Open mike 28/02/2013

98 comments on “Open mike 28/02/2013 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Socialist Paddy 1

   28 February 2013 at 7:13 am

   Well last night settled things for me.

   Mallard has to go.

   The Chauvel valedictory speech was a wonderful thing. And at the end of it I had this thought, the guy is so talented and has only been here for a short time. Why does he have to go?

   He nailed it when he said this:

   “… it is unproductive to keep trying to locate and exclude the supposed enemy within.

   Instead, in order to avoid history repeating, it is time for an honest, open, and overdue assessment of why the 2011 campaign produced Labour’s worst ever electoral result. Those responsible for it should make dignified exits

   To put it another way, in Gough Whitlam’s immortal words, the party must have both its wings to fly.”

   At the end of the speech Mallard stormed out of Parliament without even applauding Chauvel’s speech.

   He then tweeted this:

   “My decision to seek Hutt South nomination just reinforced”.

   Talk about an extreme use of belligerent incompetent use of social media.

   There is something wrong with Labour when it loses Chauvel, demotes Cunliffe and Dalziel and refuses to promote Wall. Mallard is clearly part of the problem. He was the campaign manager for the most unsuccessful Labour campaign in over 80 years and has never been held to account.

   And he is in the middle of current problems.

   He has to go.
   • geoff 1.1

     28 February 2013 at 7:21 am

     +1 Paddy. Mallard is a disgrace.
     • Skinny 1.1.1

       28 February 2013 at 7:51 am

       Mallard is too much of a liability his tweet r.e. Standing in Hutt South was typical foot in mouth behavior, he is such a turn off to voters. If Shearer believes Malard is the heavy hitter that Labour can ill afford to loose well then he is delusional. Shearer needs to start writing ‘thank you for your services letters.’ Clean out deadwood & recruit new talent NOW!      
     • Colonial Viper 1.1.2

       28 February 2013 at 9:29 am

       Talk about an extreme use of belligerent incompetent use of social media.

       In that case, I suspect that Clare Curran has taught Trevor Mallard everything that she knows about Twitter.
       • Skinny 1.1.2.1

         28 February 2013 at 6:15 pm

         A crisp salute to that Colonial..the Scottish blood in me shudders to think the strong hold Dunedin electorate seats are slipping away care of Curran. Jim K sort your patch out down there & roll her out!
       • QoT 1.1.2.2

         28 February 2013 at 6:19 pm

         I guess it is somehow fitting with the Open Government ethos to constantly display one’s arrogance publicly.
   • saarbo 1.2

     28 February 2013 at 7:31 am

     Absolutely spot on. If the people pulling the strings dont make changes soon then Labour may never recover. Mallard and Goff at least need to go. I suspect the main problem may be that Mallard and Goff are heavily involved in pulling the strings.
     • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1

       28 February 2013 at 8:24 am

       If the people pulling the strings dont make changes soon then Labour may never recover.

       I’m not overly concerned by that. In fact, I think one of the best things that could happen is that Labour becomes a minor party as they’re too close to the present system and won’t change it.
   • David 1.3

     28 February 2013 at 7:52 am

     Twitter is great for telling plonkers like that off, sure he most probably won’t listen, that’s obvious to see. But some staffer may take it onboard. What a tool.
   • marty mars 1.4

     28 February 2013 at 8:06 am

     + 1 imo mallard is thick which was quite obvious from a long way out – remember when he said he was indigenous because he lived in Wainuiomata lol – sad and useless and desperately trying to be relevant.
   • Colonial Weka 1.5

     28 February 2013 at 10:47 am

     “There is something wrong with Labour when it loses Chauvel, demotes Cunliffe and Dalziel and refuses to promote Wall. Mallard is clearly part of the problem. He was the campaign manager for the most unsuccessful Labour campaign in over 80 years and has never been held to account.

     And he is in the middle of current problems.

     He has to go.”

     All true. But equally important is that the Labour Party needs to put processes in place that allow the party to hold MPs accountable.
   • Elizabeth Bourchier Real Labour 1.6

     28 February 2013 at 1:37 pm

     Toxic Trevor has performed poorly in Hutt South. If Mallard continues the teen of the past three elections it will be a marginal Labour seat in terms of Party Vote.

     He shares poor performance with his neighbours Annette, Grant and Hipkins.
   • Rogue Trooper 1.7

     28 February 2013 at 1:39 pm

     infantility (or should that be infant aside)
   • NickS 1.8

     28 February 2013 at 2:26 pm

     +1

     And with Clark not around and no-one else with the guts, there’s seemingly no-one in the party willing or able to tell Mallard to stfu, start thinking and stop being a douche.
   • tc 1.9

     28 February 2013 at 5:21 pm

     Mallard shares alot with many Labour MP’s/candidates, they think they’re so important/relevant/liked and always have smart answers when facts and results show they’ve lost the electorate.

     Clark knew what she was doing when she walked having kept bovver boy under a tight reign for years because without some portfolios to have him twiddling his thumbs over this is the kind of behaviour he can be relied on for, the nat’s best friend is a loose opposition MP, step right up trev.

     I remain positive it can be turned around (you have to really) but not with the clowns who architected the worst result in 30 years after going up against a lying, corrupt regime with enough dirt, dodgy deals and democratic destruction to end it at term 1.

     they don’t hold slipperys gov’t accountable because they don’t know what that is.
2. logie97 2

   28 February 2013 at 7:13 am

   If National can sell ’em then they can be bought back. That should now be the message.
   Buyers of the shares should be told, loud and clear, that the shares will be taken back at cost plus costs.

   The assets do not belong to a bunch of MPs to sell.
3. Paul 3

   28 February 2013 at 7:18 am

   Buyer beware
   “We will renationalise and you will lose your money.”
   • LynWiper 3.1

     28 February 2013 at 8:01 am

     +1
   • Skinny 3.2

     28 February 2013 at 8:06 am

     Alas Paul that call has only come from Winston, One would think with 80% of Kiwi’s opposed to our assets sales Shearer has a clear mandate to make the call. I won’t hold my breath!
     • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1

       28 February 2013 at 8:29 am

       It’s also come from The Alliance.
       • Sweetd 3.2.1.1

         28 February 2013 at 11:20 am

         The Alliance?!?!?! FFS, are they still going?

         Remind me again, what did they get in the latest political poll?
         • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1.1.1

           28 February 2013 at 12:58 pm

           Less than Act but, then, they also got a hell of a lot more than Act got at their first election. This would tend to indicate a possible high level of support and it’s probably in those that didn’t vote last time.
           • McFlock 3.2.1.1.1.1

             28 February 2013 at 1:22 pm

             More to the point, I quite like that the party is still around as a sort of “ideal world” conscience for left wing parties in parliament that face decisions of compromise. It’s why I still vote for it occasionally (I might even still be a member) – Alliance policies have a funny way of turning up later as policies of the parliamentary parties.

             I don’t care who is the prime minister, or which party is in government, as long as they stay roughly on course for reducing inequality and working for the many, not the few.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               28 February 2013 at 10:41 pm

               More to the point, I quite like that the party is still around as a sort of “ideal world” conscience for left wing parties in parliament that face decisions of compromise.

               Personally, I’d prefer if they were actually in parliament and possibly part of the next government. That way we’d know that their values and principals are supported by NZers.
     • Mary 3.2.2

       28 February 2013 at 9:52 am

       If there’s any chance Shearer and Labour promise this, there’s an accompanying 100% chance of a flip-flop and a further 100% chance that Labour would then sell the remaining 51% of power companies, all of Air NZ and begin ripping up Great Barrier Island in search of coal.
   • muzza 3.3

     28 February 2013 at 8:29 am

     There is not even a 0% liklihood of that happening!
     • Mary 3.3.1

       28 February 2013 at 10:20 am

       Anyone willing to go into bat for them, then?
       • muzza 3.3.1.1

         28 February 2013 at 11:56 am

         Hi Mary,

         Anyone who is waiting for the established systems to change, needs to re-think their position.

         Only the people can go into bat for the injustice which is dominating the country, and its people, sadly in the *me me me* world, its unlikely this will happen.

         Should people not stand up for eachother, we are all on the block, just at differing periods of the timeline.
         • Mary 3.3.1.1.1

           28 February 2013 at 12:18 pm

           Yes, I agree, even if my comment was meant to be a response to millsy at 10.11!!
4. Ed 4

   28 February 2013 at 8:43 am

   The court has indicated that in relation to Treaty settlements regarding water there are other ways to provide redress. Surely one of those would be to increase fees for licenses to use water . . . That would relate to the right that is being lost; and could increase over time in line with the value of that resource.

   For any government to say to investors who purchase shares in a government sell off that they will lose money is somehow not likely to engender confidence in that government subsequently, but the possibility of increased company costs for a known issue is something that any prudent investor would need to take into consideration.

   Another possibility is to require all sales of shares in energy companies to be sold to new Zealand residents. Again is the likelihood of such a restriction is known now it may affect the price the price achieved for taxpayers now, but would be a known risk that would be allowed for by prudent investors.

   I hope that a Labour / Green government never gets involved in confiscation of property because of a political disagreement, but normal operations of government do need to be allowed for by potential purchasers . . .
5. BLiP 5

   28 February 2013 at 9:08 am

   .

   Interesting ad in today’s Situations Vacant.
   • bad12 5.1

     28 February 2013 at 9:22 am

     Lolz that’s a funny one, need something to have a smile about amidst all the Labour Party carnage on display today,

     Lucky me i walked away after that greatly applauded former leader ‘Helen’ told the poorest of the poor to ‘eat s**t’ when dishing out a previous bag of lollies,

     It is obvious that the ‘right wing’ of the Labour Party is still in the ascendency for the foreseeable future so rather than continue the wah wah wah those crying a river over this should consider supporting a political party to the left of the current Labour one…
   • joe90 5.2

     28 February 2013 at 11:37 am

     Ladies and Gentlemen, place your bets.
6. The Al1en 6

   28 February 2013 at 9:24 am

   “It is obvious that the ‘right wing’ of the Labour Party is still in the ascendency for the foreseeable future so rather than continue the wah wah wah those crying a river over this should consider supporting a political party to the left of the current Labour one…”

   Or just vote Green and continue to put the boot in to caucus knobbers for fun.
   • bad12 6.1

     28 February 2013 at 10:11 am

     LOLZ, yeah but the energy would be better spent on spitting at National, i aint happy one little bit with Labour and am even a bit disappointed with the Green Party which i am a member of for the cynical way that i see both Party’s having ‘used’ public opposition to asset sales and for the lackluster support of both Party’s for the ‘living wage’ campaign,

     (1), Both Labour and the Green Party’s could have and in my opinion should have had an alternative policy being shouted at National across the house every day of every week over the sale of the States assets,

     The simple policy should be that the ‘Cullen Super Fund’ will be restarted under a Labour/Green Government and that all the shares of the sold assets will be bought and invested within that fund AND that taxation for those who have purchased the shares MIGHT have to rise to enable this to happen,

     What tho have we got from our main Opposition Party’s, simply an oppose,oppose,oppose weak at the knees wringing of the hands insipid ‘but our petition for a referendum has the numbers’,

     (2), ‘The living wage’, what insipid support that has so far received from both Labour and the Green Party’s, both seem to be operating on the basis of never let an opportunity to advance the cause of the working poor wake you up from your sleep or drag you away from the mirrors in search of your personal vanity,

     The unveiling of the ‘living wage campaign’ was a golden opportunity for both Labour and the Green party’s to unveil an election policy of raising the minimum wage by $1.50 an hour every year while they are in office,

     Such a policy showing a clear difference between the Opposition and National along with the Treasury advice that raising the minimum wage does not lead to job losses could and should have been used every day of every week to beat upon this National Government in the Parliament, such a policy is a clear vote winner with anyone concerned with low wage structures in this country and would extend further than those subject to such abysmal wage structures,

     What have we got from both Opposition Party’s??? the Zen silence in two areas of concern that are just begging the Opposition to fill with some clear policy….
     • The Al1en 6.1.1

       28 February 2013 at 10:31 am

       “LOLZ, yeah but the energy would be better spent on spitting at National”

       Multi tasking is your friend 😉

       “and am even a bit disappointed with the Green Party which i am a member of”

       Not a member, but me too.

       L+G both need a bit of a wake the fuck up shake. You’re losing.
       Fight or fuck off out of the way isn’t too extreme, given the polling.
     • Draco T Bastard 6.1.2

       28 February 2013 at 1:43 pm

       The simple policy should be that the ‘Cullen Super Fund’ will be restarted under a Labour/Green…

       Hate to break it to you but the Cullen Fund isn’t a viable policy. The economic paradigm that we have doesn’t work and so neither does the Cullen Fund.
   • aerobubble 6.2

     28 February 2013 at 11:30 am

     Vote Green on the List, vote Labour in the constituiency. This is a double whammy, since should Labour start getting overhang…. …I mean what was the point of Clark burning the rope with Maori but to create the Maori party and a over hang of 2 seats. Its bleedingly obvious that was what ACT was for, that was what the new Conservative party is for. So why the frak is any unionist voting Labour on the List???? Someone needs to remind the left that stupid loses elections. Vote Green Duh.
7. Mary 7

   28 February 2013 at 9:59 am

   This is worrying:

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8361189/Reprieve-for-family-after-urgent-hearing

   How can a person “lose” their bond because of liquidation? I though all bonds must be lodged at the bond centre place run by the Housing ministry, and if they aren’t then the landlord faces a fine.

   Also, surely the 90 day notice is retaliatory because it “dared” to take the landlord to the tribunal? There’s a clear provision in the RTA that prohibits retaliation.

   Is there anyone in Invercargill who can help this family?
   • millsy 7.1

     28 February 2013 at 10:11 am

     Of course it is retaliatory.

     Sadly, this sort of thing happens all the time.
     • Mary 7.1.1

       28 February 2013 at 10:30 am

       That’s right, so is there anyone in Invercargill who’s prepared to go into bat for these people?
   • Draco T Bastard 7.2

     28 February 2013 at 10:21 am

     How can a person “lose” their bond because of liquidation? I though all bonds must be lodged at the bond centre place run by the Housing ministry, and if they aren’t then the landlord faces a fine.

     Yep, that’s as I understand it but ask a lawyer. It may be different for a “professional” agency.
     • Mary 7.2.1

       28 February 2013 at 10:28 am

       Am pretty sure it’s the dame for everyone. The agency is merely a representative of the landlord. xtasy will know for sure, but I’m also pretty sure, too. Hey, xtasy!! What’s the story?!!
     • aerobubble 7.2.2

       28 February 2013 at 12:05 pm

       If the landlord doesn’t lodge the bond its fraud. Now the current practice is where one side of the party has received goods and service, i.e. beneficiaries have been given money to eat, to see a doctor, to obtain housing, thus assuaging Government duty to provide basic welfare provision to all, when the beneficiary commits fraud they must not only pay back the fraudulent amount but the entire benefit for the period of the fraud. So Landlords who don’t deposit the bond are liable for to repay all the rent for the period of the fraud. Oh, wait, sorry, we live in NZ where there’s one law for government and another for citizens.

       Governments, councils, and other public institutions held undeveloped land are naturally insured by their sheer size from the loss of land, and so recoup 100% of the cost. But private holders of land who just brought from council, undeveloped land for consider more than the cost of undeveloped land (as its now easily connected to the road, water, waste, electricity networks) and can now only recoup 50% (an arbitrary amount Brownlee just made up because in his mind its ‘fair’). Oh, wait, that’s okay, we live in NZ where there’s one law for government and another for citizens. I don’t remember anywhere where a citizen can declare what’s fair and it being held over government.

       Proportionality another evil National party hates.
       • aerobubble 7.2.2.1

         28 February 2013 at 12:17 pm

         What gives? Some land is in the red zone and can be built on but the cost of supplying (fixing the services, water, gas, electricity) means the land is rezoned by edict and brought out at 50% of its pre-quake value. So land loses it value because of access to developed nature of the section, but Brownlee says the land is not developed???? so but for the fact that land is now declared and rezoned due to access to utilities the land is now worth 50%…

         So buyers brought land, in housing developments, due to the fact that the land has been developed for the purpose, and government won’t pay 100% because its nots developed, and
         other land that is quite able of being built on but can’t be because the cost of developing the land is now exorbitant and so sections rezoned red are undeveloped land.

         No still don’t get why sections aren’t getting the full 100% of their premium pre-quake price.
         • Rogue Trooper 7.2.2.1.1

           28 February 2013 at 1:44 pm

           ol’ Bob the Gilder
         • Treetop 7.2.2.1.2

           28 February 2013 at 10:04 pm

           I don’t think you can insure a section, only when building has began and I think that rates still have to be paid.

           Someone else may know the full answer.
       • bad12 7.2.2.2

         28 February 2013 at 10:30 pm

         Ah the ‘ownership’ model, bet they all wish now that they had of strong-armed the Governments of the past into supplying EVERYBODY with a home at 25% of household income as rent,

         Wait till the next tranche of the Financial collapse of Capitalism kicks in, then you will really hear the middle classes going ouch…
   • bad12 7.3

     28 February 2013 at 10:38 am

     Yes supposedly the ‘bond’ is lodged with Tenancy Services, it then becomes a question of does an insolvency allow the ‘liquidator’ access to this money,

     My view is that it shouldn’t as the bond money is only the ‘landlords’ money after application is made to the Tenancy Tribunal by the ‘Landlord’,

     i think you will find that as the story unfolds that it is likely that the ‘tenant’ paid 4 weeks rent in advance along with the bond when He rented the house,

     This is another case where the ‘little people’ having little knowledge of the law are discriminated against by those who do have a full working knowledge of the laws provisions,

     Unfortunately it would be the onus on the tenant who has to ‘prove’ that the 90 days notice is in fact retaliation, the Landlord in this case only need contend that because of the liquidation the bank is to sell the house and wants vacant possession of the property,

     Here again we have the glaring evidence of the deregulated economy favoring the haves against the have not’s, tenants are left in all these disputes to fight their own battles with little or no knowledge of the law which is exacerbated when tenants have English only as a second language,

     The Tenancy Tribunal should be given the powers and the personal to investigate and prosecute ALL alleged breaches of the law whether alleged to have been committed by the landlord or the tenant….
     • bad12 7.3.1

       28 February 2013 at 10:52 am

       The legal problem the tenant has is that he paid the bond to the previous Landlord/owner who may not have lodged this bond with Tenancy Services as required by the law and has since become insolvent,

       The liquidator has then presumably taken over ‘ownership’ of the property and thus cannot really be held responsible in law for the previous actions of the previous owner…
       • aerobubble 7.3.1.1

         28 February 2013 at 11:38 am

         Yeah, so can a person check that their landlord has the bond. So that people will now go and do so say threes month in. And landlords start going to jail for fraud.
         • cricklewood 7.3.1.1.1

           28 February 2013 at 2:53 pm

           If your landlord posts your bond onwards to the Bond Centre as they should, you will in due course receive a letter and bond number if you don’t get either it’s time to start asking questions.
   • Murray Olsen 7.4

     28 February 2013 at 10:32 pm

     Landlords absolutely hate leaving money with the government. I had one who didn’t charge a bond, just so the government wouldn’t have his money. I suspect it also helps them claim that rents they receive are less than what they actually get. As far as I know, what this agency has done is totally illegal, but there are far more landlords sitting in courts and tribunals than there are tenants. Funnily enough, this is another activity undertaken by the moneyed class that is never seen as bludging.
     • McFlock 7.4.1

       28 February 2013 at 10:36 pm

       small business syndrome.
   • xtasy 7.5

     1 March 2013 at 1:30 am

     Mary –

     “However, just hours after the tribunal decision to say the family could stay, a 90 day notice to terminate the tenancy was put in their letterbox from First National. The family decided not to fight.”

     How “bizarre” indeed.

     Bonds are held by the Tenancy Office or whatever it is called. So when a landlord goes bust for whatever reason, that should not affect a bond paid in good faith by a tenancy agreement party, i.e. this family as tenants.

     When the tenancy is taken over by a new landlord, the bond should still be held by the same office. If a bond should have been “claimed” by any landlord, the tenant would have to be notified of this.

     That is unless there are peculiar reasons unknown to me, where bonds can be claimed by creditors of a broke landlord, but it does not make sense.

     Yet a 90 day notice may of course be seen as “retaliatory”, but a landlord can always give a 90 day notice, without having to state any reasons. It is the standard notice period to terminante any residential tenancy.

     I have had something like that happen to me, where a neighbour intentionally caused problems, provoked me, and when exposed to unreasonable noise for well over an hour in a totally uninsulated flat, my “problem” was starting to take issue and have a verbal exchange with said “neighbour” (from hell). The landlord, another typical “investor” one, did not want any issues and simply gave me notice, because the neighbour’s landlord was one my landlord did not dare to take on.

     There is heaps of such shit going on, and NZ could learn from tenancy laws that are common in Central European countries, offering much better protection to tenants.

     But then again, I dare not to dream here, as ignorance and mean-spiritness seem to rule so much of NZ affairs in many areas, including tenancies and housing.
8. DH 8

   28 February 2013 at 10:58 am

   What’s happened to maths ability in this country? This nonsense about Uni of Canty was in the ‘paper;

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/8361705/University-needs-certainty-Labour-says

   It says a deficit of $67million is mostly attributed to an extra $60m of building repair costs and $20m of library depreciation. That adds up to $80million. Mostly?

   Then it says this;

   “However, ignoring earthquake recovery costs and the library adjustment, the deficit would have been $6.6m…..”

   And here was me thinking 80 was more than 67, which would leave a surplus of $13million. This is from a University?

   It’s also worth noting that depreciation is a non-cash book entry that doesn’t require any immediate funding.
   • Chris 8.1

     28 February 2013 at 12:20 pm

     A lot of the building repair costs would be recovered through insurance which would also be in the profit and loss (that is the only explanation I can come up with).

     Saying that I did read that article earlier and thought it was terribly written – it was obviously someone who doesn’t understand accounts and was just throwing down every number they were told.
     • DH 8.1.1

       28 February 2013 at 12:46 pm

       The impression I got was the deficit was due to the cost of strengthening buildings to new earthquake standards rather than repairing damage, as you say repairs are covered by insurance so there shouldn’t be any extra costs there.

       It’s debatable whether you’d put that in the books as an expense or capital expenditure, I’d think it would be more improvements than repairs & maintenance but the beancounters could probably put it down as either. If Uni has the money, which they say they do, I don’t really see why the Govt should fund it when the equity will increase with the higher building valuations.. or lower future depreciation.

       It certainly needs more information than what’s been given in that article.
   • Mary 8.2

     3 March 2013 at 11:46 am

     “Yet a 90 day notice may of course be seen as “retaliatory”, but a landlord can always give a 90 day notice, without having to state any reasons. It is the standard notice period to terminante any residential tenancy.”

     Yes, that’s right, the 90 day notice can be issued without any reason and basically reflects the fact that the landlord owns the property. I’ve got no problem with that. But even if it can be shown that the issuing of the 90 day notice was retaliatory then my guess is that the tenant still has an action against the landlord. The difference, though, would simply be in the remedy available. For example, if a 90 day was issued and it was found to be retaliatory and the landlord wasn’t prepared to relent and let the tenant stay then the Tribunal couldn’t order the tenancy to continue, but it could order some other remedy, most likely damages.
9. Jackal 9

   28 February 2013 at 11:15 am

   Hi 1prent, I don’t seem to be able to edit comments. The edit box appears and states Comment Loaded Successfully, however this is not the case and the edit box is blank. Also, The Jackal feed is not appearing while Auckland Transport Blog and Frankly Speaking are appearing twice… I would appreciate these glitches being fixed at your earliest convenience.
   • Lanthanide 9.1

     28 February 2013 at 12:43 pm

     Edit box is a known problem that he hasn’t had time to fix yet.

     I suggest emailing him about the feed issue if you want to guarantee he sees it.
     • Jackal 9.1.1

       2 March 2013 at 6:03 pm

       I’ve already emailed 1prent and was informed that the problem would be resolved last weekend.
       • Populuxe1 9.1.1.1

         2 March 2013 at 6:17 pm

         It hasn’t.
       • lprent 9.1.1.2

         2 March 2013 at 7:27 pm

         Yep, and no. What I said was that I would expend time then. Did, couldn’t find the problem, now allocated to either next weekend or holidays between then and now.
10. Addison 10

    28 February 2013 at 11:39 am

    My guess as to what will happen with the shares is this. There will be incentives for kiwis to buy and hold for a period of time. This will mean quite a lot of kiwis will hold shares either directly or through their Kiwisaver accounts. If Labour then say they will Nationalise I suspect it will be as popular as raising the pension age was and CGT. You have be out maneuvered again.
    • Colonial Viper 10.1

      28 February 2013 at 9:06 pm

      People wanna take risks with their monies, they will have been told, so be it.
11. ak 11

    28 February 2013 at 11:43 am

    The Daily Blog. Tumeke and very, very welcome.
12. marty mars 12

    28 February 2013 at 11:47 am

    It’s probably been said but I’d like say I am very pleased that Tame Iti has been released from prison. I agree with Tame that he is a political prisoner and I hope his conviction and sentence are overturned by the Supreme Court. I agree with Hone that Tame has increased his mana and I think that mana shows through in his statements, such as

    He held no resentment about being in jail nine months, saying he enjoyed his time there and was able to work and be creative with his art.

    Iti said he was inspired by reading a book about former South African leader Nelson Mandela and wants to write one on the history of political prisoners in New Zealand.

    Also good news also that fellow political prisoner Te Rangikaiwhiria Kemara has also been granted parole and will leave prison on Monday.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/129165/released-iti-says-he%27s-a-political-prisoner

    http://www.mars2earth.blogspot.co.nz/2013/02/they-cant-break-us.html
    • millsy 12.1

      28 February 2013 at 11:37 pm

      Mandela, he aint….
13. ianmac 13

    28 February 2013 at 11:53 am

    At least Jane Clifton noticed the travesty of yesterday’s Question time as reported at Stuff:
    He asked him once, he asked him twice, he asked him three times – but in a strange re- imagining of the biblical parable in Parliament yesterday, it was Speaker David Carter who cried uncle when Green Russel Norman could not get the cock to crow.

    The rooster in question, Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce, was happy to crow about how clever the Government was to have saved The Hobbit trilogy, but was cheerfully determined not to say whether Hollywood executives had pressured the Government to change labour laws for the films.

    Mr Carter let Dr Norman ask the same question three times, and agreed Mr Joyce had not answered it, but argued there was no point spending further time on it. The public would note the refusal to answer, and judge accordingly.
    But where are the other watchdogs? Political Journalists? Having cups of tea with the PM no doubt.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/8362005/Avoid-answering-three-times-and-you-are-home-free
    • emergency mike 13.1

      28 February 2013 at 3:28 pm

      I commented on this in yesterday’s open mike. I’m glad Jane Clifton noticed, but otherwise it’s proof positive that the mainstream political media is either asleep at the switch or isn’t interested in biting the hand that is scratching their backs. “The public will judge,” righto.
14. Rogue Trooper 14

    28 February 2013 at 12:12 pm

    another “McNeill Survey” spelling trouble
    http://www.bayofplentytimes.co.nz/news/spelling-trouble-in-our-classes/1772019/
    in writing 32% performing below national standards
    for excellent composition Marx there is clearly a Deb utante; Awarded ‘a’
    V, for dry, ‘a’ M, for memery, and an H for hart: NO ExpectationS Brian,
    read The Deposition of Father McGreevy (comparable to One Hundred Years of Solitude).

    On the RMA reform proposals (when A meets A), wonder what Greg’s thoughts are; “sacrifice environment to development”? (duely relaced with couple of polished Gudgeon pins).
    “heard the people who live on the ceiling scream and fight most scarily
    hearing that noise the first ever feeling saving coupons from packets of tea”

    In a “letter to the Dominion editor” a correspondent reminded that in contrast to NK, the US have carried out 1054 nuclear tests physically, official count, with a continuing program of sub-critical tests.
    They signed themselves, Chairman, NZDPRK Society; wonders never cease. 😉

    Re-engraving history leads into The Handmaids’ Tale. 🙂
    • ianmac 14.1

      28 February 2013 at 1:18 pm

      Pretty good advice there about Spelling from Brigid:
      University of Canterbury senior education lecturer Brigid McNeill said teachers typically used a memory-based strategy – spelling tests with pre-taught words – rather than concentrate on developing skills which would help children spell all words correctly.
      Teachers feel pressed to use lists of words and testing that list because that’s what parents expect. But it has almost no effect on poor spellers except to put them off for life. They say a teacher that expects 25 words in a learning list must be better than one who expects 10. Go figure.
      • Rogue Trooper 14.1.1

        28 February 2013 at 2:01 pm

        reading your reply leads to sadness concerning both Brothers, and brothers, and “brothers”; since Primary, been engaging with folk who had their reading, writing, spelling and general Comprehension neglected; (as a child, i patiently tutored my brothers from time to time after school, mandatory really; Interestingly, in context, a brother who really struggled became a Manager with an admirable ability to write presentations / power points, yet, then, he had a generous father, genetically Transference) on that subject, it is always helpful to bone up on Defense Mechanisms; healthy in moderation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_mechanisms
        (Highway 61 Revisted, from Pole to Pole).
15. Rogue Trooper 15

    28 February 2013 at 12:22 pm

    Get a fix
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY9b6jgbNyc
    Viva La Vida
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvgZkm1xWPE
    Violet
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IakDItZ7f7Q
    Charlie!
16. Rogue Trooper 16

    28 February 2013 at 12:25 pm

    STP (memory Fades To Grey. Not!)
17. Tiresias 17

    28 February 2013 at 12:50 pm

    I was drawn to the following comment article in the Guardian on-line

    “Italy’s left loses the popularity contest again

    However grotesquely, Berlusconi and Grillo succeeded in this election where the left always fails – to mobilise the masses”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/27/italy-left-loses-popularity-contest

    And struck by the following posted response:

    “Neo-Liberalism has taken the place of left wing radicalism. Career politicians see the use of platitudes and spin as a means to disguise who they really represent. When all the politicians are singing from the same hymn sheet, it is not difficult to understand that the majority of people will repeat like parrots what they are told, only to be confused by the none reality of events which they then find themselves in, lower incomes, lower standard of living and yet rising cost of living.

    This is the cost of losing the social wage (welfare state and public services) but people can’t evaluate the loss because there is no-one articulating what it all means to them.”

    I recommend the article.
    • Rogue Trooper 17.1

      28 February 2013 at 1:47 pm

      see Both Sides Now
18. NickS 18

    28 February 2013 at 3:03 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8361477/Low-income-people-have-nowhere-to-go

    That comment thread…

    T_T

    Long term consequences of poverty on kids and the (now historical) use of social welfare to mitigate it seem to escape most of the commentators on there and none are even bothering to think about the basic fucking question should ask. Such as type of crime and the length of time since it occurred, same with the bad credit + the circumstances it occurred in. Instead, it’s “zomg! theyz gots bad credit!!11!” and plain old bs about “responsibility” without any the basic knowledge to understand the issues poverty creates, let alone any bloody empathy.

    Nor is there any recognition that this is part of the problem the loss of state housing in New Zealand has created, where the vulnerable now end up sleeping in their cars, in campgrounds and at shelters provided by charities. If they’re lucky. Or worse yet, wanabe slumlords, though in CHCH’s case those arse hats are busy fleecing the middle class and rebuild workers high rents for what are often frankly crap heaps that pre-quake were cheap just to entice people into being foolish enough to rent.
    • Rogue Trooper 18.1

      28 February 2013 at 4:24 pm

      as Pat Magill laid 😉 it out succinctly, “Land of The Long White Retribution” (yes, threaten a peoples’ illusory impression of themselves with a mirror and they’ll have ya’ sown up legally in no time, regardless of the eventual cost that reflects back.)
19. Colonial Viper 19

    28 February 2013 at 3:57 pm

    Kyle Bass hits another one out of the park

    Financial and demographic strife will strain or tear Japan’s social fabric…nationalism on the increase…central banks are starting to distrust each other…hyperinflation will wipe out the middle class while the poor stay poor and the rich stay wealthy.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDs_vnyzmWU
    • Rogue Trooper 19.1

      28 February 2013 at 4:20 pm

      was reading that Abe may break their earlier “demilitarization treaty /s” and go Nuclear
      (sadly a lotta tools do not read widely enough, not a Whole Lotta Love)
20. vto 20

    28 February 2013 at 4:28 pm

    .
    honour the treaty

    then improve it
21. Rogue Trooper 21

    28 February 2013 at 4:55 pm

    Sh*ttin’ where we eat
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10868363
    in them Red Bands
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10868352
    better than Horse meat
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-most-brutal-upsetting-thing-ive-ever-seen-18yearold-woman-obsessed-with-necrophilia-accused-of-having-threeway-sex-on-top-of-corpses-of-men-the-group-allegedly-murdered-8513472.html
    and they’re off
    http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=569351
    patriots
    http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backchannels/2013/0226/Is-a-third-Palestinian-intifada-coming?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feeds%2Fworld+%28Christian+Science+Monitor+|+World%29
    in their millions
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/britain-based-charity-oxfam-says-syrias-humanitarian-crisis-spinning-out-of-control/2013/02/27/1053ba82-80f0-11e2-a671-0307392de8de_story.html.

    Roundup
22. Rogue Trooper 22

    28 February 2013 at 4:59 pm

    69 (whose on top and whose flaying)
23. Naki nark 23

    28 February 2013 at 5:25 pm

    I posted this on wrong Open Mike. I am so not good at blogging!

    Awesome speech by Mr David Cunliffe about generations and fairness. I hope Trevor watches it. Real Labour.

    http://inthehouse.co.nz/node/17360
24. NoseViper (The Nose knows) 24

    28 February 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Heard on the news : Nathan Guy advises that the government is conscious…
25. Doug 25

    28 February 2013 at 8:59 pm

    “Today’s New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows a surge in support for Prime Minister John Key’s National (47.5%, up 3.5%) now with its biggest lead over the main Opposition Labour Party (30.5%, down 4%) since July 2012. Support for third party the Greens has also dropped to 12.5% (down 1%).

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1302/S00311/roy-morgan-poll-national-with-huge-lead-over-labour.htm
    • McFlock 25.1

      28 February 2013 at 9:10 pm

      cue more navel-gazing over a 2% swing
      • Colonial Viper 25.1.1

        28 February 2013 at 9:23 pm

        reinforces the true mean at ~31.5%
        • McFlock 25.1.1.1

          28 February 2013 at 10:21 pm

          34.5 to 30.5 reinforces a 31.5 support level?
          Well, your annual average is okay, but it wouldn’t be much different (i.e. decimal place variation in the average) if this poll result were 36 or 40%.

          A) last six month average
          (to mid-sept): Labour 32.1, National 44.8

          B) previous six month average
          midfeb2012-midsept2012 average: Labour 30.3, National 46.2

          C) Election november 2011: Labour 27.5%, National 47.3%.
          C[i])election to midfeb2012 average: Labour 29.1%, National 46.45%

          Ok, C[i] is finicky because RM stopped polling until jan, but I figured it was more fair than going solely by the 2012 election, given we’re talking period trends.

          at a couple of percent every six months, with 18 months to go til the election, that’s +6% change for labour on 38%.
          Greens seem to be holding, so 12%: that’s 50% without mana or nz1.
          National losing at 1% every six months, that’s -3% change, that’s National on 41%.

          Does this mean labour can sleepwalk to victory? Nope.
          Does it mean Shearer is perfect? Nope.
          Does it mean a Left defeat is certain? Fuck no. Cautious optimism is on the table.
          • bad12 25.1.1.1.1

            28 February 2013 at 10:45 pm

            Seriously, if Labour want to make a contest of it, they would only need announce tomorrow an election policy of raising the minimum wage by $1.50 an hour for every year they are next in Government,

            They, (Labour), have a Treasury report which directly states that raising the minimum wage will not lead to job losses so with such a policy they could not only beat Slippery’s Government every day of every week in the House, rubbing their face into a policy that the Tory’s just cannot compete on,

            Hell with such a policy Labour might even attract quite enough of the ‘did not vote crowd’ to vote for them and save themselves the embarrassment of having to dream up even more election bribes to offer the middle classes in the game of ping pong being played at the moment where Labour try and wrestle a couple of % of the middle classes vote off of Slippery’s crew…
            • McFlock 25.1.1.1.1.1

              28 February 2013 at 11:06 pm

              I don’t believe in magic bullets, either in the form of policies or people.

              Hard work in the hope of gradual improvement, or even to merely tread water if the tide of society is agin you: that I believe in.
              • Colonial Viper …

                28 February 2013 at 11:11 pm

                I don’t believe in magic bullets, either in the form of policies or people.

                Forget the magic bullets, I’d settle for not turning up to a gunfight with a blunt butter knife.
                • McFlock …

                  28 February 2013 at 11:25 pm

                  Well, sometimes all you need is an empty cup and to hold your nerve.
                  • Colonial Viper …

                    28 February 2013 at 11:37 pm

                    Nice clip. And I have no problem with who’s holding the empty cup in this scenario.
              • bad12 …

                28 February 2013 at 11:23 pm

                Yeah go on Mac give us a ‘roll your sleeves up’ quote while your at it, lolz Labour can’t bribe the middle class with anything much because the shop is outta lollies now and will be for the next election as well,

                What the f**k are Labour going to fight the 2014 election with ‘a larger amount of borrowing’ perhaps, Slippery will make a fool out of Shearer in the television debates if Labour try that,

                It’s going to be one hell of a long wait for Shearer to put some meat on the bones of His ‘i’m all for the kiwi battler’ bullshit and if He don’t he can probably guaranty Labour another 3 on the wrong side of the House,

                Lolz i like your theory of the trickle down election gains but i think Slippery’s idea of holding onto the middle classes with the spending splash off of the asset sales is going to trump anything that Labour can offer that cohort of voters…
                • McFlock …

                  28 February 2013 at 11:30 pm

                  Asset sales are barely going to dent the deficit. And spending splash would happen anyway. And asset sales will piss off voters, too.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS