Daily Review 08/09/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 pm, September 8th, 2015 - 13 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

TPPA protest-29

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.

13 comments on “Daily Review 08/09/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. miravox 1
    8 September 2015 at 6:17 pm

    Getting kicked out of parliament for interjections about whether a minister had ‘ministerial responsibility’ for commercial decisions by an Australian airline?

    He thought Carter’s comment that Bridges had ministerial responsibility for the issue set an interesting precedent. It left ministers open to answering questions on all manner of decisions made by private entities, Lees-Galloway said.

    No doubt the Opposition would be considering whether there were questions it wanted to ask along those lines.

    Well done Iain Lees-Galloway.

    • Ad 1.1
      8 September 2015 at 8:10 pm

      Badge of honour Ian.

      The Speaker’s recent rulings on Ministerial responsibility are just crap. In questions framed to the Prime Minister, the PM can now decide if it can go to any other Minister he likes. How the hell you are supposed to generate an effective Opposition holding the government to account?

      Can’t wait for Carter to head off to London.
      He has been one of the worst in the last two decades.

  2. Gabby 2
    8 September 2015 at 6:23 pm

    Because Carter is nothing if not consistent.

    • miravox 2.1
      8 September 2015 at 7:09 pm

      Very consistent in supporting government ministers. But he’s left them wide open on this question of ministerial responsibility for private entities. He’ll have to work out how he’s going to backtrack on this one.

  3. miravox 3
    8 September 2015 at 7:57 pm

    I cannot understand the NZ PM and am struggling with the disconnect in this explanation when asked about his mother’s experience informing his decision-making about today’s refugees

    Mr Key said his mother Ruth had benefited from family reunification policies to get into the United Kingdom as an Austrian Jewish refugee. “If she hadn’t had that, there’s a very strong chance she would have been persecuted and gone to the concentration camps like some of her family members did.

    Next sentence –

    I have a responsibility to do what’s right for New Zealand and what works for New Zealand.”

    There appears to be no emotional connection with his mother’s story (her family, not my family) or people fleeing from war these days (despite his ‘get some guts speech’ in parliament). Or is he trying to suggest his responsibility to NZ far outweighs his personal feelings? If so, what are those personal feelings? does he think that Britain didn’t do what is right for Britain when it took his mother in? What’s his opinion on that? Does he see his mother’s situation as different because his was a family reunification? what does he think about his Aunt’s illegal entry into Britain?

    As for what’s ‘right’ for NZ – What does he mean by ‘right’ for NZ? domestic costs? Appearance on the world stage? Security Council considerations? Middle East trade? Something else? I’d like to know. Certainly it’s not to encourage empathy and solidarity in New Zealanders with people in need – something that in the long run might be ‘right’ for NZ, maybe it would be ‘right’ at some other stage in NZ’s future – if so, I wonder when that might be. Clearly ‘not a good look’ on the world stage is not something he’s worrying about.

    James Shaw is right

    The system is stretched because the Government has been chronically underfunding it. It is a matter of prioritisation

    But that doesn’t give me anymore understanding of what the Prime Minister actually believes should be the right response to refugees in any given war. What are his principles in this? Understanding those will give a better understanding of his priorities in this one.

  4. Clemgeopin 4
    8 September 2015 at 8:37 pm

    5 minutes of HIGHLIGHTS from the Republican debate. Enjoy.

    https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/14fabc1d658f8e9a?projector=1

  5. joe90 5
    8 September 2015 at 10:29 pm

    No doubt we’re in for lots more shit like this.

    .

    BBC TrendingVerified account
    ‏@BBCtrending

    False fighter – the problem with the viral photo claiming to show a ‘migrant’ IS militant.

    http://bbc.in/1i8aL11

    https://twitter.com/BBCtrending/status/640926140174102529

    http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-34176631

    • Bill 5.1
      8 September 2015 at 10:44 pm

      The opening line frm the BBC piece that purports to debunk the bollox is interesting because, bollox.

      The possibility of militants sneaking into Europe as part of the huge flow of migrants from Syria and other countries has long worried governments and experts…

      Why in the fuck would you think it a good idea to attempt entry to a country to blow people up by passing yourself off as a refugee, and therefor have your ‘operation’ delayed by some years (if you even make it thorough alive) when you could just buy a fucking plane ticket?