Open mike 03/12/2012

83 comments on “Open mike 03/12/2012 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Jenny 1

   3 December 2012 at 6:20 am

   GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD MORNING, VIETNAM!!! Hey, this is not a test! This is rock-‘n’-roll! Time to rock it from the Delta to the DMZ!
2. kiwicommie 2

   3 December 2012 at 8:54 am

   Out of touch political elite raise their own salaries, while forcing the rest of us to suffer austerity measures and job cuts: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/employment/news/article.cfm?c_id=11&objectid=10850797
   • weka 2.1

     3 December 2012 at 9:09 am

      

     Mr Allen said his salary was set by the State Services Commission after a thorough performance review process.
     “And I’ve never done a job for the money.”
      

     Yeah, right.
     • kiwicommie 2.1.1

       3 December 2012 at 9:42 am

       Just putting together a few articles:

       Foreign Affairs:
       “The increase took Mr Allen’s salary to between $620,000 and $630,000 a year.”
       “”And I’ve never done a job for the money.”
       “He did not think it was a bad look to take the increase, saying the changes at Mfat were necessary and beneficial for New Zealand.”
       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/employment/news/article.cfm?c_id=11&objectid=10850797

       Meridian Energy:
       “Former Meridian Energy chief executive Tim Lusk was paid $1.37 million, including more than $800,000 in bonuses, during his last six months with the state-owned power company.

       Mr Lusk’s pay during a period when Meridian’s profits fell sharply was disclosed in its annual report, which also revealed the company’s generous pay to other top executives.”

       “But the year to June was not a good one for Meridian, New Zealand’s largest power company. Its net profit fell from $303.1 million to $74.6 million.”
       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wages-and-salaries/news/article.cfm?c_id=277&objectid=10844284

       Mighty River Power:

       “Mighty River chief executive Doug Heffernan – already one of the highest-paid bosses on the Government’s payroll – is to receive a $500,000 bonus after steering the company through its partial privatisation next year.”

       “Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said Dr Heffernan’s retention bonus was “incredible”.

       “Who’s going to pay for it? Electricity consumers. It’s yet another cost to the Government’s privatisation programme.”

       Dr Norman said the bonus came at a time when many New Zealanders were struggling.

       “We’ve already got a problem with massive inequality, and part of that is because of the overpaying of top-end wages.”
       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wages-and-salaries/news/article.cfm?c_id=277&objectid=10841749
       • vto 2.1.1.1

         3 December 2012 at 9:48 am

         “Dr Norman said the bonus came at a time when many New Zealanders were struggling.

         “We’ve already got a problem with massive inequality, and part of that is because of the overpaying of top-end wages.” ”

         In order to highlight these goings-on to the wider public the Greens should announce similar increases to the lowest paid. Announce that the minimum wage will rise by the same amount that the top paid people in NZ have received over the last ten years.
   • vto 2.2

     3 December 2012 at 9:09 am

     These are the times we live in kiwicommie.
     • kiwicommie 2.2.1

       3 December 2012 at 9:50 am

       Just counting down the days myself, am leaving New Zealand fairly soon; have the air tickets booked. If things are better after the 2014 election i.e. National is out, then I will likely return. I am going to stay with family, because there are no jobs or future for me here as a young person.
       • David H 2.2.1.1

         3 December 2012 at 7:00 pm

         I wish i could afford to leave this country with it’s Mickey Mouse Political system, and the grasping greedies in power. And it’s not going to get any better, with the stutterer, and the Fat controller, in charge of the Labour Party. No i reckon we are going to be stuck with Key and co for at least another 3 years. And that will be a disaster.
   • muzza 2.3

     3 December 2012 at 9:49 am

     Its called hush money in old language.

     Not out of touch, so much as so bent, there is no other possible outcomes

     “And I’ve never done a job for the money.

     Translation – I’m being dropped into the positions I have because in my past there are *things* being used agaisnt me, which is why I am sitting at the top of MfAT – My job is to make sure the changes are rammed through, my past ensures I will implement the instructions!
     • kiwicommie 2.3.1

       3 December 2012 at 9:54 am

       I have shown a few of these articles to my friends in the states, to them the level of corruption and waste is astounding; and they live in a country where there are big lobby groups.
       • muzza 2.3.1.1

         3 December 2012 at 11:27 am

         Yeah its reached staggeringly obvious, decades back.

         NZ – *Perceived* least corrupt country/100% Pure, and so on!
3. Derek Seymour 3

   3 December 2012 at 9:07 am

   Come join the revolution. Contributers required for free web-based paper on the Northshore.

   http://northshorefreepress.wordpress.com/
4. Draco T Bastard 4

   3 December 2012 at 9:12 am

   Worth a read:

   “The secrecy surrounding the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) has been given a resounding thumbs down in a Consumerlink poll conducted in mid-November”, according to Professor Jane Kelsey, a critic of the TPPA who commissioned the poll.

   Almost two out of three New Zealanders think the contents of the latest and biggest free trade agreement should be made public before the negotiations are completed and any deal is signed.
5. Lanthanide 5

   3 December 2012 at 9:27 am

   The simplistic, to the point of being spin, analysis by the MSM of the recent polls continues.

   They started trumpeting that Labour + Greens would beat National 48% to 44%, but there is no second thought given to NZ First, who slipped to just 4% in the polls. That’s sufficient for their vote to be entirely written off when considering seats, but is a rather unlikely electoral result, especially given their recent polling in Roy Morgan.

   If you put NZFirst in at 5% and allocate them seats, the entire situation shifts dramatically. But nary a mention of that by the MSM. I guess they figure the public has such short attention spans that they couldn’t understand a hypothetical outcome (and yet other times they happily provide them – go figure).
   • Pascal's bookie 5.1

     3 December 2012 at 9:50 am

     I have to say it’s pretty unfair to criticise the media for reporting on the polls as they actually exist, rather than adjusting for what they might think ought to have happened instead.

     Take a poll, report on the results of the poll.

     I wouldn’t be at all surprised if NZF has dropped below 5, and won’t be surprised if they stay there either.
     • weka 5.1.1

       3 December 2012 at 10:03 am

       They could report on the NZF drop and what its implications are.
       • Lanthanide 5.1.1.1

         3 December 2012 at 10:25 am

         Yes weka. Instead, nary anything was said about NZFirst. Nor the potential for the 4% threshold change to allow them back in.

         My other point is that they just take a poll and then act like if an election was held, that’s what the results would be. They don’t look at past polls except the most recent and compare to that one. They (TV1/TV3) don’t look at other polls published by other media outfits and comment on whether they agree or not. At the end they state the margin of error, but it’s pretty clear that even the senior political editors don’t *truly* understand what it means (read Nate Silver to get an idea).

         Simplistic analysis that borders on spin.
         • Pascal's bookie 5.1.1.1.1

           3 December 2012 at 10:38 am

           You’re kind of ignoring the constraints they are operating under. You’ve got a few minutes to report on a poll that you and a polling outfit have conducted. You ahve to pitch it at people who don’t understand stats, and get their news from 6 o’clock bulletins.

           “Nate Silver” isn’t a magic spell. There is a reason he did what he did in a specialist blog (not even the print edition) on the NYT website.
           • Lanthanide 5.1.1.1.1.1

             3 December 2012 at 12:22 pm

             1. Fairfax has no such time constraints on their articles: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8025925/Polls-have-Labour-closing-in-on-Nats

             The only substantive thing in that about NZ First is quotes from Key.

             2. Not really sure what you mean by “Nate Silver” not being a magic spell. I simply meant that as an illustration for why I don’t believe the senior political editors truly understand what the “margin of error” is, and yet they dutifully report it at the end of every story about polls. This is evidenced by the fact that if they get a poll that shows a big shift compared to the previous poll (as has happened a couple of times this year already), they don’t try and do any analysis on it or temper with it by references to the poll’s margin of error or about the method used to generate the poll as anyone who was interested in honestly reporting on the polls would (as Nate Silver does), instead they try and justify the move with sound-bite and vapid analysis of ‘recent political events’ even if there really isn’t much of interest that had happened.
             • Lanthanide …

               3 December 2012 at 12:44 pm

               See this analysis, which is much more informative than anything I’ve seen offered by MSM so far: http://www.pundit.co.nz/content/left-and-right-neck-and-neck-in-poll-of-polls

               Andrew Geddis nit-picks the 4% threshold prediction in the comments below and gets a sensible reply from the author.
6. Pascal's bookie 6

   3 December 2012 at 9:51 am

   Norman smack bang whallop:

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10851514
   • kiwicommie 6.1

     3 December 2012 at 9:58 am

     Nice. 🙂
   • gobsmacked 6.2

     3 December 2012 at 10:07 am

     Good on Russel.

     The Greens have given Labour/Shearer plenty of time and opportunity to distance themselves from Jones’ attacks. Nothing happened, so now they’re fully entitled to hit back.

     Shearer (or his puppeteers) seem to think they can go through two more years just treating Green votes as a free ticket to the Treasury benches. They’d better wake up.
     • BM 6.2.1

       3 December 2012 at 10:15 am

       I don’t see an issue with Shane Jones having a go at the Greens.
       Labour != Greens.
       • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.1

         3 December 2012 at 10:42 am

         You may not but Labour should do. From what I’ve seen on here the Labour members certainly understand.
       • felix 6.2.1.2

         3 December 2012 at 12:04 pm

         Who gives a fuck whether you see it, BM.

         You don’t support Labour OR the Greens. You don’t want EITHER to succeed.
         • BM 6.2.1.2.1

           3 December 2012 at 1:14 pm

           I’d prefer Labour to have the lions share of the left vote with the Greens making up the numbers.
           The less chance of the Greens moon bat economic policies seen the light of day, the better it is for NZ.

           Facts are, the Greens are considered extremist nut bars by a good proportion of the voting public, in my view it doesn’t help Labour if they’re seen as being too cosy with the Greens.
           Having Jones lob a few shells into the Greens camp helps to alleviate those concerns
           • Colonial Viper 6.2.1.2.1.1

             3 December 2012 at 1:32 pm

             Funny, I always thought the “extremist” nutbars were the ones who think that infinite economic growth on a finite planet is the way to go.

             And that letting the very wealthy hoard even more money and resources while others go without, is a good idea.
           • Fortran 6.2.1.2.1.2

             3 December 2012 at 1:35 pm

             BM

             Problem is that Russel Norman will make such Green policy demands of Labour that cannot be acceptable to them.
             Without acceeding to these demands Labour will not be able to govern.
             Not as pretty picture.
             • David H …

               3 December 2012 at 7:09 pm

               And what makes you think that Labour can govern with Shearer at any time??

               I reckon Porky Pig and Elmer Fudd, could govern better than Shearer or Key.
           • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.2.1.3

             3 December 2012 at 1:50 pm

             It’s National and Act that are the true nutjobs. Their economics are truly delusional and require that the country impoverish itself to allow a few people to have more money in the bank. Labour aren’t much better although they, at least, seem to finally be waking up to what the scientists are saying as far as the environment goes.
             • BM …

               3 December 2012 at 2:20 pm

               The Greens are going to bet the house on peak oil, that’s the problem.
               • Draco T Bastard …

                 3 December 2012 at 2:28 pm

                 So, planning for the downturn in available fossil fuels is bad?

                 Yeah, I’d say that proves that you RWNJs are completely divorced from reality.
                 • BM …

                   3 December 2012 at 2:40 pm

                   Most of the Greens economic ideas seem to be geared up around the peak oil.
                   One thing I have learnt is that nothing is set in stone, to bet everything on some future event is foolish in the extreme.
                   • PJ …

                     3 December 2012 at 3:08 pm

                     What, like returning to surplus by 2014-15?
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     3 December 2012 at 3:14 pm

                     A future event that happened 5 or 6 years ago. And, yes, I’m quite aware of fracking and unconventional oil. Suffice to say, I don’t think they’ll get the type of return that the pro-oilers expect and they will, of course, trash the environment even more. 4 degrees is catastrophe, 6 degrees is Hell. We’re on track for the former and the unconventional oils will put us on track for the latter.

                     Again, you show just how disconnected from reality you are.
                   • BM …

                     3 December 2012 at 4:07 pm

                     Not the actual peak oil event , the after effects of peak oil.

                     Having some guy running for parliament who is so certain that the world economy is going to collapse in the near future and believes that the best way forward for NZ is detaching us from the global economy and in the process destroying the NZ economy is criminal.

                     If Norman takes us down that path there will be hell to pay.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     3 December 2012 at 4:53 pm

                     Um, why would broadening the NZ economy, making it independent of oil supplies and protecting the environment (the part that the economy can’t do without) destroy the economy?
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     3 December 2012 at 5:25 pm

                     Most everything of ‘getting ready for the effects of peak oil’ is about using energy more efficiently.

                     If it never happens, you’re still better off.
                   • BM …

                     3 December 2012 at 6:38 pm

                     No we won’t, our dollar will be worth dirt, the only one doing well will be wheelbarrow manufacturers, every one else will be fucked.

                     I guess Norman can always escape back to Oz if his theory turns out to be shit, tough luck for any one else.
                   • Pascal's bookie …

                     3 December 2012 at 6:45 pm

                     You’re demented old chap. Have a lie down.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     3 December 2012 at 7:15 pm

                     No we won’t, our dollar will be worth dirt, the only one doing well will be wheelbarrow manufacturers, every one else will be fucked.

                     And thus push us to develop technologies and other stuff that develops society here rather than importing. We won’t be fucked but be in a new boom times according to standard economic theory. Of course, standard economic theory is BS anyway and is just a justification for capitalism and the undermining of society.
           • felix 6.2.1.2.1.4

             3 December 2012 at 5:58 pm

             “I’d prefer Labour to have the lions share of the left vote with the Greens making up the numbers.”

             BM, I addressed this already. You’re a right winger. Of course you want the more-right-wing party to have more say than the less-right-wing party.

             This site, on the other hand, is run for the benefit of the (small “l”) labour movement. It’s for people who want to promote left-wing ideas. It’s for people who’s interests are the opposite of your interests.

             So why should anyone here care what you think?
             • BM …

               3 December 2012 at 6:23 pm

               Is Labour not left wing?
               • McFlock …

                 3 December 2012 at 6:42 pm

                 🙄
               • Socialist Paddy …

                 3 December 2012 at 7:07 pm

                 Hey BM

                 If you want to reduce the say of the Greens in the Government after the next election party vote Labour.
                 • BM …

                   3 December 2012 at 7:13 pm

                   I’m starting to like the look of Shearer,the way he eviscerated Cunliffe was indeed pleasing, once he brings back Tamahere and shit cans all the liberals, I may be tempted to vote Labour.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     3 December 2012 at 7:16 pm

                     Once he does that, and it looks like he will, then the true name of Labour will be National.
                   • felix …

                     3 December 2012 at 7:53 pm

                     I’m starting to like the look of National. I like the way Key dealt with that fucking grasshopper.

                     As soon as he gets rid of all the right-wingers, corporate crooks, dirty fed farmers, authoritarians, populist lightweights, neoliberals, neocons, religious extremists, homophobes, racists, misogynists and enablers, I’ll totes think about giving them a tick.
                   • Socialist Paddy …

                     3 December 2012 at 7:58 pm

                     Aye especially if he commits to doing something about poverty and global warming.
       • Murray Olsen 6.2.1.3

         3 December 2012 at 4:57 pm

         Labour’s not National either, but Shane Jones might as well be.
     • Jim Nald - Once Was National 6.2.2

       3 December 2012 at 10:52 am

       +1. Indeed.

       I never thought I would see the day arrive so soon when I would be in broad agreement with Russel Norman’s comments.

       He has indeed been gracious in giving the Shearer-Robertson leadership time to respond. There should have been more than enough hours, days and weeks for them to receive internal polling and focus groups from left, right & centre.

       “Deafening silence” is generous and charitable. Comatose or persistent vegetative state would be more apt.
       • Red Rosa 6.2.2.1

         3 December 2012 at 1:53 pm

         +1
   • vto 6.3

     3 December 2012 at 10:11 am

     Good work Russel.

     What say thee Shane Jones? Or are your clear conflicts and compromised positions too great for someone like you to overcome? Perhaps Labour needs a bigger man instead of wee man Jones.
     • Tigger 6.3.1

       3 December 2012 at 10:34 am

       +1 Gob. I find Norman unbearable but even I’m behind him on this.
   • Draco T Bastard 6.4

     3 December 2012 at 10:40 am

     Quoting article:

     The mistreatment of crews working on foreign chartered vessels has been well documented; they are essentially slave labour. The National Government has taken far too long to start to address this and Mr Jones played a part in allowing this disgrace to happen in the first place.

     The Greens Strike Back

     Now, we need all the parties on the left to say what they’re going to do about this slavery.
7. historyman 7

   3 December 2012 at 10:33 am

   People who do not know history are destined to repeat it.

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyUagbsg-HI
8. millsy 8

   3 December 2012 at 11:15 am

   4 year term?

   Discuss.
   • Pascal's bookie 8.1

     3 December 2012 at 11:31 am

     I’m unconvinced it’s necessary.

     Pollies and technocrats whinge about ‘boohoo not enough time to do the things that really need to be done’ and all I hear is ‘whah whah no one agrees with me that these things actually do need to be done, and I can’t be arsed convincing them, or my convincing attempts have all failed’

     Pollies in NZ have a very easy time of it. No executive veto, no second house, a court system that is respectful of parliamentary sovereignty.

     The only thing holding them back from doing things is the threat of not being re-elected, the arg’s for a 4 year term mostly revolve around diluting that.
     • vto 8.1.1

       3 December 2012 at 11:55 am

       Yep p’s b and that equates to accreting more power to their offices. Such a move is in the completely wrong direction. The power needs to be heading back to the people, not away from the people. As such, I advocate for 2 year terms.
       • Lanthanide 8.1.1.1

         3 December 2012 at 12:15 pm

         You might want to read up on the US congress and how the 2 year terms pretty much deadlock their system and prevent any real work from being done, since they’re effectively permanently campaigning and fundraising.
         • Pascal's bookie 8.1.1.1.1

           3 December 2012 at 12:22 pm

           That’s not the electoral system’s fault. If it was, it would have always been thus.

           Senators have a six year term, and lo and behold, they have become more and more obstructive and partisan over the last couple of decades. Perhaps we should give them a ten year term?
           • Lanthanide 8.1.1.1.1.1

             3 December 2012 at 12:30 pm

             “Senators have a six year term, and lo and behold, they have become more and more obstructive and partisan over the last couple of decades. Perhaps we should give them a ten year term?”

             Or perhaps, 6 years is too long, 2 years is too short, and they should split the difference and make it 4? Much like the presidency already is?
             • Pascal's bookie …

               3 December 2012 at 12:53 pm

               I suspect the problem in the US is that the congress has largely given up its role as being a check on the presidency; the system has become parliamentary in reality with the President’s party doing what it can to support the Presidency, and the other party opposing.

               The constitution is basically 100 years or so out of date. If you look back, for most of its history the US parties have not been ideological, you had conservatives and reformers in both parties. Getting things done meant forming cross-party coalitions, rather then getting party based majorities.

               Starting in the late sixties, and accelerating after Reagan, the parties have become more homogenised and internally coherent, and thus, partisan in their dealings with the presidency.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 3 December 2012 at 2:19 pm

                 A scenario for the break up of the USA – John Michael Greer

                 These posts of his have been very instructive in this general area.

                 http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.co.nz/2012/10/how-it-could-happen-part-one-hubris.html
         • vto 8.1.1.1.2

           3 December 2012 at 12:22 pm

           There is very little of their supposed “real work” that I rate.

           Alternatively, longer terms on the sole proviso that referendums are held and followed on all main planks of change.

           The power must be driven back to the people, not towards the politicians and their paymasters. Why on earth would anyone want to give the politicians more power?

           Concentrated power leads directly to this, amongst much more…… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyUagbsg-HI …. lest we forget
           • Lanthanide 8.1.1.1.2.1

             3 December 2012 at 12:32 pm

             I would easily and willingly agree to a 4 year term if there were improved provisions for binding referenda.

             Failing that, 3 years vs 4 years term, I’m mostly undecided although slightly leaning toward 4 years. One big difference between us and the rest of the world (which largely has longer terms) is our unicameral system, so there’s that.
             • KJT …

               3 December 2012 at 3:14 pm

               50 000 people can trigger a binding referendum in Switzerland.

               Despite twice our population.

               Time we had democracy also.
9. muzza 9

   3 December 2012 at 12:09 pm

   So TVNZ screened the documentary about a *concerned jurer* from the Bain trial, and raised *questions* around the topic of compenation about 8/9 days ago, now we see This from Stuff

   HERE is some angles about the TVNZ *documentary* from LF.
10. Dave Kennedy (bsprout) 10

    3 December 2012 at 1:24 pm

    We need to work out robust ways of working together and managing a future coalition, and not giving free rein to bullying mavericks. http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2012/12/greens-want-more-disciplined-labour.html
11. aerobubble 11

    3 December 2012 at 2:10 pm

    Moral of the Hobbit fiasco. When the high dollar, and Movie company financial troubles set to destroy your movie, and you go to the tax payer to bail youself out, remember that your brand, in a time of global depression could be hurt by the anti-union-low-wages attack of the government of the day.
    Unless of course, here’s the moral, you lead characters have big hairy feet and pointed ears.
12. Draco T Bastard 12

    3 December 2012 at 2:30 pm

    The Tumeke NZ Blogger Alignment Awards 2012

    Without further ado, here are this years Tumeke NZ Blogger Alignment Awards 2012, with much referencing to Wiki for the Dungeons & Dragons alignment descriptions.
13. Draco T Bastard 13

    3 December 2012 at 3:01 pm

    Opinion divided on ‘100% Pure’

    As Gareth Morgan and Susan Guthrie the other day pointed out in another outstanding missive, farmers who rely on irrigation to support stock, who grow crops or vegetables, or practice dairy farming with industrial intensity… “reap private benefit from their activity but pay very little to cover the environmental damage they cause, some of it irreversible, the rest requiring clean-up which the general public has to pay for. The natural injustice in this is a no-brainer”.

    There’s really not much to say about it – you really can’t pick and choose your facts.
    • vto 13.1

      3 December 2012 at 3:18 pm

      It is in fact worse than that Draco…

      Not only do WE have to pay to clean up the shit from their business…

      WE also have to pay for them to create it in the first instance. For example, taxpayers are forking out $400million to help with irrigation projects. Another for example, Central Plains Water gets locans form old lady ratepayers in the Selwyn District to forward their private irrigation schemes.

      It is simply disgusting.

      How about some farmers out there step up and explain …………….
14. Draco T Bastard 14

    3 December 2012 at 5:23 pm

    And Tamihere proves that a leopard can’t change its spots.

    Ms O’Brien asked him this morning if he was sexist, a misogynist or a homophobe, and he took to the radio waves to voice his anger.

    “Tova, go jump in the lake you stupid little girl,” he said.

    Yep, just the same old bigoted git – and now a member of Labour and likely to become a candidate.
    • QoT 14.1

      3 December 2012 at 6:59 pm

      Don’t you especially love how he waited till she was gone and he was safely ensconced behind his microphone to insult her? That’s very brave.
      • Jim Nald - Once Was National 14.1.1

        3 December 2012 at 8:02 pm

        Who needs to bring Paul Henry back from across the ditch when Labour has opened its doors, taken in a talking disaster and given him party membership ?

        John Tamihere = Labour’s in-house Paul Henry.

        John Key and Natz are lovin’ it.
    • karol 14.2

      3 December 2012 at 7:03 pm

      Not if Nanaia has her way!
15. Draco T Bastard 15

    3 December 2012 at 6:25 pm

    Govt might overrule broadband pricing advice:

    John Key says the government will not rule out using legislation to overrule Commerce Commission recommendations for wholesale broadband pricing.

    Yep, the government seems to be more concerned with a private companies profit than the best interests of the country.

    And just think, if we hadn’t deregulated and sold off Telecom then we would a) be several billion dollars better off, b) have most of the country already on FttH c) not having these regulatory issues and d) not have a government more concerned with the interests of a private company over the interests of the country.
    • KJT 15.1

      4 December 2012 at 8:48 am

      Just shows who Key is really working for…
16. muzza 16

    3 December 2012 at 9:02 pm

    Christchurch GP earned $750,00 for compo assessment work but falsely claimed further $18,300 for expenses.

    Dr Wright, a 52-year old Christchurch GP who has been working as locum GP in Rangiora, was sentenced to 150 hours of community work on October 25 for receiving $18,300 from ACC that he was not entitled to.

    In the dual meaning of the initials G.C, this guy has the negative nicely covered off!
17. prism 17

    3 December 2012 at 9:18 pm

    Read Colonial vipers item at 8 and lots of 1’s at 2.19 pm on the USA direction.
    This reminded me of a future talker on 9toNoon this morning:

    09:40 Trends shaping the future of the world economy and what this will mean for NZ
    The executive editor of The Economist, Dr Daniel Franklin. He is in New Zealand as a guest of Massey University and is delivering the keynote address at the new New Zealand Forum, which will discuss New Zealand’s future. Daniel is also the editor of Megachange: The World in 2050, a book published this year about the mega-trends shaping the future of the globe.

    Don’t know what I think about him – have to listen again.
    • KJT 17.1

      4 December 2012 at 8:50 am

      David Cunliffe is attending. Hopefully he will tell us more about it on his facebook site

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS