Daily Review 30/08/2017

Written By: - Date published: 6:30 pm, August 30th, 2017 - 62 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 …

62 comments on “Daily Review 30/08/2017”

    • weka 1.1

      Indeedy.

    • ScottGN 1.2

      Yep. That battle is over.

    • tracey 1.3

      $14m of ratepayers money. Gone.

      • ScottGN 1.3.1

        They would have spent more if they could. Thank God for Royal Forest and Bird. And Kevin Hague.

        • tracey 1.3.1.1

          True. And the non monetary cost.

          No more dairy conversions in drought suceptible areas… eg North Canterbury

          • eco Maori/kiwi 1.3.1.1.1

            + 100 tracey I think that farmers should not be farming in environments that are unsustainable environmentally or financially

        • weka 1.3.1.2

          F and B are one of the premier activist groups in NZ now. We are incredibly fortunate to have them.

    • eco Maori/kiwi 1.4

      Those Muppet’s should have consulted with everyone with a stake in that Dam instead of just trying to just ram the process trough and blowing all that money . This is how National has behaved for 9 years. In my view Hawkes Bay needs some irrigation to creat employment and economic growth as this is the economic model we run on for now. Irrigation can be run in a environmentally friendly way

      • greywarshark 1.4.1

        In my opinion we can’t trust the RW and dairy farmers to limit their use and abuse of the waterways. Better that individuals trap their own water.

  1. ScottGN 2

    Did Newshub break the rules on Election broadcasts tonight with their piece about National’s promise of Broadband rollout for rural communities? They repeatedly referred to Simon Bridges as Communications Minister rather than his correct position as National’s Spokesperson on Communications now the writ for the election has been dropped.

    • Sanctuary 2.1

      Parliament and the government are not the same things. Parliament has been dissolved and a general election is to held; however, the government remains in place and operates as normal.

      After polling day, a defeated government is bound by the caretaker convention, but remains the government until the return of the writs (since writ day was 23rd August, and writs must be returned within 50 days, that will be the 11th October) and the declaration of a final result, and the formation of a new government – or, if it can still command the confidence of the house, the continuation of the old government.

      The rules were made clearer after some of the long MMP coalition negotiations.

      So the government – and ministers – remain so until the 11th October 2017, although after being defeated on the 23rd September the National government will just operate as caretakers.

  2. Cinny 3

    Live Stream link for Financial Debate

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/election/2017/08/decision-17-livestream-the-asb-great-finance-debate.html

    Edit they are just starting to introduce the candidates now

    • Ed 3.1

      How does a party with 0.4% of the party vote invited?
      More evidence of the neoliberal bias in the media.
      I believe the Maori Party get more votes.

      • tracey 3.1.1

        So the Conservative Party must be there too then?

        • Ed 3.1.1.1

          Of course 25% of the selected audience in Queenstown vote ACT.
          The 0.4 % party are well represented in that town.

          • Graeme 3.1.1.1.1

            Not really

            Act is below average in C/S, they got 122 votes in 2014, 0.36%, in Wakatipu they got the grand total of 14 votes.

    • DSpare 3.2

      The sound is better than that Nation minor party leaders debate, but the way the camera swerves about it pretty nauseating. Also, the disruptions (from Joyce in particular) are just not moderated at all that I’ve seen. But then, it isn’t the most gripping viewing and I haven’t watched it all.

      Ed doesn’t seem to be the only one wondering why Seymour was there. The bit where Gower just ran out of patience with him and threw a question over to Shaw only to have it tossed back in the interest of fairness was entertaining (and a good dig at Gowers ineptitude at controlling the debate).

      It is very much a filmed series of performances to a room rather than a camera focused debate to the country. It would be good if someone who was there were to give their impression of how it went.

      • Ed 3.2.1

        So the role of the moderator is important.
        And that’s why Hosking should never have that role.

      • Anne 3.2.2

        Actually I found it a fascinating debate and for the most part Gower did a good job. Most of the questions from the audience in the latter stages were directed at Grant Robertson. He fielded them well but he was on a hiding to nothing because there was quite a strong anti-Labour bias in that audience. That was my perception anyway.

    • Instructive to see Stephen Joyce laughing while Winston Peters claims that privacy matters.

  3. tracey 4

    Wagner was a no-show at a Town Hall type meeting in Christchurch. Gerry fronted for her. Maybe she was out on the water?

    ” “Busy day with disability meetings in Auckland – rather be out on the harbour!” ….. looking dreamily out the window at the sparkly water ”

    I have some connections to Disability work and workers in that area. They find her ill informed at meetings and frequently uses the wrong terms to describe this sector. They find it astounding that she attends important meetings, especiaslly in relation to the rebuild in christchurch with no knowledge of the project to be discussed. However they find she has many misguided (and dated) “suggestions”.

    • ScottGN 4.1

      I’m not entirely sure why Wagner didn’t front at that Town Hall. But it’s tempting to think that National knew it wasn’t going to go well. Which begs the question; is Christchurch Central going to head back to Labour this election? And maybe Waimakariri? And if so, what about the Party Vote in Christchurch?

      • Pat 4.1.1

        think it would be a good bet to back Duncan Webb in ChCh central…he has a high profile after 6 years of advocacy for EQ victims….Nicky Wagner is not rated, but the party vote doesn’t necessarily mirror

  4. Carolyn_nth 5

    A meeting tomorrow night in Auckland, with Guy Standing on UBI/Basic Income:

    In conjunction with Basic Income New Zealand and Auckland Debating Society, Guy Standing, leading international speaker on Basic Income, author of “The Precariat’, with as a panel to respond to his presentation, Sue Bradford and Keith Rankin.

    Guy Standing is a Professorial Research Associate at SOAS, University of London, and a founder and co-President of the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN), an NGO promoting basic income as a right. He has held chairs at the Universities of Bath and Monash (Australia) and was previously Director of the Socio-Economic Security Programme of the International Labour Organisation. He is currently working on pilot basic income schemes in India and on issues relating to his two recent books, The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class (2011) and A Precariat Charter: From Denizens to Citizens (2014).

    Professor Standing’s book recently featured in University World News: Higher education and the precariat class
    See his Guardian article from January, 2017 and his interview on Basic Income.
    When
    August 31st, 2017 6:30 PM through 8:00 PM
    Location
    76 Epsom Ave
    Epsom Campus
    Lecture Room J1 – J Block
    Auckland, AUK 1023
    New Zealand

    • CoroDale 5.1

      Thanks,
      It’s not just ToP, Greens also want UBI calculated by the next Govt. Trusting a UBI Commission Report could get cross party support from Labour at coalition negotiation time.

  5. mac1 6

    Ruataniwha. There must be more to it, apart from the need and greed of farmers wanting more water, but how do you spend $14 million of ratepayers money when the land in question was not owned by the group seeking the dam, and the law as pronounced upon by the judge was pretty unequivocal to this layman as to the circumstances where conservation land can be alienated.

    If I were a ratepayer in Hawkes Bay I’d be asking questions about how private individuals can spend so much public money for possible private gain. I’d also look at how $14 million can be spent essentially on paper shuffling.

    Is it to do with that old/new adage “Privatise the profits , and socialise the costs”?

    But I don’t come from there, so I don’t know.

    • KJT 6.1

      I had some family members involved in this.

      It never added up except as a direct subsidy to the farmers concerned.

      Some of which could have paid for smaller irrigation dams on their own land. But that would have cost them money.

      Privatise the gains and socialise the loses was exactly the aim.

    • See the link I provide here.

      • mac1 6.2.1

        Thanks, Draco T. Bit of a corruption too of what ‘looking after your mates” should really mean.

        I saw the Helen Clark film tonight, A Year with Helen, where she talked about clear instructions as to zero tolerance for corruption in her UN department, so that it became the most transparent aid agency in the world.

        • greywarshark 6.2.1.1

          Ruataniwha and $14 mill. Does it match up to the Kaipara Harbour council spending – on something real and needed? They had to have a special Bill passed exonerating them didn’t they? And I haven’t followed the back story about that so don’t feel I have a good understanding.

          But how can a Council spend $14m. on nothing without censure? The whole story about why less government was A Good Thing was because it would bring more efficiency and effectiveness, etc etc. It seems to have brought the problem of bad judgment of necessary workers, meaning huge expenditure on temporary contractors. And a slush fund apparently to pay them – resulting in a sort of double bookkeeping.

          • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.1.1

            The whole story about why less government was A Good Thing was because it would bring more efficiency and effectiveness, etc etc.

            And from what we’ve learned over the last thirty years that would be a lie. All the evidence we have now shows that less government and more privatisation results in higher costs and inefficiencies.

    • weka 7.1

      I can’t even remember what was happening 3 weeks ago (when poll was done).

    • Bill 7.2

      A 100% internet based poll…

    • swordfish 7.3

      Suggests almost 60% of 2014 Green voters are now thinking of casting their Party Vote for other Parties. The vast majority of them swinging to Labour (about two-thirds of them because of the Jacinda-mania drawcard / one-third due to unhappiness over Turei’s benefit disclosures and subsequent resignation).

      That level of voter disloyalty isn’t actually all that unusual for the Greens. NZES flow-of-the-Vote data suggests less than half of 2011 Green voters remained loyal at the 2014 General Election. About 1/4 swung to Lab, with a little less than one fifth going to the Nats and NZF (each)

      But the difference now is … there appears to be no significant reciprocal swing from 2014 Lab voters to Greens (whereas at the 2014 General Election = an inflow of 2011 Labour supporters & previous Non-voters to Greens – largely (though not entirely) compensated for the Greens’ lost 2011 voters to Labour).

      So usually there’s a lot of movement back and forth between voters for the two Left-leaning parties over consecutive Elections. But it all seems to be in 1 direction now.

      Reinforces the fact that the Greens’ base vote is much lower than many pundits assume – more like 5%. Many of the other 6% who voted Green in 2014 would have been Labour-identifiers & former Labour voters. So the Green vote was always going to be vulnerable to the Metiria admission + New charismatic Lab leader.

      • Bearded Git 7.3.1

        Or have you simply got it in for the Greens Swordfish? Who do you vote for?

        • swordfish 7.3.1.1

          Better asking that of Horizon, my Bearded Chum. I’m just summarising their latest (and the 2014 NZES) findings.

          My Vote ?

          If the Greens are averaging over 7% in the final round of Polls then I’ll Party Vote Labour as originally intended.

          If, on t’other hand, the Greens are averaging between 4-7% in the final Polls then I’ll certainly switch Green to contribute – in my own ever so humble way – to getting them over the line.

          But if they’re down below 4% in the week before the Election then I’ll have to seriously re-consider because it might just be a wasted vote.

          • Bearded Git 7.3.1.1.1

            Thanks Swordfish.

            Sorry if I was hassling you but last night I was just a bit pissed off having read so many MSM media comments trying to write the Greens off because they had polled 4.3% once, then I remembered you talking about how the Greens were only polling 3.6% in Whangarei (I do think there are special factors at play there this time round and was only a poll of 500) and then all your stuff on how flimsy the Greens vote may be (per your earlier analysis and the comment above).

            For the record I will be voting Green (always do) unless they are polling below 4%, like you, but I have a strong affinity for Labour-in fact I’m organising a meeting for Labour at the moment.

            I think there is more volatility in how people choose to vote than we (and the media) realise and that National’s vote is softer than the media are portraying it.

      • tracey 7.3.2

        It makes sense that Labour’s loss of votes had to go somewhere. I remain hopeful that The Green Party may have made some headway engaging the non voting.

  6. weka 8

    James Shaw just dropped a big hint at the end of the Economics debate tonight about their intention to reform politics.

    https://www.facebook.com/NewshubNZ/videos/vb.97548423605/10155831917943606/ (around 2hrs exact).

  7. Game Of Mate: How favours bleed the nation

    While we are distracted by mythical battles in the Game of Thrones, we are being robbed in the real world “Game of Mates” where the well-connected clip the wages and profits of the hard working. Murray and Frijters provide an entertaining and well researched expose of how privilege and rent-seeking dominates the Australian economy, enriching the Mates in the Game while robbing the rest. And they propose how to end the Game. And they name real names too. This is an explosive and essential book for all Australians. Except the Mates.
    Professor Steve Keen, Kingston University

    I suspect that similar research in NZ would show the same thing. Our nation has become corrupt.

    • CoroDale 9.1

      Keen is excellent.

      Corrupt or best people for the Job? Hey, I’ve been thinking about joining the Free Masons. They seem like a nice enough bunch. Anyone here have person experiences they would share?

  8. eco Maori/kiwi 10

    +100 Draco

  9. CoroDale 11

    Outgoing Reserve Bank governor Graeme Wheeler:

    “…every prospect the strong growth would continue.”

    “The greatest risk we face at this stage relates to the inflated global asset prices and the continuing build up in global debt.”

    “There is a risk of a housing market resurgence… if loan to value ratios (LVRs) were removed…”

    “We believe that it (inflation targets only) is still the best monetary policy framework for New Zealand.”

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/338345/reserve-bank-head-defends-record-in-last-public-speech

    Sleep well boys and girls, for the Bank for International Settlements quotes our next RBNZ Chairman Grant Spencer as saying;

    “The NZ banking system is relatively vanilla.”

    https://www.bis.org/review/r170809b.htm

    • CoroDale 11.1

      RBNZ’s Spencer uses the word vanilla more than once:

      Q. How close should New Zealand stick to international norms?

      A. “In shaping our regulatory approach – with its emphasis on self- and market discipline and being at the more permissive end of the spectrum – we must consider the potential costs of deviating too far from international norms. This is especially important to consider as we seek to tailor the sometimes complex international regulatory environment to New Zealand’s relatively vanilla banking system.”

      When banker’s use the word permissive, is it normal to think of Mel Gibson’s butt?

    • greywarshark 11.2

      Thanx CoroDale
      Relatively vanilla. Lovely. That in-group in-speech matey we’re-all-in-this-together jargon. There must be a humorous clip somewhere of an in-group talking in acronyms. I have heard the one about commercial travellers quoting their preferred joke by number. I think the one for tonight could be 42.

  10. popexplosion 12

    DRM the new spam. Some idiot genius writes up free info, then drms their content, which has ads of course, this starts a herd of people doing the same. Search engines pickup just drm content and the free unencumbered content disappears. now all well and good, original content should be paid for.But what if I want content from a community of Open sources who write up without down grading the work to some drm folly. Which obviously then pays people to churn open source methods to make a buck on writing it all up wrongly, drm leads to babel. Answer would be a search engine that you can switch to search non-drm or drm. Does anyone know of such a thing?

  11. Cinny 13

    Listening to the wireless, radio live, Slater is on, crikey he has plenty to say, worth tuning into.

    • Ed 13.1

      Please enlighten us

      • Cinny 13.1.1

        Tune in dude, I’m working so switching on and off when they are talking shite.

        Relationships between politicians and family and who works where
        Winston story being a distraction to mother of scandals
        And some dickheads ringing up talking shite

        After the news they be talking about Barclay, whichis massive interest to me, especially with what I personally know about that situation and the people involved. Wonder if Oil will spin his own agenda or be truthful.
        When your boss tapes you on the phone and asks you to lie for him and gets up to dodgy dealings with a female who was a cabinet member at the time, then whats a girl to do? Talk about it with your old boss? Gosh that would make it go pear shaped wouldn’t it?

        Fact of the matter is it has nothing to do with how well barclay was liked, and she wasn’t after his job at all. It’s not nice being asked to lie for another

        Cause it was never about the tapes, it was why was he taping her, what was he worried she was going to say?

        Lolz anyways back to work here’s the link he’s on for another hour
        http://www.radiolive.co.nz/home.player.html

        One last thing loolz I prefer not to visit his blog could get a virus, radio works well

  12. Cinny 14

    HOLY SHITE.. Al Jazeera just posted a 23min doco about NZ’s water pollution problem

    This won’t be good for our tourism, but fantastic for awareness.

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/08/problem-zealand-water-sources-170831090704101.html

    “as the dairy and agriculture industries grow, they are placing an ever-greater strain on the country’s water supply and raising concerns about the quality of New Zealand’s water.

    In August 2016, more than 5,000 people fell sick with gastrointestinal illness in Havelock North, a suburb of New Zealand’s North Island’s Hawke’s Bay district. The suburb’s drinking water had become contaminated, resulting in the poisoning of a third of its population and contributing to the deaths of three residents.

    The incident shook the public’s confidence in the safety of New Zealand’s drinking water, and led to an investigation by the Department of Internal Affairs.

    But what exactly is tainting the quality of New Zealand’s fresh water supplies and could a potential solution have a knock-on effect on all of New Zealand’s main economic contributors?”

    • weka 14.1

      Fuck tourism 🙂 It’s a big polluter and has a hugely negative impact on the environment as well. It’s also not even remotely sustainable. The sooner we get off that sauce the better.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts