David Seymour can’t handle criticism

Written By: - Date published: 8:21 am, January 14th, 2019 - 112 comments
Categories: act, child welfare, david seymour, education, schools, the praiseworthy and the pitiful, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

Poor old David Seymour and the ACT party. Becoming more and more irrelevant and facing extinction. What is it meant to do?

How about being obnoxious on social media?

It started off with a simple tweet suggesting that cigarette taxes had increased robberies.

 

 Good old laura norda stuff, the sort of thing supposedly Libertarian right wing parties have done for ever.

Dianne Khan who runs the Save Our Schools website asked a very simple question.

But this was met with this amazing response from David Seymour.

And a gentle attempt at humour by Dianne received this treatment.

But wait there was more.

Where was this evidence that Dianne Khan has been so awful to David Seymour. I went for a look at the Save Our Schools website to see what I could find out. There was this example:

Save Our Schools feels a response to David Seymour’s Questions for Kelvin, Willie and Peeni should include a few relevant facts. This seems to be something Mr Seymour routinely ignores in his communiques.

First, his comment about Maori educational achievement being so utterly abysmal.

Using the Government’s main system level metric, called School Leavers, Māori achievement has been increasing steadily for many years. In 2016, 66.5% of Māori students left school with at least NCEA Level 2 or higher, the benchmark used by the government for the minimum desired level of qualification. This compares to a similar figure of 45.7% in 2009, an encouraging increase of 20.8 percentage points in 7 years.

In contrast, only 59.7% of charter school leavers left school in 2016 with at least NCEA Level 2 or higher. Furthermore, it was disappointing to see that no less than 20.2% of 2016 leavers from charter schools left without even attaining NCEA Level 1.

Second, his comments on charter school funding always require clarification. Charter schools receive much more funding than the LOCAL schools that they were set up to compete against. This gives them an advantage compared to the much bigger, more established schools in places such as South Auckland.

Save Our Schools analysed the 2015 financial statements of South Auckland Middle School (SAMS) and its local counterpart, Manurewa Intermediate. SAMS received $11,740 of funding per student after paying the rent for its premises. In contrast, Manurewa Intermediate received funding of $5,907 per student, with its property provided by the Crown.

This simple analysis destroys the myth perpetuated by charter school supporters that there were not serious problems with the original charter school funding model. Some of these problems were corrected when the funding formula was revised but the early schools still enjoy the benefit of being locked in to the overly generous original model.


Yep jammed full of, er, critical analysis and facts.

I am not surprised Seymour does not want to engage with Khan. Having someone point out so clearly why you are wrong and the reasons for it can’t be a very enjoyable experience.

And this final tweet is for you David.

 

112 comments on “David Seymour can’t handle criticism ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Morrissey 1
    14 January 2019 at 9:26 am

    Why can’t people from the ACT cult dance? I believe it has something to do with guilty feet having no rhythm….

    http://www.recipeapart.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/55ffd0ef0f2a4f2f0375.jpeg

    • Tricledrown 1.1
      14 January 2019 at 11:06 am

      Because they are robots they just repeat dogma

      • Morrissey 1.1.1
        14 January 2019 at 11:26 am

        Correct. Guilty feet ain’t got no rhythm, as we see here….

      • NZJester 1.1.2
        14 January 2019 at 5:13 pm

        They are not robots, they are puppets on strings spouting the less popular National Party dogma. National used them to pretend it was not National Party policy but a second party forcing them into it.

  2. You_Fool 2
    14 January 2019 at 9:42 am

    I was wondering why Rimmer was so upset with this person, then I realised it was because she had logic and facts and figures, and Rimmer has none…

    I also like that as a champion of free speech he doesn’t like having actual debates over his ideas

  3. Pete 3
    14 January 2019 at 10:19 am

    I know some people think David Seymour is a jerk. I know some people think he’s God because he sponsored a bill allowing bars to open and televise the 2015 Rugby World Cup games in the early hours of the morning.

    The petulance and arrogance displayed on here won’t make one iota of difference to him being Epsom MP.

    • mickysavage 3.1
      14 January 2019 at 10:27 am

      This particular incident won’t make any difference. ACT is completely and utterly dependent on National’s generosity. But one day National will realise that ACT is not worth the bother.

      • Tricledrown 3.1.1
        14 January 2019 at 11:13 am

        Mickey they need Nationals govt provided welfare to survive. Budging on the State. Euthanasia bill is Seymour only lifeline Ironically. Conservative Christians hate this bill and they will not turn up to vote rather than vote for Parties who support this legislation. Seymour is a plonker a hologram. Hollowman.

      • Gosman 3.1.2
        14 January 2019 at 2:34 pm

        What purpose would it serve National to cut ACT off? They aren’t damaged by the relationship with ACT and they provide a useful ally in Parliament even with a single MP.

        • arkie 3.1.2.1
          14 January 2019 at 2:38 pm

          In your opinion.

          • Robert Glennie 3.1.2.1.1
            14 January 2019 at 4:03 pm

            An opinion with evidence to back it up.

            If National wanted to cut A.C.T. they would have done it by now. They could have for example asked people to vote for Paul Goldsmith in Epsom so that David Seymour would lose the race and be made to exit Parliament. They did not.

            I think that was the idea of New Zealand First in Epsom to instigate such a campaign if it meant A.C.T.’s demise.

        • AB 3.1.2.2
          14 January 2019 at 3:02 pm

          Quite right Gosman. No way National will cut off ACT unless they believe their association with ACT damages them more than it benefits them. Right now it doesn’t.
          IMO National are more likely to create additional weirdo, nutter parties and keep them on life support as perhaps their only way back to power. Every safe National electorate seat can potentially be Epsomised.
          Nats are driven by power and money. Something as trifling as democracy is nothing compared to power and money.

          • alwyn 3.1.2.2.1
            14 January 2019 at 6:26 pm

            “IMO National are more likely to create additional weirdo, nutter parties and keep them on life support as perhaps their only way back to power.”

            Well it might be worth a try.
            With very few words changed you get the following, and that has worked for the Labour Party.
            “IMO Labour are more likely to create additional weirdo, nutter parties like the Greens and keep them on life support as perhaps their only way to ever hold power”.

            And give the real power to Tsar Winston, of course.

            • In Vino 3.1.2.2.1.1
              14 January 2019 at 6:47 pm

              Personally, I prefer the older spelling ‘Czar’. But you bring yourself into ridicule by your thin pretence that Winston has any such powers. Jacinda would now be dead if he had powers like that, as you well know. The Czars were utterly despotic, and Stalin followed suit, as their successor, despite the idealistic revolution..

              • alwyn …
                15 January 2019 at 11:36 am

                “The Czars were utterly despotic,”.
                Utter rubbish. Stalin certainly was but the Tsars were angelic in comparison with him.

                As for “idealistic revolution”. That might have been the case in the February Revolution but it certainly wasn’t the case in October when the Bolsheviks took over.

                Stalin was certainly guilty of multiple murders and other crimes in the 2008 – 2017 period. He was arrested on multiple occasions but the worst punishment he ever got during the reign of the Tsar was internal exile.
                Perhaps the then regime should not have been as generous to him.
                Have a look at what a bastard he was and wonder on the fact that they never executed him.
                It would certainly have got rid of a man who was probably the most evil person of the 20th century. He was, I would judge, even worse than his counterpart in Germany.
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Joseph_Stalin

                • In Vino …
                  15 January 2019 at 1:52 pm

                  OK, I should have written,’ The great and successful Czars’ Those who ruled Russia successfully always did so with a rod of iron (Peter, Catherine, Ivan..) They were despotic whether you like it or not, and it has been well argued that Stalin followed in their tradition.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 3.2
      14 January 2019 at 10:43 am

      An example of the jerk God’s petulance/arrogance from this post – desperate Dave.

      Nah you’re actually an awful person and, other than pointing out as much, I would never engage with you.

      Seems “we’re dealing here with utter scum“… Anything else to debate?

    • Morrissey 3.3
      14 January 2019 at 10:46 am

      Correct, Pete. The sheep of Epsom will do as they’re told.

  4. patricia bremner 4
    14 January 2019 at 10:24 am

    For someone who dishes it out, he does not take it at all. Quite correct Mickey.

  5. The Fairy Godmother 5
    14 January 2019 at 10:44 am

    It seems like he is losing it. He needs serious help is all I can say.

    • Tricledrown 5.1
      14 January 2019 at 11:16 am

      JLR could give him some support.

      • The Fairy Godmother 5.1.1
        14 January 2019 at 11:42 am

        True that. It is sad though. Hes obviously incredibly frustrated with no friends now national doesn’t want to play with him anymore.

    • Gosman 5.2
      14 January 2019 at 2:38 pm

      Why is he losing it? Refusing to engage in actual debate with a ideological opponent is not necessarily a reflection of someone losing it. In fact it might be entirely rational as he does not want to justify her position by giving it any credence or a large amount of airtime.

      • arkie 5.2.1
        14 January 2019 at 2:42 pm

        In your opinion. He also needlessly called her ‘utter scum’. Refusing to debate but also insulting your ‘idealogical opponent’ is not what one would call rational debate. One could say it was out of line, that he is losing it. And if he wanted to avoid giving it airtime he failed didn’t he?

      • The Fairy Godmother 5.2.2
        14 January 2019 at 3:08 pm

        It was the insults and tone of the response. If your argument was valid he would have said nothing. By giving it no oxygen it would have died very quickly. As it is he’s made himself look like an arrogant jerk.

        • Gosman 5.2.2.1
          14 January 2019 at 3:10 pm

          He dislikes Ms Khan and the ideology she represents. I am sure Mr Peters and Ms Davidson also feels the same about others and would treat them equally with disdain. If you think this reflects badly then don’t vote for them.

          • arkie 5.2.2.1.1
            14 January 2019 at 3:17 pm

            You know how Mr Peters and Ms Davidson feel huh?

            There’s also no evidence of your claim, but there is however evidence of Seymour treating a member of the public badly, calling her ‘utter scum’ and an awful person.

            Your hypothetical is irrelevant to the topic.

          • Gabby 5.2.2.1.2
            15 January 2019 at 8:28 am

            He’s just lost the utter scum vote gozzer. Who’s left?

      • woodart 5.2.3
        14 January 2019 at 4:14 pm

        is this why you refuse to answer perfectly reasonable questions gooseman. by ignoring the hard questions, you think you are not giving the questioner any credence?. is this your way of putting your fingers in your ears and shouting nonsense?

  6. Tiger Mountain 6
    14 January 2019 at 11:36 am

    Mr Seymour elevates his public self pleasuring to ever greater spectacle level

    “Trash talk” seems the way increasing numbers of reactionary MPs are heading these days, including Matt King, Nat Northland, and Mrs Bennett of course…

  7. Ross 7
    14 January 2019 at 12:32 pm

    Haven’t dairy prices gone up significantly over the last 10 years? I’m not aware of a big increase in thefts of butter, milk and cheese. 🙂

    I also find it weird that the party of responsibility is mitigating the behaviour of criminals!

    • Gosman 7.1
      14 January 2019 at 3:13 pm

      There is no evidence that prices for milk, butter, and cheese in Dairies have gone up more than the rate of inflation (very low) over the past 10 years.

      • Ross 7.1.1
        15 January 2019 at 8:23 am

        Gosman

        You didn’t even attempt to research the issue. Dairy prices have indeed outstripped inflation. 2008 is a good example.

        Why are consumers not robbing dairies and supermarkets?

        And can you explain why ACT is suddenly going soft on crime? I thought ACT believed in personal responsibility. But where’s there’s an oppprtunity to take a cheap shot at the Government, personal responsibility isn’t quite so important.

        http://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/economic_indicators/prices_indexes/rising-cost-of-food-in-nz.aspx

        • Ross 7.1.1.1
          15 January 2019 at 8:28 am

          “The Food Price Index shows that milk, cheese and eggs rose by 23 percent overall during the year to May 2008. The cost of many dairy products in consumers’ shopping baskets have risen significantly in the past 12 months. For example, figure 2 shows that the price of standard fresh milk increased by 22 percent, cheddar cheese by 59 percent and butter by 80 percent.”

          • Gosman 7.1.1.1.1
            15 January 2019 at 9:15 am

            Oh, you mean the cost of items made with milk products not items sold in Dairies. Apologies for that. Dairy products don’t tend to be very easily stored as opposed to Cigareetes. A block of Cigarrettes can be well over 100 dollars. A hundred dollars wort of dairy products is incredibly bulky. that is what criminals don’t tend to steal dairy products.

  8. Gosman 8
    14 January 2019 at 12:39 pm

    David Seymour is under NO obligation to engage in debate with Dianne Khan or anyone else if he chooses not to. Just as some people here think engaging with AGW deniers is not something you should entertain (which I have no problem with). Dianne Khan is a big person who can handle David Seymours actions.

    • arkie 8.1
      14 January 2019 at 12:43 pm

      Dianne Khan is a big person who can handle David Seymours actions.

      The point is that David Seymour is evidently NOT a big person who can handle Dianne Khan’s actions.

      An elected representative shouldn’t be calling one of his bosses ‘scum’ but he felt that he must anyway.

      • Gosman 8.1.1
        14 January 2019 at 1:57 pm

        In your opinion. Seymour does not seem to believe that he is responsible to Ms Khan just as I suspect Mr Peters or Ms Davidson would not be responsible to some ACT supporters. It may harm his re-election chances but this would be unlikely I would suggest.

        • McFlock 8.1.1.1
          14 January 2019 at 2:03 pm

          And if a Green MP called someone who asked a simple question “utter scum” while refusing to provide an actual answer, you jerks would be outraged.

          It’s a simple question: if dairy robberies have been increasing alongside tobacco taxes, where’s the data? Was Seymour speaking from direct knowledge, or just spinning bullshit to try to seem relevant?

            • McFlock 8.1.1.1.1.1
              14 January 2019 at 2:54 pm

              “Essentially”, meaning not calling people scum and actually addressing the points that had been raised.
              So, not at all similar, then.

              • Gosman …
                14 January 2019 at 3:01 pm

                She told people to delete themselves from Twitter (i.e. to remove themselves from the debate).

                • McFlock …
                  14 January 2019 at 3:10 pm

                  What’s your point? It’s hardly equivalent do just calling someone “scum” in response to a simple question. You put more effort into answering that question than Seymour did. At least Davison clearly explained her position and why she held it.

                  • Gosman …
                    14 January 2019 at 3:15 pm

                    She believed people should not be expressing their views on Twitter. Seymour obviously thinks Khan’s views are not worthy of responding to. In my mind that is a similar approach to take. You can obviously disagree with me and get upset with Seymour. What purpose this serves is unclear.

                    • McFlock …
                      14 January 2019 at 3:23 pm

                      Ah. You do not compute the difference between calling someone scum and telling abuse enablers to shut up.

            • McFlock 8.1.1.1.2.1
              14 January 2019 at 3:01 pm

              Neither demonstrate a relationship. What’s the situation regarding addictive illegal drugs like meth? Is it related to actual benefit payments and stand-downs? Is it relocation of the robbery problem from banks, which have largely eradicated robberies? Are service stations hit at the same rate, if not why not? There were some raw numbers in the news article – why can’t Seymour, as an MP, access more accurate data and give us some decent rates? He made the claim, he should have more than a google search of mediocre Stuff articles to back it up.

              • Gosman …
                14 January 2019 at 3:17 pm

                My point was there is actual data that suggests a relationship may exist. Seymour couldn’t be bothered to give this (or the more detailed evidence you requested) to Khan because he does not rate her and does not wish to engage. Again where is the issue here?

                • arkie …
                  14 January 2019 at 3:18 pm

                  Uh… from https://www.parliament.nz/en/get-involved/features/what-does-an-mp-do/

                  MPs are in constant demand to give speeches, write articles for media, attend functions, and meet visitors. They are regularly lobbied by interest groups and individuals who want to promote ideas. They must respond to many letters and emails each year, with sense, sensitivity, and often with practical action.

                  An MPs work includes communicating with the media and the public about the issues they are involved in.

                • McFlock …
                  14 January 2019 at 3:29 pm

                  May exist? If you’re going to demand a change in policy, you need more than “may”.

                  Seymour “may” have evidence – if he were going to plug his idea, the “should” have the evidence on hand, and it “might” have occurred to him that even though he didn’t like the commenter who asked a question that “could” be easily predicted, someone else on Twitter “might” be interested in the simple response he had already prepared.

                  OR

                  He has no real evidence and he’s just desperately flailing about in search of some shred of relevance.

                  • Psycho Milt …
                    14 January 2019 at 4:11 pm

                    Meh. It’s a reasonable assumption from Seymour. Continually hiking the taxes on cigarettes will inevitable take their price into territory in which a black market becomes worthwhile. If a black market becomes worthwhile, people will steal to supply that black market.

                    Given the above, the facts that cigarettes are now ridiculously expensive and we’ve seen evidence of a black market developing means you could reasonably expect robberies of dairies to steal cigarettes to be on the increase.

                    And, funnily enough, it just so happens we’re seeing a lot of news stories about robberies of dairies to steal cigarettes.

                    So it’s certainly true that we haven’t seen proof that the correlation is causal (where are the nation’s social sciences academics when you actually need them for once?), but what we’re seeing is what we’d expect to see given the circumstances. As with climate change, we’re in a situation of “Given A and B, we’d expect to see C happening, and oh look we’ve got C happening.” At that point your best course of action is to assume causation unless evidence turns up to the contrary.

                    • McFlock …
                      14 January 2019 at 4:42 pm

                      That’s why I’d be interested in service station robberies as well.

                      If they’re targeted at the same rate for hold ups, the tobacco theory holds more water. But service stations typically have much more open layouts than corner stores, obvious cameras, and you can see into them from the street – similar to the modern bank design that’s helped lower the number of bank robberies.

                      So if dairy robberies have gone up and service station robberies is constant or falling, then we’re looking at a crime displacement effect creating a new black market, rather than the black market creating the crime.

                      edit: and this is from someone who’s pissed off that the tobacco taxes finally stopped me smoking. I can only afford so many vices…

        • arkie 8.1.1.2
          14 January 2019 at 2:19 pm

          In your opinion.

          I remember that within the last year a certain Ms Davidson attempted to reclaim the C word at a protest rally. Blue murder was cried.

          • Gosman 8.1.1.2.1
            14 January 2019 at 2:46 pm

            Did I personally express any upset at her?

            • arkie 8.1.1.2.1.1
              14 January 2019 at 2:59 pm

              That’s irrelevant to me, my point being that Ms Davidson wasn’t talking to a citizen specifically and many were outraged. Seymour called Ms Kahn and ‘awful person’ and ‘utter scum’ for daring to differ ideologically. Why defend someone so unequipped to have a discussion that they resort to ad hominem when even slightly questioned?

              • Gosman …
                14 January 2019 at 3:02 pm

                David Seymour is under no obligation to be nice to people of all ideological persuasions. If you don’t like his attitude don’t vote for him. Oh wait… you don’t anyway.

                • arkie …
                  14 January 2019 at 3:05 pm

                  Uh… from https://www.parliament.nz/en/get-involved/features/what-does-an-mp-do/

                  MPs are in constant demand to give speeches, write articles for media, attend functions, and meet visitors. They are regularly lobbied by interest groups and individuals who want to promote ideas. They must respond to many letters and emails each year, with sense, sensitivity, and often with practical action.

                  An MPs work includes communicating with the media and the public about the issues they are involved in.

                  • Gosman …
                    14 January 2019 at 3:19 pm

                    LOL!

                    Do you think you’ve discovered some sort of enforceable code of conduct that means MP’s have to respond to ALL requests via ALL sources for information?

                    That is hilarious, if true.

                    • arkie …
                      14 January 2019 at 3:21 pm

                      I’m pointing out that David Seymour is unable to do the basic functions of his job with sense and sensibility.

                      If you employed someone who was equally unable to do their job would you be happy to continue paying them?

                    • Gosman …
                      14 January 2019 at 3:22 pm

                      The comment you posted does not mean what you think it means. It is detailing what MP’s usually do not what they are OBLIGED to do.

                    • Gosman …
                      14 January 2019 at 3:23 pm

                      Regardless if you don’t like David Seymour’s behaviour then don’t vote for him. Oh wait… you don’t already.

                    • mpledger …
                      15 January 2019 at 11:40 am

                      You seem to want to limit out behaviour. We can do more then not vote for him, we can show others his responses so that they can see he is ill-mannered and ill-educated.

      • Wensleydale 8.1.2
        14 January 2019 at 2:25 pm

        On a positive note, at least now nobody’s under any illusions as to the sort of person David ‘Rimmer’ Seymour is. A petulant man-child who can’t abide someone refuting his rickety excuse for an argument. Epsom voters… are you really getting your money’s worth?

        • arkie 8.1.2.1
          14 January 2019 at 2:29 pm

          This is very true!

        • Gosman 8.1.2.2
          14 January 2019 at 2:47 pm

          Do you disagree with the statistics contained in this media report?

          • Robert Guyton 8.1.2.2.1
            14 January 2019 at 4:08 pm

            Do you agree Gosman, that calling Dianne Khan “utter scum” is an inappropriate thing for Seymour to have done?

            • woodart 8.1.2.2.1.1
              14 January 2019 at 4:22 pm

              you wont get a straight answer robert. gooseman cant answer the easy questions, let alone understand the hard ones. like most right wingers, he is easily confused by logic and has shifting ,and sellable principles. and,like seymour ,his dancing on a pinhead, shuffling around a subject, isnt worth the admission price. the best thing to do with irritants like him is either ignore them, or swat them …..

              • Robert Guyton …
                14 January 2019 at 4:32 pm

                Really? Well, that would be disappointing but I’ll still wait hopefully. Gosman’s been otherwise quite polite to me so far.

            • Gosman 8.1.2.2.1.2
              14 January 2019 at 10:38 pm

              I wouldn’t have done what he did with Ms Khan as it seems a tad petulant but thst does not mean I would have engaged with her.

              • Robert Guyton …
                15 January 2019 at 8:45 am

                Thanks, Gosman, for your answer. I’m like you and wouldn’t have said, written especially, “utter scum” of someone I disagreed with. I reckon your, “a tad petulant” is a pretty generous assessment but it’s an expression that looks good when written and reads aloud well, and you can change the emphasis when you do; “It’s a tad petulant” or “It’s a tad petulant . I’d have said it’s a disgraceful thing to say, but I’m not a supporter of his.

                • Gosman …
                  15 January 2019 at 9:09 am

                  I know David Seymour (not hugely well to be fair). He can get quite prickly at times. It isn’t his best personality trait to be sure but then lots of politicians have personality flaws. It certainly does not preclude him being an MP or leading a political party in my view.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    15 January 2019 at 9:23 am

                    I agree. When we know politicians personally it’s natural, I reckon, to leap to their defence, even if they mis-step. I know I supported (and still support) Meteria when she was under attack, and I’m sure you allowed for that sort of response by pulling your punches a little, knowing that it hurts when it’s personal 🙂

  9. AB 9
    14 January 2019 at 3:27 pm

    Whether it has led to an increase in robberies or not – financially punishing the addicted for their addiction is bad policy medically and socially.
    The tobacco companies should be paying for smoking cessation treatment and medical costs – rather than getting away with externalising the true costs of their product onto others.

    • Psycho Milt 9.1
      14 January 2019 at 4:15 pm

      Given that tobacco companies would build in any compulsory costs imposed by the government into their prices, it’s a lot cheaper and more efficient to just tax the product. That said, taxes generated from cigarettes are now generate way more income for the government than the health costs it incurs, so it is quite literally profiting from others’ misery the same as the tobacco companies do.

      • patricia bremner 9.1.1
        14 January 2019 at 4:52 pm

        Are you able to prove the Government profits from the excise charged on smoking?

        After all, the money is used to fund hotlines replacement products and advertising about health risks and aid, and help with security measures for dairies as well.

        Hardly a lucrative income, as the health system is also still dealing with aging smokers with resulting conditions of emphysema asthma and cancers.

        These conditions are very expensive to treat. An exaggeration to say “profit”.

        Just as David Seymour is rude and ungracious to a voter, who has a different view and corrects him on his facts.

        • McFlock 9.1.1.1
          14 January 2019 at 4:58 pm

          Are those conditions more expensive to treat than whatever else people die from? Non-smokers don’t just keel over one day any more than smokers do. Degenerative conditions are rife in the elderly – a condition that half of smokers barely get to see, so you have the unpaid pensions on top of any difference in treatment costs.

          How much does the government fund on hotlines etc? $20mill? $100mill?

        • Psycho Milt 9.1.1.2
          14 January 2019 at 5:54 pm

          Smokers actually tend to cost the health system less overall than non-smokers, because they often die relatively young of things that kill you relatively quickly.

          The question of how much money the government makes from smokers is difficult to answer, because health officials tend to make “estimates” of the health cost that come to nearly the same as the government is receiving in tobacco tax revenue. For example, this Min of Health report in 2010:

          A 2007 estimate put the cost of smoking to the health system at $300 to $350 million per annum; however current work within the Ministry of Health suggests that figure may be as high as $1 to $1.6 billion per annum [2].

          Funnily enough, that “suggested” figure that’s so much higher than the Uni of Otago study is similar to the amount being taken in tax revenue at the time ($1.12 billion), and its upper limit is a little more than the additional tax rate being requested would take the amount to ($1.49 billion). Very convenient suggestion, especially when you take into account there was an actual study showing the actual cost to be a third of that.

          • mpledger 9.1.1.2.1
            15 January 2019 at 11:52 am

            I don’t know about that. Emphysema and bronchitis are long term conditions. And periphery artery disease is a long term condition.

            There is also the health cost that they impose on other through their smoking – children with second hand smoke conditions, newborns who have been effected by cigarette smoking – low birth weight.

      • AB 9.1.2
        14 January 2019 at 7:25 pm

        You could price freeze them as well.
        And it doesn’t matter that the early deaths of smokers may actually cost the Crown less than the later deaths of non-smokers. The point of making tobacco companies pay for the true costs of their product is not to reduce overall Crown expenditure. It is to drive the tobacco companies into the ground, with luck take every cent they have as they go down and reduce the suffering they cause. And also send a big a big “eff off, we’re in charge” to corporate power.

    • Enough 9.2
      14 January 2019 at 4:33 pm

      Despite his inept defence of Seymour, I decided not to engage with the awful Gosman. Utter scum though he is, I’m confident he’ll respect that decision.

      • Tamati Tautuhi 9.2.1
        14 January 2019 at 5:18 pm

        U are not very nice calling Gosmam “utter scum”, Gosman always tries to be nice despite his RWNJ leanings.

        • Enough 9.2.1.1
          14 January 2019 at 5:51 pm

          I was merely quoting Seymour, whose verbatim comment (top of page) Gosman has been attempting to justify.

    • mpledger 9.3
      15 January 2019 at 11:43 am

      Financially punishing the addicted is actually good policy – it’s one of the only levers that reduces smoking significantly. But it’s not the only thing in place, there are things like quitline and GP/Pharmacy services that help with people quitting and staying smoke free.

  10. ken 10
    14 January 2019 at 4:45 pm

    Pure desperation.
    Any publicity is good publicity as far as Seymour goes.

  11. JustMe 11
    14 January 2019 at 7:46 pm

    I don’t think any MP that is linked to the NZ National Party eg ACT; likes being told the truth or being critiicsed.

    They(National and co)don’t mind dishing out criticism but they just don’t like being on the receiving end.

    Perhaps their attitude is because deep down they know they are wrong but in their pure arrogance think they are right ALL the time.

    Where was David Seymour’s voice of concern when Bill English and John Key were criticising NZers eg Key’s nastiness towards NZers which protested against the TPPA and National?

    And so to the likes of Seymour and so many others like him in the NZ National Party if you don’t like being criticised then please refrain from criticising others. Criticism is a Two Way Street.

  12. Srylands 12
    14 January 2019 at 9:26 pm

    David Seymour is a beacon in a desert of socialism. Just what I would expect from a Labour Party blog.

  13. mpledger 13
    14 January 2019 at 9:29 pm

    If I were being cynical I’d say that ACT got some Indian money when National trashed them in favour of the Chinese. He has to defend his money stream to the hilt no matter what.

  14. Sacha 14
    14 January 2019 at 10:19 pm

    No surprise to see Davey lash out at one of the main people who resisted his charter schools baby. How very dare she! The logic is inescapable (except to 99.5% of the population).

    Imagine him watching impotently as the Nats withdraw the Epsom lifeline because he can’t deliver any more than one vote for them and the unrewarded donors are deserting in droves. Lipstick won’t save that pig. Perhaps a fresher party altogether can perform better with that tame electorate as an anchor in 2020, the Nats realise ..

    Master Seymour was the epitome of a mid-life crisis today, alone and tightly blue-suited in a low-slung, tastelessly-bright yellow roofless Morgan convertible as the tepid rains began to lash Remuera Rd. Uncomfortable but a prisoner of choices made some time earlier. Running on empty.

    • shadrach 14.1
      14 January 2019 at 11:00 pm

      Hi Sacha

      Rather than take your information from https://saveourschoolsnz.com/, you may want to look at http://www.saveourschools.nz/.

      Opposition to Partnership Schools is driven by fear of their success at a time when the public education system is failing so many students.

      Remember this – those who truly benefit from this model are the children who participate in it. Visit the website and hear THEIR stories.

      • Sacha 14.1.1
        14 January 2019 at 11:08 pm

        Sideshow.

      • Pete 14.1.2
        15 January 2019 at 9:25 pm

        Are partnership schools which take kids who are “being failed” by the public education system or are they just schools operating under some different strictures?

        • shadrach 14.1.2.1
          15 January 2019 at 9:36 pm

          Partnership schools were indeed taking children who were being failed by the public system. Read some of the stories at http://www.saveourschools.nz/. There is a large number of students who have been failed by this government’s distaste for success outside of mainstream public education. What is particularly irksome is the hypocrisy of certain Maori Labour MP’s who supported these schools in words, but when the going got tough, they piked. Poor, poor form.

          • R.P Mcmurphy 14.1.2.1.1
            17 January 2019 at 7:46 pm

            what is irksome is these poeple never provided any proof whatsoever that they could do a better job.

        • R.P Mcmurphy 14.1.2.2
          17 January 2019 at 7:45 pm

          they are just money grubbers who think they know better than trained people. they want to get their hands on government funding and buy property and when the school tanks then they own it. neat trick eh?

          • shadrach 14.1.2.2.1
            18 January 2019 at 2:34 pm

            Money grubbers? Seriously? Almost all Partnership Schools were ‘not for profit’. You didn’t know that, did you?

    • Robert Guyton 14.2
      15 January 2019 at 12:04 pm

      charter school “baby” should read, “changeling”, Imo.
      Mewling and puking, like a baby, only…twisted somehow…

  15. shadrach 15
    14 January 2019 at 10:56 pm

    “Where was this evidence that Dianne Khan has been so awful to David Seymour. ”

    Mickey, where is the evidence that David Seymour claimed Dianne Khan had been awful to him?

    Your own post includes Seymour’s quote “Nah you’re actually an awful person…”. So not awful to him, just awful.

  16. tc 16
    15 January 2019 at 6:22 am

    What a great post for the RWNJ to earn some extra brownie points defending the indefensible.

    Even some charter school spin thrown in….Nice work tr%$ls !

  17. Michelle 17
    15 January 2019 at 11:33 am

    thank you Epsom for this d..head

  18. Sue 18
    16 January 2019 at 12:37 pm

    David Seymour’s personal attacks on Diane Khan as “an awful person” could be regarded as online bullying.

    If he’s so rude to the public, I would be surprised if other MPs find him easy to work with.

    National, please cut him loose at the next election! ACT doesn’t have a public mandate to be in Parliament.