NRT: Good riddance to John Banks

62 comments on “NRT: Good riddance to John Banks ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Tracey 1

   9 June 2014 at 12:59 pm

   Can someone explain how a party can refuse to “take” anothers vote? If it means proxy, does he mean key would have said ” no john. You must get another party to exercise you proxy, i would feel dirty if we took it.”
   • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1

     9 June 2014 at 1:05 pm

     “I thought about it for a while and concocted this meaningless drivel, in the hope that the people who believe my lies won’t experience much cognitive dissonance.”
     • Tracey 1.1.1

       9 June 2014 at 1:12 pm

       i lost my tea on that one OAB

       still chuckling
   • Matthew Hooton 1.2

     9 June 2014 at 1:42 pm

     No one can explain it because it is nonsense, except in the proxy sense. In which case John Banks could have decided to turn up in parliament and vote for government bills himself. Don’t know who in National advised the PM to come up with such an odd line.
     • Tracey 1.2.1

       9 June 2014 at 1:47 pm

       its very wierd. With a proxy, any party could cast a vote for anotger if they have the piece of paper/authority?
       • Matthew Hooton 1.2.1.1

         9 June 2014 at 1:49 pm

         Yes, but if you take a proxy you are obliged to act on the person’s instructions
         • Tracey 1.2.1.1.1

           9 June 2014 at 1:55 pm

           but you could refuse to take the proxy in the first place?
     • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.2

       9 June 2014 at 1:50 pm

       Probably the same person who advised him to say that everything was fine because no conviction had been entered. Or the same person who advised him not to read the police report. Or perhaps the same person who advised him that he couldn’t sack Judith Collins because Oravida owns his corrupt arse.
     • framu 1.2.3

       9 June 2014 at 3:35 pm

       much like

       “i dont comment on GCSB operational matters” – “theres totes heaps of dangerous muslims and were spying on them”

       really its just a sign of the intellectual shallowness and poor leadership of key (thats not to say hes dumb – just not interested or bothered to the point of not realising when hes making an ass of himself – if the topic was international currency trading he would wipe the floor)
     • Lanthanide 1.2.4

       9 June 2014 at 5:05 pm

       I guess in practice, National could refuse to vote Banks’ proxy, or if he showed up in person to vote could abstain one of their own votes? Would seem very odd in practice though.

       Talk first, think later, typical Key.
     • Ed 1.2.5

       10 June 2014 at 11:22 am

       Key covered this in an interview – National hold Banks’ proxy, and it is inconceivable that Banks would vote other than as instructed by National. If he actually turned up in the house, Banks would have to cast his own vote. Even Key seemed to realise that it was a lame explanation.
2. blue leopard 2

   9 June 2014 at 1:18 pm

   A very good reminder what a very slim majority the right-wing achieved in the last election.
   We will be given messages that it is a foregone conclusion that ‘National’ will win.
   Like we were last time around.

   What would have occurred had people not listened to such messages?
   • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1

     9 June 2014 at 1:50 pm

     More democracy.
     • blue leopard 2.1.1

       9 June 2014 at 1:59 pm

       😀 😀 😀
   • infused 2.2

     9 June 2014 at 2:12 pm

     So you are saying that these people are stupid then?
     • Tracey 2.2.1

       9 June 2014 at 2:48 pm

       national and ACT voters you mean?
       • blue leopard 2.2.1.1

         9 June 2014 at 2:54 pm

         lol I was thinking about a response along these lines too.
     • blue leopard 2.2.2

       9 June 2014 at 2:49 pm

       Are people stupid for being affected by tactics devised by fairly in-depth research into what is most likely to affect peoples’ attitudes and actions?

       Nope

       Would I like that people became consciously aware of these tactics and actively ensure they are not as vulnerable to their effects?

       Yes.
       • Tracey 2.2.2.1

         9 June 2014 at 2:58 pm

         agree. Advertising is an industry where billions is spent to dupe people.

         John key has never revealed how much he or anyone connected to national pays crosby textor…
         • framu 2.2.2.1.1

           9 June 2014 at 3:46 pm

           and CT arent cheap – if it didnt work they wouldnt spend the $$
         • Colonial Viper 2.2.2.1.2

           9 June 2014 at 6:07 pm

           agree. Advertising is an industry where billions is spent to dupe people.

           Nope – the exploitation of the psychological and perceptual biases involved is a fine art. “Dupe” is a term which not only does no justice to what the best PR and marketing firms do, it seriously risks underestimating the potency of these black arts.

           The tools of propaganda as founded on principles discovered by Sigmund Freud and his young relation Edward Bernays were effective in undermining and turning around a massive US anti-war movement pre-World War One and shifting public opinion into backing the US involvement in the war.

           At the same time, socialist and communist movements were very effectively denigrated to the extent that what was a VERY socialist thinking nation in the 1910’s became just 40 years later a nation which demonised socialists and communists as evil pariahs.

           And this is the scary part: the most well educated and most intellectual of people were the ones who were amongst the most easily taken in by the propaganda.

           Being very smart and being highly educated sometimes just makes you dumber.
           • Tracey 2.2.2.1.2.1

             9 June 2014 at 7:19 pm

             yup. duped. jaques ellul stated the literate are great at spreading propaganda and those who consider themselves intelligent are eager to disseminate anything they read pronto.
           • blue leopard 2.2.2.1.2.2

             9 June 2014 at 9:07 pm

             @ CV

             “And this is the scary part: the most well educated and most intellectual of people were the ones who were amongst the most easily taken in by the propaganda.”

             I question you on this one CV, I would posit the most well educated and most intellectual of the power elite went along with the propaganda because it allowed them to retain their places in society. This is quite different from being ‘taken in’. Although, I would guess over time, they started believing their own lies.

             I posit there would be a myriad of very intellectual and well educated people who didn’t get taken in by the propaganda, the thing is, they would no longer be in the public eye for long if they held such a stance, as occurred here in NZ – their arses will have been fired, and reputations ruined, so that only the obedient ones remained.

             I would need a link to show otherwise

             The rest of your comment I thoroughly agree with.
             • Colonial Viper …

               10 June 2014 at 1:41 am

               What you are arguing for as far as I can tell is that most of these smart and educated people weren’t taken in as such, instead they merely chose to go along with it for the sake of their careers and their standing in society.

               Like how a lot of intellectuals and opinion makers joined the Nazi Party and supported Hitler, because that meant you would get the promotions and the pay increases.

               I don’t really think this scenario is that much of an improvement, to tell you the truth, BL.

               Chris Hedges writes about it very well in his essay, The Careerists.
               • blue leopard …

                 10 June 2014 at 12:04 pm

                 I don’t think you are understanding what I am getting it – perhaps I didn’t explain clearly enough.

                 You make an assessment that ‘the most well educated and most intellectual of people were the ones who were amongst the most easily taken in by the propaganda.’

                 I am saying there are plenty of well-educated and intellectual types who don’t get taken in, however, they also don’t get positions of prominence due to this. Those ‘well educated and intellectual people’ that you base your assessment on are the ones most visible to you and they are most visible to you and prominent in society because they hold the views that they do.

                 I believe you are omitting the effect of power and money in the equation – it is those educated/intellectual people that are keen on status/power/money and therefore are prepared to be obedient to the dominant idea understanding doing so will get them places who become prominent and that leaves you believing that well educated and intellectual types are more vulnerable to being taken in – it is not their education or intellect – it is those educated and intellectual types who place a priority on status and financial reward that is causing the vulnerability – it is the value system of these individuals that is the pivotal factor here.

                 There is a reason that educated and intellectual types are usually the first on the hit list when a new regime is usurping power – for us, this process has been less visible -they haven’t been lined up and shot, or sent off in army trucks to prison camps – it has simply been made extremely difficult for them to gain prominence in any area where their views could challenge the dominant (and domineering) ideas that we speak of.

                 I believe this phenomena may be shifting due to the internet- where the dominant powers are no longer able to control what information people propagate, nor what they read…yet.
     • McFlock 2.2.3

       9 June 2014 at 2:58 pm

       apparently, many of them are more likely to have lower iq than left voters.
       • Colonial Viper 2.2.3.1

         9 June 2014 at 6:13 pm

         Then how come the Left keeps getting fucked over.
         • KJT 2.2.3.1.1

           9 June 2014 at 7:31 pm

           Most people have to rely on what they are told from TV and the MSM.

           Goebbels would have been proud.

           Or, As one Soviet official said, paraphrasing a bit, “we have to force our reporters to write propaganda, yours do it to them-selves”.
         • McFlock 2.2.3.1.2

           9 June 2014 at 7:45 pm

           because simple lies are easier to swallow than complex truths
           • blue leopard 2.2.3.1.2.1

             9 June 2014 at 9:08 pm

             +1 McFlock exactly
             • Colonial Viper …

               10 June 2014 at 9:54 am

               And knowing this, and having learnt from the example of the last many decades, what is the left to do next?
               • McFlock …

                 10 June 2014 at 12:36 pm

                 What the left has done over the past 200 years – keep saying the same thing until things get bad enough that the people swing the other way.

                 We tried cutting ethical corners to speed up victory once or twice – ended up with Stalin and Mao, and still the tories made ground on the backlash.

                 Whereas over the long term the left makes steady swings and roundabouts progress when it sticks to its principles and the practise of activism, research and advocacy. Not too many kids running under looms these days, even after thirty years of neolibs.
                 • Colonial Viper …

                   10 June 2014 at 10:29 pm

                   I don’t see any of those patterns you do in history. The Romanovs ruled brutally and the Kuomingtang were a corrupt oligarchy to their eyeballs. Your “research and advocacy” approach is suitable only for very specific circumstances.

                   The overthrow of totalitarian regimes requires song, dance, theatre and creative literature, not research.

                   With regards to “the last 200 years” it is fascinating that you have picked almost precisely the era of western civilisation fuelled by coal and oil. That’s coming to an end too.

                   Whereas over the long term the left makes steady swings and roundabouts progress when it sticks to its principles and the practise of activism, research and advocacy.

                   Well this is a pleasant fiction, albeit not wholly untrue. Historical reversals and set backs have been at least as major as any forward movement, and the myth of perpetual progressive advancement is just that: a myth.

                   We can see this by the cyclical and repeated destruction of knowledge and civilisation over the millennia bringing on the rise of dark ages.
                   • McFlock …

                     10 June 2014 at 10:41 pm

                     Great, the Marx-did-it-all-without-research bullshit again. He believed revolution would happen via interpretive dance.

                     Historical reversals and set backs have been at least as major as any forward movement, and the myth of perpetual progressive advancement is just that: a myth

                     What are our child labour laws compared to 150 years ago?
                     Holidays and wage laws? Workplace safety?

                     BTW, the “dark ages” weren’t that dark. And folks didn’t go back to bronze when the romans left.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     10 June 2014 at 10:51 pm

                     Great, the Marx-did-it-all-without-research bullshit again. He believed revolution would happen via interpretive dance.

                     Sorry mate but you have no idea. Marx gave an excellent critique of capitalism, but you may have noticed that he got the part about the revolution of the proletariat quite wrong.

                     And yes, revolutionary movements rely on song and dance, poetry and theatre. It’s one reason why the corporate state always crushes the imagination and creativity those disciplines bring to the people, defunds those departments in a university, and ensures an economy where studying those subjects becomes a dead end.

                     What are our child labour laws compared to 150 years ago?
                     Holidays and wage laws? Workplace safety?

                     Shrug

                     Whatever you say. But I’d ask you don’t narrow your perspective to wins made 50 or 100 or 200 years ago, and I’d ask you not forget small facts like there are more Blacks in chains now in the USA than 150 years ago.
                   • McFlock …

                     10 June 2014 at 10:55 pm

                     Careful with that shrugging attachment to US perspectives.
                     You’re beginning to look like Dunnokeyo.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     10 June 2014 at 10:58 pm

                     All I’m saying is not to buy into the myth of inevitable progressive advance, over any significant timeframe. It’s a myth.
                   • McFlock …

                     10 June 2014 at 11:10 pm

                     Never said it was inevitable.

                     My point for “what is the left to do next” is “what we’ve done in the past worked over the longer term”.

                     And those times when we’ve copied the simple lies of the right, the left has become as bad as the right. With bodycounts to match. So you can do your song and dance and theatre and writing, in the tradition of John A. Lee. But they are also only good for very specific circumstances.

                     Maybe it all requires a broader approach, with everything?

                     edit: except copying the lying. That’ll fuck us all.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     10 June 2014 at 11:14 pm

                     It’s actually really amusing that you’re saying “Stalin! Bad!” “Mao! Bad!” “Massacres! Bad!” just like the RWNJs used to do.

                     Regardless, the oppressed always seem to manage to find their expression and voice in various art forms. And it doesn’t particularly matter what the well educated well fed social liberals think of that.
                   • McFlock …

                     10 June 2014 at 11:26 pm

                     laugh away. Not that I ever mentioned those two – I was thinking more of the french revolution and the fact that lenin was also sinking boats full of prisoners before the man of steel was rocking out. Or even the recently-mentioned here Huey Long.

                     But it starts with some guy who thinks that he’s the smart dude who can take shortcuts and come back from it. Mostly because, though he might know how to google, he still doesn’t know half as much as he thinks he does.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     10 June 2014 at 11:32 pm

                     But it starts with some guy who thinks that he’s the smart dude who can take shortcuts and come back from it. Mostly because, though he might know how to google, he still doesn’t know half as much as he thinks he does.

                     Have it your way mate, you know best.
                   • McFlock …

                     10 June 2014 at 11:45 pm

                     pot meet kettle.
     • framu 2.2.4

       9 June 2014 at 3:45 pm

       i always liked a line from stupid white men – (ok – lets put aside our opinions of michael moore – hes not my fav either)

       he was talking about a man he met who didnt know anything about politics – but could remember years of detail regarding baseball.

       was that man stupid? – no, just uninformed on a particular subject and too busy paying the bills to make a start

       so put that little slur away –
       how do the vast majority of people get their political info? – from the MSM
       do the vast majority of people have the time, inclination or interest to go beyond even a headline and cross check/examine the details? – probably not
       do political parties spend vast amounts of time and resources on PR? – yes, if it didnt work they wouldnt do it

       the MSMs job re: politics is to inform us – not tell us who will win. If you think that doesnt have an effect please argue the case

       anecdotal case
       “who are you going to vote for?”
       “i dont know – im going to see whos ahead in the polls and vote for them”

       thats a true story
       • blue leopard 2.2.4.1

         9 June 2014 at 5:08 pm

         +100
       • Matthew Whitehead 2.2.4.2

         10 June 2014 at 8:57 pm

         Yep, very little of the country votes based on assessments, direct or indirect, of either how good party policy will be for them, or how good it will be for the country as a whole. Sad truth.
   • NZJester 2.3

     9 June 2014 at 2:54 pm

     What would have happened also without the famous John Bank cup of tea. John Banks helped prop this government up in power with a slim majority and they have gone to bat for him at every stage. It is strange that the initial case against him was not proceeded with claiming there was no real evidence, when it could have brought down the government early. Now that the election is almost here John Key is trying to make it look like he has some principals now that it no longer matters.
     • blue leopard 2.3.1

       9 June 2014 at 3:02 pm

       +1 It really is getting farcical
3. NZJester 3

   9 June 2014 at 2:41 pm

   I mean do any of you believe the line “Prime Minister John Key says National would have refused to accept some votes of Act MP John Banks had he not said he would quit Parliament.” in the article titled “PM’s snub for Banks’ vote” in the latest NZ Herald article posted at 8:53 AM Monday Jun 9, 2014. He even put in a qualifier of “some votes” as if accepting some would still be alright?
   It is typical National party spin with a headline that sounds like he has actually snubbed a vote when he has not. If Banks had decided not to quit Key would have got his spin doctors to come up with some good excuse to let him help them vote in the controversial Employment Relations Amendment Bill. He has had so many chances to really act on principal in the past and passed them all up. Now that there is no real need for him to actually act out of principal he is claiming he would have done so. The only phrase here that fits this situation is the one now used a lot by a beer company “Yeah Right!”
   • emergency mike 3.1

     9 June 2014 at 3:56 pm

     If we had a halfway decent democracy John Key would have been laughed out of office when he refused to read the police report on Banks.
4. Treetop 4

   9 June 2014 at 4:10 pm

   The IPCA has to now process the complaints they have received regarding the police not charging Banks. The public need to have FULL confidence in the police investigating any politician or public figure or witness/complaint who is involved with the case of the politician.

   If the IPCA do not thouroughly investigate they are just as bad as the incompetent cops in my eyes.

   I have three decades of incompetent cops under my belt when it comes to systemic failure in getting to the truth when a politician has over stepped the mark or a cop has used his position to mislead the police/public/government when it comes to the politician.

   Key referred my complaint to him to Power and Power told me to go to the IPCA.

   I have had to put my health first due to the complex nature and seriousness of my condition and it aint psychological either.

   The police either know or don’t know how to investigate a politician and if they don’t know they need to learn and if they do know they need to be answerable as to why they did not investigate.
   • framu 4.1

     9 June 2014 at 4:33 pm

     weve had a whole raft of dodgy police actions over the last few years – looking at this case in isolation isnt digging deep enough but thats what the IPCC will do
     • Treetop 4.1.1

       9 June 2014 at 5:19 pm

       The police commissioner Bush also needs to speak up, even though Marshall was commissioner at the time. Bush would have a problem because of what he said at Huttons funeral.

       Any high profile cases where the police have stone walled need to be exposed.

       I have given Pora a thought or two and I wonder how he is doing; he is not allowed to talk to the media.

       Incompetent high ranking cops who play politics, this stops them from being independent. That is why Banks was not charged.
5. KJT 5

   9 June 2014 at 5:18 pm

   If Banks had not been part of the group that has been de-constructing and asset stripping New Zealand, in favour of their election funders and providers of lucrative positions, after Parliament, for the last 3 decades, I could almost feel sorry for him.

   After all, selling favourable legislation to their rich funders, is something that all National/Act, and a proportion of the Labour caucus, do all the time.

   Banks is just the one who was stupid enough to get caught.

   Past time for transparent public funding of political parties, on the basis of membership numbers, BCIR, and recall petitions.

   Why! why! do we let this bunch of arrogant, power and money seeking, dickheads, pretend to “represent” us, when they believe they have the right to “rule” us..?
6. Once was Tim 6

   9 June 2014 at 6:26 pm

   In other NRT opinion http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2014/06/what-bills-has-banks-passed.html
   “What bills has Banks passed?” there are quite number – passed BECAUSE of a fraudster:

   Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Act 2012 (2012 No 58) – which includes the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 allowing offshore drilling, the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2012 which further gutted the ETS, and the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2012 allowing the Minister to impose local body dictatorships. If we allow time for the case to come to be tried (about seven months from the decision to stand trial), then he’s still on the hook for the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Amendment Act 2013 which further extended the Canterbury dictatorship, the Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Act 2013 which reintroduced youth rates, the Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 which banned anti-drilling protests, and of course the GCSB and TICS Acts.

   Any incoming, principled government (one where its honourable members are good, wholesome Christians with good wholesome Christian values’ – such as Archie) will of course repeal all such – within the first 100 days.
   I won’t hold my breathe but I bet the honourable members still wonder why Joe and Josephine Public are disillusioned with politicians and by politics.
   • john 6.1

     9 June 2014 at 8:11 pm

     If every bill that Banks voted for should be repealled, does that mean every close bill that Taito Phillip Field voted for should also be repealled? (he was jailed for six years on corruption).
     • Once was Tim 6.1.1

       9 June 2014 at 9:18 pm

       but john! Taito wasn’t a good, wholesome, Christian man with good, wholesome Christian values!
       If I had my way, I’d put ’em in the army – show ’em some discipline!
       But yea – how about we repeal those passed both Taito and Archie voted for, and send them the bill for the cost of Parliamentary time – that’d be a suitable sentence.
       • john 6.1.1.1

         9 June 2014 at 9:34 pm

         Yes he was – he even formed a Christian political party – after previously looking at teaming up with Destiny Church.

         So what’s the criteria for repealing bills? An MPs criminal conviction?

         I suppose you’d then have to rule our everything Sue Bradford voted for, and Hone Harawira, and Steven Joyce (careless driving), Rodney Hide, ACT’s Garret for identity theft, Donna Awatere Huata.

         Wow – ACT might have trouble getting representatives in parliament but they don’t have any problems getting representatives on this list – Banks, Hide, Garret Awatere Huata
   • Matthew Whitehead 6.2

     10 June 2014 at 9:24 pm

     While a conviction does and should bar you from Parliament, I don’t think that should really say anything about the legislation they’ve passed.

     The bills that relied on Banks’ vote should be repealed for the far more reasonable justification that they are terrible bills. 🙂
7. vto 7

   9 June 2014 at 7:38 pm

   John Key – what a total bullshitter.

   Tried telling a distant rellie and tru blue nat voter how much of a lying pig he was, but nup, didn’t want to hear it…… “I just think he doesn’t lie…”

   ffs.

   Whenever you hear anybody use the word “just” to support their opinion it means they have no bloody idea.
   I just think …..blah blah blah
   I just think …..

   means they don’t think at all
   remember it and identify it when you hear it.
   • blue leopard 7.1

     9 June 2014 at 9:18 pm

     I had some conversations on a similar subject, except the respondents to my ‘john key is a liar’ message was ‘well all politicians lie’ and when pushed a certain respect for the Machiavellian skill that Key’s lies in particular display started showing up.

     The person you were talking to saved themselves having to admit either the weakness of their position or their admiration for corrupt practices by answering you in the way that they did. I, however, was not so lucky, was pretty upsetting to realise someone delighted in such qualities and didn’t take into account what such qualities are doing to our Western world.

     My conclusions from such conversations:
     It appears that there is a disconnect between how important trustworthiness is in our system and how lies can lead to a breakdown of the system that the people one is talking to, very much value.
   • Matthew Whitehead 7.2

     10 June 2014 at 9:25 pm

     They are in deep denial. What you should really be asking them about is what it says about Key that he trusted Banks, and that he apparently still trusts Collins.
8. Bluey 8

   10 June 2014 at 10:40 pm

   Yes, good riddance Banksie.
   But when will the next cabbage boat float up the river, and dump its stinking load in central Auckland.
   Will the good people of Epsom poke at it, sniff it, taste it, and then against all reason, vote for it?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS