Getting ALL the facts right

26 comments on “Getting ALL the facts right ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Steve Pierson 1

   12 February 2008 at 10:09 am

   You mean National performed a last minute flip-flop on an issue and totally disowned their previous position, which until that point thay had passionately defended? Incredible.
2. Phil 2

   12 February 2008 at 11:36 am

   Actually Steve, changing voting position between readings is quite common-place.

   If you or I were opposed to a bill going through, but felt that it deserved public submission and a proper debate, it would be entirely consistent to vote “For” it at the first or even second reading (does SC come before or after reading #2?)

   Quite a few MP’s did that with the Prostitution Reform Act.

   Additionally, while we’re talking about ALL facts, wouldn’t it be worth looking into changes to the bill/act between readings 2 and 3?
   Last minute legislative changes are a regular feature of the current administration…
3. AncientGeek 3

   12 February 2008 at 7:52 pm

   On a complete side-issue, and just because this topic is about getting the facts straight (and because it isn’t politics – boy am I going to be tired of politics by election time).

   Have a peek at this link at In a strange land Maybe mothers aren’t parents. It observes that The New Zealand Families Commission new website has

   But there’s a great, gaping hole on the site. There’s specific advice for fathers, specific advice for grandparents, but absolutely nothing for mothers. Not a link, not a word, nothing.

   Seems like a rather large!!! oversight. The rest of the post by Deborah displays a wry humour.

   I’m a little less humoured by it. Perhaps the commission should stop thinking less about vocal lobby groups and more about how families operate.

   Damn – I drifted back into politics again – that is a really bad habit I’m picking up..
4. AncientGeek 4

   12 February 2008 at 8:28 pm

   Steve – Phil is correct. Over the past 20 or so years, the work of the select committees has become steadily more important in the house. While often still quite partisan, it is not uncommon for a bill to be substantially altered in committee to the point that you actually get most of the house able to vote for it.

   Consequently it is common practice for parties to vote for bills to go before the select committees to see what can be done about them. More importantly, bills ground through the select committee processes are often better than as originally drafted. Groups from outside parliament like poking bloody great big holes in the bill that are better handled before a bill becomes an act. For instance, despite all of the hoopla over the EFB, the bill coming out of select committee was substantially better than when it went in.

   I regard this as a trend in NZ politics to be fostered. Also reading their transcripts is a lot more fun than reading the transcripts of the house – so I suppose it has better entertainment value as well.
5. AncientGeek 5

   12 February 2008 at 8:34 pm

   On a side note about getting the facts correct. Have a look at this post at In a strange land (definitely getting to be a favorite blog to read for me) – “Maybe mothers aren’t parents“.

   Deborah is pointing out a curious omission at the The New Zealand Families Commission website.

   There’s specific advice for fathers, specific advice for grandparents, but absolutely nothing for mothers. Not a link, not a word, nothing.

   Oh dear… Bet that gets fixed in a hurry.
6. Kimble 6

   13 February 2008 at 12:32 am

   It isn’t just pedantic, it is pathetic. Are you going to correct his spelling now too?

   One tiny inconsequential error and you lot probably now feel comfortable ignoring the whole story about Labour being led by a blatant liar.

   On an unrelated issue, when you start to accuse someone of being paid to blog, I guess you can expect the spotlight to end up back on you and your free server and hosting.

   [lprent: asked and answered as you are quite well aware.

   You’ve been noted for personal attacks previously, and that last sentence is a direct attack on my veracity. Read the Policy and About pages.

   IrishBill has previously commented that you sometimes contribute. After having scanned back over all of your comments, I cannot see why. I cannot see any contribution to debate. Just seems like mindless attack mode on all of the time. The only difference between you and a troll is that you write your own lines, don’t repeat them too frequently, and shuffle multiple ones in different orders between messages. It is possible that you act differently on other blog sites. But since I seldom read comments elsewhere, so I’m just looking at what you write here.

   I’ve put you into moderation. I will let through comments that contain an argument and are not simply assertions.]
7. ben 7

   13 February 2008 at 7:55 am

   Good catch, and good call for recognising the minor correction that it is.

   It was a still an extremely bad call by Clark and she should do the decent thing and retract it.
8. GPT 8

   13 February 2008 at 9:04 am

   Well spotted I guess. I assume I missed the correction of Clark’s blatantly wrong assertion that National never voted for Treaty Settlements during Labour’s tenure?
9. John Ansell 9

   13 February 2008 at 7:25 pm

   Just so we’re clear…

   Helen Clark said National voted for 0 of Labour’s Treaty bills.

   David Farrar said they voted for 8.

   Your reader said the real total is 7.

   Farrar apologises for being only 7/8 correct.

   Clark fails to apologise for being 0/8 correct.

   And you fail to mention it.
10. westmere 10

    13 February 2008 at 7:48 pm

    Have you apologised for Iwi/Kiwi, John?

    Planning to?
11. Robinsod 11

    13 February 2008 at 7:48 pm

    So John, outta that cupboard yet? Nah, you’re back in after those abysmal FSC billboards. Don’t worry mate – all the real talent’s unavailable at the mo'(I noticed Textor is helping our mate Cameron out and I’d say the US is drawing some serious resource now too) – I’m sure even an old hack like you can make a go of it again…
12. Billy 12

    13 February 2008 at 7:54 pm

    I wouldn’t worry, John. Clark lying is hardly newsworthy anymore. Her sychophants don’t even attempt to defend her. Time to move on.
13. John Ansell 13

    13 February 2008 at 9:44 pm

    Thank you westmere and Robinsod, right on cue.

    I just won a bottle of wine for betting that you guys would immediately change the subject from your boss’s work of fiction to something about billboards.

    Cheers!
14. Robinsod 14

    13 February 2008 at 9:51 pm

    But Bro, I only mentioned the billboards as an aside to a comment on your declining career – tell you what mate, give me half the wine and I’ll let you know how to arrest the slide… Nah, actually I don’t think I will.
15. The Double Standard 15

    13 February 2008 at 9:58 pm

    John – Mr Porton is nothing if not predictable.
16. westmere 16

    13 February 2008 at 10:00 pm

    So, have you apologised for Iwi/Kiwi, John?

    Planning to?

    And why didn’t Key take one of your billboards to Waitangi?
17. Robinsod 17

    13 February 2008 at 10:07 pm

    TDS – billboards are the only decent work the dudes done. What else would I hit him up on – his crappy taste in “vintage” leather jackets? (by the way John, I hope you didn’t pay “vintage” prices for that). Love your work – both of you.
18. The Double Standard 18

    14 February 2008 at 7:46 am

    Off topic personal attacks are your stock-in-trade Mickey.

    When are you going to apologise for those?
19. Robinsod 19

    14 February 2008 at 8:08 am

    Ha! – Called to account by a professional troll! That’s the best laugh I’ve had for days bro. Keep it up!
20. John Ansell 20

    14 February 2008 at 10:27 pm

    OK, a roundup so far…

    Mr Robinsod’s responses:

    1. I’m an old hack.
    2. My career is declining.
    3. Billboards are the only decent thing I’ve ever done (ta).
    4. I don’t share his (presumably impeccable) taste in clothes.

    Mr westmere asks:

    1. Whether I’ve apologised for Iwi/Kiwi.
    2. Whether I plan to.
    3. Why Mr Key didn’t take one of my billboards to Waitangi. (?)

    The Left’s total contribution to the debate…

    Diversionary insults: 7
    Response to comment: 0

    Game, set and match. Thank you linesmen, thank you ballboys.

    [lprent: I believe the comment he was referring to was this one. Couldn’t remember it with all of the flaming going on.]
21. James Kearney 21

    14 February 2008 at 10:55 pm

    John Ansell- as someone who blatantly lied and incited racial hatred in this country with your iwi/kiwi billboards you have no right to demand apologies or even common decency from anyone else.

    My advice is to keep up the poetry – I think you’ll be needing it after your latest billboard effort.
22. Robinsod 22

    14 February 2008 at 11:02 pm

    He’s really so dumb he doesn’t get it, eh?

    John a word of advice – I don’t give a fuck about your game set whatever. I’m just pleased I got the chance to burn you. In public. Given the judgment you’ve shown in allowing me to do so I can see why you’re not considered a particularly safe pair of hands…
23. Historian 23

    14 February 2008 at 11:06 pm

    Surely “Diversionary insults” is a pretty good summary of your billboard campaign, John.
24. Robinsod 24

    14 February 2008 at 11:08 pm

    Hmmm, perhaps he trolling here for new ideas…
25. r0b 25

    14 February 2008 at 10:40 pm

    Helen Clark said National voted for 0 of Labour’s Treaty bills.

    Strictly speaking John, HC said she was scratching to think of any they voted for. Guilty of a faulty memory is all. Whereas you are guilty of misquoting to attempt a political smear. That’s hollow.

Links to post

1. Kiwiblog » Blog Archive » Treaty Settlements correction: posted on 12 February 2008 at 11:43 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS