Daily Review 01/07/2015

25 comments on “Daily Review 01/07/2015 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. joe90 1

   1 July 2015 at 7:17 pm

   When stacking the board won’t cut it..

   Legislation giving government ministers sweeping new powers to sell off state houses without the approval of Housing New Zealand has been tabled in Parliament.

   The Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill would allow designated ministers to sell Housing NZ properties without the approval of the board of the corporation.

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/69886055/ministers-seek-power-to-bypass-housing-nz-for-state-house-sales
   • mickysavage 1.1

     1 July 2015 at 7:28 pm

     Gee why have a board? Why not just let the Minister make the decision?
     • Ad 1.1.1

       1 July 2015 at 8:36 pm

       Perversely, if I were in a Labour government I would do the same:
       – eradicate the Board
       – decorporatise housing
       – pull the whole portfolio under more direct Ministerial control

       Bring back real Departments again.
       • mickysavage 1.1.1.1

         1 July 2015 at 8:41 pm

         Agreed.

         I always struggled to understand why Housing NZ needed a board. It is quite a simple model, own heaps of houses and make sure they have people in need living in them and make sure they are fixed up and kept repaired. And let the Government know how much from year to year you need to make sure you can keep doing this.
         • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1.1.1

           1 July 2015 at 9:20 pm

           Yep. The SOE model of providing profits to government has failed in so many ways.
           • Ad 1.1.1.1.1.1

             1 July 2015 at 10:55 pm

             In fact I would be tempted to get rid of the idea of a Departmental Chief Executive, and go back to a Secretary. I think Twyford would have fun with that 😉
       • millsy 1.1.1.2

         1 July 2015 at 11:03 pm

         Perhaps take the maintenance work back in house as well. ie having this hypothetical “Department of Public Housing” employ their own tradies and running their own apprenticeships.
2. Heyegg 2

   1 July 2015 at 7:33 pm

   I heard Andrew Little repeatedly dismissing national for being “ideological”
   When and why did ideology become such a dirty word?
   • mickysavage 2.1

     1 July 2015 at 7:37 pm

     When it is stupid ideological?
   • G C 2.2

     1 July 2015 at 7:41 pm

     When ideology is sold WITH the presupposition ‘people are not greedy’
   • Dianne 2.3

     1 July 2015 at 7:43 pm

     Even as a child you were a real B-A-S-T-A-R-D!

     Things never change!
   • adam 2.4

     1 July 2015 at 9:12 pm

     Ideology is always a dirty word in politics – when it becomes rigidity, dogma, blinked thinking and an inability to embrace any other opinions.

     Ideas can be constructive, when it leaves the mind open, creates discussion, and does not impose itself. But ideology, when it believes it is the only right – kills ideas.

     The present government has gone down the ideology path into dogma, and right thinking. They have more in common with the old East German communists, than with democrats or social democrats.

     They have walked off the reservation into la-la land. Because there is no right way, no perfect set of ideas, no way for one fixed set of ideas to be right. That style of thinking, a right way, with right outcomes, has always lead us to some sort of – man made hell.
     • Heyegg 2.4.1

       2 July 2015 at 12:23 pm

       Adam your ideology sounds like the brand I’m concerned about… That is some kind of pragmitism or relativism which has turned dogmatic.
3. b waghorn 3

   1 July 2015 at 7:49 pm

   http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/headlines.cfm?c_id=1
   Another balls up by the nats
   Oh and apparently motoring safety is all about saving money . They’re one dimensional buggers all right.
   • Draco T Bastard 3.1

     1 July 2015 at 9:22 pm

     Which particular headline are you talking about?

     EDIT: I suspect you mean this one.
     • b waghorn 3.1.1

       2 July 2015 at 8:13 am

       Bugger yes that one Cheers I forgot to see if link worked properly.
4. Heyegg 4

   1 July 2015 at 7:52 pm

   Right, so ideology in general is okay.
   • G C 4.1

     1 July 2015 at 8:04 pm

     You MUST have an ideology to have governance. Ideology is simply a system of ideas and ideals – in the political realm it’s the ‘lens’ through which legislation is developed. Problems occur when ideology becomes dogmatic/dogma
5. Heyegg 5

   1 July 2015 at 8:15 pm

   Thanks G C that was my understanding as well. which is why it seems strange when people get “accused” of ideology
   • mickysavage 5.1

     1 July 2015 at 8:21 pm

     Ideoloogy is fine if it produces results for ordinary people. If the ideology is that the rich should be allowed to get richer for all of our benefit and the benefits do not materialise then the ideology is a failure.
     • Heyegg 5.1.1

       1 July 2015 at 8:46 pm

       Right, I guess I ask because in the past when I have heard the term ideology used as an insult, it has come from Key etc. I thought the rights objection to ideology was it was an antithesis to right thinking, common sense, pragmatic, mainstream, blah blah new Zealanders.
6. adam 6

   1 July 2015 at 9:25 pm

   This just makes me sick. Any government who decides to push their chaotic agenda on the the most helpless, is not only lacking morality. It is, for want of a better word – evil.

   http://eveningreport.nz/2015/07/01/backers-banking-on-social-bonds-cash-labour/
7. Macro 7

   1 July 2015 at 9:55 pm

   Now I know that many consider the problem of Plastic bags to be minor – and to a certain extent they may be – but what we don’t see doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
   From “Top Ten Facts about Plastic Bags in our Oceans” here is one:

   In the middle of the Atlantic, there is an area that spans the distance between Virginia to Cuba called the Great Atlantic Garbage Patch: a soup of plastic with up to 26 million plastic particles per square kilometer

   http://www.environmentmassachusetts.org/sites/environment/files/reports/Bag%20Ban%20Fact%20Sheet%20_0.pdf

   When “Our Seas Our Future” campaign called for the government to phase out plastic bags The call was immediately rebuffed by Minister for the Environment Nick Smith.

   Nick Smith said plastic bags made up a “tiny portion” – 0.1 per cent – of total waste that goes to landfill and the government was “not giving any consideration to a ban nor do we think it’s justified”.

   “I take quite a scientific view of issues of this sort and the advice is that plastic bags are a tiny portion of the waste stream and a tiny proportion of the overall waste problem,” he said.

   NRT shows that – as per usual – he was lying.
   http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2015/07/a-scientific-view.html
   • Wensleydale 7.1

     2 July 2015 at 7:52 am

     What does Nick Smith actually have to do to get sacked? Everything he touches turns to shit. And not ordinary shit. Radioactive borderline sentient shit that wants to devour your children and suffocate you in your sleep. If I were even a fraction as incompetent at my job as he is at his, I’d have been sacked a hundred times over.
     • b waghorn 7.1.1

       2 July 2015 at 8:18 am

       I recently saw one of the political reporters voice the opinion that they couldn’t sack him because other than Collins there is know one else capable of running a ministry. I guess that’s what happens when you bring unthinking yes men/women to parliament.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS