Written By: - Date published: 9:27 am, May 30th, 2008 - 56 comments
Categories: election 2008, humour -
Tags:
Following a series of National Party questions to the house the Herald has discovered the Labour government has spent nearly $27K on sausage rolls since taking power in 1999. Sources inside the public service reveal that in many cases morning teas would be provided with nearly two sausage rolls per person in attendance and some sausage rolls may have contained pork.
National Party grocery spokesman John Key says the situation is disgraceful:
At a time when hardworking Kiwis are struggling to buy cheese this kind of extravagance is shameful. Rather than wasting taxpayers’ money by governing the country and badgering us for trivial information about how we would govern it, this tired third-term government should be stepping up and coming clean over just how much they know about this over the odds sausage roll spend.
Sausage-roll-gate comes hard on the heels of a series of small goods scandals for the government including last month’s discovery that the Ministry of Economic Development has infinitely increased its spending on teabags since 1998 when it did not exist.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Robinsod
Not much fun in Helengrad….
Rather unfair of Key to blame the entire Labour government when it’s patently obvious that one particular Minister is responsible for at least 75% of over all sausage roll consumption.
You know, the same Minister who speculated kids were going to school with empty bellies because they were dieting?
You can do better than that Rex.
Who ate all the pies?
Oh, gee wow. I believe the average smoking rate was also dropping under the last National govt (not as much) as it has been in the entire western world for some years. Its been dropping since the big court cases against the cigies companies and the clear link to cancer. I don’t think Labour spending was the sole reason! Please!
Robinsod: sorry old boy/old girl I’m not one of the party faithful of either National or Labour although I would say people indicating in the polls of the past 6 months that they will vote National rather than Labour is becuase as Irishbill untentionally hinted, they simply don’t want to vote Labour anymore.
National’s biggist weapon in this election..is the Labour party
All JK has had to do so far is grin, shake hands and watch Labour crash and burn. What ever happened to Helen’s big plan of ‘keeping things positive’?
At least in 1999 Labour had to work at getting support, JK hasn’t to date had to do a thing. Lucky boy.
Richard – I know you are a National party activist. Why are you (and so many other tories) ashamed to admit it?
You know, for a party that is supposedly crashing and burning, you’d think that their polling would actively be going down, instead of pretty much staying in the same place.
Labour is doing fine. It just needs to do better by the time the election comes, which is certainly quite possible.
No one was claiming that Govt spending (NOT Labour spending!!) was the sole reason for the drop in smoking rates, but it is a bit absurd to try and argue that it had no effect. You seem to be of the mind-set that this Govt can do nothing right.
Richard’s arguments are straight from the Tony Ryall school of logic – “Everything they do this year is electioneering”. In this case it’s “All Govt expenditure is waste” – but they both forget that so far the only policies from National are “We’ll do that too!”
Ari: HAHA! Labour is doing fine?! Really? Ah, well, theirs none so blind as those that can see, eh?
But your right, Labour have failed to get above National for, well, it seems since forever really.
TR: I never claimed “govt” ( which is Labour, becuase it is in control of govt spending last time I checked!) hasn’t had an effect but it was you linking it to drops in smoking which is absurd when you consider the long term trend of smoking reducing in the Western world over the last 20 years. Smoking rates would have dropped anyway. How much govt spending has impacted on this, is I put it to you, very hard to measure and therefore unsuitable as a claim of effective govt spending.
Robinsod: Clearly you know more than I do! I know I’ve never attended a National party meeting in my life. I know you may be talking utter BS, but hey I know your a Labour party activist. or am I just making a jugdement without any real knowledge about you? Hmmm….
Richard: Labour have failed to get above National for, well, it seems since forever really.”
Well, the 2002 election was hardly forever ago, but the more important point is that Labour don’t have to win a plurality – they have to get enough support to form a government with other parties. According to the last two polls this is a little more than one margin of error away.
The election is National’s to lose, much like it was in 2005.
L
Hey ricky – just to start it’s “you’re” not “your” – the apostrophe indicates a contraction of “you are”. If I am to assume your general illiteracy extends to economic illiteracy then you must be an Act supporter. I’ve noticed your crank letters to South Island papers and they do tend to incline me toward thinking you are of the the spotty Act-boy ilk. Tell me mate, were you ever a prebbles rebel or are you just another angry loner projecting his impotent rage into a political position? Y’know kinda like a Christchurch Travis Bickle but without the new wave cool.
Sh*t, I know you better then I thought…
So by your logic Richard, advertising has no effect on what people spend their money on. I agree that it is hard to measure – I mentioned it because of the recent reporting of the stats, but is also a good example of the longer term thinking that has gone into some of this Govts spending. Lower smoking rates, less spent in the future on smoking related health issues. This is so unlike the National/ACT thinking of short term gain for what turns out to be long term pain.
I agree Robinsod, he’s definitely acting like an Act supporter.
Yeah Rodinthesod the Press kept making them into the feature headline letters and threw me a gold plated pen for letter of the week way back over that fart tax letter I wrote and for some reason Labours new boy nobody Julian Blanchard down in Timaru gets stressed whenever I write. I can’t think why people do. All crank letters of course. I’ve managed to fight off the phone calls from local nats for me to join so far. When will they leave me alone?
One other thing, have you ever thought of using your real name, or would that expose you too much? I can asure you nothing bad has ever happened to me, rather the opposite.
From flicking through your blog you seem to be a bit of an angery man yourself, lots of abuse towards public figures in there. Nice.
TR:Oh dear, I said it was hard to measure, not that advertising has no effect. By the by I’m considering voting for the party that is promising tax free income for the working poor. I see when its closer to the election and Nat etc have realeased policy.
Richard, I’d never have picked you for a maori party voter
L
Captcha: `rockaway drowned’. Rock rock, rockaway drowned …
Ricky – I gather from your increasing incoherence that I may have touched a raw nerve. No hard feelings brother. I’ll keep watching your frothing. It gives me pleasure.
Lew- the Maroi party promise, but will they really deliver?
the rest of your post..????I assume your drunck. Have one for me, work starts in an hour.
Robinthesod: Yes I didn’t actually think you read any of those South Island papers you claim to have.
P.S I do hope your not touching yourself while reading my ‘froth’. I would really rather not be giving you that sort of ‘pleasure’.
This is not a porn site.
Ricky – your fascination with onanism is revealing. Don’t get out much, eh?
Tamaki Resident
I think Richard has learnt this from the Labour party. After the 2005 election when it was revealed that Labour had illegally spent $800k of tax payers money on advertising Labour said it didn’t make any difference to the outcome of the election.
I found this a bit confusing because apparently the money spent by the EB’s was an affront to democracy and then Labour went on to pass the EFA which was apparently to stop uncontrolled and unknown spending.
So I think advertising has no effect if acknowledging that effect is something you don’t want to admit for legal reasons.
Move on!
Labour had illegally spent $800k of tax payers money on advertising Labour said it didn’t make any difference to the outcome of the election.
All parties (except Progressives) spent money inappropriately in the last election (according to the retrospective opinion of the AG).
But I don’t recall Labour saying that it made no difference to the outcome. So could you show me the actual quote or source? Because that sounds to me like it might just possibly be an incorrect claim there Burt.
Hi guys, this is a great site, with some really informed views, and a lot of smart people.
This is off-topic, but I wonder if you guys know how I can further reduce my tax responsibilities in New Zealand? I have only recently moved here with my family, and through an LAQC and property I have reduced my tax rate to 7c in the dollar, but want to reduce it further to about 1c if possible. I’m earning 105k at the moment and don’t think its very fair that I should be paying so much tax when I have a wife and 2 kids to feed as well as a mortgage.
Any good sites you guys know of, or some general ideas?
Thanks, and keep up the good work!
Anthony Johnston.