Open mike 10/03/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:56 am, March 10th, 2014 - 197 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

197 comments on “Open mike 10/03/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. phillip ure 1
    10 March 2014 at 7:19 am

    the (on hi-repeat) voyeurism and exploitation of the wife of the missing plane passenger..on tv one breakfast..

    ..is puke-inducing..

    (you just keep wringing out that tissue…eh..?..)

    ..they wouldn’t know ‘class’ if it came – and bit them on the arse..

    ..i flicked over to tv3..and everything was fine .. until that wilson chap opened his mouth..

    ..and i was outta there..

    ..for some reason..(and it’s only me..!..)..i just cannot watch/listen to michael wilson..

    ..and that tv3 made him a co-host blew my mind..

    ..he puts the ‘wood’ in wooden..

    ..and the ‘stilt’ in stilted..

    ..(just had to get that off my chest..)

    ..phillip ure..

  2. Ad 2
    10 March 2014 at 7:52 am

    Nice article from Salon on the slow decline of a progressive politics in the United States. If anyone can get the original Harpers article that would be helpful. Some analogues to Labour here, but only a few.

    http://www.salon.com/2014/03/09/we_are_all_right_wingers_now_how_fox_news_ineffective_liberals_corporate_dems_and_gop_money_captured_everything/

    New Zealand MMP this year looks like such a permanently refreshing politics, compared to many of the English-speaking democracies right now. A good number of quirky and fresh voices on the fringes, helping the centre look coherent and sensible.

  3. phillip ure 3
    10 March 2014 at 7:55 am

    the poorest…forced onto pre-paid electricity by the supplier..

    ..we are forced to pay up to 60% more for our power..than the rest of you…

    ..almost sadistic/beyond cruel..that one..

    ..and i think that most nz’ers are decent people..

    ..and would hope their horror/disgust at this gross-exploitation of the poorest..

    ..by these scumbag power companies..

    ..will bring/force change..

    ..(and of course..that champion of ‘the level playing-field’..key..

    ..he is quite ‘relaxed’ about this situation..blithely advising those in this particular poverty-trap..

    ..to ‘shop around’..)

    ..david shearer was on the box..(for a brief moment..)..talking about this..

    ..and he was in fine form..

    ..(shearer always performs best when slightly red/hot under the collar..his inherent uncertainties disappear..)

    ..and this is an issue that labour/shearer should seriously front-foot..

    ..in microcosm..if highlights everything that is so wrong..

    ..do most of you..(paying the ‘standard’ exploitive-prices for power..)

    ..do you really think it is fair and right…

    …that the poorest have to pay 60% more..?

    ..and unless something changes..

    ..i..and many many others..(250,000 of them children of the poor..)

    ..we are all steeling ourselves for another cold-winter…

    ..this is life in nz…in 2014..for so/too many..

    ..atter 30 yrs of these (uncaring/poor-bashing) neo-lib cnuts…

    (labour is banging on about ‘digital-rights’..(and good on them..

    ..but what about the ‘rights’ to the basics of life..

    ..like heat in winter…?

    ..shouldn’t we/they take care of that first..?

    ..and i hafta say..seeing cunnliffes’ interviews..

    ..i am somewhat dismayed that ‘the poor’ rated not a mention..

    ..in his stated priorities..

    ..i hope cunnlife is just not another fucken obama..eh..?..)

    phillip ure..

    • risildowgtn 3.1
      10 March 2014 at 8:05 am

      re the ..we are forced to pay up to 60% more for our power..than the rest of you… comment.

      Saw this on news last night,

      THERE s your opening Mr Cunliffe…

      • phillip ure 3.1.1
        10 March 2014 at 8:53 am

        and/but we will get the bastards..one way or the other..

        ..their days are numbered..

        http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/09/cheap-batteries-renewable-energy-market-big-power-companies-wind-solar-power

        “..The big power companies will struggle to keep up –

        as a solution emerges to the problem of storing wind and solar power..”

        ..bring it on..!

        ..and instead of buying back the power-companies..

        ..why not just regulate them into submission..?

        ..why buy into a sunset-industry..?

        ..why not instead ‘buy into’ the idea of giving new zealanders power-self-sufficiency..?

        ..that money would help bring about that seachange in improvement for many more new zealanders..

        ..than just buying back these (dinosaur) power-companies..

        ..and as noted..the problem with them..namely their gross-exploitations of their mini-monopolies..and us..

        ..that can be taken care of with the central-buyer plan from lab/grns..

        ..and further regulation..if needed..

        ..phillip ure..

        • bad12 3.1.1.1
          10 March 2014 at 9:12 am

          The big question tho, and one which remained un-addressed in your link, will the manufacturer of all these cheap batteries take them back and find a means of ‘re-powering’ them once their useful life has been reached,

          The alternative is that we pay the children of the sub-continent 2 cents a day to rip what will be a Tsunami of spent batteries apart in an effort to recover any metals of value, poisoning them all in the process…

          • Bearded Git 3.1.1.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 10:30 am

            Good point bad12-hopefully all batteries will be easily reclyclable-but great post Mr. Ure.

            Not sure this will help with the Genesis share sale!!!

  4. Sanctuary 4
    10 March 2014 at 7:56 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11216842

    Shane Jones keeps up the pressure.

    And shows up the rest of his caucus as being full of lazy deadwood.

  5. bad12 5
    10 March 2014 at 7:57 am

    Judith Collins just happened to drop in to Orivida a company Her husband is a director of for an unscheduled cuppa on the way to the airport,???,

    Not likely, a letter, released under the Official Information Act, from Orivida to Collins’s’ office shows that She was invited to make such a visit prior to taking the Official trip as Justice Minister to China,

    Such an invitation shows that the visit to Orivida was not simply an off the cuff unplanned one and in the light of this further calls will obviously be made for Slippery the Prime Minister to release the advice He says He has that this trip did not expose Collins to a conflict of interest,

    Collins, or Ministers answering questions in the House on Her behalf, have exposed themselves to charges of having mislead the House,(in other words lied to their fellow MP’s),

    If the Prime Minister continues to refuse to release the Cabinet Office advice He says He has in light of this exposure of Collins duplicity We can only conclude that such duplicity extends to the PM and that He either has no such advice from the Cabinet Office, or, He is refusing to release such advice as He is enjoying having the Opposition hold a political rivals feet to the fire as Her duplicity is exposed…

  6. Skinny 6
    10 March 2014 at 8:01 am

    I will watch Native Affairs with great interest tonight. It’s little wonder Countdown is charging $38 per kilo for snapper.

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11216842

  7. Skinny 7
    10 March 2014 at 8:18 am

    Does this Key-National Government not care about our environment? Obvious not going on this latest report.

    I could take you to a waterway in John Key’s electorate where stock are openly dumping into the stream. 

    Come on the Greens get out to Helensville with Paddy G lol.
    You need some runs on the board!

       http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/238350/water-quality-ranks-high-for-voters

    • bad12 7.1
      10 March 2014 at 8:57 am

      Yes, hopefully the Green Party election campaign, especially their television advertising, centers around the protection of our waterways for the 2014 election,

      The survey highlighted by RadioNZ National of 3000 voters showed that a third of them, 1000 people are deeply concerned with the ongoing degradation of our rivers, lakes, and, streams,

      The schizophrenic nature of this National Governments policy toward such pollution should alarm most thinking people where National have spent or plan to spend $500 million dollars on river and lake ‘clean-ups’ while also planning on intensifying such pollution with plans to spend a further $500 million on various irrigation schemes which without Legislation to require those using the land to have scientific water/fertilizer plans in place which promote using less water/fertilizer on any given farm paddock to achieve the same or greater production while producing no escape of such water/fertilizer to any off farm enviroment be that the water table or our rivers, lakes, and, streams, will simply lead in future years to a ‘pollution rush’ form the on-farm enviroment to the off-farm enviroment,

      It is becoming more than obvious that those involved in farming who are willing, without a Legislative requirement, to fence of all waterways from stock encroachment have done so and Legislation is now required to ensure even this most basic of enviromental protection is achieved across all farms,

      It is also becoming obvious that ALL leaching of water/fertilizer from the on-farm enviroment to either the water table or the off-farm rivers, streams, and,lakes has now reached an unacceptable level and ‘sinking lid’ Legislation need be introduced requiring those using the land to either take steps to gradually bring such leaching down to zero levels from current land use, or, a requirement that the use of such land be changed to one where zero leachate of any sort is recorded…

    • TE 7.2
      10 March 2014 at 9:13 am

      reply to Skinny
      Key & national do not care about the environment he said so in his “vote for me speeches” running up to the elections and has proven he means what he says since. He said he cared more about getting the heavy debt of NZ down . The guy is a capitalist to the bone so why would he care about our land our sea our water… money’s to tight to mention.

      • bad12 7.2.1
        10 March 2014 at 9:18 am

        Which further exposes the Schizophrenia inherent in the present National Government, ”get the heavy debt of NZ down”, meanwhile back in the jungle Slippery the PM runs up a 80 billion dollar gross Government debt…

      • Skinny 7.2.2
        10 March 2014 at 2:41 pm

        Yip we know this, however this latest survey shows it’s a major issue for voters. Meanwhile you would think the Green and or Labour would be putting out PR spin surrounding a policy that will make farmers pay to clean up waterways they pollute with a new tax. Why the fuck should taxpayers and ratepayers pay 500 million dollars of our hard earned to subsidise farmers. It is not like we get cheap subsidised milk, quite the opposite if you ask me.

  8. Roflcopter 8
    10 March 2014 at 9:02 am

    umm… it’s the 10th?

    • bad12 8.1
      10 March 2014 at 9:16 am

      Lolz, yeah i had to look on my phone to make sure i hadn’t indulged in a bout of time travel during the night…

    • fender 8.2
      10 March 2014 at 9:24 am

      Nah it’s ok, BM single-handedly spun the planet backwards so we can all have another sunday..

      • One Anonymous Bloke 8.2.1
        10 March 2014 at 9:31 am

        😆

        You’re all wrong. It’s Groundhog Day: exactly the same tr*lls running exactly the same lines from now until the election.

      • bad12 8.2.2
        10 March 2014 at 9:54 am

        Lolz, BM can have half a ‘brownie point’ for an unusual attempt, for a ‘wing-nut’, to use Fact over in the ‘Overreach’ Post,

        The not inconsequential ‘fact’ that BM was then caught out promoting ‘shit’ as fact makes the half a ‘brownie point’ awarded one of Bovine defecation, a large ‘pat’ on the head for BM,

        In consideration of the apology tendered by BM, i have to conclude that BM is capable, at least momentarily, of ceasing to suck the scum off of the bottom of the pond and on occasion surface to breath real air…

        • fender 8.2.2.1
          10 March 2014 at 10:04 am

          Yes BM needs a pillow, sleeping with his head on a ‘pat’ may be warm but there’s unintended consequences for the poor fellow when he awakes with a mouth full of shit..

          • bad12 8.2.2.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 10:09 am

            Possibly worse, having what appears to be a vacant space between His attached audio antennae and obviously sucking big time could result in BM becoming full of ‘it’,

            Too late???, has BM been exposed as a complete shit for brains…

  9. Skinny 9
    10 March 2014 at 9:08 am

    Go put some heat on Minister Clean Geen the dirty waterways between Kumeu- Taupaki.

  10. aerobubble 10
    10 March 2014 at 9:37 am

    Religious Conservatives splitting from the Conservative party,
    for its new position on sending their wives out to work.

    Colin Craig breaks down on The Nation, and says the Green
    party has integrity.

    What’s Craig doing, wobbling all the way to court? To what?
    Holding a stance contrary to his own base.

    Seriously though what damage has been done to Colin Craig by Normans
    comments, and why would the courts enjoy being used by Craig for
    political purposes?

  11. aerobubble 11
    10 March 2014 at 9:46 am

    Why Putin doesn’t want Crimea to leave Ukraine…
    …firstly it will weak Russia influence in the Ukraine parliament. Secondly, why would Putin want a province to be able to leave Russia, sorry Ukraine, the precedent would be shattering… …thirdly, Russia has done this before, remember halving Poland anyone and then dominating E.Europe, why would Russia unite every nation on its borders. Yeah, like China is looking North as some of Russia provinces. Oh, wait, didn’t the Germans invade the ?Sudaten? lands because its German speaking majority was in need of help.

    Sorry, Putin isn’t that stupid. More likely Putin doesn’t want Crimea to become Russia next province, but may more to do with Muslim Tartar living in Russia getting to move back to their ancestral lands (and also bolster Russian influence in the Ukrainian parliament). Hey, who knows, but its no so simple as it looks.

  12. Jim Nald 12
    10 March 2014 at 10:53 am

    Sensible policy from the Greens about anchoring MPs’ pay rises to the increase in the median income. It is a moderate approach although not as far as tying MPs’ pay rises to the increase in the minimum wage. Good on the Greens for walking the talk with inequality.

    After dealing with MPs’ pay increases, the next stop should be the really generous remuneration packages of the top dogs of SOEs, Crown Entities and Ministries. The argument about not paying them enough, despite the heaps of money already involved, to get people to do those jobs won’t wash.

    Time to rebalance the public sector’s values away from personal material gain and private sector excesses towards real public service.

    • Lanthanide 12.1
      10 March 2014 at 1:42 pm

      Tying MP pay rises to the minimum wage would be a bad thing, because the minimum wage is something the government has direct control over.

      Tying it to the median is much better, because the median can rise – and fall – in response to government policies and the wider economic picture, but the government can’t directly influence it.

  13. Pascal's bookie 13
    10 March 2014 at 11:21 am

    That theory that if both sides hate it, it must be good. This is obvious nonsense, and I suspect it will be proven so over next the coming while:

    http://www.politicheck.org.nz/

    • Colonial Viper 13.1
      10 March 2014 at 11:34 am

      Pete George as editor of a supposedly neutral non-partisan fact checking website LOL

      Where is the funding for this coming from again, especially in an election year?

      • Pete George 13.1.1
        10 March 2014 at 11:37 am

        Facts are facts. The process is sound and will be transparent with several people always involved. Anyone who is not afraid of the truth should at least give this a fair go and judge the results.

        • Pascal's bookie 13.1.1.1
          10 March 2014 at 11:42 am

          Hi Pete. You’ve been saying for ages, in various places that you were currently banned from the Standard, and yet here you are.

          Perhaps as a sign of good faith you could fact check one of your posts at yournz and show us how rigorous you can be. Someone here could nominate a post, and then you post your fact checking of it in comments here. deal?

          [lprent: His last ban was in August 2012 when I got tired on repeatably banning him for trying to tell us how to run our site. That ban was lifted in the amnesty in mid March 2013.. His absence from the site since then has been voluntary. ]

          • Pete George 13.1.1.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 12:12 pm

            Politicheck is focussing on fact checking MPs and parties claims.

            There’s little point in worrying about the blogging fray, it’s irrelevant jousting. And I don’t think anyone would have the resources to cover it all.

            • Pascal's bookie 13.1.1.1.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 12:19 pm

              Not what I was asking.

              You are the Editor with final say on what’s what. Your track record is relevant.

              Would you say that your blog is factually up to the standard you will be setting as Editor?

              • Pete George …
                10 March 2014 at 12:48 pm

                Nothing like it, and neither are most other blogs including this one. A general blog is a part of the political game. Quite different.

                There are processes being set up that will involve myself, the deputy editor and the research manager. We will all contribute to ensuring as much accuracy and impartiality as possible. And we will no doubt be well scrutinised. It will all be out in the open.

                • phillip ure …
                  10 March 2014 at 4:33 pm

                  bullshit pete george..

                  ..i stand by the integrity of every post i make..

                  ..all 90,000 + of them…

                  ..can you say that..?

                  ..with yr record of anti-left/green spin/lies/deliberate-distortions..

                  ..half of everything just plucked out of yr arse..

                  ..as i said..you checking anything..

                  ..is just a sick joke..

                  ..phillip ure..

        • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.2
          10 March 2014 at 11:56 am

          Facts are facts.

          Incorrect. There are lifeless facts and vital lies. Walter Lippman identified a century ago that in political terms there is no difference between fact and fiction; it is what you can get people to believe and become emotional about which is the thing which matters.

      • Pascal's bookie 13.1.2
        10 March 2014 at 11:38 am

        I don’t think there is much in the way of funding, seems to be a personal idealistic project from a keen young green. #trainwreckedalreadytho 🙁

      • Sanctuary 13.1.3
        10 March 2014 at 11:41 am

        An idiotic choice from a organisation that wishes to be perceived as neutral. No one on the left will take anything coming from politicheck seriously. A colossal and unbelievably stupid mistake.

        • Pascal's bookie 13.1.3.1
          10 March 2014 at 11:43 am

          Kyle Church is partisan left, but PG is just not very smart.

        • Pete George 13.1.3.2
          10 March 2014 at 11:46 am

          No one would have been perceived as neutral by some people. on the ititial Politicheck launch thread here Rory was criticised as potentially not a left enough Green.Based on jumped conclusions.

          I’m aware that some here would never accept anyone involved who is deemed not of the labour left but others will understand that if the processes are sound and transparent there’s no reason why it won’t be successful.

          It’s typical in politics for people to pre-judge. I’m aware we’ll have to prove ourselves. I intend to do that, along with the twenty plus people who have volunteered to make it work.

          • lprent 13.1.3.2.1
            10 March 2014 at 1:18 pm

            I’m aware that some here would never accept anyone involved who is deemed not of the labour left…

            Possibly. However I’m on the dry right wing of Labour (and always have been), and I share exactly the same skepticism about your appointment as Sanctuary does (as I mentioned in the email).

            I’ve never noticed much balance in your assessments of anything. When something is horribly wrong with a policy of the right, at best I’ve seen you try to excuse it as aberration and move hurriedly to something else. If something is even a minor problem on the left, then you bang on about it for months.

            Your obsessive qualities are rather well known. For me it has to be epitomised that this site and my handle rank so highly in your sites tag cloud. Almost seems to drown out the major political parties. Certainly TS appears to drown out your “balanced” excusing on National… But we are at least behind your obsessive attacks on Labour.

            Quite simply your appointment makes me think that this is just another one of the PR shill organisations set up by the right to provide white noise and PR cover to stupid media. The “taxpayers union” being a prime example.

            You read this site so often and still haven’t figured out that the spectrum of authors and commenters covers the whole of the labour/greens/mana spectrum from dry business orientated people like myself to bill? I guess from your perspective on the right they all blur into the label “labour left”. My guess is that we’ll see that bias reflected in your new “unbiased” editorial role.

            As I mentioned in the email. I have a certain amount of cynicism about “unbiased” sites. I suspect this one is just another figleaf for the right regardless who else is on it.

            • Pete George 13.1.3.2.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 1:28 pm

              Quite simply your appointment makes me think that this is just another one of the PR shill organisations set up by the right to provide white noise and PR cover to stupid media. The “taxpayers union” being a prime example.

              While I can’t do much about the levels of paranoia currently apparent on the left I intend to prove you wrong.

              • Lanthanide …
                10 March 2014 at 1:47 pm

                Good, please do.

                While I think your appointment is probably a mistake, I really do want to see you prove me (and the others above) wrong.

                • McFlock …
                  10 March 2014 at 2:08 pm

                  The proof, as they say, will be in the pudding.

                  The systems they put in place might be enough to keep the best of PG’s characteristics while moderating the worst, or being forced to work with others might well get him to pull his socks up, or he works for a while and eventually they go their separate ways. Or the new site goes downhill and stays there before dying a slow death in obscurity.

                  I don’t know any of the others who are involved, and PG’s involvement does make me skeptical, but we’ll see.

              • freedom …
                10 March 2014 at 2:01 pm

                Interesting you would right someone off over perceived bias before anything has been published [name witheld]. To try and claim that Pete is at all like Cameron Slater is the most hilarious claim. I knew Pete would be an interesting pick, I knew the risks in picking him. I have read through his supposed attacks on the left which all are cited and then a horde of left wing trolls rush in to try and discredit him with inflammatory remarks – as you have just proved. If you could take off your rose tinted glasses you would see the information Pete posts is referenced, and the attacks he makes backed up by facts. Not sure why he’s a “National” poster boy as he regularly shows ways they are failing.

                from Politicheck’s FB page

                This does not bode well at all

                Rory is losing any shred of credibility writing dross like this Pete
                (I thought this bit was worth a second quote)
                “I have read through his supposed attacks on the left which all are cited and then a horde of left wing trolls rush in to try and discredit him with inflammatory remarks “

                • McFlock …
                  10 March 2014 at 2:33 pm

                  lol
                  On the FB page they’re having issues with “my argument’s so powerful it’s not necessary to talk about it” Rick Giles, an actoid as nutty as Banks.

            • Sanctuary 13.1.3.2.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 1:49 pm

              I Don’t think Rory McCarthy intends to set up a right wing shill site, but that is what he is going to get because the entire left will now pretty much lose interest in dealing with him.

              Rory has shown incredible naivity in his appointment of Pete George. He has fallen into the middle class trap of seeing partisan party politics as somethings vulgar that is beneath him and the partisan activists who inhabit that space as not worth his consideration.

              It betrays a very orthodox middle class value bias where “reasonable” middle class people like Pete George are capable of parking their politics, whereas the left are not.

              Rory wants to play referee, but only if the game is at a vicar’s tea party in a nice suburb. How else can you explain the otherwise inexplicable appointment of Pete George than as a monumental two finger salute to the entire left wing activist base born from a disregard of what makes activists tick?

              At the end of the day what gets party activists to work for free on phone banks or door knocking or passing resolutions in draughty halls on rainy nights is a combination of tribalism, political xenophobia and true belief in the cause. Appointing a tribal enemy like Pete George then expecting everyone on one side of the political spectrum who do all the thankless spade work to just accept it is so obnoxiously thoughtless that it defies belief.

              So sad. A good idea, botched in execution.

              • Pete George …
                10 March 2014 at 2:12 pm

                <

                blockquote> but that is what he is going to get because the entire left will now pretty much lose interest in dealing with him.

                <

                blockquote>
                Thanks Sanctuary, you’re proving that Rory is on the right (correct!) track. The “entire left” is not as closed minded as you are.

                At the end of the day what gets party activists to work for free on phone banks or door knocking or passing resolutions in draughty halls on rainy nights is a combination of tribalism, political xenophobia and true belief in the cause. Appointing a tribal enemy like Pete George then expecting everyone on one side of the political spectrum who do all the thankless spade work to just accept it is so obnoxiously thoughtless that it defies belief.

                That’s quite funny. I suspect Sanc wouldn’t be happy with anyone who didn’t fit his tribal ideals – that pretty much narrows it down to himself.

                You’d almost think a few here are not keen on seeing things examined for their truthfulness.

                • Sanctuary …
                  10 March 2014 at 2:19 pm

                  “…You’d almost think a few here are not keen on seeing things examined for their truthfulness…”

                  Your off to a roaring start champ.

                  • phillip ure …
                    10 March 2014 at 4:40 pm

                    @ sanctuary..heh..!

                    ..’champ’..

                    ..that was a classic pg-bullshit-whinge..

                    ..wasn’t it..?

                    ..and that quote from rightwing-rory…

                    ..couldn’t make where he is coming from any clearer..

                    ..phillip ure..

                • lprent …
                  10 March 2014 at 2:45 pm

                  Yep. There goes PG back into a defensive victim mode…. It happens every time he gets challenged on his biases.

                  • Pete George …
                    10 March 2014 at 4:53 pm

                    What are my biases, in your view?

                    • Bill …
                      10 March 2014 at 5:04 pm

                      Pete. I lied. This is my second comment (and soooo soon after the first that i claimed would be my only too!)

                      Anyway. Read my comment below. In my opinion – based on reading far too many of your argumentative engagements – you don’t have the necessary attributes for this position you now hold.

                    • phillip ure …
                      10 March 2014 at 5:31 pm

                      it’s always about ‘you’..

                      ..isn’t it..?

                      ..factcheck for you..

                      ..i don’t think anyone really fucken ‘cares’ enough to even think about that..

                      ..you have a certain dull/low intelligence…

                      ..and definitely think you are ‘more’ than you actually are..

                      ..eh..?

                      ..oh..!..b.t.w…the person currently in charge of getting back that $5billion ripped off by his mates/the right..

                      ..is yr mate..dunne..

                      ..hasn’t he done/isn’t he doing such a ‘good job’..eh..?

                      phillip ure..

                    • Pete George …
                      10 March 2014 at 5:37 pm

                      Bill

                      Jousting on a blog amongst a fair amount of unfriendly fire is quite a different situation to objectively assessing evidence for and against claims of fact. I’m, not sure how you can make judgement based on comment threads here.

                    • lprent …
                      10 March 2014 at 7:31 pm

                      Given any position that involves material you don’t know, you will fall back on your immediate instinct about it and avoid or ignore any information that threatens it.

                      When I have observed you here, I haven’t seen you ever shift your position in view of what anyone says or the material that they link to. Offhand I can’t remember you ever discussing anything that was in a link passed to you apart from newspaper reports.

                      I have only seen you change your position when someone you consider is an “authority” writes about it. Since that includes David Farrar, newspaper columnists and TV news people who are usually experts at bugger all – it’d be fair to say that I think you have a pretty piss-poor personal research ethic.

                      One of the problems you’ll have in your new role is that you appear to view research in the grand Trantorian late empire tradition. That is a Azimov foundation reference. Since Asimov was a biochem researcher as well as a writer, he neatly encapsulated the issue. Rather than digging down into the raw material and stats and trying to disprove your favoured theory the way that actual researchers do, you will read the “authorities” and weigh how you feel about them.

                      That is the path to shite judgements because you will judge on if you resonate and understand something easily rather than going down until you’re damn well sure it is probably correct. It is shallow style talkback research rather than factual research.

              • Bill …
                10 March 2014 at 5:00 pm

                Only comment I’ll make on this. (I think). But any editor or fact checker should have had as a principle strength, the ability to think and read critically and accurately.

                With that ‘in the bag’, any political leanings become increasingly irrelevant. That Rory (or who-ever) promote a pastiche of neutrality as the be all and end all of fact checking etc is….well, fck it – they’ve fcked it.

    • veutoviper 13.2
      10 March 2014 at 11:44 am

      Well —– I am gobsmacked.

      Doesn’t Rory McCarthy know his new editor’s reputation in the blogasphere?

      There goes an excellent idea down the gurgler. I am pleased I had not got around to volunteering.

      The irony is that I suspect that there will overwhelming unity across the right, left and other blogsites on PG’s appointment!

      EDIT – one possible exception to the last comment above. Bryce Edwards…..

      • Rory McCarthy 13.2.1
        10 March 2014 at 1:57 pm

        A lot of conjecture today.

        Did I not know ? Actually I knew perfectly well what his reputation was on the blog websites. I spent time reading and looking into statements he made. I liaised with countless external contacts to make sure I was making the right choice. I believe I have. I have a great Deputy Editor who cares for the truth implicitly. I have a large number of left wing researchers who have expressed interest.

        Our processes are bigger than one person, our transparency greater than traditional media. For Pete to alter any judgement made by other researchers (as he is but the final step in the process of approval) he must have significant reasons that can be cited for making a revision through a mediation process.

        There are contracts signed, I haven’t just hired people on a whim and there are performance clauses and trial periods associated with staff. Any move toward either left or right with the website will be met with people looking for somewhere else to volunteer and push their agenda.

        There will be comments sections for people to post on our judgements, with clear guidelines about citing counter claims made by the public.

        So before you decide to right us off; consider that at the moment, we have a Green running the show for me (another Green), left and right wing researchers, an environmentalist research coordinator and a libertarian Deputy Editor. The political spectrum is well covered.

        The organisation is the sum of its parts, not any individual within it.

        As for Pete, I ask you only take him on the merits of what is submitted to the website, not conjecture based on his past.

        Thanks,

        Rory McCarthy
        Founder of Politicheck.org.nz
        email: rory@politicheck.org.nz

        • freedom 13.2.1.1
          10 March 2014 at 2:14 pm

          You declare your site to be a not-for -profit organization.

          You have “hired” people.

          How are you financed?

          I cannot find anything on your site about the finances of Politicheck.

          and no women applied for any positions?
          or did they all fail to wow you with their qualifications and reputations when compared to such a paragon of sincerity like Pete George?

          • Rory McCarthy 13.2.1.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 2:22 pm

            I have contracts, they are hired on a volunteer basis. So far all the funding for the website has come out of my pocket. If you want me to post our financials I will – I will give you access to my personal bank statements.

            Women did apply, however when I contacted them about pursuing a position that would require upwards of twenty hours a week most could not commit that much time for a volunteer organisation. That’s the simple truth. There are female researchers who will be working with us, they have been contacted already as we are in the final stages of recruiting our research team.If people are really that worried I will happily post all my communication (I have nothing to hide). Off the top of my head (I would need to go and look back through emails to confirm) under five females actually applied to volunteer. That’s the statistics and the fact of the matter. There were also some who contacted us were far too late in the process for us to consider other candidates without moving the venture forward, as it is time critical.

            I don’t consider Pete a paragon of sincerity, and I don’t consider myself to be one either.

            Thanks,

            Rory McCarthy
            Founder of Politicheck.org.nz
            email: rory@politicheck.org.nz

            • freedom 13.2.1.1.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 2:37 pm

              thank you for your honesty Rory.

              sine cera, appointing Pete George and wanting to be seen as an unbiased resource is somewhat mutually exclusive. If I were you i would worry about the motives of whoever you went to for advice on appointing him.

            • phillip ure 13.2.1.1.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 4:47 pm

              was farrar/williams/edwards-the-younger..any of them..

              ..involved in any way..at any stage..

              ..in the setting up/ongoing of this..((as advisers..?..)

              ..and could you tell us where you stand on the idea of the greens going into a coalition with national..

              ..is this a door..you as an individual..would rather be left open..?

              ..and yeah..echoing the request above..

              ..i think we would all like to know just who advised you that pg was ‘the man’..

              ..was it any/all of the above..?

              ..phillip ure..

          • Pete George 13.2.1.1.2
            10 March 2014 at 2:30 pm

            The ‘hiring” has been done properly with contracts, but all positions are voluntary. A lot of time is being contributed to make this work.

        • lprent 13.2.1.2
          10 March 2014 at 2:27 pm

          Quite simply I’ll believe it when I see it. Personally I’ve never known Pete George to be particularly concerned about facts except when it suited him. In the last three or so years that he has been around the blogs, he makes a great show of being “balanced”. But whenever he is challenged at a factual level he starts playing victim rather than reexamining his presumptions.

          There are contracts signed, I haven’t just hired people on a whim and there are performance clauses and trial periods associated with staff. Any move toward either left or right with the website will be met with people looking for somewhere else to volunteer and push their agenda.

          Appointing PG makes me immediately suspect the organisation is just another right wing shill like the Taxpayers union and other previous ones.

          They also started with “contracts” and undisclosed sources of finance and rather dubious appointments. Makes me want to have a very close look at exactly how and from where this site is funded (something that isn’t mentioned on the site anywhere). Quite simply before I give this site any credibility, I’d want to have the word about who and what this organisation is from someone that I know and trust. What I don’t see at present is anyone who I know is from the labour movement.

          Merely asserting you’re a green means virtually nothing in the context of the political spectrums. I know personally some deeply conservative greens.

          • Rory McCarthy 13.2.1.2.1
            10 March 2014 at 2:48 pm

            Disclaimer: Please note these are my personal views and not the views of Politicheck.org.nz

            I am not conservative by any means – if you want to see some of my views they were recently posted in an article edited by stuff to read “Stop being selfish, NZ”.

            The article is available here: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/assignments/share-your-news-and-views/9788458/Stop-being-selfish-NZ

            If you wish to hear more of my views you can email me directly, but I don’t believe a public discussion would achieve much in the realm of helping Politicheck achieve it’s goal if people can begin to label us. (Especially when I am addressing issues raised about Politicheck being impartial.)

            I hope you understand.

            • RedLogix 13.2.1.2.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 3:01 pm

              Rory.

              I appreciate your response. It’s fair enough as far as it goes, and personally I’m willing to give PG a chance to show if he can live up to the impartiality standards you have hopes for.

              Fundamentally the project is good idea and I commend you for giving it your time and energy.

              At the same time you have to be aware that PG was finally booted off this site (after tolerating several years of his tendentious rambles) for his constant passive-aggressive behaviour, making extreme right-wing claims and then pretending he was ‘middle of the road’ and ‘boo hoo why is everyone picking on me’ victim behaviour.

              And then spending the next few years in the wilderness of his own blog obsessively demonstrating that he did not understand why he was banned. In particular he never seemed to understand that The Standard is a left-wing blog. That it is owned and operated by left-wing people, to serve left-wing purposes. His constant complaints that we did not operate the blog to suit his right-wing thinking were just plain bonkers.

              Having said that – people can change. Even PG. If he lives up to the role then good on him.

            • lprent 13.2.1.2.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 3:01 pm

              I don’t believe a public discussion would achieve much…

              That was more of a hint for people who know me and who know of the people involved at politicheck to email me. With the limited degrees of separation in NZ and the amount of time I’ve been involved in politics and the net here, I’d be surprised if I don’t get contacted with some personal assessments.

        • Te Reo Putake 13.2.1.3
          10 March 2014 at 2:40 pm

          So, Rory, your editor is dully, mindnumbingly conservative and your deputy editor is even further out there on the Galtian right. Where is this balance you speak of?

        • McFlock 13.2.1.4
          10 March 2014 at 2:44 pm

          by the way, it might have been mentioned before, but here’s a start for you

          • marty mars 13.2.1.4.1
            10 March 2014 at 9:22 pm

            Good one McFlock – I went to the list and just had a look at one – this is typical of key – he fucken lies about everything – everyfuckenthing – what a joke.

            “Prime Minister John Key has dropped another clanger – this time misreading history around New Zealand’s biggest aviation tragedy.

            While in Antarctica, Key spoke of how he was affected by news of the Air New Zealand flight which crashed into the side of Mt Erebus.

            Flight TE901 was destroyed on impact, killing all 257 passengers and crew.

            “I know I was starting School C at around that time – it’s a memory that’s lasted with me till now,” Key said this week.

            John Key was born on August 9, 1961, and the Erebus disaster was on November 28, 1979 – meaning he would have been 18 at the time. Students usually sat School Certificate examinations about the age of 15.”

            It’s a memory that’s lasted with me till now – scumsucking wanker

            • McFlock 13.2.1.4.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 9:44 pm

              and yet he doesn’t remember what he thought about the tour in ’81

            • RedLogix 13.2.1.4.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 9:59 pm

              It’s typical of a lot of people to be a bit woolly with their timelines going back years – but Key’s got a track record of making definitive statements like this which on a little investigation prove to be complete bs.

              The big open one is still his account in his CV around exactly when he started with Bankers Trust in the 1980’s and exactly what his working relationship with Kruger was. Kruger is on record (in a completely different context) as leaving BT, six months before Key claimed he started.

              It’s just not possible, yet no-one has ever explained it. Nor thought it worth digging into.

              • marty mars …
                10 March 2014 at 10:23 pm

                The thing is that noone forced him to say, “It’s a memory that’s lasted with me till now” and it wasn’t needed – he chose to lie, to try and ingratiate himself on their side of the fence – it’s basic bankster/trader mo – and he has continued with Pike River, with Christchurch – he needs the people there to think of him as one of them – and the interesting thing to me is why does he need that and how can that be used to drop him. He is a smiling snake so you can’t take his legs out but he will slither into a hole (of lies and made up bullshit) and deeper he will slide until no traction is left and he is gone. labour (why I bother I don’t know) need to get some holes ready for him to slide into or start pointing out the ones he’s already gone down – he’s vulnerable because he needs to be liked and he needs to lie to be liked. Factcheck that mid-ill-pete.

        • Draco T Bastard 13.2.1.5
          10 March 2014 at 3:07 pm

          Any move toward either left or right with the website will be met with people looking for somewhere else to volunteer and push their agenda.

          There’s a problem with that idea – facts tend to have a left-wing bias so under this policy they either won’t get published or when they get published the site will be declared left-wing.

          As for Pete, I ask you only take him on the merits of what is submitted to the website, not conjecture based on his past.

          People judge. That’s inevitable as people need to so as to make informed decisions and the way they judge is on their knowledge of the persons past actions. Pete’s past isn’t all that great. I can remember threads going round and round in circles as PG kept changing what he was saying and then claiming that others had read him wrong. PG has a bad reputation because he damn well deserves one.

          as for this:

          I have read through his supposed attacks on the left which all are cited and then a horde of left wing trolls rush in to try and discredit him with inflammatory remarks

          Did you actually bother to read the references? I ask because more often than not PG was twisting what was said so as to make it conform to his story. Here he confuses people critiquing what was said with someone attacking an author. There’s a difference that he just doesn’t comprehend.

  14. Sanctuary 14
    10 March 2014 at 11:39 am

    “…Well, what a huge, crushing disappointment.

    Politicheck NZ Major Staff Appointments:

    Politicheck NZ, New Zealand’s first specialist political fact checking organisation, is proud to announce the appointment of key personnel.

    Editor – Pete George

    Deputy Editor – Phil Howison

    Chief Operating Officer – Kyle Church

    Research Coordinator – Kirk Serpes…”

    That’s right folks. Pete George. REALLLLY.

    Rory what the fuck were you thinking, are you really that naive? You might as well have given the job to David Farrar. Can’t you see you’ve just destroyed your credibility before you even started?

    • Pete George 14.1
      10 March 2014 at 11:54 am

      Statement on Politicheck

      I have been appointed as editor to a team establishing Politicheck, a political fact checking website for New Zealand. Those of us involved have a variety of political connections from across the spectrum, from libertarian to green. We are all disclosing our affiliations.

      It’s well known I’ve been involved with UnitedFuture after they asked me to stand for them in 2011. My level of involvement has often been overstated, especially over the past few months when it has significantly diminished. I am no longer a party member. I will continue blogging my personal views but apart from that I am dedicating my interests to Politicheck.

      Our individual politics should be irrelevant. We are setting up a fact checking process that will be as transparent as possible, and each fact checked will be re-checked involving at least three of us in an editorial and research role.

      Our findings will be open to public scrutiny and will be reviewable should we get additional information. Some decisions we make may be contentious but most will simply be a judgement of fact.

      We expect to build a good relationship with blogs. As well as encouraging submissions of issues to check we will monitor MSM and social media to look for issues worth investigating.
      We are aware we will have critics, both personal and of Politicheck. That’s the nature of politics. We will be up front and will address any reasonable criticisms openly. Mistakes will inevitably be made, we will do whatever it takes to rectify them.

      Please give us a fair go and give Politicheck a fair go. This should be a valuable service for improving politics in New Zealand. The more support we get the better we will be.

      I am happy to engage on this, either on this blog, on https://www.facebook.com/PoliticalFactCheckingNZ or by email – peteg@politicheck.org.nz

      • arken 14.1.1
        10 March 2014 at 12:00 pm

        People would probably be happy to give it a go but now we know you’re involved in it, Pete, and you’re a well known nutbar.

    • phillip ure 14.2
      10 March 2014 at 12:07 pm

      (ahem!..)

      ..cn i hearken back to my scoffing/jumping all over this..

      ..back when it first leaked..

      ..that this rightwing-green..farrar..and williams..were setting up a rightwing attack machine for the election..and to roll on post-election..should the progressives win..

      ..(and of course..should key get back..?..of course these ‘politichecks’ would just sink back into the swamp from which they emerged..)

      ..but pete george as editor..?

      ..that moves it into the realm of low-farce..

      ..(i mean..people on the right dislike me/my ideas/arguments..

      ….people on the left also dislike me/my ideas/arguments..

      ..but i think more people wd gag at the name ‘pete george’..

      ..than they would at mine..

      ..this is beyond fucken hilarious..

      ..and i wd like that rightwing-green ‘rory’..to tell us where he sits on that ‘awkward’-question:

      ..does he think the green party should keep open the option of coalescing with national..?

      ..i did try to ask him in that original thread..

      ..and he either thought it below him to reply to the likes of me..

      ..or else it’s a question he wd rather not be asked..

      ..and..once again..marshalling my psychic-powers..

      ..i am thinking/picking ‘rory’ wd be quite ‘relaxed’ about the idea of a national/green coalition..

      ..(but pete george..?..seriously..!..we aren’t all being ‘pranked’..are we..?)

      ..so of course that wannabe-acceptable-gatekeeper edwards-the-younger would have his grubby fingers all over this..

      ..reason number 53 to avoid it like the plague..

      ..this is a ‘trojan’-politicheck..

      ..phillip ure..

      • veutoviper 14.2.1
        10 March 2014 at 12:20 pm

        Phillip

        “that this rightwing-green..farrar..and williams..were setting up a rightwing attack machine for the election..and to roll on post-election..should the progressives win..”

        I think you might be confusing Politicheck with the Taxpayers Union.

        • phillip ure 14.2.1.1
          10 March 2014 at 12:23 pm

          @ veuto..no i’m not…

          ..go back to that original thread..

          ..but yes..the same people are behind both..

          ..the only difference being the rightwing-green as a front with this one..

          ..and..(drum-roll..!..)..’pete george’..(snigger/snort..!)..as ‘illustrious-leader’..

          ..will the volunteers b forced to sing to their leader..?

          ..’the sun will never set – on pete george’..

          .and other such north-korea-styling ditties..?

          ..phillip ure..

          • Pete George 14.2.1.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 12:25 pm

            You know that how? If you have no proof of that (and I don’t see how you can have proof of it) then you’re making things up.

            • Sanctuary 14.2.1.1.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 12:33 pm

              Having no proof has never stopped you. Your general MO these days seems to be to post baseless idle speculation on your website that no one visits, then link whore to it from Kiwiblog as the basis for the ultimate echo chamber.

            • phillip ure 14.2.1.1.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 12:37 pm

              were you really secret-squirrel about it..were you..?..(‘phones off!’..)

              ..are you here/now issuing a flat-denial that farrar/williams/edwards-the-younger had no parts to play..either together or individually..

              ..albeit only ‘advising’…

              ..had any part to play at any time ..

              ..in this politicheck-chimera..?

              ..is this what you are telling us..?

              ..phillip ure..

              • Pete George …
                10 March 2014 at 12:44 pm

                I had nothing to do with setting it up. When the site was launched last month I expressed an interest in contributing, and as a result was offered one of the positions.

                I know Rory talked to a wide range of people. I’m not ware of anyone you mention being involved in setting Politicheck up. They seem to be nothing more than paranoid guesses.

                • phillip ure …
                  10 March 2014 at 12:53 pm

                  aah..!..the shultz-defence..

                  ..and..maybe you could ..ask rory..?

                  ..y’know..!..run those names past him..ask that question..)

                  ..and then get back to us..?

                  ..i am sure openess/transparancy will be a feature of yr editorship..eh..?

                  ..may as well start as you mean to go on..

                  ..oh..!..and when talking with rory..

                  ..do ask him that natty-coalition question..

                  ..eh..?

                  ..and once again..

                  ..then get back to us..

                  ..eh..?

                  phillip ure..

                  • Pete George …
                    10 March 2014 at 1:12 pm

                    Disclosures are here: http://www.politicheck.org.nz/who-we-are/

                    You can ask Rory via the Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PoliticalFactCheckingNZ

                    “..do ask him that natty-coalition question..”

                    I don’t see that that has anything to do with Politicheck.

                    • phillip ure …
                      10 March 2014 at 1:56 pm

                      themes..pg..consistent-themes..

                      that’s what it has ‘to do with’..

                      ..rory..farrar..williams…edwards-the-younger..

                      ..and now..you..?

                      ..any leftwinger who has volunteered..having believed the original bullshit..

                      ..should now be out the door..

                      ..phillip ure…

                    • freedom …
                      10 March 2014 at 2:06 pm

                      from the ‘who we are’

                      The buck stops with Pete. Should any piece of evidence slip through our rigorous process he will be the one to discern if we should go ahead with making the publication and with which truth rating. The face of Politicheck NZ, he will be responsible for making sure that the data submitted to the website is true and accurate. He will be directly accountable for any bias and will strive to improve our processes should they prove insufficient.

                      say no more
                      nods as good as a wink to a blind bat

                      got that Pete, it is there in black and white

                      it stops with you

                • marty mars …
                  10 March 2014 at 2:10 pm

                  I note that rory states,

                  “One of the major considerations behind the scenes is that I am looking to find our main editor who will have final judgement call on items submitted for final showing to the public. This editor for me needs to be utterly impartial. They need to preferably have no affiliation with any party, and a reputation as a solid researcher. When the site commences running shortly, this is the person that will be accountable should any bias start occurring and I would ideally like this person to have a good understanding of cognitive biases that can occur with even the most rational of people.”

                  pete do you really have a ‘good understanding of cognitive bias’ especially as you’ve voted for 4 different parties in 4 elections.

                  and it seems to me this whole thing will rest on you and what you do – I hope it goes well but I have to say that I remain unconvinced of your impartiality and true middleoftheroadness – like phil I believe it is a bit of a front for more extreme divisive views. nevertheless time will tell.

                  Edit: snap with freedom 🙂

                  • RedBaronCV …
                    10 March 2014 at 8:32 pm

                    When all else fails at least they will have someone who counts the angels on the head of a pin or something like that..

                  • karol …
                    10 March 2014 at 8:37 pm

                    Unbelievable.! Fail before it starts:

                    reputation as a solid researcher

                    Already, I’m yearning for a site to fact check politicheckNZ.

      • phillip ure 14.2.2
        10 March 2014 at 12:21 pm

        and i’m picking this announcement of their ‘leader’..as being one pete george..

        (i’m sorry..!..i just can’t stop fucken laughing..!..)

        ..this will mean some serious volunteer-seepage will occur…

        ..around about now..

        ..heh..!

        ..phillip ure..

        • phillip ure 14.2.2.1
          10 March 2014 at 12:48 pm

          and psstt!!..i have a mission for you…you politicheks..!

          ..the elites/corporates (criminally) rip-off some $5billion a year in tax revenue..that should go to the state/common-good..

          ..go politicheck that..eh..?

          ..let us know how you get on..

          ..i’m sure those people you have had no previous connection with..’the taxpayers-union’..

          ..i’m sure they will be up for giving you a hand with that one..eh.?

          ..wot with them their ‘defending the rights/interests’ of the tapayers as their claimed goal/raison d etre..

          ..eh..?..

          ..i mean..what could be more urgent..than politichecking that $5billion..ripped off from the rest of country..

          ..each and every year..

          ..you go sic ’em..!

          ..eh..?

          ..phillip ure..

          • phillip ure 14.2.2.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 1:03 pm

            and..um..!..do you have a brand-name yet..?

            ..i understand ‘truth’ might be up for grabs..

            ..phillip ure..

          • phillip ure 14.2.2.1.2
            10 March 2014 at 1:17 pm

            and that taxpayers union..

            ..so vigilant/engaged over the wallowings in the perk-trough by mojo mathers..

            ..imagine how ‘vigilant/engaged’ they will be when you tell them about that $5 billion rip-off of taxpayers..eh..?..

            ..i am sure they will be incensed at the news..

            ..and will want to get right onto it..

            ..eh..?

            ..philip ure..

    • freedom 14.3
      10 March 2014 at 1:20 pm

      I had to check the date to make sure it wasn’t April already

      But as Pete says let’s wait and see eh.

      It’s not like [his few decaying threads of credibility] have anything riding on it or anything.

      You have joined an operation that plainly stated reality is to be the lead. Be honest here Pete, that has never been your strongest position. If you do not comprehend the totality of the role you and others have accepted, then you do not deserve to be there (and personally I cannot see how the totality of your statements remotely qualify you for such a position of trust) I certainly hope your ego has not clouded your judgement or misrepresented your ability to deal with facts.

      Btw in fact checking, you do only get one chance, a fact is a fact. Wrong facts = failed credibility.
      If you do fail, you will certainly understand the disdain and animosity that will have been provoked.

      A small glimmer of hope is most likely the job comes with a dictionary and we all hope the word ‘fact’ is the first item on the editor’s notes to be checked.

  15. greywarbler 15
    10 March 2014 at 12:29 pm

    Hello Pete George……………………………………………………

  16. fender 16
    10 March 2014 at 12:41 pm

    Yuk, wealth accumulating addict Gina Rinehart is like a p-piping freak who can’t get enough. She urges Australia to implement policies similar to those pursued by Margaret Thatcher

    • Zorr 16.1
      10 March 2014 at 12:50 pm

      She scares me… there are no other words for it.

      The words that I want to use would probably get me locked away.

      • fender 16.1.1
        10 March 2014 at 1:43 pm

        I know what you mean, she’s hideous in every way.

        This ‘Every time you refer to us as the ‘mining state’ as though the western third of our ancient continent is just Gina Rinehart’s inheritance to be chopped, benched and blasted, you are reading us wrong’ while funny on one level is just so true it’s sick.

    • millsy 16.2
      10 March 2014 at 12:59 pm

      Gina seems to me to be a very nasty person. I dont think she has a compassionate bone in her body. The only difference between her and those that machine gunned striking workers (or murdered trade union leaders) in the 1900s is that Australia now has laws banning that stuff (for now). Other than that, the very same attitude.

      Australia is slowly moving into an age of darkness….

      • Murray Olsen 16.2.1
        11 March 2014 at 12:27 am

        I’m not sure it’s moving all that slow. The Queensland government is heading rapidly into full jackboot mode.

    • RedLogix 16.3
      10 March 2014 at 1:39 pm

      This is the woman who’s never done an honest day’s work in her life lecturing Australians that they need to compete with Africans who will work for $2 per day. And if you’ve never been to some of these outback mine sites it’s often dirty, tough, hot and sometimes dangerous work. Rinehart wouldn’t last ten minutes.

      She’s everything you hate about the feral, dehumanised rich. The frightening thing is that she has the Abbot govt in her pocket.

    • Draco T Bastard 16.4
      10 March 2014 at 3:47 pm

      Parasite

  17. millsy 17
    10 March 2014 at 12:52 pm

    If you want to be welcomed back on this blog, Pete, then I suggest you openly admit to being right wing. BM, Monty, srylands and the like openly admit to having such political affiliations and such are tolerated on here. You on the other hand, have ACT-like positions on economic issues, yet try and pass yourself off as being middle of the road.

    • Pete George 17.1
      10 March 2014 at 1:01 pm

      Like a growing number of people I don’t think in terms of right versus left. I agree with policies from Act. And National. And Labour. And Greens. I’m on the same page as Colin Craig when it comes to wanting to improve honesty in politics. And I disagree with aspects of policies from all parties as well. All those parties have policies that could be regarded as left and right.

      But this is irrelevant to what Politicheck is going to do. We will check the validity of claims and publish our findings. And if someone provides additional information we will update our finding. It’s a process that is not governed by old school left and right politics.

      • phillip ure 17.1.1
        10 March 2014 at 1:49 pm

        yr first paragraph defines why you are so reviled..

        ..you set the benchmark in wishy-washy-ness/fake-centreist..

        (and of course you purse yr lips..when spouting this bullshit..eh..?..)

        ..you are there because you are one of them..

        ..and will be fully on board for this ‘wheeze’..

        ..eh..?

        ..philip ure..

  18. dv 18
    10 March 2014 at 1:07 pm

    From a comment in NBR re the Airplane crash

    The passengers with stolen passports were issued tickets by China Southern to travel on flight MH370.

    Isn’t China Southern the airline John Key’s government lets issue visas to enter New Zealand? And now 2 Kiwis are dead.

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Red-flags-missed-in-MH370-disaster/tabid/417/articleID/335236/Default.aspx

    [RL: Right now that’s way too long a bow to draw. End this here.]

    • Lanthanide 18.1
      10 March 2014 at 1:52 pm

      “Isn’t China Southern the airline John Key’s government lets issue visas to enter New Zealand? And now 2 Kiwis are dead.”

      And… what? The flight wasn’t from NZ.

      We still have no idea what the cause of the plane going down was.

    • PapaMike 18.2
      10 March 2014 at 2:26 pm

      What is interesting with the two stolen passports is not that they were flying to China – Beijing was a transit point only, and they were going on to Europe via Amsterdam , Copenhagen and other European cities. Not together.
      They booked their tickets together though.
      Perhaps this is why the FBI have been included.

  19. Penny Bright 19
    10 March 2014 at 1:12 pm

    Am I now blocked from making comments on The Standard?

    Or are there ‘gremlins’?

    Cheers!

    Penny Bright

    [No sign of a comment Penny. Obviously gremlins. Do you want to post again? A few people have made this comment today – MS]

    • Lanthanide 19.1
      10 March 2014 at 1:54 pm

      How long before Penny uses this as proof positive of a conspiracy by the owners of The Standard, in cahoots with Len Brown and John Banks to shut down criticism of Auckland politics?

    • Pete George 19.2
      10 March 2014 at 2:02 pm

      I’ve had gremlins commenting too, some comments are taking a while to appear.

  20. blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 20
    10 March 2014 at 1:35 pm

    lprent

    There appears to be something odd with Karol’s ‘Beltway thread’ I have now posted 2 comments on it and both have completely disappeared. The page just reappears without any ‘post php’ sign in the address (which is usually what occurs when they disappear for good) – one can’t hit the back button and ‘refind’ the comment either (which often is the case)

    Noting what happened to Rhinocrates on a recent thread (where they all appeared after some time) I am not going to post another(!) rather, thought I’d alert you to a possible problem.

    [lprent: They should have reappeared. I was fixing something and everything headed to spam for a few minutes. ]

    • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 20.1
      10 March 2014 at 1:44 pm

      Same thing happened with the above comment [edit: but not this one]- I have posted comments today without this problem occurring ….it is odd…..

  21. PapaMike 21
    10 March 2014 at 2:09 pm

    A new Silver Birthday

    www. is 25 years old today – happy birthday web.

  22. Tracey 22
    10 March 2014 at 2:09 pm

    i am most interested in how the new politicheck will select facts to check. am less interested now i see the choice of editor.

    • freedom 22.1
      10 March 2014 at 2:28 pm

      I suggest a basic credibility test for Politicheck.

      A [random] date is selected from the calendar past and Politicheck declare it as the test date. Any Governmental or Party Political announcements and the front page stories of the daily newspapers released on that day are checked for facts. Politicheck release their findings, within a reasonable timeframe, say seven days*? and we will get a very clear idea if they are winning or spinning.

      *exceptions stated for outstanding OIA requests, replies from MP’s etc

    • amirite 22.2
      10 March 2014 at 2:31 pm

      +1

  23. Draco T Bastard 23
    10 March 2014 at 2:32 pm

    Inflation: The fraud at the heart of our economy that is destroying the middle class

    Research by Positive Money shows that only about 10 per cent of newly-created money has gone into the kind of consumer goods tracked by CPI. So all CPI does is measure the effects of about 10 per cent of money creation.

    Positive Money’s research shows that 13 per cent of newly-created money has gone into real businesses that create jobs and boost economic growth; 37 per cent into financial markets and 40 per cent into residential and commercial property.

    Is it any wonder the financial sector has grown so disproportionately large and powerful, or that the British are so obsessed with houses? That’s where the money’s gone.

    The creation of money by the private banks far outstrips both inflation and the productivity of the nation. And, yes, I’m talking about NZ while the article is talking about the UK – we use the same banking system, a system that rewards the rich for being rich and punishes the poor.

  24. Pete George 24
    10 March 2014 at 2:51 pm

    Now first impressions have been expressed, a question.

    Putting aside the people, perceptions and agendas involved, does anyone see any possible advantages in having more fact checking of political claims and policies?

    • Colonial Viper 24.1
      10 March 2014 at 2:58 pm

      As with all good ideas, the devil is in the details of how it is actually carried out.

      • Pete George 24.1.1
        10 March 2014 at 3:03 pm

        Yes, And in the practice of how it’s carried out.. Getting it right is quite a challenge, but we’ll do our best to make a decent go of it.

        The only way of assessing it is to see how it works in practice. Doesn’t it deserve to be judged on results?

        • karol 24.1.1.1
          10 March 2014 at 3:05 pm

          Yes.

          Who is going to check the fact checkers?

          • Pete George 24.1.1.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 3:51 pm

            Another comment seems to have disappeared, apologies if a duplicate surfaces.

            “Who is going to check the fact checkers?”

            a) Research Manager
            b) Editor/Deputy Editor
            c) public scrutiny

            All issues will be open to review should further information be provided or later surface.

            • wtl 24.1.1.1.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 5:05 pm

              So if your facts are found to be incorrect by public scrutiny, will you be willing to accept you made a mistake? Because in my experience reading your contributions, I have never seen you back down and admit fault, instead you just try to twist things or run away and appear in another thread.

              • McFlock …
                10 March 2014 at 5:20 pm

                That’s my worry for the new site, because it depends on credibility.

                One of my bosses a while back had a practise of pre-empting the announcement of any errors we found – errata, retractions, withdrawals, whatever, just while we double-checked. It doesn’t feel good, but it’s got to be done sometimes. The reputation for doing so meant that when they said something, it was respected because everyone knew it had been exhaustively checked.

                As soon as politicheck starts dragging its feet while pete does his dodge and dive and sophistry to avoid admitting error, it’s fucked.

            • karol 24.1.1.1.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 7:08 pm

              As was taught some guidelines way back to follow in terms of assessing the credibility of a website. This is not totally dependent on any one factor, but, failure to measure up on any factor does weaken the credibility of an online source

              For instance, Columbia University says this, among other things, about assessing the credibility of online sources:

              How do you determine if a source is credible? You can evaluate the reliability and scholarship of information you find both online and in print by using these guidelines:

              Authorship
              If the author is not identified be wary. When an article or website is authored anonymously it has little credibility. It should be evident who created the content. What are the author’s credentials? Does he/she have expertise in this field? Is biographical information provided?

              […]
              Consider the publisher’s reputation and trustworthiness.

              When I read the first statements about the politicheckNZ site, I assumed there would be some people with highly credible backgrounds in all key positions, including editor. I had been expecting someone with academic credibility in researching.

              Choice of PG as editor does not give me any confidence in either the editorial processes, or the people who chose him for that role.

              A person can change. But in my experience so far, PG does not present well reasoned arguments, and thus I question his ability to recognise such in other people’s work. He could surprise me, but i’m wary.

              I am wary also because of things like this on online covert operations, coming from Greenwald and the Snowden leaks. Greenwald sumarises:

              Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable.

            • phillip ure 24.1.1.1.1.3
              10 March 2014 at 8:55 pm

              so..that’s you and the randian..

              ..having the final-say..eh..?

              ..phillip ure..

        • freedom 24.1.1.2
          10 March 2014 at 4:01 pm

          Dear Editor of Politicheck, since you are in the neighborhood and doing all this lovely promo work for what is after all a very exciting idea….I have a couple of questions. I could send them to the site but as they would just be posted here anyway I thought I would save us the time and post the questions out here in the open, where you want to be. You know, all transparent like.

          My biggest question is :

          You are all volunteers [apparently] so it won’t be every article every day.
          Print, Web, TV, Government Press Releases, Party Statements etc it is a hell of a list of media sources to check.

          Can you give a basic overview of the daily operation because it is not at all clear just what facts will be checked, how and when this checking will occur and in what time frame said facts will be reported.

          So far there are three editors and an undisclosed team of researchers (ten?)
          I am guessing the fact to be checked will be a small list, so again…
          Who selects what facts get checked?

          What is also not clear, is the plan if incorrect facts are exposed.

          (no offence intended here) You are after all a collection of volunteers with what on the surface does not appear to be what one would call the biggest influence on the MSM.
          Do you have a support network somehow primed to combat the daily papers and the tv channels? Who will be doing your media liason. Who will be your talking head if you get on TV? There is a crying need for clear reality here. Some facts need checking so to speak.

          • Pete George 24.1.1.2.1
            10 March 2014 at 4:38 pm

            Thanks, it’s good to get pertinent questions. I’ll link to this from our Facebook page.

            Can you give a basic overview of the daily operation because it is not at all clear just what facts will be checked, how and when this checking will occur and in what time frame said facts will be reported.

            We have to work some of this out yet.

            I’ve committed to working 20 hours a week on it, I expect to do more than that. I think this is a worthwhile enough project to put that into it.

            As I do now I’ll review news as it comes online in the morning, I’ll monitor what I can through the day, and I’ll target what seems to be the main points of interest in Parliament. I’ll also scan blogs as they can be good sources amongst the general noise. And I’ll receive submissions of topics to research, that’s already started.

            The editors will evaluate topics and refer what they think is worth doing to the Research unit, where the manager will assign them. Once complete to a standard acceptable to the research manager they will come back to the editors to finally evaluate.

            Some topics will be simple and quick, I’m hoping 1-3 days for them. Others could take weeks, especially when detailed costings of policies are involved.

            So far there are three editors and an undisclosed team of researchers (ten?)

            Editor, deputy editor and research manager. There have been tens expressed interest in researching, we’ll have to see how many commit to continue. We will always be open to taking on more researchers, the more we have the more we can do.

            We have some experts who are willing to assist.

            I am guessing the fact to be checked will be a small list, so again…
            Who selects what facts get checked?

            It should become a big list, resources allowing. The editors select which get checked.

            What is also not clear, is the plan if incorrect facts are exposed.

            We put them through the same process to correct or update.

            (no offence intended here) You are after all a collection of volunteers with what on the surface does not appear to be what one would call the biggest influence on the MSM.

            We don’t aim to be a big influence on the MSM. I think we’ll be complementary to the MSM and will help each other. My aim is to accumulate a valuable database.

            Do you have a support network somehow primed to combat the daily papers and the tv channels? Who will be doing your media liason. Who will be your talking head if you get on TV? There is a crying need for clear reality here. Some facts need checking so to speak.

            At this stage I’ll be the main point of contact, backed up by deputy editor Phil. I have some experience with media.

            If that workload gets too big and we can get someone suitable to handle it this may change.

            • freedom 24.1.1.2.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 5:28 pm

              Thanks for the confirmation that today’s big launch is really just a protracted press release introducing the principal staff. Which if you read all you have written today looks like you and Rory. There are other staff, I saw pictures. Staff ,who I must say, you have mentioned very rarely. You are well known here. Surely this would have been an opportune time to introduce your co-editors and bring us all up to speed. A chance to really promote the site’s ideas by explaining the thinking behind it, not just rehash the words printed on the website, on fb, on reddit. I haven’t been to KB or WO but imagine you are doing the same there also.

              Maybe the announcement was a bit premature or maybe this whole thing is as suspect as it continues to appear. Where is the content? If, at this late stage, you have not even a format sketch or a template of a checked fact to put up to show people ….what are we meant to think?

              Your own words show you have no clear understanding of the interface to come, how can people believe anything other than you are doing busywork till you get your first delivery of topics. All buffed and pretty and I am guessing many techs around the country will be able to give some fair estimates of the time/$ requirements for the bells and whistles.

              So on what date can the public expect a taste of the format?

              I am guessing the heralded database is a long ways off, so no point asking about its format of data distribution.

              P.S.
              You might want to get a grammar nurse. Mistakes on your own site are one thing, but you are an Editor on someone else’s site now . . .

              e.g 1 of ???
              “There have been tens expressed interest in researching”
              surely you mean ‘Dozens have expressed interest in researching ‘

              • Pete George …
                10 March 2014 at 5:51 pm

                I don’t think anyone said it was a big launch. It was an update of progress after the initial launch last month. The main launch will be when the website goes live.

                While the planning and web development has been going on for some time we have just started on editorial/research. We will work to a realistic timetable.

        • Te Reo Putake 24.1.1.3
          10 March 2014 at 4:16 pm

          “Getting it right is quite a challenge, but we’ll do our best to make a decent go of it.”

          Unconscious slip of the wormtongue Pete? Still, appointing a conservative and a Randian to the two senior posts should definitely help to get it right, no question.

          • Pete George 24.1.1.3.1
            10 March 2014 at 4:21 pm

            Still at it TRP? No slip, I just didn’t see any point in repeating a dual word to explain the obvious.

            I don’t know if you’re suggesting I’m Randian or conservative, but either or funny. Taking majority descriptions from both sides I’m probably more like a progressive neolib.

            • Te Reo Putake 24.1.1.3.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 5:57 pm

              You’re the conservative, Pete. But anyway, well done on the new gig. You’re already bringing the same level of success to it as you did to United Future (anybody remember them?).

              • Pete George …
                10 March 2014 at 6:40 pm

                I can’t remember being called a conservative before.

                I agree with Colin Craig when he said:

                “It’s becoming clear that New Zealanders are truly tired of the low standard of political debate, and of politicians who think they have a licence to lie when it suits their interests.”

                http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/index.php?page=PressReleases&pressid=125

                Targeting that has always been one of my primary motives for getting involved in politics, that’s why I wanted to support Politicheck to help target this.

                But I don’t agree with this part of their policy:

                One nation, remove the Maori seats and end the treaty settlements

                http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/index.php?page=Issues

                It would be ludicrous to end the treaty settlements before they are all settled. And I’m happy for Maori voters to decide if and when the Maori seats are removed.

                • wtl …
                  10 March 2014 at 6:58 pm

                  I think it is pretty obvious that TRP doesn’t mean you support (or a member of) the Conservative party itself. He said “conservative”, not “Conservative”.

            • phillip ure 24.1.1.3.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 6:50 pm

              “..I’m probably more like a progressive neolib…”

              an oxymoron..

              ..there is no such beast..

              ..it’d be like me saying i’m a carnivorous-vegan..

              ..you idjit..!

              ..and then just below you outright fucken lie..

              ..with yr claim of ‘never been called a conservative’..

              ..you lying piece of work..

              ..phillip ure..

              • Pete George …
                10 March 2014 at 7:02 pm

                “an oxymoron..”

                Well spotted. Although it isn’t out of the question, there’s blue-greens, purples, social conservatives, conservative socialists etc etc.

                I said “I can’t remember being called a conservative before” – and if I have it’s not a label applied to me. If you’ve called me a conservative I probably didn’t see it, I find your punctuation too hard to read to bother with usually.

                • phillip ure …
                  10 March 2014 at 7:38 pm

                  careful..!

                  yr usual self-pitying/whining passive-aggression..

                  ..almost tipped over into outright aggression there..

                  ..and ‘blue-green’..another oxymoron..

                  ..yr last 2 examples are a nonsense..

                  ..and nobody has ever said that you are a conservative..?

                  …are you seriously expecting anyone to believe that..?

                  ..phillip ure..

    • McFlock 24.2
      10 March 2014 at 3:00 pm

      Nobody is criticizing the objective, provided such checking is genuinely neutral and impartial regardless of the personal convictions held by the individuals doing the checking and overseeing the process.

      Some people have merely expressed skepticism that the objective is attainable if you are involved.

    • freedom 24.3
      10 March 2014 at 3:44 pm

      To the Editor of politicheck
      It stops with you so it most likely starts there too

      I suggest a basic credibility test for Politicheck.

      A [random] date is selected from the calendar past and Politicheck declare it as the test date. Any Governmental or Party Political announcements and the front page stories of the daily newspapers released on that day are checked for facts. Politicheck release their findings, within a reasonable timeframe, say seven days*? and we will get a very clear idea if they are winning or spinning.

      *exceptions stated for outstanding OIA requests, replies from MP’s etc

      • Pete George 24.3.1
        10 March 2014 at 3:56 pm

        It would be difficult to find a day with a fair representation of party announcements.

        We are currently working on evaluating the capabilities of researchers, and we’re compiling research topics. When the website launches in a few weeks will have a number of issues evaluated from all parties posted. That should give you a reasonable idea of how we are managing.

        • freedom 24.3.1.1
          10 March 2014 at 4:23 pm

          “It would be difficult to find a day with a fair representation of party announcements.”
          frikkin hilarious
          day one and you are already doing the Pete George Fudge
          what is really tragic is you don’t even see it, do you?

          This is a test of your team’s ability to fact check,
          It was not anything to do with how your daily editorial imbalance will eventuate.

          Pick a day, pick up a newspaper and do a trial run.

          I had real hopes for Politicheck.
          Hopes that are now like trees in the Arctic autumn, darkening quickly in the fading light.

          • Pete George 24.3.1.1.1
            10 March 2014 at 4:51 pm

            I think we can get a better cross-section of topics to check be evaluating current party websites and media coverage. However we do it we have to make selections.

            But if you would like to try what you suggest then you could select a random date, pick a range of issues across parties for that day and submit it to me. I’d be happy to assess that and explain my assessment.

            We are open to any submissions.

            • McFlock 24.3.1.1.1.1
              10 March 2014 at 5:15 pm

              here.
              Just a few of the releases from the main parties/govt would be fine.

            • freedom 24.3.1.1.1.2
              10 March 2014 at 5:40 pm

              What has ‘across parties’ got to do with the price of eggs?
              I thought you were a fact checking site?
              Is New Zealand’s daily political coverage not diverse or balanced enough a resource ? 😉

              Then maybe that is a starting fact you guys could check for us all?

              but seriously folks,
              Is Pete suggesting that a topic not every party has made comment on, will not be researched?

              Are you saying if submissions on facts to be checked are only questioning statements from a single political party, they will not be checked?

              We could circulate q+a’s for days but it will not change the incontrovertible fact that political affiliations are not the issue Pete.

              Unbiased investigation of facts, does not see a flag of any colour.

              I do not see you as someone who understands that simple precept.

              • Pete George …
                10 March 2014 at 6:16 pm

                We want to ensure we cover a good range of topics across all parties. Of course individual topics can apply to individual parties, they often will.

  25. Molly 25
    10 March 2014 at 3:17 pm

    Guardian article update yesterday from the authors five years after the release of The Spirit Level. The Spirit Level authors: why society is more unequal than ever.

    Concluding sentences:
    “…The Equality Trust calculates that the richest 100 people in Britain now have as much wealth as the poorest 30% of households. The top-to-bottom pay ratios of around 300:1 in the FTSE 100 companies is not diminishing.

    It is hard to think of a more powerful way of telling people at the bottom that they are almost worthless than to pay them one-third of one percent of what the CEO in the same company gets. Politicians must recognise that reducing inequality is about improving the psychosocial wellbeing of the whole society.”

  26. tricledrown 26
    10 March 2014 at 4:14 pm

    Gina Reinhart is just like her dad.
    Even knowing how dangerous blue asbestos Ginas dad allowed families to have sand pits made of blue asbestos tailings.
    Then demanded the govt build houses and roads for his blue asbestos mine.

  28. fender 28
    10 March 2014 at 4:20 pm

    RNZ just said Sept. 20 is election day..

    edit: snap scotty

    Stuff

    • fender 28.1
      10 March 2014 at 4:29 pm

      From the link:

      “Key wanted to announce the election before his trip to China next week. National would campaign hard on its record rebuilding Christchurch, improving the economy and protecting the most vulnerable”

      ?? He’s taking the piss….

  29. Te Reo Putake 29
    10 March 2014 at 4:21 pm

    Sweet, Key obviously knows the polls will never be better for him, so best go as early as possible without looking too desperate.

  30. freedom 30
    10 March 2014 at 4:46 pm

    Hekia Parata

    Just the mention of her name right?
    isn’t anger a strange emotion?

    some follow up from her bizarre statements on Q+A

    http://saveourschoolsnz.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/responses-to-hekias-implication-that-teachers-want-performance-pay/

  31. greywarbler 31
    10 March 2014 at 5:15 pm

    Yesterday while commenting on Open Mike about local government I noted that Nicky (Wagner the Associate Local Government Minister) had said that libraries and swimming pools were ‘nice to haves’, and I deeply disagree with such careless elimination of them as costly luxuries, and now have seen this in The Press, Saturday 8/Mar/2014.

    Drownings rise as swim lessons dip.
    Wellington is one of the worst-affected regions for pool closures, with 26 of 48 having closed over the past two decades….40% of primary school pupils were leaving school without the basic confidence needed to survive in the water, said Water Safety NZ Chief Executive Matt Claridge.
    …Two out of three schools have to travel to use a swimming pool….

    “We don’t have to teach 5 year olds how to do the butterfly stroke, we just want them learning how to float and tread water, and that way they will be safer.”

    MoE HoE Infrastructure said that the Ministry provides funding through the operations grant which can be used for upkeep of a pool, or transport and entry charges to a local community pool…and current policy was not to provide pools in new schools, or replace ones that needed upgrading.

    However if drownings are rising (no figures) then that policy is inadequate. It involves a lot of organisation and time, and it takes the children away from the essential NatStands so it can be seen that it would often be shelved. Do Handstands instead perhaps, on the school grounds.
    And anyway only people with spare money can afford to travel to the beach from town, or have a swimming pool in their own grounds – very expensive politically and economically especially when they develop leaks.

    • McFlock 31.1
      10 March 2014 at 7:14 pm

      drownings seem to be decreasing – 81 in 2013 as opposed to 98 in 2012 (although the same puff piece in jan 2013 said only 93 in 2012, but there’s often a data lag).

      Although I agree that libraries and pools are a necessity. I know my personal habit of sinking at the sight of a small puddle has limited my activities, including professional ones. c’est la vie.

      • greywarbler 31.1.1
        10 March 2014 at 9:47 pm

        Don’t give up Mc Flock. There are always water wings. Or as one comedian explained, who wasn’t quite at home in large puddles ‘Swimming to me is staying alive in the water.’

    • Lanthanide 31.2
      10 March 2014 at 11:16 pm

      My bf was pretty outraged that she doesn’t consider libraries as vital infrastructure.

      Without a doubt, the printing press is one of the most important inventions in the last 400 years, but it is the library that allows distribution of the output to the masses, not just the select upper-classes.

      Similarly these days libraries act as gateways to the internet for many poor and underprivileged people.

      • freedom 31.2.1
        10 March 2014 at 11:50 pm

        I think what they are most concerned about is how Libraries, especially in the smaller centres, are beginning to stake their claim as hubs of communities and all the places that can lead.

        Communication, camaraderie, conversations, sharing, empowerment. You know, really dangerous stuff that the little people aren’t meant to have unrestricted access to.

  32. greywarbler 32
    10 March 2014 at 6:16 pm

    Hold onto this link and play it when you are being bitten by the ‘black dog’. Happy and lots of lovely people dancing around and being joyful. Litty bitty ditty. Pharrell Williams

    • freedom 32.1
      10 March 2014 at 10:46 pm

      ahhh bless the curse of the black dog greywarbler. Learning to live together day by day is everyday. May be a tough old cur at times, and sometimes you never really know who it’s gonna bite, but every now and then there is a physics defying frisbee catch that seems to make it all worthwhile.

      • greywarbler 32.1.1
        11 March 2014 at 9:13 am

        freedom
        You seem to understand those black dogs. I know a real one who is overjoyed when you play tug and she tugs and shakes her head and gains control of whatever. It and chasing balls and sticks plus having a swim and then living in a happy family where she is appreciated and fed seems to all she wishes. Happy dog. Rather different than the one that sat on Winston Churchill’s shoulders sometimes. He is admirable, in that he thought and fought his way through it. I wonder, though not too much, to what extent he showed his distress and what helped him rise above it.

        • freedom 32.1.1.1
          11 March 2014 at 10:26 am

          Spent my first thirty odd years not understanding the illness at all gw, and saw dark days I would wish on no-one. Last decade or so, a wholly different condition created a set of circumstances which dictated much closer attention was paid to identifying the symptoms.

          I learned the triggers. I learned to be honest with those I trust and try my best to be gentle with those I love. It is hard bloody work but it is rewarding.

          The reality though, is a melee of hope and hassle and best intentions.
          Mirth is good, melancholy sucks,
          but both are part of this crazy world and as an artist I cannot imagine life without them.

          • greywarbler 32.1.1.1.1
            11 March 2014 at 10:42 am

            freedom
            Yes light and shade eh. How can we see the concept without them?
            Did you look at Pharrell Williams. The images of happy people dancing and playing, with the idea of unselfconscious expression, and the repetitive singing of the same hopeful ditty,
            I found delightful. I know many uptight people who would never open themselves to the judgement of other uptight people and could not bring themselves to do this.

            I find it interesting dealing with my mind, my unconscious/subconscious. The studies about the mind are interesting. Some seem to indicate that we don’t really think anything for ourselves at all. But that be gentle bit, that’s good to apply to oneself, plus some firmness – it seems you have to take yourself in hand sometimes. I found insight into the process through looking at transactional analysis – ie looking at how we communicate. The Parent, Adult and Child effect in transactions spoken or noticed.

            • freedom 32.1.1.1.1.1
              11 March 2014 at 11:27 am

              “But that be gentle bit, that’s good to apply to oneself, plus some firmness – it seems you have to take yourself in hand sometimes.” the pivot point of the whole machine 🙂

              p.s. I admit i’m not really a Pharrell fan, but when next at Te Takere I will have a look.
              I’m no music snob
              …. except Coldplay of course, yeech, a band for people who cannot handle Radiohead

  33. lprent 33
    10 March 2014 at 9:37 pm

    Fixed the bug that was causing everyone to have the same IP today and periodically causing save problems as it ran into checking issues..

    Hopefully no-one else noticed the site rebooting through its web servers 17 minutes ago.

  34. Murray Olsen 34
    10 March 2014 at 10:16 pm

    I always wondered which day was Groundhog Day. Now I know. It’s the 9th of March.

  35. Penny Bright 35
    10 March 2014 at 11:15 pm

    FYI

    Ok folks!

    It’s WAR …….

    URGENT ‘Open Letter / Privacy Act’ request to Auckland Mayor Len Brown – re: threat from Auckland Council to sell my house.

    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz/urgent-open-letter-privacy-act-request-to-auckland-mayor-len-brown-re-threat-from-auckland-council-to-sell-my-house/

    URGENT PRIVACY ACT REQUEST:

    Please provide ALL information which explains the role you, as Auckland Mayor Len Brown had in the decision to send this letter:

    1) Auckland Mayor Len Brown – did you know about it this letter?

    2) Auckland Mayor Len Brown – did you authorise this letter?

    3) Auckland Mayor Len Brown – do you support this letter?

    4) Please provide the information that confirms the role played by the Principal Administrative Officer of Auckland Council, CEO Stephen Town, in the writing, authorising and sending of this letter.

    5) Please provide the information which confirms the role of all/ any members of the Governing Body of Auckland Council, in the writing, authorising and sending of this letter.

    Please be advised that there is now significant and growing public interest in this matter:

    http://content.radionetwork.co.nz/weekondemand/auckland/21145.mp3

    Scroll to 8.00 to hear Leighton Smith reading from and commenting upon my following letter:

    10 March 2014

    Good morning Leighton!

    The first working day after I spoke on your show Leighton – (Friday 28 February 2014) – explaining why I refused to pay my rates – a letter is sent from Auckland Council date 3 March 2014 – threatening to sell my house.

    (Letter attached)

    DESPERATE stuff.

    I have three words to say to Auckland Council:

    “GO TO HELL!”

    This is a politically explosive decision that will NOT have been made at middle management level by the ‘Credit Control Rates Team Leader’ of Auckland Council.

    What role has Auckland Mayor Len Brown had in the decision to send this letter?

    1) Did he know about it?
    2) Did he authorise it?
    3) Does he support it?

    I shall be sending him an ‘Open Letter’ asking these questions later this morning, and requesting under the Privacy Act, ALL information held by ALL/ANY persons relating to this matter.

    It is Auckland Council who are breaking the law by not upholding their statutory duties arising from the Local Government Act 2002 and Public Records Act 2005 for ‘open, transparent and democratically accountable’ local government, and by NOT providing the ‘devilish detail’ of where EXACTLY rates monies are being spent on private sector consultants and contractors.

    I am neither a SHEEP nor a SLAVE.

    They are picking on the WRONG woman …….

    Cheers!
    Penny Bright
    …….