Daily review 01/05/2024

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, May 1st, 2024 - 15 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

15 comments on “Daily review 01/05/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Patricia Bremner 1
    1 May 2024 at 5:59 pm

    1st of May Our special day and their poll results gave us what we hoped.

    Slippery slope to go "Out "

  2. Phillip ure 2
    1 May 2024 at 6:21 pm

    Question time: mini-review..

    Interesting to watch the body language/competition between the two contenders to succeed lux-on…

    Bishop and finance minister..

    He ignores her when she speaks…and when he speaks her face tells the story..

    A green mp gets today's fashion-disaster award…a female mp in a splotched green leathery jacket thing…that had all the grace/style of a sack…I couldn't hear what she said..my mind was just going: 'look at that coat..!'

    And a labour backbencher (female/blond..back row) gets today's lean-in (to camera shot)-award..tho' a couple of tory male MPs almost pipped her at the post..

    ..Mitchell in repose/his eyes..is still looking haunted..(for reasons unknown)… someone give the man a hug..!

    There was a discussion about the cruel abomination that is live animal exports .(Hey..!..I never promised to be unbiased..)

    The minister..Hoggard..pretty much failed in his attempted defence of the indefensible…(That bias again..)

    The speaker seems to run the whole thing in a reasonably genial/balanced way..

    The only surprise was finance minister confirming her budget will contain (the previously much maligned by her) fiscal cliffs…but aside from that…

    Some questions were asked..and answers given…about some things…but nothing much jumped out…apart from the coat..

  3. SPC 3
    1 May 2024 at 7:54 pm

    I got some gifts this May Day.

    A VPN download from "Yu Wu". Why me indeed.

    And as an extra treat can now only get Spotify offline (previous downloads only).

    Something to do with Beehive matches now being made in Stockholm (formerly in the electorate of Hipkins) presumably.

  4. ianmac 4
    1 May 2024 at 7:57 pm

    When asked Luxon said their plans will be fully funded into the future.

    Oops. Later he said maybe some will not be fully funded. (He had much of Pharma not being fully funded by Labour.)

  5. SPC 5
    1 May 2024 at 8:57 pm

    May Day

    Winston Peters says

    1.new Poseidon and new Hercules aircraft might not be compatible with new technology developed under AUKUS

    1a.

    The P-8A Poseidon is the Navy’s newest maritime, patrol and reconnaissance aircraft and is configured with state-of-the-art sensors and communications equipment, allowing it to support a wide range of missions over large bodies of water, including sub-surface search-and-rescue operations.

    https://www.southcom.mil/News/PressReleases/Article/2037461/us-navy-p-8a-poseidon-to-support-chilean-led-search-for-c-130/

    1b.more advanced tech developments occurred without something called AUKUS in the past. Upgrades to communications on transport aircraft – Hercules is no biggie.

    2.there was not a benign security environment in 2000 (the end of history era) and the 9/11 attack proved it

    2a.9/11 was evidence of poor homeland security standards, not a dangerous security environment.

    2b.an imagined security crisis led to the destablisation of the ME to the ultimate benefit of Iran.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350259986/live-nz-long-way-signing-aukus-peters-says

  6. Ad 6
    1 May 2024 at 9:06 pm

    In 6 months National have made more people unemployed than Labour did in a term.

    Can't wait to see their next economic rebuild move.

  7. SPC 7
    1 May 2024 at 9:38 pm

    May Day

    3.Peters said there are two conditions before New Zealand could or would participate in Pillar 2.Firstly, AUKUS partners need to invite Aotearoa to participate, which Peters said they have not.

    "This Government, like its predecessor, has its ministers and officials seeking information and in discussions with their counterparts so that we can better understand what opportunities and benefits Pillar 2's advanced technologies may offer New Zealand," he said. "We must also carefully examine what utilities, if any, we might offer, or be expected to offer Pillar 2 partners, in return. That will take time."

    If Aotearoa is invited sometime in the future, we would then need to decide whether or not to accept a decision, which Peters said the Government was a long way from making.

    3a which manages the risk of a Trump presidency (5 years delay, if necessary)

    4."We are disquieted by any potential breakdown in foreign policy bipartisanship over Pillar 2. Bipartisanship in foreign policy is not a luxury for our small state, it's a necessary condition for advancing our sovereign interests effectively, thereby keeping New Zealanders secure and prosperous.

    4a.Bill English said National supported the coalition of the willing in Iraq – thus did not agree with the Labour government decision to only be part of a UN action.

    https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/document/47HansD_20030318_00000052/debate-on-iraq

    5."Pillar 2 is not a military alliance but a technology sharing mechanism being developed by three of our closest traditional security partners. It is being developed as a response to a deteriorating strategic environment. It seeks to strengthen defence capabilities, deter coercion or aggression in our region, and support security and stability."

    5a.true

    6.He lashed out at the criticism that the Coalition was abandoning an independent foreign policy as "anti-Americanism" and said the countries critics are "scaremongering" about are "three of our closest friends on the international stage", meaning the US, UK and Australia.

    6a. No, it is really more a conflation of foreign policy with security arrangements. We have a security arrangement with Oz, are part of NATO+ and intelligence partners 5 Eyes, yet still have an independent foreign policy. And maybe a technology development and sharing agreement (AUKUS Pillar 2) as well. How it would impact on foreign policy, whereas the other partnerships do not, is a case not well made.

    It seems to be based on fear of a confrontation with China resulting from a focus on greater defence preparedness to enable a practice of containment (as per the Chinese maps). However the idea that diplomacy is an alternative path is in the hope that it would work when practiced without a safety net.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2024/05/winston-peters-lashes-out-at-wild-rhetoric-surrounding-aukus-clarifies-government-s-position.html

  8. SPC 8
    1 May 2024 at 10:17 pm

    May Day – the USA and China

    The global reserve currency nation (private capital) and the work to centre the world economy around China.

    An issue of co-existence … or

    1.promoting democracy in Hong Kong to coerce a crackdown. And then stand by Taiwan remaining independent.

    2.a boon for the MIC, but since the invasion of Ukraine (and with the ME facing an existential conflict between a nation occupying the WB and a theocratic revolutionary regime intent on war) comes a sense that the USA has too much on its hands – and isolationism rises.

    The worst of all worlds would be an arms build up, without deterrent effect, because of isolationism.

    3.unsurprisingly some seek a diplomatic alternative to a new Cold War arms build-up.

    This is not posturing as independent, or non aligned, that of itself achieves nothing – that is just identity politics. It is having a plan for a peaceful resolution of disputes and working to realise them.

    PS. Of course, doing nothing all to offend China, is a lot like hitching the lands resources to the biggest market available – it is the ultimate neo-liberalism (there must be the money to fund the social democracy – just not any CGT, estate or wealth tax ..)