All Down to Dunne

Written By: - Date published: 7:31 pm, May 15th, 2014 - 37 comments
Categories: budget 2014, peter dunne, political education, united future, workers' rights - Tags: ,

Within the next few hours the government will be voting on their Paid Parental Leave bill. Labour’s response is a Supplementary Order Paper. If the ammendment passes it will mean the government will have to commit to Labour’s policy of 26 weeks leave.

But of course, it could never pass. Well, actually… it turns our that Peter Dunne has made it clear he supports Labour’s policy. Like here , here , and here.

Which means he can get it across the line right now.

You can help remind him to do so by tweeting him at @peterdunnemp

Kiwi families will get a fair go, or they won’t. It’s all down to Dunne.

 

Update: Nope. He voted against it. He’s trying to claim it was a budget vote and he’s a Minister so couldn’t vote against the govt. But it’s not a confidence issue. Cowardly and dishonest.

37 comments on “All Down to Dunne ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. One Anonymous Bloke 1
    15 May 2014 at 7:56 pm

    Peter Preener picked a peck of pickled pressure.

  2. vto 2
    15 May 2014 at 8:21 pm

    precious peter
    should be
    put to pasture

  3. McFlock 3
    15 May 2014 at 8:28 pm

    I am modeately intrigued to see the depths of his hypocrisy

  4. Mike the Savage One 4
    15 May 2014 at 8:50 pm

    SOPs get wiped off the table like a bit of unwanted rubbish all the time in Parliament. Does anybody here seriously think that an SOP to extend parental leave, or to slow the process off a bill, will have any substantial effect?

    This is naivety and dumbness here, as it is the majority of the representatives in Parliament that will vote any SOP down straight away. Do not pretend for one moment here, that such SOP has any chance to get anywhere, unless a couple of Nat MPs may suddenly have a “warming” for Labour, which is like hugging the enemy.

    Gosh, how naive are people here?

    Get ready for election campaign, if it is even worth it, with the comments and “talent” in the Labour Party, it is a foregone conclusion, I hate it, but it is depressingly true. Who will vote for that lot??

    • felix 4.1
      15 May 2014 at 8:59 pm

      th’ fuck are you talking about mike?

      National don’t have a majority in the house. They require support from other parties to pass anything.

      • Mike the Savage One 4.1.1
        15 May 2014 at 9:04 pm

        felix, that “majority” is the Mr Dung you are thinking about, maybe your realisation that he can block almost anything requires refreshing?

        • felix 4.1.1.1
          15 May 2014 at 9:22 pm

          Yep, in this case it comes down to Dunne. This link should explain everything but I warn you in advance it is very long and you will have to read it all.

          • Mike the Savage One 4.1.1.1.1
            15 May 2014 at 9:59 pm

            Don’t know about your “linking”, it just leads us back to where we are!”

            • McFlock 4.1.1.1.1.1
              15 May 2014 at 10:05 pm

              lol

            • ianmac 4.1.1.1.1.2
              15 May 2014 at 10:17 pm

              Mike the Savage One. Must be fun to try out your new slant on trolling. You really really are in favour of Labour but aw shucks. You have the sad duty to tell us “to surrender now and try some other job. Come back in a few years. So sad. So sorry. Sniff. Sniff. ”
              Gee thanks kind man. But I am not packing up anytime soon. You are as credible as a cow pat!

              [lprent: He isn’t a troll. I checked. Like you I suspected a wingnut and I even had a vague plan to rename his handle on all his comments to “Mike the Concerned Troll” as a suitable warning. But alas for that idea, he is for real. Just more disillusioned than anything else. ]

              • felix …
                16 May 2014 at 5:38 am

                “[lprent: He isn’t a troll. I checked. …”

                Jesus. It’s worse than I thought.

            • the pigman 4.1.1.1.1.3
              15 May 2014 at 11:02 pm

              so good.

            • emergency mike 4.1.1.1.1.4
              16 May 2014 at 12:02 pm

              Not much gets past you does it Mike.

      • Tamati 4.1.2
        15 May 2014 at 9:19 pm

        Is this considered a supply bill?

        Doesn’t the executive have the right to veto any appropriation of funds anyway?

        • Mike the Savage One 4.1.2.1
          15 May 2014 at 9:24 pm

          The link leads to a Twitter account, and once I saw that, I blocked it further, as I do not read info on law and so via Twitter, so who knows what this is about.

  5. felix 5
    15 May 2014 at 8:52 pm

    “…castigate the government for the borrowing it has undertaken over the last 6 years to maintain services, and avoid austerity measures given the collapse in revenue that began in the 2008 Budget.”

    Nope, we castigate them for borrowing to cover the shortfall in revenue created by neglecting to raise the taxes that used to pay for said services.

    The problem isn’t the services – here in nz we always vote for these services – the problem is the National party lied and said they could continue to provide all the services AND cut taxes at the same time.

    They lied.

    edit: this was a response to a comment from srylands which seems to have disappeared. Probably for the best, it was utter rubish.

    • greywarbler 5.1
      15 May 2014 at 9:23 pm

      felixx It could be No.30 on Open Mike. Have you seen the Trans Tasman lineup for 2013? I thought it was interesting and put the reference to it close to No.30. Quite harsh but fair? summing up of the political scene.

  6. Mike the Savage One 6
    15 May 2014 at 9:27 pm

    This is a childish attempt by Labour to change the legal process in Parliament, which will have little effect, sorry, those posting this are not serving the interests of the Labour Party or of the workers’ movement, this is infantile.

    • mickysavage 6.1
      15 May 2014 at 9:39 pm

      What? Trying to get an MP to live up to their principles??

      • Mike the Savage One 6.1.1
        15 May 2014 at 9:57 pm

        This is about as SOP process, not just about an MP living up to principles. Yes, they can release as many SOPs as they like but while they know it will not make a difference, it will make no difference. So it is OK in ways, but otherwise just “show”.

        • mickysavage 6.1.1.1
          15 May 2014 at 10:51 pm

          Que?

          If Dunne and the Maori Party lived up to their principles the SOP would have succeeded. So any not try?

      • Mike the Savage One 6.1.2
        15 May 2014 at 10:11 pm

        You would know. would you not???

    • Stephanie Rodgers 6.2
      16 May 2014 at 9:59 am

      Do you understand that “changing the legal process” is kind of what Parliament does all the time?

  7. Clemgeopin 7
    15 May 2014 at 9:47 pm

    Dunne is a self serving unprincipled useless cretin…and he is gutless. He will sacrifice his honesty and integrity to be on the good books of Key.

  8. Mike the Savage One 8
    15 May 2014 at 9:51 pm

    He is “white”, “middle class”, “comfortable”, “educated”, lives in “Ohariu”, thinks he is “deserving”, yes, perhaps “better”, and has a distinct “entitlement attitude”. Now how different is this man from the “ordinary” beneficiary, I ask? Is a sick, disabled, sole parent person that has no income “less” deserving to this specimen, a so called “MP”? Tell us what you think.

    • felix 8.1
      15 May 2014 at 10:04 pm

      Think it might be time to take a wee break from the pipe, mike.

      • Mike the Savage One 8.1.1
        15 May 2014 at 10:09 pm

        felix, it is duty that calls, to reveal the rot, so do not suggest I am on some type of “pipe”, which may relax some, but this is more serious What is your pipe doing?

    • North 8.2
      15 May 2014 at 11:01 pm

      I think you’re a piece of obfuscating Tory detritus, that is, a Tory troll. I think it, you obligingly prove it. Fuck off back to your natural habitat at SlaterPorn arsehole !

    • Rosie 8.3
      16 May 2014 at 9:21 am

      Actually Peter Dunne lives in Khandallah, Mike The Savage One. Ohariu is the name of the electorate and also the name of the valley between the northern suburbs of Wellington and the coastline out towards Makara.

      As for Peter Dunne’s choice here, it just reeks of his double talk / double standards. He is so achingly desperate to to cling to his diminishing power he will swallow rats.

  9. Mike the Savage One 9
    15 May 2014 at 10:03 pm

    I am astonished the biased speaker got them to vote for this under urgency, we live in a damned dictatorship, I feel. So the opposition is quiet (thinking they can do the same when they are in government), or all in public fully agree, right??? That is New Zealand, I really do NOT feel comfortable living here.

    • thatguynz 9.1
      16 May 2014 at 12:46 am

      The speaker is possibly the most biased in my living memory. At least Lockwood made a pretense of being impartial…

      I’ll bang my usual drum about now. Why the fuck is the speaker not an independant….

      • freedom 9.1.1
        16 May 2014 at 1:03 am

        +1

      • Tracey 9.1.2
        16 May 2014 at 9:48 am

        I dont think lockwood pretended I think he was very evenhanded and the best speaker I have witnessed.

        • felix 9.1.2.1
          16 May 2014 at 9:30 pm

          Yeah Lockie was very good.

          The only time I didn’t think he was playing totally straight was when dealing with John Key.

  10. jh 10
    16 May 2014 at 8:20 am

    From The Lancet

    Screening for Ministerial appointments? Systems failure in Peter Dunne’s appointment as a New Zealand Revenue and Associate Health Minister
    MP Peter Dunne has recently been appointed as a Minister outside cabinet for two positions, Associate Minister of Health and Minister of Revenue. These appointments may be relevant to a wide range of health issues in New Zealand, the Pacific region, and elsewhere. This letter focuses on his record on tobacco issues, and considers some of the implications of his appointments.
    For nearly 20 years, Mr Dunne has taken a public position opposed to tobacco control. In 1987, while an Undersecretary of Health in the Labour Government, he was reported as describing those who wanted a ban on tobacco advertising as ‘elitist zealots’.1 Since he left the Labour Party in 1994, he has consistently voted against tobacco control initiatives.
    Mr Dunne has described the efforts in New Zealand to prevent the sale of tobacco to underage children as ‘fascist’,2 and tobacco control spending as a ‘scandalous waste of money in pursuit of some health zealots’ beady eyed political correctness.’3 Mr Dunne also described the 2003 New Zealand legislation for smokefree bars as ‘extremism’.4
    Speaking in Parliament to oppose the legislation,5 the evidence indicates that he used (without attribution) statements previously published on a website by Barry McKay of the Canadian tobacco industry front group PUBCO: The Pub and Bar Coalition of Canada.6 He incorrectly attributed these statements (about ventilation being a solution to secondhand smoke dangers) to a British Medical Journal article.
    A December 1994 note from Paul Adams of British American Tobacco, to Peter Dunne, stated that it accompanied 100 pounds:
    ‘to help pay for your ‘Awayday’. I do hope you will enjoy yourselves.
    I would be grateful if you could get receipts for your expenses and pass them to the driver, even large companies have to account for their money!
    Enjoy your visit to England.’7
    In 2003, the month before this tobacco industry document was revealed, he was reported as saying:
    ‘I am constantly labelled by the health sector as a tool of the tobacco industry or a stooge … I cannot remember when I last met with someone from the industry.’ 8
    In 2000, when the possibility of tobacco companies being sued by government was raised, Mr Dunne stated that Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark had a ‘fanatical anti-smoking obsession’ and described ASH NZ as an extremist pressure group.9 In 2001, Prime Minister Helen Clark said that ‘he had consistently picked up issues in support of the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries.’10
    That a politician with this track record can be appointed to a Ministerial role in the health portfolio is a side effect of the MMP political system New Zealand now has (given he is a leader of a minor party in a type of government coalition). Nevertheless, it also indicates a design fault in the way the New Zealand political process selects new ministers.
    That is, there is no systematic publicly transparent review process for ministerial appointments, or a public appraisal of a ministerial candidate’s past support for commercial vested interests in the portfolio area they are considered for. Until such a transparent and effective system is established, it may be appropriate for the public (and the rest of Parliament) to at least tightly monitor the performance of such Ministers. In particular, non-governmental organisations need to take a monitoring and advocacy role to minimise any damage by such Ministers to important regulatory and legislative controls that protect public health and society.
    Or perhaps Mr Dunne should come with a warning label?
    George Thomson
    Department of Public Health, Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences
    University of Otago, Wellington
    Nick Wilson
    Department of Public Health, Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences
    University of Otago, Wellington
    Competing interests: Both authors have worked for health sector agencies concerned with tobacco control.

  11. jh 11
    16 May 2014 at 8:22 am

    Last week, after select committee hearings on the new real estate agent legislation, he was up to his same old tricks. However, United Future leader, Peter Dunne, (who calls himself Mr Common Sense) played a card not many expected.
    In a release which has probably gone unreported, he says the United Future party “will withdraw its support for the Real Estate Agents Bill…unless there are major changes to the legislation and the sponsoring minister, Clayton Cosgrove, adopts a more consultative attitude.”

    http://landlords1.wordpress.com/

  12. Tracey 12
    16 May 2014 at 2:06 pm

    minister for myself

    a portfolio shared by

    peter dunne
    judith collin
    s