Work needed

81 comments on “Work needed ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Zony2012 1

   8 March 2012 at 9:36 pm

   Lmao.
2. fender 2

   8 March 2012 at 10:08 pm

   I’m sure the parasites Dunne is hanging with now will line him up with something. Key will take him on as gardener or pool cleaner at one of the mansions. Don’t worry about Dunne, he will get a payback for playing lapdog to these pricks. Pete George however won’t do so well when UF evaporates………..
3. shreddakj 3

   8 March 2012 at 10:11 pm

   That protest can’t come soon enough imo.
4. johnm 4

   8 March 2012 at 10:19 pm

   I wouldn’t be too sure, the brain dead voters in Ohariu might vote this zombie back in for the umteenth time : he’s one of their kind after all!
   • Janice 4.1

     9 March 2012 at 8:04 am

     Everybody deserves to be represented by their own kind in parliament, even idiots, alas perhaps these are over represented.
5. Policy Parrot 5

   8 March 2012 at 10:32 pm

   If they pass his pension bill, which outlines a prescription by which you take your pension early, you get a smaller amount, from age 60; he can simply become a pensioner at the age of 62. With addition of the MPs super scheme, and 30 years service in a high salaried position, he is hardly going to be broke.

   If he wanted to work, he could always get a gig modelling hair product.
   • Hami Shearlie 5.1

     8 March 2012 at 11:23 pm

     And don’t forget his 90 percent taxpayer subsidised travel perk!!
6. Georgecom 6

   8 March 2012 at 11:09 pm

   Maybe Dunne will get his income splitting idea through parliament this term, with some modifications. Rather than modifying a persons tax bill according to the number of non-working partners, your tax is reduced according to the number of political parties you have (1) started (2) belong to and (3) buried. Dunne’ll end up with a tax rate lower than Mitt Romneys.
7. hellonearthis 7

   8 March 2012 at 11:12 pm

   This National run government is going to be worse than the ‘think big’ disaster of the Muldoon years.
   • burt 7.1

     9 March 2012 at 12:21 pm

     Yeah, nationalising everyting is doomed to fail…. That socialist Muldoon was a disaster….
8. Colonial Viper 8

   8 March 2012 at 11:15 pm

   He’s survived the cage fight that is Parliament longer than most. Time to make him tap out, though.
   • Hami Shearlie 8.1

     8 March 2012 at 11:28 pm

     With his support for asset sales it seems pretty clear he doesn’t intend to stand for parliament again. But it might be a shock to Pompadour Pete if the nacts don’t last the full term! After all, that $250,000 ministerial salary is something he’s rather fond of, CV!
9. infused 9

   9 March 2012 at 12:05 am

   He was never going to stand again.
10. Pete George 10

    9 March 2012 at 6:52 am

    Should we examine the outside parliament/bureaucracy/union experience of other MPs? What about starting with Labour? Then have a look at Greens?

    Dunne gave a strong speech in parliament yesterday on the MOM bill: http://inthehouse.co.nz/node/11829
    • Colonial Viper 10.1

      9 March 2012 at 7:00 am

      A strong speech, good idea, maybe Dunne could pick up work as a Toast Masters coach?
    • Jackal 10.2

      9 March 2012 at 7:54 am

      You’ve linked to that already Pete George. Nobody is interested in what a traitor has to say.
      • Rich 10.2.1

        9 March 2012 at 12:14 pm

        It isn’t a very opaque alias “Pete George” => “Peter Dunne”.

        Why doesn’t he give up pretending there’s more than one person in his party? Jim Anderton did that and never looked back. Also, Peter Dunne’s United Future has a ring to it: P-DUF.
      • infused 10.2.2

        9 March 2012 at 12:31 pm

        How is he a traitor?
        • Jackal 10.2.2.1

          9 March 2012 at 5:30 pm

          Peter Dunce is a traitor because he mislead the public into believing he was opposed to asset sales and then supported National’s Mixed Ownership Model Bill when it has been shown there is absolutely no financial benefit to New Zealand in selling our assets. He has betrayed his country and is therefore a traitor.
      • Rosemary 10.2.3

        9 March 2012 at 3:47 pm

        That’s right. I’m sick to bloody death of Pete George repeating what’s become a ridiculous response. Once or twice as part of the discussion – fine – but we’ve dealt with that now. Your repetition shows you support asset sales, also fine. even if you do try to mask that with the “I’m all for public debate blah blah blah, but if you want to continue the discussion properly address the current point, which is that regardless of the precise words Dunne used, he made people believe that he and UF did not support asset sales.
        • Pete George 10.2.3.1

          9 March 2012 at 4:00 pm

          he made people believe that he and UF did not support asset sales.

          Nonsense. People chose to misrepresent what he said and what UF advertised, and others believed that. It’s still happening. They just don’t want to admit they’ve been duped by their own side’s propaganda.

          I keep repeating because people keep showing their ignorance, or refuse to accept facts.
          • Colonial Viper 10.2.3.1.1

            9 March 2012 at 4:31 pm

            *Shakes head*

            Dunne has the power to be recorded in NZ’s history books as a politician with backbone, standing, defending future generations of NZers by protecting our economic sovereignty.

            But he’d prefer his Ministerial salary for another 2 years, no contest really.
            • rosy 10.2.3.1.1.1

              9 March 2012 at 8:38 pm

              Until PG can reason away PD saying he knew that people voted for John Key despite asset sales – as he said in his Deloittes speech – anything he says is hollow. That portion of the speech has been linked to at least 3 times on this site (by Jackal and me) and strangely Pete has no comment to make on it.
          • Jackal 10.2.3.1.2

            9 March 2012 at 5:34 pm

            Could you link to where Peter Dunce said he supported National’s asset sales then Pete George? You keep repeating because your argument is a broken record.
            • Pete George 10.2.3.1.2.1

              9 March 2012 at 7:29 pm

              United Future didn’t campaign on supporting asset sales, they campaigned on acknowledging the right of National to promote their major policy, and they campaigned on putting limits on how far any asset sales could go (they negotiated most of those into the C&S agreement).

              United Future’s position now is to ensure there are adequate limits and safeguards on the MOM – those issues are being discussed and negotiated with various parties.

              Working in a coalition no party can get to have all it’s policies progressed, compromises have to be accepted. If Labour were able to lead a coalition they would have had to compromise, the Greens would have had to compromise much more.

              And a few people on blogs don’t get to dictate.
              • McFlock …

                9 March 2012 at 7:37 pm

                Pete, the fact is that UF gave a lot of people the impression that they wouldn’t support asset sales. Now Dunne is in a position where only his active support will enable them to be sold. 
                     
                You can fiddle that all you want, but Dunne is actively selling assets when he could prevent it. This will piss a lot of people off.
                   
                I’m sure Chauvel will have fun campaigning against the man whose vote sold us down the river and cost the country billions. 
          • Rosemary 10.2.3.1.3

            9 March 2012 at 6:06 pm

            Piss off, we’ve heard it before.
          • Rosemary 10.2.3.1.4

            9 March 2012 at 6:46 pm

            “Nonsense. People chose to misrepresent what he said and what UF advertised”

            No, you are not listening to what people are saying about what they genuinely believed Dunne was saying. Dunne created the perception that he was against asset sales – that is what his words made people believe. It’s easy to go back in hindsight and dissect every single word and say “no, just look at the precise words Dunne used, he did not say this…”, but you simply cannot deny that the average person would receive his message was he was against asset sales.

            “They just don’t want to admit they’ve been duped by their own side’s propaganda.”

            Whose propaganda? If it’s the left’s you’re talking about then I haven’t been duped by anything because if you’d been listening to what the left is saying you’d know that the position is how I’ve already set out: that regardless of the semantics-based argument about the precise words Dunne may have used (that you are referring to to say Dunne did not say he was against the current ‘partial’ sales) the average person received the message that Dunne was against those sales. This is the “fact” that forms the basis of where the discussion currently is, but you keep harping back to proclaim the irrelevant point “but Dunne didn’t say that”. This is not the point. Meaning is in how words are used and in the context of their usage, meaning is not situated in the words themselves. It is the overall way in which words are conveyed from which meaning is created. Dunne created a very wide perception that he was against the sale, partial or otherwise, of the power companies (and of Air NZ). If you’re talking about being duped by the propaganda around what Dunne said, then yes, I certainly have been, in exactly the same way as the many many thousands of people led to believe Dunne was against all asset sales. Dumb of us all, I know, but that doesn’t change the “facts”.

            “I keep repeating because people keep showing their ignorance, or refuse to accept facts.”

            We know what you’ve said about what you say are the “facts”. Are you saying that you will keep repeating yourself until people agree with you about what those “facts” are? Does this mean you’ll keep repeating yourself until people start saying “yes, Dunne did not say he was against all asset sales. Silly us. What the heck have we been on about? For heaven’s sake, it’s our own fault for not seeing that Dunne was going to support “partial” sales of the power companies. Yes, Pete George, you are right – we, the people of Ohariu, voted for the “partial” sale of our power companies”? Don’t you believe people when they say that they thought Dunne was against asset sales? Don’t you think this is important? Thousands of people received that message. This is the relevant “fact”.
            • Pete George 10.2.3.1.4.1

              9 March 2012 at 7:21 pm

              No, you are not listening to what people are saying about what they genuinely believed Dunne was saying.

              What people “genuinely believed” is not my responsibility. If they believed some of the things Phil Goff claimed about asset sales they would have been a long way from reality.

              If people of Ohariu believed everything Charles Chauvel claimed then they wouldn’t have had a great grasp of reality either.

              Peter Dunne and United Future campaigned on limiting asset sales but recognising the right of National as the major party in a coalition to progress it’s major policy. Most of the UF limits were negotiated in the confidence and supply agreement with National. That’s how coalition government works.

              It would be quite improper now for Dunne to reneg on that. Of course that’s what some on the left are maneuvering for, they lost the election but want win after the fact by bringing down the government. Asset sales and people in Ohariu who didn’t vote for Peter Dunne are being used.
              • McFlock …

                9 March 2012 at 7:48 pm

                What people “genuinely believed” is not my responsibility. 

                 
                Yeah it is. You campaigned on it.
                You were either shit at getting the true message across, or you were good at getting a false message across.

                   
                Which was it?
                • Rosemary …

                  9 March 2012 at 9:11 pm

                  Precisely, Pete George, precisely. Which is it?
                  • Pete George …

                    10 March 2012 at 8:18 am

                    Not our fault if the media and public chose to ignore UF policy. It was available for anyone that bothered to check it out. I posted some here and was usually attacked and abused for doing so.

                    Rosemary, how many voters who voted for for Peter Dunne are you talking on behalf of?

                    The advertising and campaigning was clear.

                    Everyone should have known that Peter Dunne would support National if elected, that was made very clear.

                    If voters were unaware of any of that they have themselves to blame – probably for listening to Goff, Chauvel and Hughes, who were the ones grossly misrepresenting.

                    McFlock and Rosemary, you both seem to be afflicted with the looney left and Labour disease – everything has to be someone else’s fault.
                    • rosy …

                      10 March 2012 at 8:32 am

                      http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/peter-dunne-address-to-deloitte-business

                      Asset sales are on National’s agenda, but the jury is very much out on just how comfortable New Zealander’s are with this policy.
                      – My take on it is that Kiwis are not very comfortable at all with it – most certainly not with anything close to open slather.
                      – The many people who want John Key back in power for the next three years, want him in spite of asset sales and not because of them.
                      – I sense very strongly that New Zealander’s do not want to give National a blank cheque on asset sales.

                      Comment, Pete?
                    • Pete George …

                      10 March 2012 at 8:43 am

                      That’s why UF campaigned on not giving a blank cheque on asset sales, of ensuring limits and protections. These were negotiated in the coalition agreement.
                      [Pete George. As a UF candidate. Please confirm that your party never campaigned on selling any assets and the C&S agreement contains no reference to your party voting for the mixed ownership model. Eddie]
                    • rosy …

                      10 March 2012 at 9:03 am

                      That’s why people believed Peter Dunne might not have supported asset sales.

                      That’s why Peter Dunne is fully aware Nationals ‘mandate’ is not as it seems.

                      That’s why Peter Dunne can refuse to support the asset sales programme as the public confirm their opposition.

                      That’s why voters are not to blame if they did not realise Peter Dunne would unquestioningly support National’s asset sales programme.
                    • Pete George …

                      10 March 2012 at 9:10 am

                      UF have made commitments via the Confidence and Supply agreement:

                      There will be no sale of any part of Kiwibank or Radio New Zealand

                      Introduce statutory limits on the sale of public assets to no more than 49% of shareholding to private interests including limits on the extent of single entity ownership

                      The Government has identified the initiatives on National’s Post-Election Action Plan as priorities and United Future acknowledges the electoral support for this plan. Accordingly, United Future agrees to support the legislation required to give effect to the plan, insofar as it is consistent with this agreement.

                      http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/confidence-and-supply-agreement/

                      UF had a responsibility to honour this agreement – that’s how our MMP works.
                    • rosy …

                      10 March 2012 at 9:16 am

                      The confidence and supply agreement signed AFTER the election.

                      Peter Dunne has an electorate. Given to him. One of the anomalies of MMP – I hope you have your next party lined up PG.
                    • McFlock …

                      10 March 2012 at 2:33 pm

                      Pete, a few points:
                        
                      “Supporting National in government” != “voting for everything National does”
                          
                      The media blatantly misrepresented NZ1, and they managed to get their message out reasonably well. Maybe it was because when, e.g. Winston was doing the talk politics thing at UO, he actually answered questions clearly and with specifics. Dunne waffled.
                               
                      A party is, in some ways, like any other brand. If a large number of people went into Kmart to buy fried chicken, then yeah Kmart’s message communication sucked. There seems to be a large amount of confusion about what Dunne’s message was before the election. A few people, okay, maybe they’re a bit dim and not in the target market anyway. But there seems to be widespread surprise that Dunne is in no way moderating National asset sales policy. This rests with whomever was in charge of UF’s communication, including its leadership and candidates, in exactly the same way that Labour comms are getting shit for not clearly and loudly standing labour beside the unions.
                             
                      Dunne is the sole vote enabling our country’s assets to be sold. He knew that would probably be the position when he signed up to the confidence and supply agreement. He signed it anyway. To argue that he doesn’t want to be a prick, but earlier on he made a commitment to be a prick, so sadly he needs to honour that agreement and be a prick even though he might not really want to… well, that’s just hoping that the nation is more stupid than you have any basis to believe.
                        
                       
                       
                    • Pete George …

                      10 March 2012 at 2:52 pm

                      “Supporting National in government” != “voting for everything National does”

                      No. Dunne has indicated support for the Mondayising bill, National haven’t.
                    • Pete George …

                      10 March 2012 at 3:24 pm

                      Eddie: Please confirm that your party never campaigned on selling any assets

                      In the last election UF did not campaign on selling assets but campaigned on putting limits on sales, which acknowledged there were likely to be some sales.

                      The C&S agreement contains no reference to your party voting for the mixed ownership model.

                      Not specifically, but as I’ve aleready posted:

                      The Government has identified the initiatives on National’s Post-Election Action Plan as priorities and United Future acknowledges the electoral support for this plan.

                      Accordingly, United Future agrees to support the legislation required to give effect to the plan, insofar as it is consistent with this agreement.

                      And the Action Plan includes:

                      Extend the mixed ownership model to four SOEs,
                      reduce the Government’s stake in Air New Zealand,
                      and use the proceeds to create the FIF.

                      http://www.national.org.nz/PDF_General/Post-Election_Action_Plan_.pdf

                      The Action Plan was released before the election, on 23 November.

                      http://www.national.org.nz/Article.aspx?ArticleID=37648
                    • Rosemary …

                      10 March 2012 at 4:00 pm

                      “…you both seem to be afflicted with the looney left and Labour disease – everything has to be someone else’s fault.”

                      Perhaps you’d be correct if it were just the two of us who didn’t understand that Dunne would be supporting the Nactoids. But there are thousands of people who believed he wouldn’t. If you want to keep on treating people who voted for UF thinking it’d be a vote against asset sales with such contempt, then do it. You’ll pay for it dearly, that’s if you haven’t already. If so many people received the wrong message from UF’s campaigning then you should be apologising, not blaming the very people you looked to for support, and who voted for you believing Dunne was against all asset sales. Your position is arrogant beyond belief. The issue has moved a long way from who’s fault it is that so many people misunderstood UF’s policy, but you keep blaming the voters. You’re saying “we never said we wouldn’t support National’s plan to sell shares in the power companies. If people thought that we did say that then they’re silly or stupid or naive for not understanding our policies properly”. What a great way to do politics? Your attitude towards voters will certainly be the death of UF. As far as I’m concerned, I’d like you to continue with it so we can finally see the end of such a pathetic excuse for a political party. UF has become a joke. The sooner it f@#ks off and dies the better.
    • Frank Macskasy 10.3

      9 March 2012 at 2:09 pm

      How about a “strong speech” on NOT selling our SOEs, followed by crossing the floor and voting with the Opposition?

      Wouldn’t that be nice, Pete?
11. Carol 11

    9 March 2012 at 6:57 am

    This outline of the Dos resume is spot on, and funny in a sarcastic way. But why lead with his age? This is the least relevant point in his CV.

    And PD’s support of asset sales, after seeming to oppose it earlier, will be his main and lasting legacy.
    • Pete George 11.1

      9 March 2012 at 7:06 am

      “after seeming to oppose it earlier”

      That’s opposition promoted misinformation. Dunne has been consistent, as has United Future. Unlike some.

      Goff strongly opposed the MOM in the election campaign, having supported MOM as recently as 2010, and being a part of setting the Air NZ MOM – but admittedly has been a part of more outright sales than mixed ownership over his long parliamentary career.
      • tc 11.1.1

        9 March 2012 at 7:24 am

        Consistently shifting his position to ensure he stays in the trough Petey boy, weasel words time is over matey this is nz future he’s selling out here.

        He’s no fool so now is the time to make a stand or lie down with the asset stripping dogs and spend the rest of his days never quite being able to rid himself of that moral itch that’s if he has any of those Christian moral values of the do onto others variety.
        • Pete George 11.1.1.1

          9 March 2012 at 7:36 am

          He is making a consistent stand. Derogatory attacks based on bullshit show up the weakness of the opposition.
          • muzza 11.1.1.1.1

            9 March 2012 at 7:44 am

            Excuse me, stage hand….Can we get a fluffer over her, get Pete George in, he’ll do it!
            • ghostwhowalksnz 11.1.1.1.1.1

              9 March 2012 at 7:48 am

              Hes the candyfloss of the fluffer business
          • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.1.2

            9 March 2012 at 7:49 am

            The fact you follow a loser National aparatchik says something about you Pete, although I am not sure what. Making the country poorer while you run intereference for him, you can be proud of the difference you are making.
          • tc 11.1.1.1.3

            9 March 2012 at 8:15 am

            Now your sounding like a teenager doing the Egyptian fish routine….living in de-Nile, your morals are as low as his Petey that’s why you can’t see any issue because you have no high ground to get perspective from.

            Wibble on while your idol sells out instead of standing up for those that need it! it’s what you do best.
      • Kotahi Tane Huna 11.1.2

        9 March 2012 at 7:37 am

        Goff used to support asset sales? Wait a second? Isn’t that the argument that was lying in the corner with its chest all caved in in the last scene? Oh my gawd Pete’s got a zombie!
      • Frank Macskasy 11.1.3

        9 March 2012 at 5:12 pm

        “Goff strongly opposed the MOM in the election campaign, having supported MOM as recently as 2010…”

        Rubbish.

        But even if correct, if Goff did cartwheels naked down Lambton Quay, would that be a good thing to emulate??

        Honestly, Pete, Dunne is is own man. He should be able to make his own decisions without pointing fingers at someone else.

        You really need to talk to your leader and talk some sense into him. Unless he wants to be remembered in the same vein as Douglas, Richardson, and Bradford – he’d better do some serious navel-gazing and working out what the right thing to do is.

        Because I can guarantee you one thing; this will be his last term as an MP if he votes with National. Guaranteed.
        • Pete George 11.1.3.1

          9 March 2012 at 6:37 pm

          Honestly, Pete, Dunne is is own man. He should be able to make his own decisions

          He is and he made his own decision several months ago and is being consistent with that decision, and reiterating his right to maintain the same stance.

          Just because a few people at The Standard, who are more likely to abuse and misrepresent Dunne than anything, want to reinvent a past election and get him to side with them, it doesn’t mean he should somersault for them.
          • Rosemary 11.1.3.1.1

            9 March 2012 at 9:13 pm

            If there was another election people wouldn’t be duped into believing that Dunne was opposed to all asset sales and they’d vote Dunne out. You are getting tiresome, Pete George. Think it’s time you took a break.
    • mikesh 11.2

      9 March 2012 at 9:39 pm

      He did the same thing with the Electoral Finance Bill, supported it until the very last minute , and then changed his mind and voted against it.
12. higherstandard 12

    9 March 2012 at 7:54 am

    Cushy diplomatic job or local QANGO/SOE board directorship…… isn’t that the way parliament works ?
    • Jackal 12.1

      9 March 2012 at 7:58 am

      It’s who will employ that bouffant we should be worrying about.
      • higherstandard 12.1.1

        9 March 2012 at 8:21 am

        As above – he has been on the taxpayers tit his entire life and I would be surprised if that doesn’t continue through to his death.
13. mickysavage 13

    9 March 2012 at 8:08 am

    David Cunliffe flayed the coiffured one in Parliament yesterday.

    His comments are about 7:45 minutes in and include the following:

    “And there is Peter Dunne, always the swing vote, but this time he matters.  This is the Peter Dunne epitaph bill.  He will go down in history at the perpetual 150 pound straw in the wind who this time blew the wrong way.  This time who sold out a generation by selling billions of dollars of their birthright.  He can hang his head in shame.”

     
    • Pete George 13.1

      9 March 2012 at 9:04 am

      Funny isn’t it, always trying to portray Dunne as swinging in the political breeze, but now trying to sway him with a barrage of bollocks – and he stands firm.

      Cunliffe tries to argue the wind is blowing from the left and the right at the same time and get’s caught in his own whirlwind of bombast.
      • Ordinary_Bloke 13.1.1

        9 March 2012 at 9:40 am

        Hey Pete, would you care to add some evidence to your fine rhetoric ?

        I can’t see any to contradict

        “And there is Peter Dunne, always the swing vote, but this time he matters.  This is the Peter Dunne epitaph bill.  He will go down in history at the perpetual 150 pound straw in the wind who this time blew the wrong way.  This time who sold out a generation by selling billions of dollars of their birthright.  He can hang his head in shame.”
        • Pete George 13.1.1.1

          9 March 2012 at 9:55 am

          Do you think he should break his campaign and confidence&supply commitments?

          The shame is on those blowhards in the breeze of defeat and duplicity.

          Labour spent much of their last term waiting, expecting voters to flock back to them, thinking 2008 was just a poll fluctuation that was undeserved. They even complained at Greens encroaching in ‘their’ voters.

          How much of this term are they going to spend trying to re-fight the campaign they lost in 2011? At what cost?

          Serious question?
          • Kotahi Tane Huna 13.1.1.1.1

            9 March 2012 at 9:59 am

            How long is the stigma of treachery and shame going to attach itself to the name “Dunne”?
          • Frank Macskasy 13.1.1.1.2

            9 March 2012 at 5:03 pm

            Dunne’s “Committments” consisted of promising to oppose the sale of Kiwibank and Radio NZ.

            That would be fine except…

            John Key promised not to sell Kiwibank, and National made no mention of selling Radio NZ when they listed the energy companies and Air New Zealand for part-privatisaton.

            So what’s the point of promising to “oppose” something that even National was not planning to do?!?!?!
      • Colonial Viper 13.1.2

        9 March 2012 at 10:02 am

        LOL trying to portray Dunne standing firm on damaging NZ’s future as a moral thing to do. Get out of here mate.
14. Pete 14

    9 March 2012 at 10:22 am

    Dunne is a good local MP, which is why people vote for him. We also vote for him to keep Chuckles out, which is further icing on the cake.

    Oharuiu is an educated and wealthy electorate with the highest number of families earning between $70,000 and $100,000 per year. I think it’s fair to say we understand strategic voting.

    Say what you will about him, but he has single handendly achieved far more than most in parliament. Remind us how many government positions the entire Green Party has held in the last 20 years?
    • Colonial Viper 14.1

      9 March 2012 at 10:26 am

      And it doesnt hurt to have some new no-risk investment opportunities for all that cash sitting in the bank.
      • Pete 14.1.1

        9 March 2012 at 10:43 am

        Which is why this new group of “concerned Orahui citizens” – well, mainly just Gareth Hughes – are wasting their time.
    • Treetop 14.2

      9 March 2012 at 1:36 pm

      Tell me what Dunne has achieved for his electorate?

      What a run down shabby place the Johnsonville Mall is.
      Transmission Gully has not eventuated in the whole time that Dunne has been the electorate MP.
      The main road through Johnsonville is so busy and narrow that the traffic competes with pedestrians. Without the zebra crossings the road would be chaos.

      The final lethal act for United Future, who could not make a go of it in their heyday and in spite of MMP. Dunne is not satisfied to annihilate his party, he wants to annihilate the future of the country.
      • Pete George 14.2.1

        9 March 2012 at 2:04 pm

        New Zealand has managed to survive much more than a bit of bugger all assets being sold.
        • Treetop 14.2.1.1

          9 March 2012 at 2:11 pm

          Minimising the sale of energy assets is foolish.
        • fender 14.2.1.2

          9 March 2012 at 3:36 pm

          PG , you could always try running as an Act candidate next time.
      • mikesh 14.2.2

        9 March 2012 at 9:59 pm

        The Johnsonville Mall is not his responsibility.
        Transmission Gully is just another RONS that we don’t want.
        The main road through Johnsonville is no better or no worse than the main roads of most of the small towns in this country.

        Even so, Dunne has achieved stuff all for the Ohariu electorate. He is popular mainly becaus e he works hard at being seen at every local function.
    • Treetop 14.3

      9 March 2012 at 1:52 pm

      “Remind us how many government positions the entire Green Party has held in the last 20 years?”

      Well let me see, there has been a steady growth in the number of MPs in the Green Party.
      The Green Party is now the third largest party in parliament.

      I take “government positions” to include one vote, one MP.
    • Frank Macskasy 14.4

      9 March 2012 at 2:18 pm

      Pete, I hate to break into your little “lovefest” with Peter Dunne (what IS IT about “Peters” at the moment?!), but Dunne’s ‘success’ in Ohariu hinged on two factors;

      * a “wink and a nod” from Dear Leader, which annoyed Katrina Shanks no end,

      * 1,775 Green voters being Noddys and giving their ELECTORATE vote to Gareth Hughes rather than the Labour guy.

      http://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/post-mortem-1-green-voters-in-electorates/

      Had those Green voters* not been so ‘purist’, and given their velectorate vote to Chauvel, Dunne would’ve been Goneburger by dinnertime.

      (* Disclaimer: I’m a Green supporter.)
15. Mark 15

    9 March 2012 at 6:21 pm

    I love how defeatist you all are. You can’t stop asset sales without Dunne, and yet you still continue to abuse him over his hair. Surely sucking up to him would make a little more sense?

    Or maybe it’s that you are smarter than you look and know that Dunne won’t back down on his plan (that’s right, look back to United Future’s 2008 manifesto and see who Key got the partial asset sales idea from!). Maybe you remember he came in to parliament under Labour in the 1980s and backed the Roger Douglas faction’s economic ideals – he’s bringing back the 80s! He’s not inconsistent – it is in fact the major parties that have switched sides on asset sales over the past 30 years.

    Will he stand in Ohariu again? As you all point out his CV is pretty limited and given he’s been doing this 30 years he clearly enjoys it… Would he win Ohariu again? Given the vocal opponents of asset sales are Labour party members they will hardly influence his majority. And now that Katrina Shanks has been demoted for going against the party line and as such National doesn’t have a familiar face there, it would not be unprecedented for them not to stand at all. And let’s not forget Charles Chauvel has completely shut up shop in Ohariu after he picked the wrong side in the leadership struggle and was dropped down the ranks… Even if Ohariu voters remember/are reminded about asset sales in 2014, there will be no stronger candidate than Dunne. And lets be honest, why are National pushing ahead with the sales this year? Voters have short memories.

    I guess in summary, there was an election in 2011 and you lost. The people spoke and voted for asset sales. You can’t win them all.
    • mikesh 15.1

      9 March 2012 at 10:16 pm

      The majority of voters didn’t support National, or a National led government. John Banks got into parliament only because Epsom Nats had what was in effect a two bites at the apple. And as far as asset sales were concerned the only substantial party which didn’t make it into parliament, the Conservatives, were neutral on asset sales and favoured a referendum on the issue.
16. johnm 16

    9 March 2012 at 7:41 pm

    Dunne is rubbish, refuse pure and simple. but the ohariu assholes voted this rubbish in to cover shonkey’s scrawney pathetic ass. NZ you are rubbish.
    • johnm 16.1

      9 March 2012 at 7:52 pm

      Got that NZ? I no longer respect NZ it’s a sucker hole for selfish garbage Shonkeys and Dunny rubbish . I am sick of these fucking bastards infesting parliament. Shonkey is Americanised garbaaaaage.
17. johnm 17

    9 March 2012 at 7:58 pm

    GOT THAT NEWZEALAND? YOU’RE SUCKER RUBBISH. THESE BASTARDS MUST BE FOUGHT OTHERWISE THEY’LL SCREW YOU UP THE NEOLIBERAL ASSHOLE. YOU FUCKING SHEOPLE.

    [lprent: Don’t SHOUT. Annoys me even when it is in context. ]
18. johnw 18

    9 March 2012 at 8:15 pm

    What annoys me is the expense of the protection squad for Dunne, to avoid him getting kneecapped when he goes out in public, for many years to come

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS