide anything. This rule is true even when he is clearly lying.

                      To hell with it. It is far to nice an evening in Wellington to bother sitting in front of a computer screen. That statement is true. It has been lovely weather today.

                    • McFlock …
                      29 January 2014 at 5:48 pm

                      When Key makes a slip of the tongue, or there is a typo or a word left out of a document it is because he is lying. This rule applies even when he is clearly telling the truth.

                      Which cases in Blip’s list of dunnokeyo’s lying do you think that summary applies to, Alwyn?

                    • weka …
                      29 January 2014 at 5:52 pm

                      It says alot alwyn that you can’t tell the difference between a mistake and lying.

                      When Key makes a slip of the tongue, or there is a typo or a word left out of a document it is because he is lying. This rule applies even when he is clearly telling the truth.

                      When Cunliffe makes a mistake and leaves something out it is only a mistake because we all know that Cunliffe never tries to hide anything. This rule is true even when he is clearly lying.

                      That’s about how you see things. I don’t see it that way, which begs the question of why you would post that in reply to me.

                    • alwyn …
                      29 January 2014 at 6:08 pm

                      @McFlock. I was going to put, as an example, the comment about working for families.
                      I suppose if I do so you will tell me it doesn’t form part of the class I was talking about as there is no typo, nor slip of the tongue.
                      It isn’t a lie though, which Blip claims. Now you tell me why you think it is a lie?

                    • McFlock …
                      30 January 2014 at 9:42 am

                      Blip’s list:

                      we are not going to cut working for families

                      .
                      Linked to this page here.

                      Contrast with this news report re:2011 budget, wich was found in a5 second google search. Headline “Thousands affected by Working For Families cuts”.

                      Do you see why some folk might think that dunnokeyo’s statement did not match reality? Hence why it might be a “lie”, especially as his promise was in a carefully crafted speech and media release?

                    • alwyn …
                      30 January 2014 at 6:24 pm

                      McFlock at 9.42am
                      The statement by Key was in July 2008, before the 2008 election. It was, like the decision not to sell shares in the SOEs a statement of what the National Government would do in its 2008-2011 term if they were elected. They did NOT make changes to WFF before the 2011 election.
                      Before the 2011 election they announced their policy for the next term and, in some cases, made changes to laws that would take place only after that election, if they were re-elected. If they hadn’t been reelected there was plenty of time for a new Government to reverse them.
                      Key’s promises prior to the 2008 were always predicated on being for that term. The only promise he has made that is to apply to his whole time as PM was the one on the age for National Super. Thus Key did not lie about WFF.
                      If you think that this is a lie would you accept that Cunliffe is a liar, because at the 2011 election he campaigned on removing GST from food? Now he says he isn’t going to do so. He must, by your reasoning, have been lying in 2011, mustn’t he?

                    • McFlock …
                      30 January 2014 at 6:40 pm

                      This is the fruit you choose to pick out of blips entire tree? A semantic argument that making changes in the 2011 budget does not count as making changes before the 2011 election (as if that was even a qualifier in the original statement, which was part of their labourlite campaign of lies) because the changes wouldn’t impact until after the 2011 election.

                      And even then you can’t tell the difference between not being in a position to backtrack on your promises (because, news flash, they lost the election) and making the promise in order to get into government only to backtrack on it while in that term of government?

                      And no, “the next government could reverse it if they wanted” does not count as “telling the truth”.

                      It’s an interesting argument, I grant you, but you’re still just rolling a turd in glitter and trying to sell me a diamond. It sure doesn’t come close to honesty.

                    • alwyn …
                      30 January 2014 at 6:54 pm

                      @McFlock.
                      When I read the comment I was trying to reply to I thought you had put the singular “case”, not the plural “cases” you had actually typed. I was therefore only giving an example.
                      I assure you I have much better things to do than go right through that list showing the flaws in all of them.
                      The truth about the one I did list is that no changes were made that affected what anyone got during the first term, as they promised, and they gave notice of changes that were going to take effect in their second term. If people didn’t really like them they didn’t have to vote for him did they?

                    • McFlock …
                      30 January 2014 at 7:08 pm

                      Ah, so there might be actual cases in blips list where key did not in fact lie, mislead, or utter an untruth, but you’re too cool to bovver.

                      I’d like it if you showed an actual flaw in any of them, as in something that you don’t need to squint at sideways in order to argue that our prime minister made a “slip of the tongue” rather than it being clearly obvious to all that he’s an habitual lying prick.

                    • McFlock …
                      30 January 2014 at 7:14 pm

                      The truth about the one I did list is that no changes were made that affected what anyone got during the first term, as they promised, and they gave notice of changes that were going to take effect in their second term.

                      See the bit you have to add in order to pretend that LabourLite wasn’t an outright lie?

                      If people didn’t really like them they didn’t have to vote for him did they?

                      Hey – partners go back to their abusive spouses, too. That doesn’t mean that they weren’t lied to.

    • geoff 1.3
      29 January 2014 at 1:08 pm

      Cunliffe really should have made this clear in his speech.

      Yeah the problem is Cunliffe not pointing out the detail in a broad speech, not National making shit up about Labour 🙄

      Hey I get to use that eye rolley thing twice on you today, Lanth.

      Or are deliberately trying to derail the discussion?

      • Lanthanide 1.3.1
        29 January 2014 at 1:15 pm

        Maybe you didn’t read everything in my comment, so I’ll post it here again for you.

        It would not have taken much to mention it: announce paid parental leave first, then add the $60 payment for those not receiving paid parental leave.

        Simple. But he didn’t do it.

        Knocking out 50% of the claimed $60/week payment is a *significant* discrepancy.

        I’m not expecting Cunliffe to detail absolutely everything in his speech, but this is a point that should have been mentioned.

        • geoff 1.3.1.1
          29 January 2014 at 1:47 pm

          So says….the pedant.

          Derailing the discussion with pedantry is still derailing the discussion.

          • Lanthanide 1.3.1.1.1
            29 January 2014 at 1:52 pm

            It’s not pedantry.

            Cunliffe factually did not mention, on several occasions including the initial unveiling speech, that the $60 payment is not made to those who are on parental leave. The speech was plenty long enough already that claiming he couldn’t fit these little but important details in was impossible is rather disingenuous.

            Whether this is an important point or not does not change the *fact* that on numerous occasions, Cunliffe did not make this clear.

            Now, I think it is an important point, and he should have said it; but on the flipside the media shouldn’t be buying into Key’s spin and repeating it ad-nauseam. This should be little more than a footnote in the discussion of the policy.

            However this is another learning point for Labour. They need to get better at communications. First thing to do is to say “how will National attack this?” and then make adjustments until there are no obvious attack points left and they have rebuttals for anything that needs rebutting.

            • geoff 1.3.1.1.1.1
              29 January 2014 at 2:01 pm

              So you think Patrick Gower’s reporting was good?

              You thought John Key’s lines on Tv3 this morning were fair enough?

              • Lanthanide …
                29 January 2014 at 2:04 pm

                Once again, I shall repeat a part of my comment because it appears you didn’t actually read it.

                Now, I think it is an important point, and he should have said it; but on the flipside the media shouldn’t be buying into Key’s spin and repeating it ad-nauseam. This should be little more than a footnote in the discussion of the policy.

                Instead of imaging what my position might be, try actually reading the comment to see if my position is already stated.

  2. shorts 2
    29 January 2014 at 1:04 pm

    quite a number of people taking Gower to task over this on twitter – which is good but unfortunately few will see it

  3. Andrew 3
    29 January 2014 at 1:11 pm

    There would seem to be some confusion regarding the info-graphic that Jacinda Ardern has put out, where it clearly shows that the “best start” payment starts from birth.

    best start info-graphic

    It clearly states that the $60 payment is for the first year of the child’s life. Nowhere does it mention after 26 weeks paid parental leave.

    • BM 3.1
      29 January 2014 at 1:23 pm

      Yes, that’s a bit misleading, jeez what a balls up

      • Tracey 3.1.1
        29 January 2014 at 4:22 pm

        And key should know misleading… he wrote the book aye bm

        Which schools are getting the super principals and when bm?

    • DJ 3.2
      29 January 2014 at 1:28 pm

      In other words no one has a fucking clue what is going on. Oh dear!

    • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 3.3
      29 January 2014 at 1:46 pm

      That Labour infographic clearly and unambiguously shows paid parental leave and the “Best Start” allowance occurring simultaneously.

      Muppets.

  4. SPC 4
    29 January 2014 at 1:17 pm

    This is an opportunity to state the reasons why the $60 payment is universal in the first year

    1. the parental leave payment is universal
    2. most families do not get parental leave

    • Lanthanide 4.1
      29 January 2014 at 1:19 pm

      The $60 payment isn’t universal.

      • SPC 4.1.1
        29 January 2014 at 1:35 pm

        Lanthanide, the parental leave payment is universal because all those working at the time get it (most mothers are not working at the time they get pregnant).

        Universal means no means test. But note universal tax credits do not go to those who get parental leave now. This $60 payment for the first year is now in that category.

      • geoff 4.1.2
        29 January 2014 at 1:49 pm

        more pedantry from Lanth.

        • Lanthanide 4.1.2.1
          29 January 2014 at 1:54 pm

          Well hey, if you want to live in a world where the details don’t matter and people can just say whatever and get away with it, then I guess you enjoy being under a National government that promises 170,000 new jobs are coming just around the corner.

  5. fisiani 5
    29 January 2014 at 1:38 pm

    Another own goal by Labour. Jeez I thought Shearer was useless. The Cunliffe said it would be for the first year of life. No ifs and no buts other than not for the uber-rich. What a PR disaster. Slippery Cunliffe. How many more lies will he tell?

  6. SPC 6
    29 January 2014 at 1:45 pm

    Zetitic, the issue has been discussed on twitter.

    I got his from a post over on kiwiblog.

    Pete George (20,736 comments) says:
    January 29th, 2014 at 1:32 pm
    There’s been a lot of debate about this on Twitter, with claims and counterclaims. It seems to have been clarified.

    @patrickgowernz

    Labour dishonest on baby bonus. Blog:http://www.3news.co.nz/Opinion-Labour-dishonest-on-baby-bonus/tabid/1382/articleID/330156/Default.aspx#.UuguycjrLVw.twitter … Labour deliberately misled voters by omission of key details

    Keith Ng ‏@keith_ng
    Gower should’ve read the fact sheet. Cunliffe should’ve been clearer about all the exceptions. These facts are not contradictory.

    Tim Watkin ‏@Tim_Watkin
    But Gower did read the fact sheet and is now reporting a contradiction found therein.

    Keith Ng ‏@keith_ng
    Amendment: Gower should’ve read the fact sheet prior to filing the story. He had five goddamn hours.

    Claire Trevett ‏@CTrevettNZH
    the fact sheets handed out to reporters at the speech were not the fact sheets that contained the PPL bit.

    Keith Ng ‏@keith_ng
    Oh. Fuck. Withdrawn with apologies to @patrickgowernz then.

    It seems that fact sheets handed out at the speech had less facts than the fact sheet that could be found online.

    • geoff 6.1
      29 January 2014 at 1:55 pm

      Yeah I’m sure the mistake by Labour was deliberate.
      Oh no, it wasn’t. It was a mistake.
      What was deliberate? Key trying to smear the policy by telling lies, again!

      Key the lying liar just cant stop telling lies.

      I love the reaction this policy is getting from the wingnuts. When all those swing-voting, young mums realise that Labour is going to help them out, National….are…fucked. Hee hee its going to be fantastic.

      • TightyRighty 6.1.1
        30 January 2014 at 12:59 pm

        100% deliberate. All the authorised info graphics show that that’s it was intended to be understood by the average punter to combine PPL and BS (like that?) from when the baby is born.

  7. fisiani 7
    29 January 2014 at 1:47 pm

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Opinion-Labour-dishonest-on-baby-bonus/tabid/1382/articleID/330156/Default.aspx

    Read it and weep. Total dishonesty from The Cunliffe. Found out to be lying.
    How many heard or read his speech and guessed that the bribe was only half what he promised.

    • SPC 7.1
      29 January 2014 at 1:56 pm

      You and some journalists seem unaware that those receiving parental leave now do not get universal tax credits at the same time – this would apply to the $60 payment as well.

    • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 7.2
      29 January 2014 at 1:57 pm

      Jesus, what a cockup. Just when you think Labour couldn’t possibly get any more incompetent at articulating a message, they come along and prove you wrong.

    • McFlock 7.3
      29 January 2014 at 2:04 pm

      damn, gower’s throwing a major tanty.

      What the fuck is he, three?

    • mickysavage 7.4
      29 January 2014 at 2:24 pm

      I am not sure about the utility of responding to Fisi and thinking that he will change his mind but the speech was a generalised statement of the policy, the information released at the time had more detail. Instead of reading out 40 pages of technical material David gave a generalised description. This is not a lie.

      • Lanthanide 7.4.1
        29 January 2014 at 2:34 pm

        But it wouldn’t have taken him more than a sentence or two to indicate a very important point, that you only get the $60/week payment after the parental leave entitlement has run out.

        He SHOULD have said it.

        • mickysavage 7.4.1.1
          29 January 2014 at 2:58 pm

          Gee Lanth

          Key announces a $360 mil spend with absolutely no details apart from the number of teachers getting extra pay and their designation and everyone celebrates. Labour comes out with some really detailed policy and some sloppiness in the language for the associated speech is used to attack the policy.

          It is a proposal at this stage. It is not finalised. Of course there needs to be work done in fleshing it out.

          • geoff 7.4.1.1.1
            29 January 2014 at 3:03 pm

            +1 Mickey

          • emergency mike 7.4.1.1.2
            29 January 2014 at 3:31 pm

            That’s the issue for me to ms, Key announces a big spend on vaguely defined ‘lead’ ‘expert’ and ‘change’ teachers and the media calls it a winner without pointing out the lack of any meaningful details or evidence that this will do anything to help education.

            Meanwhile Labour announces a detailed solid proposal and Gower has a tantrum because the fine print wasn’t communicated perfectly.

            I don’t see many new parents getting too outraged about missing out on $60 a week if they are getting paid parental leave. Buy hey Paddy, don’t let that stop you howling to the moon.

            • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 7.4.1.1.2.1
              30 January 2014 at 12:16 am

              “I don’t see many new parents getting too outraged about missing out on $60 a week if they are getting paid parental leave.”

              +100

          • Lanthanide 7.4.1.1.3
            29 January 2014 at 5:00 pm

            “It is a proposal at this stage. It is not finalised. Of course there needs to be work done in fleshing it out.”

            But it HAS been fleshed out. Cunliffe just neglected to convey the details that have already been decided.

            • Colonial Viper 7.4.1.1.3.1
              29 January 2014 at 7:52 pm

              You really are such a “could have, should have.” The real story is of course the blatantly unequal treatment given to Key’s teacher spend up and then to Cunliffe, as MS points out.

              And I would point out that you are doing exactly the same.

              • Lanthanide …
                29 January 2014 at 8:16 pm

                Actually there are a quite a few people in this thread defending Cunliffe and Labour.

                They should not be defending them, because they did screw up, and they should know better.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  29 January 2014 at 8:39 pm

                  Nah screw you mate.

                  The point I made about your completely unequal and hypocritical treatment of Cunliffe’s and Key’s recent announcement stands.

                  Did Cunliffe fail to make certain details clear in his speech? Yes. That’s clear. But it was a leadership speech and not a policy bureaucrats’ monologue. The detail was there and it was available on the day.

                  It’s not a fucking hanging offence, and why you are judging how serious a “screw up” it is by Patrick Gower’s and the rest of the MSM’s bullshit hyperbole is beyond me.

                  • Lanthanide …
                    29 January 2014 at 9:09 pm

                    It’s not a fucking hanging offence, and why you are judging how serious a “screw up” it is by Patrick Gower’s and the rest of the MSM’s bullshit hyperbole is beyond me.

                    Good, because I never said it was a hanging offense, nor am I judging it by what Gower or the MSM are saying. Here’s a snip from one of my comments earlier in this thread:

                    Now, I think it is an important point, and he should have said it; but on the flipside the media shouldn’t be buying into Key’s spin and repeating it ad-nauseam. This should be little more than a footnote in the discussion of the policy.

                    Once again, it is not like this was a difficult thing to slip into his long speech. Nor was it a minor policy point that was correct to leave out – we’re literally talking about slashing the much-touted payment by 50%. That’s a big deal.

                    Also not sure how I’m being hypocritical about Key’s speech. Did Key gloss over very important details that were pointed out by accompanying written policy notes? Or did they simply not have any written policy notes at all, therefore making your comparison completely specious?

                    Many many times we have right-wing nutjobs coming on here trying to say how what Key/National did is the same as what Shearer/Labour/whoever did and how we’re being hypocritical, and we point out that actually the situations are different in significant respects to make their claims baseless. It seems you’re trying to do the same here, conflating Key’s SoN speech to Cunliffe’s when really the situations are different.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 January 2014 at 9:16 pm

                      Dude, I’d be a great speech writer too if I could go back in time to the day before a speech is given armed with 20/20 vision of the media reaction.

                    • Markymark …
                      29 January 2014 at 9:26 pm

                      + 1 Lanthide.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      29 January 2014 at 9:35 pm

                      And yet in subsequent interviews he also failed to mention the PPL aspect of the policy. The printed material produced by Jacinda Ardern also implies that you get $60/week and that PPL isn’t taken into account. They gave out printed policy materials to journalists that failed to include all the relevant information.

                      This is not just about his speech. This is about their whole communications strategy around this policy that they bungled.

                      It would have been *very simple* for Cunliffe to have addressed this in the speech. Introduce the 26 weeks PPL *first*, and then after mentioning the $60/week payment, say that it kicks in after any PPL has finished. Simple. Easy. Not confusing. On-message. You don’t need a time-machine or 20/20 hindsight to do this.

                      At my work I am highly regarded as being able to write clear, comprehensive (although not always concise) descriptions of software issues and proposed solutions, as well as document existing software designs. Part of the approach I take is to think to myself “what are the important points that need to be presented, and what order do they need to go in”. So it is not rocket surgery for me to see how this speech should have been written with regards to this policy, and how I would have written it – and this is *not* hindsight speaking. The 50% reduction in payments is a big oversight to leave out of the speech.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      29 January 2014 at 9:41 pm

                      Good suggestions and a clear structure. It is a worry that an opportunity to deliver things better was missed.

                      Nevertheless Cunliffe’s machine is new, the MSM think that THEY are the news, and there’s going to be bugs and a steep learning curve. Move on.

                    • weka …
                      29 January 2014 at 9:42 pm

                      “Good, because I never said it was a hanging offense, nor am I judging it by what Gower or the MSM are saying. Here’s a snip from one of my comments earlier in this thread:

                      Now, I think it is an important point, and he should have said it; but on the flipside the media shouldn’t be buying into Key’s spin and repeating it ad-nauseam. This should be little more than a footnote in the discussion of the policy.”

                      Thing is Lanth, your emphasis says different than your words. You focus alot of attention on the fuck up and then you claim that the media should treat it as a footnote, when you are making it the main menu yourself. It’s not the first time you have done this with an issue, but I’m not sure if you are aware of it. It makes sense that people would react to the presentation.

                      fwiw, I’m defending Labour against the idea they intentionally misled the media and that Cunfliffe lied. Which is annoying because I’d much rather be criticising them for the blunder. Nevertheless, it’s a good policy and deserves more attention paid to that than the mistake.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      29 January 2014 at 9:47 pm

                      I belabour issues to get my specific point across, weka, which in turn distorts how people perceive what it is that I’m saying because they think I’m getting overly worked up over the issue (or something). Actually I’m just trying to be precise – see what I said above about writing clear and comprehensive, although not always concise, descriptions of issues?

                      Not much I feel I can really do it about it. I say enough to ensure I get my point across. If I said less I wouldn’t feel like I’d made my point adequately.

                      fwiw, I’m defending Labour against the idea they intentionally misled the media and that Cunfliffe lied. Which is annoying because I’d much rather be criticising them for the blunder. Nevertheless, it’s a good policy and deserves more attention paid to that than the mistake.

                      Completely agree. I have also defended Labour about it not being a deliberate attempt to mislead anyone. I have also criticised them for the blunder, obviously.

                      One thing I have noticed is that Joyce’s immediate “where’s the money coming from” line is no longer getting any air time, which is good.

                    • felix …
                      29 January 2014 at 11:55 pm

                      “I belabour issues to get my specific point across”

                      😀

        • Tracey 7.4.2.1
          29 January 2014 at 4:23 pm

          Which schools are getting the super principals and when?

          • fender 7.4.2.1.1
            29 January 2014 at 8:26 pm

            To qualify one must send pic of completed voting form to Nat HQ on voting day..

            • Anne 7.4.2.1.1.1
              29 January 2014 at 9:47 pm

              One must also send a dentist’s certificate confirming teeth are laser white and even. This is a prerequisite for anyone associated with the National Party (not just MPs) and includes super-teacher principals.

            • felix 7.4.2.1.1.2
              29 January 2014 at 11:58 pm

              Bill nailed it. Any teacher/principal who uncritically endorsed National Standards and was happy to “teach the test” will be given the authority to whip the others into submission.

  8. Sabine Ford 8
    29 January 2014 at 1:51 pm

    Note to Labour,

    the Media is not your friend. The media will be your friend maybe, once you have won and/or paid them off. Repeat, Rinse, Repeat and finally accept it.

    Note to Cunliffe,

    you can not abolish child hood poverty while ignoring the poor Parents or Parents to be. Raise the minimum wage for a starter. For all that are working the minimum wage….not just those with children. And when presenting policies that might be a bit harder to understand than ‘raise the minimum wage’ speak clearly, pronounce properly and leave nothing out.

    I am quite frankly sick and tired to see the Taxes subsidize Corporations that only pay minimum wage. Because this is what we are doing.

    Oh, and another way to combat childhood poverty….Jobs, for all those unemployed and underemployed. Full Time Jobs that pay at least 15$ minimum wage.

    Now that is something even the laziest Journo would understand.

    • Colonial Viper 8.1
      29 January 2014 at 8:41 pm

      An immediate increase to $15/hr minimum wage has already been well signalled by Cunliffe and the detail didn’t need to be in the speech again.

  9. captain hook 9
    29 January 2014 at 1:52 pm

    Whata lot of tripe from fissiwho. Puting words in peoples mouth is the same as lying and you should be ashamed of yourself.
    David Cunliffe is trying to do something for the most underprivileged people in new zealand and all you can do is poormouth. Shame on you.
    and as fo rhte media they are too cute for words.
    last night on TV1 when they were doing a cringing apology for Whale Boil they had a piccy of len brown on whale boils monitor.
    The msm seem to be getting as sleazy as that monster.

  10. Mickey 10
    29 January 2014 at 1:58 pm

    Yep another cluster f#@k from Cunliffe, and now Clarks ban facebook gaffe, it gets better and better.
    How can anyone trust these clowns to run the country.

    • greywarbler 10.1
      29 January 2014 at 4:19 pm

      Mickey, short for mickey mouse? Clowns have to be funny to stay in their jobs. Politicians aren’t asked to be funny and neither are commenters who come here. Not even calling yourself mickey is amusing. If you want to stay, and be funny, earn your stripes as you have to be funnier than that. I suggest you go back to the circus and practise your gymnastics and Cirque du Soleil or whoever may snap you up.

    • Colonial Viper 10.2
      29 January 2014 at 7:55 pm

      Yet you trust John Key, a guy who cant remember what he had for breakfast. Or deliberately lies about not remembering.

      • the pigman 10.2.1
        29 January 2014 at 10:59 pm

        Give Keys a break, he just hasn’t read what’s in the report about him lying yet. Nor spoken to himself about his alleged lying yet. And eckshully he probably doesn’t need to have that conversation because he is ruhlexed and has full confidence in himself.

  11. Rodel 11
    29 January 2014 at 2:01 pm

    Lot of women don’t get paid parental leave. They will benefit immediately.
    Women who do get parental leave, will benefit when it’s needed.
    Simple as that. Wonder what part of that don’t the desperate Tories understand?
    Desperate arguments by our right wingers sound like the spin of Hannity and O’reilly on F** news.

  12. SPC 12
    29 January 2014 at 2:16 pm

    The issue

    Cunliffe said that the 60,000 families that had a child each year would benefit from the near universal (to $150,000 pa – it should have been universal) roll out in year one.

    TV3 journo’s were first wondering if the $150,000 income was that including both incomes before the child birth or after, looking for the detail.

    Then looking into the matter of whether the $25,000 pa rate parental leave payment as factored in after the child’s birth (thus $150,000 to $125,000 other partner and investment income).

    But before they got answers to these questions Cunliffe left the “press conference”.

    The difference between the two fact sheets, the one on-line had more detail than the one given to journalists must have wound them up a little more.

    Journo’s were trying to do their jobs and this was an inconvenience – but the reaction to infer that they had been deliberately mislead was a little spiteful and unprofessional. It is a claim made without any evidence.

    • mickysavage 12.1
      29 January 2014 at 2:31 pm

      The real issue is that this is a first go at the formulation of policy in a complicated area.

      On one hand Labour is being criticised for it being too generous so that a family previously earning more than $150k per year may qualify and on the other hand they are being criticised for being not generous enough. Swings and roundabouts SPK …

  13. George D 13
    29 January 2014 at 2:28 pm

    Cunliffe and his team screwed this up.

    Among the most important rules of politics is that you must be able to explain the policy to a six-year old (or have very good reasons why this is not the case). When it is a headline policy to start your election year, this should be doubly so.

    tl;dr – what Lanthanide said.

    • weka 13.1
      29 January 2014 at 4:14 pm

      Yes, they screwed up. Do you think they lied and deliberately misled the media and the public?

      • Michael S 13.1.1
        30 January 2014 at 5:54 pm

        Yes. I believe he deliberately tried to mislead. If he didn’t it means he did not understand the policy.
        He said today he wasn’t responsible for that section of the speech. But he must have read it before delivery, so why say it as written if he knew it was wrong.

        • mickysavage 13.1.1.1
          30 January 2014 at 9:00 pm

          Welcome Michael. I do not believe you have commented before.

          What a stupid thing to say.

          Do you have any proof?

          And why?

          The policy is broadly in line with what was proposed.

  14. captain hook 14
    29 January 2014 at 2:40 pm

    What a lot of crap from geroge d. A 6 year old cant read properly because national standards doesn’t work and they cant understand policy anyway.
    Stop repeating this nonsense.
    David Cunliffes plank is clear, plain and simple to understand.
    anyway back to the chase the media in New Zealand are chosen for their hair and teeth and not for their ability.
    and like most narcissists they are tinpot tories to boot.

  15. BLiP 15
    29 January 2014 at 2:56 pm

    ‘

    In a play straight out of the Crosby/Textor Manual of Dark Arts, John Key accuses his opponent of the very thing he himself is practising . . .

    Prime Minister John Key has launched a scathing attack on Labour leader David Cunliffe’s credibility, calling him “tricky” and questioning whether he’s been telling the public the truth . . .

    . . . meanwhile:

    John Key’s Big List Of Lies

    I promise to always be honest

    we are not going to sack public servants, the attrition rate will reduce costs

    there’s no way one in five New Zealanders will lose their jobs

    we are not going to cut working for families

    I firmly believe in climate change and always have

    We seek a 50% reduction in New Zealand’s carbon-equivalent net emissions, as compared to 1990 levels, by 2050. 50 by 50. We will write the target into law.

    National Ltd™ will provide a consistent incentive for both biofuel and biodiesel by exempting them from excise tax or road user charges

    I didn’t know about The Bretheren election tactics

    If they came to us now with that proposal [re trans-Tasman Therapeutic Goods regime], we will sign it

    I can’t remember my position on the 1981 Springbok Tour

    Tranzrail shares

    I did not mislead the House (1)

    Lord Ashcroft

    National Ltd™ would not have sent troops into Iraq

    Standard & Poors credit downgrade

    the double-down grade doesn’t really matter and its only about private sector debt

    I did not mislead the House (2)

    I didn’t say I want wages to drop

    I can’t remember why I voted against increasing the minimum wage

    lifting the minimum wage to $15 an hour will increase unemployment

    the real rate of inflation is 3.3 percent.

    the tourism sector has not lost 7,000 jobs

    no I have never heard of Whitechapel

    I won’t raise GST

    people who are on the average wage and have a child are $48 a week better off after the rise in GST

    the purchase of farmland, by overseas buyers will be limited to ten farms per purchase

    the Pike River Mine was consented to under a Labour Government

    no promises were made to get the remains of the miners out of the Pike River mine

    I did not provide a view on the safety of the Pike River coalmine

    I did not mislead the House (3)

    capping, not cutting the public service

    raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour will cost 6000 jobs

    north of $50 a week

    privatisation won’t significantly help the economy

    wave goodbye to higher taxes, not your loved ones

    I never offered Brash a diplomatic job in London

    Tariana Turia is “totally fine” with the Tuhoe Treaty Claim deal

    Kiwisaver

    National Ltd™ is not going to radically reorganise the structure of the public sector

    tax cuts won’t require additional borrowing

    New Zealand does not have a debt problem

    New Zealand troops in Afghanistan will only be involved in training, not fighting

    the wage gap between New Zealand and Australia has closed under my National Ltd™ government

    It took 9 years for Labour to make a complete and utter mess of the economy

    National Ltd™ has changed the Overseas Investment Act to include 19 different criteria

    the price of goods and services has risen by 6 percent since the last election, while the after-tax average wage has actually gone up by 16 percent

    no, although its a week ago and here I am being interviewed on television about them, I havn’t seen Gerry Brownlee’s comments regarding demolitions in Christchurch and which caused such outrage, but I can talk all about them

    our SAS soldiers were not involved in the Kabul Hotel gunfight

    the use of the Vela brother’s helicopter was required so I could attend meetings relating to national/international security concerns

    the DPS makes the decision about accompanying the Prime Minister or not, I had no choice but to take them on holiday to Hawaii

    I did not mislead the House (4)

    oh, maybe our SAS soldiers were in the Kabul hotel gun fight but they weren’t wounded by friendly fire

    New Zealand has lost $12 billion from GDP due to the Christchurch earthquake . . . oh, it might actually be around $15 billion from GDP due to the Christchurch earthquake . . . Blinglish said what?

    10,000 houses will have to be demolished in Christchurch due to the earthquake

    14,000 new apprentices will start training over the next five years, over and above the number previously forecast

    our amendments to the ETS ensure we will continue to do our fair share internationally

    we are committed to honouring our Kyoto Protocol obligations

    any changes to the ETS will be fiscally neutral

    New Zealand has grown for eight of the last nine quarters”

    National Ltd™ will tender out the government banking contract

    we will be back in surplus by 2014-15

    Nicky Hager’s book “Other People’s Wars” is a work of fiction

    unemployment is starting to fall

    we have created 60,000 jobs

    we have created 45,000 jobs

    the 2011 Budget will create in the order of 170,000 jobs

    I don’t know if I own a vineyard

    no, I did not mislead the House (5)

    the Isreali spy killed in the Christchurch quake had “only one” passport

    the Police will not need to make savings by losing jobs

    I voted to keep the drinking age at 20

    New Zealand is 100% Pure

    I’ve been prime minister for four years, and it’s really 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year

    baseball in New Zealand is attracting more government support

    the decision to buy brand new BMWs was made by the Department of Internal Affairs without reference either to their minister or to me

    I didn’t have a clue that Ministerial Services, which I am in charge of, was going to buy brand new BMWs

    even though four of my ministers knew all about it, I didn’t have a clue that brand new BMWs were being bought.

    even though my Chief of Staff met with officials to discuss purchase of the the brand new BMWs, I didn’t have a clue

    even though I personally signed papers discussing the matter, I still didn’t have a clue

    Labour forced us into buying the brand new BMWs, its their fault

    ummm, look, sorry about that BMW thing , it was because I was so upset

    I did not describe David Beckam as thick as batshit

    I did not mislead the House (6)

    the public demanded that we change the labour laws for The Hobbit

    “The Hobbit” created 3000 new jobs

    we have delivered 800 extra doctors in the public service

    I did not mislead the House (7)

    I wasn’t working at Elders when the sham foreign exchange deals took place

    I was starting School Certificate exams in 1978

    I don’t know who arrived on the CIA jet to visit the spies I am responsible for

    reducing barriers to property developers will increase the availability of affordable housing

    Labour left the economy in poor shape

    forecasts show unemployment will fall

    we have closed the wage gap with Australia by $27

    Ngati Porou and Whanau Apanui are not opposed to mining

    I have not had any meetings with Media Works

    our [NZ’s] terms of trade remain high

    the TPPA is an example of democracy

    the TPPA will still have to be ratified by Parliament

    National Ltd™ will use the proceeds of state asset sales to invest in other public assets, like schools and hospitals

    New Zealand troops will be out of Afghanistan by April 2013

    overseas investment in New Zealand adds to what New Zealanders can invest on their own

    overseas investment in New Zealand creates jobs, boosts incomes, and helps the economy grow

    National Ltd™ will build 2000 houses over the next two years

    there are only 4 New Zealand SAS soldiers in Bamiyan and all working in the area of logistics and planning only

    selling state assets will give cash equity to those companies

    the Sky City deal will provide 1000 construction jobs and 800 casino jobs

    all five bidders for the convention centre were treated equally

    my office has had no correspondence, no discussions, no involvement with the Sky City deal

    I did not mislead the House (8)

    I can’t remember what was discussed at my meeting with the SkyCity Chief Executive on 14 May 2009

    I have no record of the 12 November 2009 email from Treasury advising that the SkyCity deal was dodgy and needed to be referred to the Auditor General

    there was nothing improper about the Sky City deal

    SkyCity will only get “a few more” pokie machines at the margins

    any changes to gambling regulations will be subject to a full public submission process

    Sky City has approached TVNZ about the purchase/use of government-owned land

    I did not mislead the House (9)

    this government has been very transparent about all its dealings with SkyCity

    I did not mislead the House (10)

    the Auditor General has fully vindicated National over the Sky City deal

    I did not mislead the House (11)

    the Deputy Auditor General supports the view that there was nothing inappropriate about the Sky City deal

    I did not mislead the House (12)

    I did not breach the confidentiality of the Auditor General’s Report into the Sky City deal

    the Labour Government did exactly the same sort of deal back in 2001

    Labour has promised to not revoke the Sky City legislation

    there’s a 50/50 chance the Hobbit is going off shore unless we do something

    David Shearer has signed up for the purchase of shares in Mighty River

    Solid Energy asked the government for a $1 billion capital investment

    fracking has been going safely on in Taranaki for the past 30 years without any issues

    no frontline positions will be lost at DOC

    Iain Rennie came to me and recommended Fletcher for the GCSB job

    I told Cabinet that I knew Ian Fletcher

    I forgot that after I scrapped the shortlist for GCSB job I phoned a life-long friend to tell him to apply for the position

    I told Iain Rennie I would contact Fletcher

    I haven’t seen Ian Fletcher in a long time.

    I did not mislead the House (13)

    I have no reason to doubt at this stage that Peter Dunne did not leak the GCSB report

    I called directory service to get Ian Fletcher’s number

    the new legislation narrows the scope of the GCSB

    the GCSB has been prevented from carrying out its functions because of the law governing its functions

    because the opposition is opposed the GCSB law ammendments, parliamentary urgency is required

    the increasing number of cyber intrusions which I can’t detail or discuss prove that the GCSB laws need to be extended to protect prive enterprise

    it was always the intent of the GCSB Act to be able to spy on New Zealanders on behalf of the SIS and police

    National Ltd™ is not explanding the activities of the GCSB with this new law

    cyber terrorists have attempted to gain access to information about weapons of mass destruction held on New Zealand computers

    the law which says the GCSB cannot spy on New Zealanders is not clear

    it totally incorrect that the Government effectively through GCSB will be able to wholesale spy on New Zealanders

    we self identified that there was a problem with the GCSB spying on Kim Dotcom

    the illegal spying on Kim Dotcom was an isolated incident

    The advice I have had in 4 years as a Minister is that in no way ever has there been an indication of unlawful spying

    the Ministerial Warrant signed by Bill English did not cover anything up

    first I heard I heard about Kim Dotcom was on 19 January 2012

    first I heard about the illegal spying on Kim Dotcom was in 17 September

    I did not mislead the House (14)

    I won’t be discussing Kim Dotcom during my Hollywood visit.

    The Human Rights Commission couldn’t get its submission on the GCSB legislation in on time.

    it would cost too much to for the police and SIS to carry out the spying on New Zealanders that this new legislation will permit

    critics of the GCSB legislation, including the Law Society, the Human Rights Commission, and the Privacy Commission, are all uninformed

    no, I did not mislead the House (15)

    I do not know how Mr Henry is conducting the Enquiry

    no, I did not mislead the House (16)

    the Henry Enquiry had permission to view Ministers’ emails

    no, I did not mislead the House (??)

    we do not spy on journalists

    the passing of phone records to the Henry Enquiry was an error on the part of a contractor

    I wasn’t aware that my own Chief of Staff was instructing Parliamentary Services to hand over information concerning journalist Andrea Vance

    National Ltd™ has never tried to impinge on the role of the media

    I had nothing to do with information on a journalist being handed over to the inquiry into the leaking of the GCSB report

    the terms of the enquiry made it clear to everyone that it was only the phone records of parliamentary staff and ministers that were to be provided

    I have the utmost respect for the media and the role it plays in New Zealand’s democracy

    the Henry Enquiry did not access a journalist’s building-access records

    the Henry Enquiry did not ask for phone and email records

    no, I did not mislead the House (17)

    the Greens are opposed to the GCSB and the SIS even existing

    the GCSB needs to spy on New Zealanders because there are al-Qaeda terrorists in New Zealand

    John Minto is in the Green Party

    the GCSB needs to spy on New Zealanders because of the terrorist threat, even though official reports released over my signature say there is no risk and the SIS has the matter in hand

    the GCSB Bill does not give the GCSB the power to look at the content of communications as part of its cyber-security functions

    no, I did not mislead the House (18)

    there will be no mining on Conservation land in the Corromendel

    no, I did not say we would follow the US and Australia into a war against North Korea

    New Zealand has an arrangement to have asylum seekers processed in Australian detention camps

    I did not mislead the house (19)

    I paid for that lunch and I’ve got the credit card bill to prove it

    I am honest and upfront

    the only way net new jobs can be created is by private investors putting their money into businesses in New Zealand

    you can’t hide if yuu’re Prime Minister

    an increase in the number of people looking for work indicates that confidence is returning to the economy

    the 10 percent of taxpayers in New Zealand who are the top earners pay 76 percent of all net personal tax.

    I did not mislead the House (20)

    the substantial wage growth under Labour was eroded by inflation

    National Ltd™’s 2010 tax changes were fiscally neutral

    I did not mislead the House (21)

    the bulk of New Zealanders earn between $45,000 and $75,000 a year

    Pike River Coal did not put profits and its production ahead of the safety and lives of those 29 workers.

    Radio Live had sought advice from the Electoral Commission about my show just before the election

    it is because of National Ltd™’s policies that the price of fresh fruit and vegetables has dropped.

    the length-of-the-country cycleway will create 4000 jobs.

    police training for next year has not been cancelled

    National Ltd™ has only cut back-office jobs in the health service

    The Crown’s dividend stream from the Meridians, the Mighty Rivers of the world is large and there is no motivation to sell assets; actually we’re about creating assets not selling assets.”

    National believes employment law should treat all parties fairly. It should . . . Protect employees and employers.

    I am not trying to tackle such issues in a “fearful” way ahead of the next election

    Wellington City is dying.

    National Ltd™ has been working on a number of things with New Zealand First on a number of things one of which has a financial component but I can’t talk about it

    the best way to get growth in the economy is to reduce public debt

    New Zealand mum and dad investors will be our number one priority in the allocation of Mighty River shares

    we won’t let “cowboy” oil exploration companies operate here in New Zealand

    the Green Party is racist by not allowing Chinese residents in New Zealand to buy a house

    the Labour Party is promising a four-bedroom house in Auckland for $300,000

    the food in schools programme is in the 2013 budget

    the meat exports are being held up in China because of issues in relation to the Chinese looking to trace counterfeit meat

    its notoriously difficult to win three elections in a row

    I am deeply concerned about every child in New Zealand who is in poverty

    there is no manufacturing crisis in New Zealand

    the government’s exposure to MediaWorks’ going into receivership is reasonably limited

    the money from the sale of state assets will not be used to prop up Solid Energy

    I don’t see a place for a Winston Peters-led New Zealand First in a government that I lead. It’s not a matter of political convenience, it’s a matter of political principle.

    The vast majority of the buildings in Christchurch came through the earthquakes in good shape

    the commemoration of New Zealand’s involvement in the Korean War will not be used to bolster trade talks

    third generation Chinese New Zealanders will be required to present their passport before buying a house under the Labour government

    the Labour housing policy is an attempt by David Shearer to save his leadership

    the Labour housing policy is in breach of free trade agreements

    only 2% of the proceeds of the sale of Mighty River will be spent on the sales process

    David Cunliffe is lying to you

    Labour wants to nationalise the super market industry

    The government will engage in no further negotiations with Rio Tinto

    Without a government subsidy of hundreds of millions of dollars Chorus will go broke

    No, I did not mislead the House (??)

    the justice system is already adequate for handling situations involving new evidence

    my Minister Nick Smith was not aware of the content of the leaked draft submission on the Ruataniwha situation until 17 September

    New Zealand First will nationalise a host of industries and businesses

    I have no responsibility for the statements I make

    Mark Mitchell was just gossiping at a cocktail party when he tipped Webster off about Len Brown’s affair

    it was a lack of external analysis and accountability which put Solid Energy into its debt crisis

    the Commerce Commission misinterpreted the law when deciding the price for access to the Chorus copper infrastructure

    no analyist predicted that the cost of access to the copper infrastructure would go down

    there has been only one problem with oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

    If it was my vote, it would be no pay increases for Mps

    Greenpeace are just scare mongering about any oil leaks off the New Zealand coast

    For every election for the last five elections , we have had royal visitors to New Zealand.

    No decision has been made on the timing of the sale of Air New Zealand shares

    its not true that in New Zealand the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer

    This summer is the most active season ever for oil and gas exploration, with the industry spending up to $750 million. At the same time, the Government is strengthening the regulations that govern drilling, particularly in deep water.

    Labour is trying to mislead people about eligibility for Best Start because they don’t get the payment while they also get paid parental leave.

    • KJT 15.1
      29 January 2014 at 3:17 pm

      Or. More simply put.

      “How do you know when Key is lying?

      His mouth is open…”

    • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 15.2
      29 January 2014 at 3:50 pm

      tl; dr

      • McFlock 15.2.1
        29 January 2014 at 4:10 pm

        too many syllables in the words, I guess.

        The nice thing about that list is that even reading a few of them demonstrates that dunnokeyo’s lying is many times more habitual than the entirety of labgrn combined.

    • geoff 15.3
      29 January 2014 at 4:08 pm

      BOOM, and there it is. Nice one BliP, was hoping you might do that.

      Be great to mail that list out to all New Zealanders around election time.
      Wonder if we could rope the Brethrens in to help us?

      • freedom 15.3.1
        29 January 2014 at 7:32 pm

        or
        maybe we crowd-source a basic and sporadic poster campaign and take Blip’s List to the people

        pretty sure the companies who do the paste ups would be ok with it, and we know then they are pretty safe, (although for the dedicated poster grabber they become instant collector items)

        they may even cut us a good $ deal too

        so to get Blip’s List public we need:

        ; the data – check

        ; Layout and formatting
        – I think i just saw a couple of dozen hands go up
        – perhaps they all put one together and we have Standardistas choose the preferred design
        – It would be good to print the links in full under each line
        – people will snap images of the poster with their phones so it is useful to include the info

        ; a call to Sticky Fingers to fix a contract price & terms
        – i think they cover paste ups for all the main centers now

        ; approximately a couple of grand for printing a whole bunch of posters,
        – I am guessing that price would be generously supported by the printers
        – posters can be printed in whatever center that they end up in so freight is not necessary

        seems pretty doable to me

        I pledge $20 here and now
        (which is 9% of my income this week)

        • geoff 15.3.1.1
          29 January 2014 at 8:47 pm

          I love that concept!

          The font size of the lies on the list would have to be so small to fit on a poster that people would have to come nice and close to the poster to read it and that would help engage them.

          Have a nice big title and then the endless list of lies in tiny font underneath.

          You could have one of those new-fangled box shaped barcodes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code) that people snap with their camera phones that takes them to a website with more info on the lies.

          Maybe a page title like, “We don’t care who you vote for, but for pete’s sake don’t vote for National!”

        • BLiP 15.3.1.2
          29 January 2014 at 10:39 pm

          ‘

          I’ll chuck in $50. Over the weekend I’ll have a look at that indie-gogo site and see what’s what. Perhaps we can rope lprent in to run the money side of things and maybe set aside a wee space on The Standard where people can link to. I don’t have a clue how those bar code thingywotsits work but it can’t be that tricky. I’ve been having some fun with with Gimp lately so I’ll also see if I can come up with a design for consideration. What say we catch up for a chat on Saturday’s “Open Mike” around 6pm-ish?

          • Colonial Viper 15.3.1.2.1
            29 January 2014 at 10:45 pm

            I wonder if someone could do a Twitter account thing.

            2 or 3 times a day it tweets out some discrete element of the BS from Key, English or some other Cabinet member or their hatchet team.

            You’d probably want to start with a list of about 150 items and then build from there as the year went on.

            Would love to have that pretty boy’s disaster on Campbell Live linked to and tweeted out, for instance.

            I reckon we could get 10,000 followers by E-Day and a shit load of regular retweets out to 10x that number.

          • geoff 15.3.1.2.2
            29 January 2014 at 10:55 pm

            Brilliant Blip!
            I can’t make it on Sat night but i can read the thread after the fact.
            This will be so cool if it can happen.

          • freedom 15.3.1.2.3
            29 January 2014 at 11:55 pm

            Saturday sounds like a good plan Blip,
            I am hanging a new show this weekend but will try to check in, if I can’t join you all I will play catch up later. Either way, I will play around with some roughs next week.

          • lprent 15.3.1.2.4
            30 January 2014 at 12:26 am

            Perhaps we can rope lprent in to run the money side of things and maybe set aside a wee space on The Standard where people can link to. I don’t have a clue how those bar code thingywotsits work but it can’t be that tricky.

            No problems with any of that. The QR stuff is easy enough.

            I and/or TS will be happy to chip in a dollop of cash as well.

          • Cleo George 15.3.1.2.5
            2 February 2014 at 2:36 pm

            Well done Blip! The truth about Key’s lies.

            Consider emailing the list with the lies and their links, to the parliamentary email addresses of all the MPs of all the non nat/act parties for their education and use.

        • Tracey 15.3.1.3
          30 January 2014 at 10:31 am

          I will put in 200. Let me know when and how. Paypal?

    • Tracey 15.4
      29 January 2014 at 4:26 pm

      Thats different

    • Bill 15.5
      29 January 2014 at 5:33 pm

      That list. If I’d the money, I’d flesh out or summarise the info from each link so that it fitted on – oh, I dunno – say, individual tissues of toilet paper. Then produce the whole lot in six packs of ‘extra long’ toilet rolls.

    • (a different) Pete 15.6
      30 January 2014 at 9:27 am

      And this relates to the topic under discussion … how exactly? Calling Key a liar has no relevance to the matter of whether Cunliffe made a mistake or not. Also for those of you who like to blame the media for this, you are making a mistake. I suspect that if you were a fly on the wall in a national party gathering that they would be complaining just as bitterly about the media.
      Time to lose the chip on the shoulder about whether Labour/Cunliffe is getting fair treatment and focus on doing a better job.
      Most of the comments here are just far too defensive. Take it on the chin, fix it and move on.

      [Bill: Pete, I’ve asked you before to change your handle since there is already a ‘Pete’ commenting on ‘ts’. Please do it. Cheers]

      • Bill 15.6.1
        30 January 2014 at 9:36 am

        Just a reply to bring your attention to the above edit.

      • Pete 15.6.2
        30 January 2014 at 9:39 am

        Ok will do. I ignored it because I had been commenting here off and on for a while under that handle. But, no problem. Does that mean you want me to repost this under a different handle, or post all future responses under a new name?

        [lprent: Thanks. Just use a different handle – anything that is readily identifiable as being ‘different’. Even “pete” would be enough – caps are easily distinguishable. We allow Rob and r0b for instance. ]

    • Will@Welly 15.7
      30 January 2014 at 7:01 pm

      BLiP – your “words” are lovely. Every so often, you pop up, and refresh the conversation.
      I’d have you as an “honourary” M.P., just to keep them all honest.
      How could one not help but contribute to see BLiP’s words in print, or up on Billboards – that’d really brass Key & co off !! Damn fine idea !

  16. Xtasy 16
    29 January 2014 at 2:58 pm

    The truth is that the mainly government friendly and even in many cases Key and government praising “mainstream media” staff (overseen by their editor bosses), are in too many cases partly incompetent, or lazy and simply NOT doing their jobs. Some apparently never read published releases of policy or press releases and other statements in detail.

    Others even twist and manipulate the truth, by using information selectively, by using certain, hand-picked data, and simply ignoring other relevant data. There are sadly some media “personalities” that are personally quite biased, and what they do has not much to do with traditional journalism. Uttering personal opinions has become common, when “reporting”, and this is unacceptable conduct for a good, professional and ethical journalist.

    So no wonder we get what we get, and as most are paid by their particular “paymasters” in corporate, privately owned and operated media outlets, they do not dare to bite the hand that feeds them, that also has certain “expectations” in “standards” to be followed.

    Who of them bothered to dissect and analyse the ‘SON’ speech by John Key, as that was full of untruths, half truths and twisted figures and other details. It was rather John Key “misleading” the public, than I suppose David Cunliffe.

    I sense an apparently increasing, almost “contagious” level of unacceptable “bias”, I am afraid.

    Hence we need the restoration of robust, balanced, more responsible public broadcasting media, and community based reporting and discussing of matters of relevance to New Zealanders. Social media can only do this so much.

  17. Blue 17
    29 January 2014 at 3:35 pm

    Why the hell would anyone even assume that people would get both paid parental leave AND Best Start at the same time? You’d have to be a moron to think any government would allow double-dipping in this way.

    My guess is that DC didn’t state it in his speech because it’s so fucking obvious it doesn’t really need stating unless you are mentally deficient in the first place.

    • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 17.1
      29 January 2014 at 3:52 pm

      Then Labour shouldn’t have been distributing material showing the baby bonus and parental leave happening simultaneously starting at birth, and Labour should have corrected the reporters when they reported what Cunliffe had said – Labour knowing that what Cunliffe had said was not literally true.

      • geoff 17.1.1
        29 January 2014 at 4:01 pm

        I spose what’s most hilarious about the whole thing is Key trying to make out Cunliffe as untrustworthy.
        Key! Mr porkies himself! I spose he has that memory problem though so it’s no wonder he can’t remember the hundreds of lies he’s told NZ.

        • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 17.1.1.1
          29 January 2014 at 4:08 pm

          +1 It is a breath-taking case of projection and hypocrisy.

          • emergency mike 17.1.1.1.1
            29 January 2014 at 6:07 pm

            “It is a breath-taking case of projection and hypocrisy.”

            As well as that, when you are an untrustworthy liar yourself, calling your opponent an untrustworthy liar is just common sense.

      • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 17.1.2
        29 January 2014 at 4:04 pm

        Weak SHG.

        ‘Wah wah, Labour shouldn’t have…bleat bleat’

        Who is to say Labour hasn’t corrected reporters reporting nonsense?
        What a pity that it has got to the point that a political party has to spend their precious time checking the accuracy of our media.
        When will our media take reporting accurately seriously?

    • Rodel 17.2
      29 January 2014 at 5:14 pm

      Blue
      Absolutely!..Blindingly obvious…but then English and Key would assume double dipping is normal ethics wouldn’t they?

    • Anne 17.3
      30 January 2014 at 10:12 am

      I’ve been confused about this claim Blue because I was at the SoN speech, and Cunliffe stated parents would not start receiving Best Start until the “paid parental leave” was completed. He said it more than once to make sure every-one was clear about it. If he didn’t say it then I’m going bonkers. 🙁

      The problem was a poorly phrased paragraph in the Fact Sheet. I saw it online and it would have been hard to fathom what it was supposed to mean. But the media knew what it meant because they were there – unless they weren’t listening to Cunliffe. This isn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened and I suggest the Labour Party put in place a robust proof-reading system before anything ends up in the public arena. Either that, or employ people who know how to properly word documents.

      Edit: I see Disraeli Gladstone (love the pseudonym) below has made similar points. He/she is right!

      • karol 17.3.1
        30 January 2014 at 10:23 am

        I’ve been confused about this claim Blue because I was at the SoN speech, and Cunliffe stated parents would not start receiving Best Start until the “paid parental leave” was completed. He said it more than once to make sure every-one was clear about it. If he didn’t say it then I’m going bonkers.

        I was there. I don’t remember that. And it isn’t in the printed version of Cunliffe’s speech.

        • Anne 17.3.1.1
          30 January 2014 at 10:38 am

          Well, I remember him mentioning the 26 weeks parental leave and the Best Start programme more or less one after the other, and putting two and two together – correctly as it has turned out to be. Maybe it was just luck… but that is what I came away believing he said. Perhaps it was common sense kicking in.

          Was the printed version a verbatim account of what Cunliffe said? He actually spoke without any notes that I could see.

  18. Disraeli Gladstone 18
    29 January 2014 at 3:51 pm

    Nope, sorry. Key is being an opportunist prick, yes. The media is beating up on Labour more than they would if this was a National mistake, yes.

    But it’s still a cock-up.

    It seems like there were two different fact sheets and the one given to the media (an earlier copy) had less facts. Why? How hard is it to make sure you have the proper fact sheet to give out and not give journalists who often tear you down a draft? A draft with holes in.

    Cunliffe was clear in his speech that it was $60 a week for the first year that your baby was born. Yes, I agree with the point that you shouldn’t delve into all the fine print of a policy within a speech. That would be stupid. You know what else is stupid? Not pointing out that the first year may in fact only be HALF of that year due to paid paternal leave.

    Ugh. It’s hard to believe but the sense of amateur hour within the top office at Labour has only increased since Shearer left.

    Someone get Malcolm Tucker in or something.

    • Lanthanide 18.1
      29 January 2014 at 5:17 pm

      +++

    • burt 18.2
      29 January 2014 at 5:58 pm

      Exactly, and it seems the cover-up for this stuff up is just about as feeble as the initial mistake.

      The problem is the so-called hidden information is actually right there on the first page of the factsheet Labour put up on line when policy was announced:

      I wonder why Zet specifically referred to the online fact sheet rather than the printed version given to reporters ?????

      [lprent: Don’t be a dickhead burt, a moments thought would have given you the answer. Because he isn’t a reporter? Like me he relies on what is visible from the net. ]

    • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 18.3
      29 January 2014 at 7:47 pm

      Ugh. It’s hard to believe but the sense of amateur hour within the top office at Labour has only increased since Shearer left.

      Staggering, isn’t it ?

    • greywarbler 18.4
      29 January 2014 at 9:33 pm

      Okay there was some confusion. But it was great to hear some positive new social policy.
      So next time David could give out the general info and hand out the details printed on fact sheets for the journalists so it’s incontrovertible evidence – there could even be an 0800 number to phone if they are unsure about anything. There would be less wiggle room then to weave little stories.

      David isn’t Superman, mixed with Gandalf. But he may get to where he bars Key with his magic staff and say “You shall not pass”. We could get a local doco maker to trace the battle through the year and capture the great moment on film at the end. That would be a finale! So let’s put on our hairy feet and get into training. And we won’t go into spins when there is something that ain’t perfect. We’ll be learning and moving on and upwards.

    • Anne 18.5
      30 January 2014 at 10:26 am

      I’m sure Cunliffe mentioned the Best Start programme kicking in after the 26 weeks parental leave Disraeli Gladstone.

  19. Rob 19
    29 January 2014 at 4:06 pm

    To put it plainly, both sides (Labour & the media) have learnt a lot from this and will no doubt approach the next big policy release quite differently.

    Any residual honeymoon that remained from the leadership change with general media has evaporated.

    • McFlock 19.1
      29 January 2014 at 4:26 pm

      thanks for your concern

      • Rob 19.1.1
        29 January 2014 at 4:40 pm

        No concern McFlock at all, just a dawning reality that not much has changed at all with all the changes.

        • McFlock 19.1.1.1
          29 January 2014 at 4:44 pm

          True that – no matter what policies labour comes up with, the media will always report it unfairly and other folk will always pretend that the slightest inconsistency or imprecision is a yawning chasm that will lose the Left the next election.

        • Anne 19.1.1.2
          30 January 2014 at 10:28 am

          …not much has changed at all with all the changes.

          Some truth in that – where the media is concerned.

    • Tracey 19.2
      30 January 2014 at 10:46 am

      Hi rob

      Which schools are getting the first super principals and when? WHAT is the criteria for getting one. Key didnt say and I cant find it in the media follow up. An important detail I think. Spending 359m and all

  20. Tracey 20
    29 January 2014 at 4:40 pm

    Patrick gower tweeted @publicaddress @@rsalmond Agreed. Still big impact policy, nothing to be ashamed of

  21. burt 21
    29 January 2014 at 5:51 pm

    Lets all get excited about how many different welfare entitlements are available and how they interact together for new parents. I know that reducing taxes for everyone and having benefits that are universal and simple will not enable Labour to stack the public service with newly created jobs. Jobs that take from the same people it gives back to in some form of merry-go-round that looks good to dim-bulb half thinkers.

    But for F-sake – how can anyone be stupid enough to support further complications of the benefit and tax system. It’s already a playground for anyone with a good accountant and a way of shuffling income between themselves, a company and/or a trust.

  22. tricledrown 22
    29 January 2014 at 6:07 pm

    Burt your 1/2 right how many families are going to miss out very few just make it universal ang inccrease tax to cover.
    This is policy to aleviate child poverty and not create a poverty
    trap.
    Research out of China has shown that a family with an income of $8,000 per child guaratees that child has a 90%+ rate of sucess as an adult .
    So low income is proven to be the major factor in child povertu.
    Just giving across the board tax cuts isn’t going to fix the problem.

  23. tricledrown 23
    29 January 2014 at 6:07 pm

    Burt your 1/2 right how many families are going to miss out very few just make it universal ang inccrease tax to cover.
    This is policy to aleviate child poverty and not create a poverty
    trap.
    Research out of China has shown that a family with an income of $8,000 per child guaratees that child has a 90%+ rate of sucess as an adult .
    So low income is proven to be the major factor in child povertu.
    Just giving across the board tax cuts isn’t going to fix the problem.

    • burt 23.1
      29 January 2014 at 6:10 pm

      tricledrown

      So if I was earning $45K and my QC partner $3m/year and she decided to take a year off with a baby ?

      We’ll get $60/week – because we are poor ?

      • mickysavage 23.1.1
        29 January 2014 at 6:13 pm

        Yep but what are the chances of you even applying if your finances are in that condition?

      • weka 23.1.2
        29 January 2014 at 7:01 pm

        “We’ll get $60/week – because we are poor ?”

        No, you will get $60/wk for half the time (assuming she takes PPL), because it is a universal benefit aimed at all families to support the best start for babies in those families. If you were poor, you would get the $60 a week for 3 years instead of one.

      • felix 23.1.3
        30 January 2014 at 12:04 am

        Who cares, burt? There’s no point designing policy around what a cunt like you might do to rort it.

        Just take the $60 if you need it. How fucking hard is that?

  24. mickysavage 24
    29 January 2014 at 6:36 pm

    How ironic …

    Gower accuses Cunliffe of dishonesty over a mistake. I just had a look at a video claiming to be about Cunliffe and the best start policy and the video is about interest rates increases. The video is at http://www.3news.co.nz/Cunliffe-admits-policy-speech-error/tabid/1607/articleID/330233/Default.aspx?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter but I am sure they will fix it up.

    So TV3 stuff ups happen. But no need to say it is evidence of dishonesty …

    • karol 24.1
      29 January 2014 at 6:44 pm

      Hah! Tweeted it to Gower. He needs to know when his team’s stuffing up, too….. as well as when he’s being down right diversionary and spinning against the left.

    • geoff 24.2
      29 January 2014 at 7:19 pm

      Classic!
      Seems like the TV3 political news team is packed full of National supporters. Campbell might be TV3’s only saving grace.

  25. fisiani 25
    29 January 2014 at 7:48 pm

    The Cunliffe has really jumped the shark. Anyone care to guess what digit will follow the 2 when the next poll comes out.

    • chris73 25.1
      29 January 2014 at 9:29 pm

      Now be fair its not Cunliffes fault that others report things and Cunliffe doesn’t correct them because hes a busy guy.

      I mean its obvious he helped with the formation of Fonterra, sure it was 8 hours worth of help two years before Fonterra was formed but anyone disagreeing with him is merely nit picking

      and yes there was that business with the CV but the reporters got it wrong and Cunliffe could have corrected it with a phone call but hes a busy guy

      So this is really just a case of (the evil) MSM getting the wrong end of the stick

      • Lanthanide 25.1.1
        29 January 2014 at 9:38 pm

        It’s a case of some narrow parts of the MSM making a mountain out of a molehill.

        Poor form for Labour to create the molehill in the first place, though.

        • chris73 25.1.1.1
          29 January 2014 at 9:42 pm

          The real problem is that this has been happening since Goff took over and still labour are managing to shoot themselves in the foot (and then blame everyone else)

          You’d think someone in labour would work it out eventually…

          • Lanthanide 25.1.1.1.1
            29 January 2014 at 9:51 pm

            It wasn’t great under Goff and was particularly bad under Shearer. Cunliffe so far has been a a lot better, but they need to be near-flawless, and they aren’t.

            As others have mooted on several occasions, National can get away with being sloppy because they’re the government and the media love them, especially Key. It’s not a fair situation, but Labour have to deal with it. The Greens generally do very well, for example.

            • chris73 25.1.1.1.1.1
              29 January 2014 at 10:03 pm

              I don’t agree with much of the greens but they do run a tighter ship then labour though interestingly enough i think if you combined the Greens and Nationals plans you’d probably have it spot on and you wouldn’t need Labours

              • Lanthanide …
                29 January 2014 at 10:17 pm

                Yeah, pity National has ruled the Greens out. And also that National are taking the country to hell in a handbasket, of course.

                • geoff …
                  29 January 2014 at 10:58 pm

                  +1 Lanthanide!

                  • Rob …
                    30 January 2014 at 10:20 am

                    From a comms point of view and clearer messaging, there was probably more value in presenting both the extended parental leave and then the $60 per week benefit as an integrated package. the simple message being is that assisatnce is complete throughout the year.

                    A subtle change I know, but a more correct, clearer and robust message .

                    • Lanthanide …
                      30 January 2014 at 10:54 am

                      I’ve thought about that too. Unfortunately it then leads to this sort of situation:

                      Q: “And if you don’t qualify for PPL because your aren’t employed?”
                      A: “Then you get $60/week from the beginning”.

                      Then suddenly it’s framed as Labour paying special money to beneficiaries.

                    • Rob …
                      30 January 2014 at 1:13 pm

                      Oh ok, given the range of pathways into the programmes (employed, not working etc) it is a little more complex to present.

                • chris73 …
                  30 January 2014 at 5:19 pm

                  Like the Greens would ever go with National, the Greens have made themselves Labours doormat

                  • fender …
                    30 January 2014 at 5:32 pm

                    Like the Greens would ever go with National, the Greens have integrity and are nothing like the Maori Party.

                    FIFY

      • QoT 25.1.2
        29 January 2014 at 10:14 pm

        God, if you’re back to repeating Hooton’s embarrassing little screwup on Fonterra things must be getting desperate.

        • chris73 25.1.2.1
          29 January 2014 at 10:18 pm

          Merely pointing out that Cunliffe has a habit of being economical with the truth with the added bonus of showing that Labour don’t seem to be able to learn from its own mistakes

          • Colonial Viper 25.1.2.1.1
            30 January 2014 at 12:07 am

            meh

            Although Key is still the ace liar I have to admit.

          • Tracey 25.1.2.1.2
            30 January 2014 at 10:40 am

            So does key but you say you trust him. This was a stupid mistake by labour. By that standard key is up to stupid mistake 150 and climbing Agree chris?

  26. fisiani 26
    29 January 2014 at 9:40 pm

    The Cunliffe visited the Pope and went out on the balcony. Everyone in St Peter’s Square was asking “Who is the old guy standing beside The Infallible Cunliffe.”

    • felix 26.1
      30 January 2014 at 12:07 am

      Can we have a whip-round to help Slater get his site back up?

    • Rob 26.2
      30 January 2014 at 1:10 pm

      Yes just like the title of the 2nd book “what I learn’t from Jesus…. and what he learnt from me”.

    • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 26.3
      30 January 2014 at 1:19 pm

      lolz
      Fisiani & Rob gain the most amusing right-wing sour grapes comments award – from blue leopard. Really quite funny!

      [Guess you a just sore because the person you support would only be mentioned as “an unidentified guest/author”……]

  27. Paul 27
    30 January 2014 at 7:08 am

    Posts like this challenging the corporate media’s lies and distortions are to be encouraged

  28. chris73 28
    30 January 2014 at 5:13 pm

    Note to Cunliffe – check your facts

    – There you go, no more problems for Labour 🙂

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.