Written By: - Date published: 6:20 pm, November 28th, 2007 - 49 comments
Categories: john key -
Tags: john key
Linda Clark: “This is a gimmick, that’s all it is. if people don’t know John Key, well he needs to come to Parliament more, he needs to be more upfront on some of the policies, he needs to take on Helen Clark a bit more, then we’ll all know the real John Key”.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
ok Thomas, think it was you and that mainland titbit. Mr Key mentions we are 22 out of 30 in the OECD
Ok have a bit of an answer from the site myself, Mr Key needs to define this a bit more as which stat this is. There is not a combined overall stat. So Mr Key, which stat are you referring to?
People the only thing funny here is that Linda Clark goes on nationwide TV to pontificate about a DVD that she then admits she has never watched!!! Haha what a lightweight – TV3 should fire her as their pundit cos she is not really putting the effort in.
Cheers
Rob so: Re Govt spending:
“I actually agree with you that this creates a grey area and an advantage for the incumbent (whether National or Labour).”
But you will let the EFB slide anyway.
Re The Select Committee:
“It wasn’t an ideal process.”
But you will go with it anyway.
Re the EB:
“The EB can still do exactly what they did last time. The only restriction on them is that this time they have to be honest about who is doing it.”
They did consult with the Electoral Commission, then ignored the rules, so the processes to stop them were already in place, but badly applied.
So the EFB changes nothing there, but you will let that slide.
‘Hysterical RIght-wingers’ ok, you didn’t say it, but the Standard is full of references to anyone who has the temerity to oppose the EFB.
The use of the Select Committee in this case was an abuse of the system.
It seems to me that the left is already positioning itself for the long struggle it will have to face to get this apalling sham of a law changed after it passes, despite the fact they twisted every argument they could to get it passed. Now it is close to passing, they are already starting to wriggle out of the unsavoury fact that it is flawed and undemocratic, despite the Party Line saying otherwise.
However, I actually agree with you that this creates a grey area and an advantage for the incumbent (whether National or Labour). So I’d be interested in your suggestions as to how to deal with that issue.
Sorry as an afterthought – I’d suggest a more cross-party consultation process on the kind of public information package the electorate needs to see, and a projected budget. It would be a way to exploit the MMP system and train MPs how to use the communications media, as well as put some kind of checks on abuses.
Lee C – Rob so: Re Govt spending: “I actually agree with you that this creates a grey area and an advantage for the incumbent (whether National or Labour).” But you will let the EFB slide anyway.
It’s a grey area Lee, the boundary between electioneering and informing the public is very grey indeed. If you think the EFB is complicated and unwieldily now, just imagine what it would have been like if it had tried to take on this too. And I’m sure you don’t want to argue that a government cannot inform the public.
Sorry as an afterthought – I’d suggest a more cross-party consultation process on the kind of public information package the electorate needs to see, and a projected budget. It would be a way to exploit the MMP system and train MPs how to use the communications media, as well as put some kind of checks on abuses.
There you go, see, a constructive suggestion, bravo. Mind you, it is dependent on the opposition party being constructively engaged. Which National, sadly, is not. Their only mode is blind negativity. Why else would they vote against tax cuts? Never mind, maybe when Labour is next in opposition they will be a constructive opposition (and of course, maybe they won’t).
Re The Select Committee: “It wasn’t an ideal process.” But you will go with it anyway.
Sure will! Because it addressed a problem that needed addressing. Better a bad process than none at all.
Re the EB: “The EB can still do exactly what they did last time. The only restriction on them is that this time they have to be honest about who is doing it.”
They did consult with the Electoral Commission, then ignored the rules, so the processes to stop them were already in place, but badly applied. So the EFB changes nothing there, but you will let that slide.
Be consistent Lee. The EFB either restricts the EB (as you argued above) or changes nothing (as you argue here) but not both.
I think we are going in circles.
I haven’t argued that the EFB restricts the EB, You said it would have no difference on them. I questioned why we should have it then? How is that inconsistent?
As for the statement that National are too negative to get involved with the discussion, this is a betrayal of the electorate as much by Labour as by National. But to pick up the football and refuse to play, as Labour have done, is like suggesting that because some people refuse to vote, we should do away with democracy, because people are being ‘negative’.
The Government is elected to show proper leadership and set a proper example – not to massage the rules, for partisan expediency.
As you handing out praise for positive ideas, how about this for a law such as the eFB?
Cross party consultation,
Public consultation
White Paper
Draft Bill
Select Committee
Vote
Law.
I strongly recommend you examine your principles around your attitude to the way the Select Committee process has been used here. “Because it addressed a problem that needed addressing. Better a bad process than none at all.”
You mean, in your opinion.
This is the whole crux of my argument and has been so far. We cannot just invent policy and rig procedures to enable it based on ‘the end justifies the means’ as a rationale.
I say this not because I am looking at it from a politically partisan viewpoint, but because I am concerned that it establishes a dangerous precedent. Especially when money is involved.
Those who got involved with the construction of the EFB did so for the wrong reasons.
The Greens to get back at the EB
Labour to get the pledge Card fiasco sorted,
WInston to get his overspend back.
Anderton and Dunne well – go figure.
When you circumvent the process, and the checks and balances are ignored, it is an admission of defeat – it is saying that your belief in the democratic process is lost, even if you say you are doing it to ‘protect democracy’ – usually the firs thing any despot in waiting uses to declare ‘emergency powers’ too!
In the post 9-11 world, suppression of dissent is the new orthodoxy and you are blindly subscribing to it.
I gotta go be in the real world for a bit Lee, I’ll be back tonight. Before I go though you said: “I haven’t argued that the EFB restricts the EB”. Please check your post of 9:39 am and tell me how you haven’t contradicted yourself?
Later…
“Cross party consultation,
Public consultation
White Paper
Draft Bill
Select Committee
Vote
Law.”
Sounds grand. How long would that take realistically? Bearing in mind that the process wouldn’t have gotten underway untill at least 6 months after the election, and that the new law would need to be in place well before the next election I’m thinking the window isn’t big enough.
I understand your points about the percieved perfidy of the parties involved in drafting this law, but do you accept that the National Party aint exactly lilly white in their obstruction?
One thing I find interesting is that while everyone seems to agree that reform is needed before the next election I havn’t seen anything but whinges from the Nats.
Yes they were excluded, and yes this is, on it’s face, wrong. But given that the Nats haven’t come up with any alternative legislation, or even serious amendments, I am left with the impression that their presence in the discussion would not have added anything. You can tell me that ‘anything they came up with would only have been ignored’ if you like, but that doesn’t change the fact that they havn’t come up with anything when there has been nothing stopping them from doing so.
At the moment the Nats position is simple repeal of the new act. What does that mean in practice? A return to the stautus quo ante? But doesn’t everyone agree that we need reform? But the Nats, as with so much else, have got nothing that they feel comfortable talking about. They are the party of ‘No’. So for my money they can sit out in the cold.
One of the problems is the shortness of the electoral cyle.Three yeras is too short. But, if Labour had been serious about this issue, they would have got their skates on straight away, rather than leaving it so late then conveniently blaming ‘time-pressures’ for the almighty cock-up. No National haven’t been lilly-white over this, but they did not write this dreadful piece of legislation.
Would Labour now accept taht the Bill is flwed, and should go to a proper round of consultation and drafting.
No.
So then therefore it is a bit rich to say the fault for this whole mess is Nationals.
They din’t write it, it was Labour’s throwing their toys out of the pram after teh idea of public funding was rejected that caused this fiasco. And why did they need public funding? Because they were broke after th Pledge Card fiasco.
Whichever way you cut it, this is all down to Labour. To try and move the goal-posts and suggest this is National’s fault is a desperate act of a Party caught with their hand in the cookie-jar.
This is not about who should have the higher maoral plateau, it is about trusting our governments to do the right thing by us. Helen Clark has been in government for eight years. Surely she should know how to organise something like this?
No, the only logical conclusion is that they tried to sneak it through, under the radar, or ‘inside the beltway’. You only then are invited to ask why? TO stop Big Business rorting elections.
This is me smiling. :0)
Lovely, glad to have have you smiling.
Now why haven’t National come up with anything at all?
And where did I say that it was entirely National’s fault, which seems to be the strawman you are arguing against?
Admittedly it’s a strawman that was roundly slain and I trust that your smile is one of pride. You big clever hunka straw killing man you.
Lee C – “I think we are going in circles.”
I quite agree, but this is my last time round the circle, as it is my last reply to you in this thread.
I haven’t argued that the EFB restricts the EB
You surely have, at 9:39am in this thread.
As to your other points, I agree we are going round in circles, and you can find my position stated above.
I strongly recommend you examine your principles around your attitude to the way the Select Committee process has been used here. [...]
I say this not because I am looking at it from a politically partisan viewpoint, but because I am concerned that it establishes a dangerous precedent.
I found your attempt to claim the non partisan moral high ground rather interesting Lee C. Because I’m wondering if perhaps you really are a partisan after all. What makes me just a little bit suspicious, Lee C, is your opinions as expressed on Kiwiblog. I hope you can forgive me for wondering if you are one of those who just cynically exploit the concepts of democracy and free speech to attack a government that they hate and mock?
A small selection of Lee C on Kiwiblog:
===
Lee C Says:
November 6th, 2007 at 9:57 am
My criticism of National thus far has been its refusal to get ‘down and dirty’. They really need to stop cowering in the corner and stand up to the bullies. Actually ‘fight’ an election. Life’s too short to spend it reminiscing about how close you came to winning.
===
Lee C Says:
November 6th, 2007 at 11:46 am
[...]
Labbbour’s greatest asset is Helen Clark. She has assiduously cultivated a mystique of power about herself, so that it is almost a heresy to be seen to criticise her. Some might label her as pompous, patronising, aloof, cynical, creative with the truth, or even corrupt, but she has a teflon personality.
Funny about Teflon, once you put one decent scratch in it, it renders the implement largely useless. However, I have yet to see an incident of a teflon pan scratching itself.
That is the job of the opposition.
===
Lee C Says:
November 6th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Bwakile – I may be wrong, but I am of the opinion that bewteen us we could probably cobble to gether a more effective campaign of opposition than the present lot in National are evidently capable of. I would be happy to vote National simply because I have developed a hatred of the present Government, but on the face of National’s handling of this EFB issue, frankly they will not get my vote.
I mean if they can’t even cobble together a strategy around a generation-defining piece of legislation like this, what good are they?
They make Neville Chamberlain look macho
===
Lee C Says:
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:43 am
Speaking of narrowly averted suicides. Like I heard that one time when she was at low ebb, Helen attempted suicide. Sobbing quietly, she placed the revolver against her breast., pulled the trigger. and shot herself in the knee-cap.
drum roll, cymbal clash.
aythenkyu..
===
Lee C Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
I’d like to see Helen Clark Burn for democracy.
===
Lee C Says:
September 15th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
[...]
Ironically, MMP might go down as a failed experiment which caused voters to think in a first past the post way, because the way the Labour Government has turned the other parties into its bitches makes a mockery of the idea of widened participation in government for the voters, and has created a virtual single=party state here in NZ
===
Lee C Says:
September 6th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
I think it is time to start suggesting the myriad ways that one will be able to break the Law (if this bill passes) during an election year and then expose it for the piece of work it is.
===
Lee C Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Watch the Labour Party backlash on the Herald. But, bullies only prosper when they pick on those smaller than themeselves. I look forwared to these money-grabbing, egregious venal power-turned goons in the Labour Government and their allies, getting the bloody noses they so richly deserve.
I said before that the media wins or loses elections – it looks like the war is on.
Shit, looks like my cover is blown. Or something.
Should I be scared? is this a scary situation?
Is this how Catholics used to feel under Henry the Eighth? Do I need to find a safe-house because I have uttered heretical sentiments? FFS, Rob Grow up!
Gosh, did I really say National are doing a crap job as opposition? you might be able to dig out the times I said they’d lost my vote as a result of that.
Did I really accuse Labour of bullying? Ask Setchell, ask that woman Mallard victimised the other day from parliament.
Did I suggest MMP is open to abuse? Did that only yesterday, here, as well. I used the words ‘Labour and Shameful’ in the same sentence. Should I get my family out of the country?
Didi I raise a point about how media win/lose elections? did that here too, and on kiwiblog referring to how Blair won in the UK by courting the media.
Yes I have a hatred of Labour, I think it started with the retrospective legislation to legalise their Pledge-Card rort, but the way they picked on the Exclusive Brethren community (not the idiot businessmen) assisted.
Better get that out of my system before January 2nd, hadn’t I?
So to summarise:
Criticisms of Nationals crap opposition to the EFB 3
Criticism of Helen Clark 1 and a bit (do two jokes about Helen count? i thought we enjoyed political satire here)
Criticism of Labour over the EFB 1
Criticism of labour and how they used MMP to abuse the parliamentary system 1
Criticism of Labour’s bully-boy tactics 1
So you have me bang to rights, I guess. I am so partisan that I hate Labour, and won’t even vote National because they have failed to mount a realistic oppositon to the EFB.
Really – what is your point? are you calling me a liar? Just say those four little words. ‘You are a Liar.’
I won’t be angry.
PS I also wrote a crap submission to the Select Committee about the EFB. I believe that has been quoted in The Standard too.
I have a blog too; http://troubleingodzone.blogspot.com/
please feel freee to visit.
I am, however flattered taht you took so much time to trawl through the kiwiblog and pull out my pearls of wisdom. I like it when people quote me – it adds polish to their conversations.
Looks like the EPMU need to recruit someone who isn’t afraid of a hard day’s work,
this is me p***g myself: ;*0
ps if you think I am rude about Helen you should see some of the unspeakable filth I have written in ‘Monkey Fluids’.
http://www.monkeyfluids.com/2007_11_01_archive.html
Do take a look:
(Not you, Gruela, I respect you tooo much)
ps have you read this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/