Written By: notices and features - Date published: 7:15 am, January 27th, 2014 - 85 comments
Categories: open mike -
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step right up to the mike …
Why does David Cunliffe support Deep Sea Oil Drilling?
Typhoon Haiyan which struck the Philippines in November is the most powerful storm ever recorded, it was preceded by Hurricane Bopha and Hurricane Sandy all unprecedented record breaking Superstorms. Australia has suffered two, hottest ever, record breaking heatwaves in a row. Low lying Pacific Atoll nations are at risk of becoming uninhabitable due to storm surges from Superstorms and the slow but relentless rise in sea level.
Climate Change is a near and present danger.
We must convince David Cunliffe to change his mind over deep sea oil.
Climate scientists say, that we must halt all unconventional oil extraction, like fracking, like deep sea and Arctic drilling, like tar sands and shale oil.
As well as the threat of oil spills, Green Party politicians say that Deep Sea Oil Drilling must be opposed on climate change grounds.
An election in the American Coal State of Virginia, was decided on climate change issues. But not in the way you might expect. Democrat Terry McAuliffe beat, Republican Ken Cuccinelli in the race for Governor of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe was critical of the coal industry saying that he hoped never to see another coal fired power plant ever opened in the state. Cuccinelli argued on behalf of the coal industry and jobs.
“McAuliffe beat Cucinelli”
McAuliffe’s victory over Cucinelli came as a surprise to US politicians who deny the science, or who repeat the oil industry’s lies out of fear. This result also took many of the main stream US media pundits who pit the environment against job creation by surprise.
A recent poll taken in the state found that over 60% of voters in Virginia believe that human activity is driving climate change.
There are hardly any polls taken of New Zealanders views on climate change.
But this figure of 60% is similar to that found by a 2012 Horizon poll of 2829 New Zealanders aged over 18 with a 95% confidence of plus or minus 1.8% accuracy.
64.4 per cent wanted Parliament to do more
60.6 per cent wanted the Prime Minister to do more
(This poll was taken before Sandy, before Bopha, before Haiyan, and before the Australian Heatwaves)
A new political dynamic is emerging. Climate Change is an election winner, not a loser.
If you are a Labour Party member, or supporter concerned about the environment, and you want your party to win the election, tell your leader David Cunliffe to rethink his support for Deep Sea Oil Drilling.
Like the citizens of the US Coal State of Virginia we must see the climate change elephant in the room.
“A new political dynamic is emerging. Climate Change is an election winner, not a loser.
Nah, don’t think so. There are lots of people who say they want more action on climate change, as long as it doesn’t adversely impact on them.
I disagree, the mistake of the last election (lost by just 10,000) was the lack of space between the Greens and Labour (asset sales). It was correct to attack asset sales, still is. It was also good that lots more people split their vote and gave Greens a go. Cunliffe has obvious seen the need to differentiate, not only for Labours interests. Voting Green just gives the partnership an idea how far they can go or not. If you like Green policy split your vote. If not, vote Labour, either way you win and you get more say. National voters can vote Labour in the knowledge they will de-emphasis the Greens, while they know its risky giving Key their vote, he may lose, or worse win with the five head monster with a untried baby head. Its not like Labour is that different from the socialist left leaning Key.
..(this for maybe later in the relationship..?.
..’whispered words i don’t believe..
..i’ve got teeth you cannot see..’..?..)
(and a great/classic kee-wee track too..
..it’s a ‘grinder’…eh..?..it wears you down..)
“..i’m very suspect..”
Doing my bit to bring common sense to the argument.
Don’t think you can disregard the author but no doubt the response will be critical of where it is published…….
Hey, Grumpy, are you ok with your name being known? And, as to the post, the argument is over, so best we just move on to doing something about it.
That’s the thing about science, the argument is never over……an open mind is a pre-requisite for science.
‘..the argument is never over..’
(said in ponderous tones..?..no doubt..?..
..and..a cliche-award for that person..!..)
..but..yes it is..grumpy..
..haven’t you heard..?
..we are now pretty certain the earth isn’t flat…eh..?
..why don’t you take it from there..?
..and work yr way forward..
That’s the thing about science, the argument occurs in peer-reviewed journals. FIFY
…and Climategate laid bare the methods used by the AGW extremists to shut that debate down eh? Even now we see argument that “democracy should be suspended”, that “deniers should be jailed” and bizarrely that “China has the best political system to combat AGW”. Attempts made to hound academics who don’t enthusiastically join in the group think out of their jobs., attempts (often succesful) to impose censorship on media.
Free and honest debate is essential to science, that is what Partridge is pointing out.
What’s his next shattering revelation going to be? The Sun is hot? Water is wet?
I look forward to your citing the peer-reviewed research that calls for a suspension of democracy.
If you were interested in the ruminations of open minds, you would not be reading The Quadrant. The minds that dribble there are closed tighter than a steel trap.
“..no doubt the response will be critical of where it is published..”
..seeing as the home-page of yr link reveals it to be a cess-pit of rightwing conspiracy-theories..
..them arguing that 95% of the worlds’ climate-scientists are involved in this massive conspiracy..
..(and that none of these conspiracy-scientists..has yet has ‘blown the whistle’ on this conspiracy..eh..?
..imagine the payday they would get from the kochs’..eh..?
..if they could produce ‘conspiracy-evidence’..eh..?
..tighter than the fucken mafia..those conspiring climate-scientists..eh..?
..and 95% of them ‘in on it’..eh..?
..absolutely – fucken – barking..!
..thanks for the laffs..there..grumpy..
Clearly another knee jerk reaction without reading the link, thought so…..
..if it looks like a duck..
..walks like a duck..
..and ..as in this case..quacks like a duck..
..it probably is a duck..
..and of course any ‘evidence’ must be considered in the context from which it comes.
..(as in i was able to present with some confidence..the evidence of meat/dairy causing cancer..’cos it was published in a reputable peer-reviewed academic-journal…
..whereas this is a far-right-rag..end-of-story..)
..the language on that homepage is table-leg-chewing in the extreme..
..i wouldn’t trust them to tell me the time of fucken day..
..and that you ask/expect us to read this swill..
..really does yrslf no favours..
..and for some more laffs..why don’t you tell us..grumpy..
..how tyou reckon those 95% of climate-scientists are able to keep that omerta so tight..eh..?
..i’d be fascinated to hear yr theories on this..there..grumpy..
So the mantra of Global Warming lives on in the halls of the ignorant and illiterate. Certainly appears that way. Face it, the AGW crowd have become the flat earthers, the brief fad joins the ranks of the Y2K idiots.
grumpy, is science not more of a spectrum than a never-over argument. For example, “the earth is not flat” is something that would be at the settled end of the spectrum, whereas “black holes are full of jelly beans” is at the unsettled end of the spectrum.
Where does AGW fit on that spectrum do you think?
Y2K was a serious issue caused by shortsightedness of some programmers – and it was the concerted efforts of programmers that made the millenial roll-over a non-catastrophe. If only AGW could be so easily fixed…
You add nothing but bigotry. Stop wasting our space.
Y2K was a complete con.
The whole purpose of Y2K was to scare businesses into upgrading their computer systems, wouldn’t surprise me if Microsoft wasn’t behind the whole thing.
Y2K was something; but not what reported on the news – journalists trying to make a story out of a coding error. But the point is that AGW is real and not something we can easily patchup.
We might agree that “climate change” is real but there has been no warming for 17 years and some scientists are even predicting a cooling phase. Even if we were to agree that “climate change” is real, there is a whole new argument as to whether it is man-made or even if it can be halted or controlled by man.
Climate always changes (well at least for the last few million years).
Yawn. Can’t you do better than this sorry-assed collection of feeble zombies?
You are doing your best to look like an idiot or a liar, as this graphic demonstrates.
Lift your game, you boring tr*ll.
Y2K wasn’t a coding error, and neither is it fair to describe it as “shortsightedness of some programmers”.
Many of the systems concerned were originally developed in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
They were designed to run on computers that were tiny compared to today’s systems and an extra byte of storage to hold the two digits of the century in every date field was very hard to justify, particularly as the typical life of a computer system developed in the 1960’s was probably less that 10 years.
Do most people involved in the industry today really understand how small mainframe systems were?
A typical computer system for a New Zealand company in the late 1960s was, say, an IBM 360, model 30 with tape drives and 3 2311 disc drives.
It had 64k of memory. That is 64 THOUSAND bytes. A disc held 7.25 megabytes so the whole system had 21.75 MILLION bytes of disc.
Today a typical PC probably has 2 gigabytes of memory and a terabyte of disc. That is about 32,000 times the memory and 45,000 times the disc. An extra byte for the century simply wasn’t feasible. Remember this is a PC and the old machine was a mainframe.
They decision not to allow for it was not shortsighted. It was completely rational and sensible considering how sparse was the memory and disc available, and considering that the systems were expected to be replaced within a decade.
Here endeth an oldtimers rant.
“Y2K was something; but not what reported on the news – journalists trying to make a story out of a coding error. But the point is that AGW is real and not something we can easily patchup.”
What was it then?
Read alwyn above (seems a strange thing for my fingers to type – haven’t put my fingers in that pattern before). “Coding error” was quicker to type.
..leaping from rock to rock..(‘y2k’..?..whoar..!..)
..and no answer to that ‘how do they do it?’-question..?
..just ignoring that elephant in yer room..eh..?
Face it, the AGW crowd have become the flat earthers
Interesting that Paltridge’s paper proves nothing. All it does is raise some concerns about whether or not man made global warming has been conclusively proved. Yet Grumpy falls in the trap of confusing slight doubt that something is happening for conclusive proof that it is not …
….but Mickey…..”the science is settled”!
I agree Paltridge’s paper does not disprove AGW, that is not what I claimed. It certainly casts considerable doubt on the motives of those pushing it and the probable overstatement of it’s effects.
It does nothing of the sort. You are conflating a statistical possibility that something may not actually be occurring with proof that it is not occurring.
….or, more exactly, a reality that does not match the predictions by the models used to scare the shit out of us.
The Arctic has warmed more than the Antarctic – predicted by a model.
Nights have warmed more than days – predicted by a model.
Winter has warmed more than summer – predicted by a model.
The amount and pace of warming – predicted by a model.
Changes in migration patterns – predicted by a model.
Changes to the treeline – predicted by a model.
Increased insurance claims due to weather events – predicted by multiple models.
You are completely shit at this stupid game you’ve invented. Embarrassing.
:..lives on in Nature, NASA, and all of the academies of science. FIFY
I presume you mean THIS Nature.
…also casts doubt on some of the wilder unsubstantiated claims made by warmists.
Denies AGW. Links to an article that affirms AGW.
Read the article. It is critical of claims being made linking extreme weather with climate change and points out gaps in the models.
“Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.”
So how does this prove that man made climate change is not happening? All it shows is that one scientist is not convinced.
I read the article before I commented. That’s how I know it confirms AGW. Attribution of individual weather events is notoriously difficult, this is not new information. Pall et al and Min et al (both published in Nature 2012) are two examples. Hansen Sato & Ruedi 2012 also provides an overview.
FFS – it is Nature Magazine!!! Of course it does not prove AGW is not happening but it does throw considerable doubt (from a warmist source” that the link to “Extreme Weather” which is so abused by media and politicians, is, at best, dubious.
For more comment on the “Nature” article;
The answer to the oft-asked question of whether an event is caused by climate change is that it is the wrong question. All weather events are affected by climate change because the environment in which they occur is warmer and moister than it used to be.
Trenberth 2012, Journal of Climatic Change.
Oh? THAT Trenberth…….
Hell Grumpy don’t ya think you could have gotten something a little less Head in the sand deniers?
well..that’s grumpy done and dusted for the day..
You know grumpy, if you posted an article saying the same thing but written by someone with no connections to Monckton and the oil industry I’d read it. But Garth Paltridge , no thanks.
Where is a link or post to the greens state of the nation speech? Third biggest party and all that? Perhaps karol is working on one.
Anyway stuff and herald have nothing on online first headlines. Herald has editorial on it but brown ranks a headline.
Third biggest party but this has less coverage than colin craig who is not in Parliament. Media influencing not reflecting again?
Grumpy there is far more evidence to support the theory of man influence climate change than the flat earthers ever had.
Do you believe that since industrialisation and human population growth man has had no negative impact on his ecosystem and environment?
Press Release: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1401/S00138/green-party-launch-policy-to-tackle-inequality-on-education.htm
This bit from Trevett’s Herald piece (reprinted in ODT) is wonderfully manipulative:
“Ms Turei was critical of the National Party’s education announcement last week. That policy rewarded good teachers and principals and set up a system for them to share their skills and knowledge across other schools. Ms Turei said it did nothing to address the primary cause of under-achievement which was poverty.”
That’s some impressive skill with which she (Claire T) implies that Turei said that Nat’s scheme; “rewarded good teachers and principals and set up a system for them to share their skills and knowledge”, when she (Turei) said no such thing.
Skill, Pasu? Simple re-hashing of dubious tory propaganda more like. Dubious in it’s entirety actually, because no matter how highly parents may rate their current principal, the waving of large amounts of cash to entice them to piss off and interfere with the BOT from the school down the road is not terribly thrilling. Bash all teachers one day, reward hand-picked individuals – prior to any performance at all – the next? Try harder John.
..and while conceding the eyewatering differences between blanket coverage of chem-trail col’s every brain-fart/arse-scratch..
..and the general ignoring of most others..by that corporate/access-media..
..and tho’ i am all for giving them a rark-up..most of the time..
..you are factually incorrect..as this morn i have seen coverage on both the herald and stuff websites..
..so i dunno where yr ‘no-coverage’ claims come from..
..but you’d hafta ask..
..just how up for/to the job are the green party media-team..?
..i dunno who they are..
..but they don’t seem too crash-hot at their job..
..there was no pre-publicity for the speech..
..(i kinda carry the conceit i keep an eye on things..and i didn’t know..hadn’t heard..and had actually wondered..)
Radio NZ National
First item on the news bulletin is an opinion from Richard Prebble on what he thinks about the Labour leaders timing of a State of the Nation speech.
Yep and he had a line of spin that since David’s speech was last he has missed the boat. Prebble had written it off even before the speech was given …
I wish they had a rule of refusing comment from clearly partisan commentators …
Yeah, it’s pretty stupid. Lets come up with a news piece whose longevity will span this morning only, from someone clearly partisan.
What got me was the introduction to the news item where a ‘former Labour MP’ was critical of Cunliffe. While it is true that Prebble is a former Labour MP, I am sure even he would prefer the characterisation that the item then gave, of ‘former ACT leader’. The former Labour MP tag was an attention grabber, and misleading, as I then expected a criticism from within the Labour Party.
So the lead off item was that a former ACT leader was criticising Cunliffe. Big deal? Worthy of lead off item? Honest portrayal of Prebble’s status?
I see Hekia’s comment “inequality only equates to 18 percent of underachievement.” has been removed from the TV3 article http://www.3news.co.nz/Green-Party-in-denial-over-inequality—Parata/tabid/423/articleID/329814/Default.aspx. The same has happened on “Stuff’s” online site although it was printed in the DomPost’ “Inequality was a driver of under-achievment but accounted for only 18 per cent of the difference between students who were disadvantaged and those who were not” she said. “The other 82 per cent was the result of the quality of teaching and school leadership and the expectations of parents and communities”
Wow and TV3 let your comment through, without editing it seems.
Said another way Hekia’s bullshit, i figure she pulled such figures from an orifice which shall go unmentioned, says that under a National Government happily tossing 300+ million bucks into the pot in what looks like an effort to get teachers and principles fighting among each other for a slice of the filthy lucre, there will be a failure rate across the education spectrum of 18%…
…quality of teaching and school leadership…
But, but, but… “quality of teaching” and “principals/school leaders” are well below “socioeconomic status” on the Hattie Index! Surely David Farrar will be calling her a liar any minute now.
But Prebble is only famous because the Stake thru the heart didn’t work, and he was rejuvenated. Sooner or later this old Vampire will shrivel up and turn to dust.
However what he says should be taken with a pound of salt!
Much mirth was generated last night while watching Prime News coverage of Metiria Turei’s speech on the Green Party’s education policy for deprived kids,
A couple of items later and cut to the Ads and here’s the Meridian Energy ad which also promotes ‘food in schools’ telling everybody that 1 in 4 Kiwi Kids are going to school hungry,
To rub salt into wounded ‘wing-nuts’ everywhere, Prime repeated the ad after the news…
Posted this as a belated response to mdxxkea on Open Mike yesterday, but am reposting here (if it is allowed) to generate discussion – and solutions – on today’s thread:
“I’m all for the educational/community hubs – just a couple of points about having them at schools.
1. Many of the disengaged have had disastrous experiences at schools – and will be loathe to return to them in a positive way later on in their lives. You may miss out on reaching those who have the most to benefit – just because of the choice of venue.
2. Schools are already underresourced and overcrowded – where are the facilities and capacity that will allow this to happen without capital investment?
3. You are introducing the community – many of whom are unknown individuals – into the school environment – how do you then ensure safety for both those individuals and the students of that school?
4. Future governments – using the MoE – can destroy these programmes even if they are successful by claiming they are focusing on “getting back to basics”
1. Adjust the stated policy to deal with these potential problems and ensure that the continuation of these programmes is strengthened.
2. Create community hubs in local community facilities that are underutilised – obvious choice is to use local sports facilities that are not in use during the weekdays. Ensure cooperation between schools and hubs but try to set up hubs so that the communities own them – makes it more likely to survive long-term.”
Interesting!!!, $11,000 sleepouts snapped up for offices, so says the Herald online in what looks suspiciously like an advertisement dressed up as news,
The attached article goes on to say the the Chinese manufacturer of these ‘flat-pack’ buildings can supply ‘complete’ 2 bedroom units for $40,000,(i assume that the 40 grand price tag includes the ‘ticket’ having been ‘clipped’ substantially by the Auckland suppliers featured in the article),
i have to wonder just how robust these 2 bedroom units are and whether they will stand the test of time, along with a question mark surrounding the term ‘complete’, the question being does this include kitchen/shower/laundry,
Considering that a NZ supplier was quoted in the same article claiming to be able to supply a similar sleepout to the one featured for 5 or 6 thousand dollars there is probably room for movement in the cost of a complete 2 bedroom unit,(but even 40 thousand is cheap),
Are these ‘flat pack’ factory built housing units the answer to the gross shortage of HousingNZ rental property, my initial view if the questions posed above were answered positively would have to be Yes,
Having had a good look at a couple of village type housing complexes purpose built onsite for HousingNZ which cost millions of dollars i would in conclusion say that while these village type clusters were well built, some with garages some without,all with a reasonable sized garden/lawn area and well fenced to provide a sense of privacy the multi-million dollar cost of such ‘excellent’ use of scarce space could be trimmed substantially with the use of such flat pack factory built housing…
There’s a growing Tiny House movement in NZ that’s really captured my attention in the last month. A few links:
Really innovative stuff going on.
Yep, very interesting. Home ownership without having to own land brings the cost down massively, as does owner/builder, no building consents, and use of recycled/reused/upcycled materials.
Jay Shafer – a long time US proponent of tiny houses – talks about the politics of this movement. Pretty long at 24 min – but some salient points about the political aspect – in addition to the usual economical and ecological reasons.
Thanks, I hadn’t seen that. Will have a look.
But as much as he enjoys talking about design, what he really wanted to talk about was the politics of tiny houses. Why building and zoning codes are stacked against tiny houses, how the costs of purchase and upkeep compare to the big houses he calls “debtors’ prisons”, and why, when the Big One shakes the land around San Francisco Bay, he’d rather be in his tiny house than anywhere else.
The tiny house movement in the States is primarly a middle class one, and it’s no coincidence that it’s grown so much at the same time as the recession and home-owning/mortgage issues there have affected the middle classes. But it has the potential to reach beyond that, particularly where skills are taught/shared and people form groups to help each other build. Unfortunately such alt middle class groups don’t have a good history of expanding to including people affected by poverty. Still, in NZ perhaps some of the middle classes could move into tiny homes, freeing up regular houses for low income people.
The consent issues in NZ are different than the US too, it’s much easier here at the moment. That would need to be safeguarded if a movement here arises. Already I hear that the minimum size building for which consents apply has shrunk (presumably to prevent people from living in small, cheap dwellings).
Shipping container conversion is the other area that bears potential. We have plenty, and as they are moveable rather than permanent buildings I suspect that the consent issues are different, which would keep costs down.
Small housing is also important in a resource depleted future, esp when it comes to energy (it’s way easier to heat a small space than a large one), and being able to move the building in response to the environment.
Shafer: “mandatory consumption laws”, that’s good.
NZFemme, nice little homes, reminds me of the ‘homes’ i had the pleasure to see at one of the ‘Ohu’ set up under the auspices of Norm Kirk’s Labour Government,
Although far more primitive in nature, these little houses, some built with actual trees growing through their center put Peter Jackson’s Hobbit-town to shame,
i fear tho, while a great way for the individual to build their own home the concept might be a little ‘too far out there’ for the provision of a mass of low cost rental accommodation which is my main area of interest,
If the state wanted to go ‘trailer homes’ with all the negative connotations ascribed to such housing i would suggest that for 40-60,000 luxury 5th wheeler caravans set up on a properly serviced site would be a far better fit,(obviously for single people)…
The benefit of these ‘trailer’ homes is that they require no building consent and can move, if job or life situations change. I also believe there are issues with toxicity with traditional/luxury trailers.
So, for low income families/young people the initial financial layout can reduce the costs of renting and/or eliminate them if you find someone who is willing to have you on site.
For the more stuff-accumulative – scale up a bit to something like the cottages on the Tumbleweed house site.
As for your suggestion re the properly serviced site – something along the lines of this?
Agreed on toxicity issues (which I think might be a problem with the Chinese import housing too). And the $50,000 range of mobile homes aren’t the luxury ones (think over 100 grand), and they’re not that big. Tinyhomes are built out to max size, I think in NZ for towing that’s something like 11 metres? A quick look at the mobile homes online, $50,000 gets you 6 or 7 metres.
Plenty of couples live in tiny housing (sometimes even with kids). Not for everyone granted.
There are companies starting to build too, so it’s not just for owner/builders. Tiny houses, container conversions etc.
I do agree that immediate or even medium solutions for mass low cost housing aren’t going to come from the tiny house movement though.
Again, is there any link to this ‘toxicity’ in 5th wheeler or flat-pack housing, with regards to the flat-pack housing such toxicity would be a matter of materials used and in a New Zealand situation,(the NZ supplier in the original Herald online article pointed out that using timber construction they can still produce at least the featured sleep-out for far less than the imported one featured),such toxic materials could be designed out of such housing,
How that would effect cost i have no means of calculating…
Hi bad12, sorry for the delay was AFK for a few hours.
From recollection I saw this mentioned in a couple of documentaries – but for the life of me I can’t remember which ones. However, googled outgassing motorhomes and came up with a blog ref to EPA RV’s outgassing Archives. Bit old though.
But as you say, this can be fixed with alternative materials – and along with design – that is what tiny trailer homes are.
Molly a link to this suggested toxicity of trailer homes/caravans would have been nice,(not a must i will have a Google later and see what i can find),
An excellent link to the ‘serviced site’, exactly what i would envisage and much the same as the two HousingNZ villages i have had a good look at previously, i would suggest tho that more space or fencing is needed with the picture showing the housing a little ‘too close for comfort’ in the front on aspect,
Pity the site didn’t include the actual cost, flat-pack housing on a suitably serviced site while not ‘as pretty’ as that shown might be found to be a more economical solution in the same vein when looking for mass housing suitable for the HousingNZ estate much of which features two properties to the acre…
As a post-script it appears that HousingNZ after nine months of ‘thinking’ have decided to sell the Gordon Wilson apartment complex in central Wellington, meanwhile, as plans go ahead to flick off this valuable property located on the Terrace which can accommodate 100+ tenants 100 people wait,and wait,and wait on HousingNZ’s urgent housing list, a small sample of those with dire housing needs as National’s housing criteria denies most applicants even the luxury of the long wait,
This is more of Nick Smith and National’s unspoken of Asset Sales, with the HousingNZ estate said to be worth 50 billion dollars and Smith along with the HousingNZ CEO making statements in the vein of ”i plan for HousingNZ to provide 20% less of the social housing and NGO’s to pick up the shortfall”, and, ”If a property is worth $750,000 and is empty it will be sold” it is easy to see the looming cluster-f**k that this will cause in the supply of affordable rental accommodation to those on the lowest incomes…
Agree on the State Housing – and Labour need to step up to the plate.
But they also need to proof it from further meddling: ie. pick some model that will share ownership with local community trusts or similar. Else the next right wing government will sell it all off again.
Neolibs are good at death by a thousand cuts. They chip away at long-term programmes in order to crow about short term benefits.
Along with finding solutions – the left need to design methods of tamper-proofing. If communities own 51% of the State Housing in an area, then a national government cannot sell it without their say so.
As for the Gordon Wilson sale, – words fail me. That sounds like exactly the type of housing they should be keeping – but HNZ in National hands is not about providing housing is it?
Yes there’s two tragedies occurring at the same time, the ransacking of the HousingNZ estate is not only a social catastrophe,(a cynic would suggest deliberate engineering to keep property prices going up along with the data on ‘economic growth’),and an Asset Sale that will in fact dwarf in monetary terms the selling of the Power generators,
Across the country Smith has been gleefully selling property as fast as He can, Hamilton 123 homes sold with 120 on the urgent waiting list,(remembering all the time that this is National’s criteria a far tighter regime than that of Labour),
Auckland while Paula Bennett holds a public meeting to decry the $30,000 a week provided to the owner of a ‘holiday park’ via His 300 rack rented tenants, most of whom are beneficiaries Nick Smith has ripped out at least 300 state houses from the area or simply sold them to the speculators, and on it goes,
Yes i agree with you on the ‘future proofing’ of State Housing, my little thought on this is Yes to housing trusts, the actual property should be vested in such trusts who would have a management overview, perhaps there need be a partnership with HousingNZ and such trusts where rents are still paid directly to HousingNZ while management passes to such housing trusts with the trust management being able to draw down on rents that have been paid plus the government subsidy to address maintainence issues,
That sounds a little complicated but with the actual ownership in Housing Trusts while finances are held by HousingNZ who could/would have a representative as a trust member the security of public ownership could be maintained even in the face of a Tory government and financial security of such housing trusts could be maintained by both having a HousingNZ rep on the trust as a liason while having HousingNZ in the role of accounting for spending to keep such trusts solvent…
Housing Trust idea sounds like a pretty good start. Let’s hope Labour picks it up… Long term tenancy allows people to make roots in a place and build community networks.
I believe there is more to housing than just putting a roof over peoples heads.
If HNZ can build healthy and safe communities as part of their stock – the social benefits of this are considerable and increase with time.
On National Radio, the Green policy on education was a welcome add on to the weak labour response to Hekia and JK on education.
What is or should be the purpose of ‘The System’ in your view?
Who should the System be for?
And by system I’m not referring to the political system, I am instead referring to the all pervasive one that we all live under and are subjected too.
Reading is a skill. I did not say the online had no articles. I said
” Anyway stuff and herald have nothing on online first headlines. Herald has editorial on it but brown ranks a headline.”
I nearly puked this morning when I heard richard preeble poormouthing David Cunliffe on RadioNew Zealand this morning. Is this news or are RNZ turning into shills for the tories?
Does RadioNew Zealand have any standards at all?
And I’m getting really pissed off with grumpy for posting links all the time.
why dont you say what you have to say instead of tying people up in fruitless searches for your bullshit!
And its official: wail boil is an addict.
Reliable sources report that he spends at least 15 minutes every morning when he wakes up looking in the mirror, he has a picture of himself as his screen saver and mirrors all around his workstation.
Time for him to join the noo noo heads, nitwits and narcississts 12 step programme.
I’ve been looking at service provision by governments as a general topic and got some interesting threads that I’ll put in here as I’m not sure what is the best current place for them.
Australian ideas on government – good to find what they are thinking. It should be enlightened.
Information about Open Government Guide – I was interested as to who was behind this outfit so am showing the names of those involved.
Who has the Guide been developed by?
The Guide was first published as a report by the Transparency and Accountability Initiative (T/AI) in 2011 and has been updated as an online resource in 2013. T/A I is a donor collaborative that aims to seize momentum and expand the impact breadth and coordination of funding and activity in the transparency and accountability filed as well as to explore applications of this work in new areas.
The collaborative includes the Ford Foundation, Hivos, the International Budget Partnership, the Omidyar Network, the Open Society Foundations (OSF), the Revenue Watech Institute, the UK Department for International Development and the William and Flora Hewett Foundation.
and getting background on government voucher use by citizens –
University of Birmingham listing of sources and info on voucher use
an interesting economist that seems to have a heart plus practicality –
About Nobel laureate Indian Economist Amartya Sen –
Interesting sounding info on economics –
Public Opinion, Happiness, and the Will of the People – Centre for ..
Note in the University of Birmingham link you will need to put voucher in the search space and that should give you 21 papers on their use. Which should be interesting.
Don’t know what happened but some of the links above don’t work.
The nlgn.org.uk -Choice one – no.
At the bottom the bhutan studies – no.
Choice and local services – it had a hidden character on the end of it.
Public Opinion, Happiness, and the Will of the People: Policy-making in a Democracy
The Standard is proudly powered by
WordPress. Theme by Mummybot.
166 queries. 2.262 seconds.