Open mike 01/09/2013

Written By: - Date published: 6:30 am, September 1st, 2013 - 149 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

149 comments on “Open mike 01/09/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. North 1
    1 September 2013 at 7:25 am

    Could someone please assist me here and tell me if this article by Paul Little in The Sunday Herald today 1/9/13 says ANYTHING at all……….and if so………WHAT ?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11117648

    Yes I know it says that whoever leads the Labour Party in two weeks time will NEVER be prime minister but that qualifies only as a foolishly bold claim to onmipresence.

    In short, would we be any the worse off were this piece of scribble for the sake of scribble never written ?

    • Paul 1.1
      1 September 2013 at 7:34 am

      Other fair and balanced headings from that right wing rag the Herald.
      ‘Rivals’ costly vows lure votes’
      ‘Rodney Hide: Rudderless time not a good look.’
      and their editorial..’Let’s hear ideas from Labour trio.’

      Far be it from me to note, but headline 1..the costly vows one….obviously points out that there are ideas!

      Remember Labour, Greens and Mana, the Herald and other media is owned by people who don’t want you to win.
      Act accordingly.

    • Saarbo 1.2
      1 September 2013 at 7:35 am

      Agree North…lightweight drivel, sometimes reading this crap saps your will to live, I couldn’t finish reading it.

      • bad12 1.2.1
        1 September 2013 at 9:14 am

        i foolishly took the plunge this morning too, having shied away from reading that malicious little rag, The Herald, better described as a piece of gutter trash, for a few days,

        Skipping Rodney Hide’s ‘opinion piece’, after all what the f**k has that abject failures opinion worth after the exposures of the actions of Him and other’s in the Party he once lead, if i want hypocrisy i will teach myself the art thanks,

        As i read Little’s contribution to the fading light that is the Herald, thats exactly what i experienced, eyes beginning to droop i wondered why i had left my bed this morning, my brain still dulled by such an after-effect,

        Is such journalism deliberate???, you would have to suspect so, the Herald as the countries major newspaper should be the leading light of the print media informing the nation, most of the provincial newspapers put the Herald to shame in this respect making that Rag look, well provincial…

    • Clement Pinto 1.3
      1 September 2013 at 10:06 am

      I just made this post there after reading your article here:

      Key did make a few ‘visionery’ policy announcements before he came to power. Here is a sample :
      * I will create 175,000 new jobs. * I will not raise the GST. * I will be unrelenting in my quest to lift our economic growth rate and raise wage rates. * One of my key goals, when I lead the government will be to stem the flow of New Zealanders choosing to live and work overseas. * I want to make New Zealand an attractive place for our children and grandchildren to live – including those who are currently living in Australia, the UK, or elsewhere. * Therefore under my watch, Kiwis will receive competitive after-tax wages. * From the Key’s Vision at the “Job Summit” in 2009: I’m really looking forward to the 3000km Kaitaia-to-Bluff cycle way, the nine-day fortnight, and the $1 billion contribution from the banks plus $8 billion from government to invest in job-producing industrie.
      * I will also continue to increase the incomes New Zealanders earn. That is a fundamental objective of my plan to build a stronger economy. * The driving goal of my Government will be to build a more competitive and internationally-focused economy with less debt, more jobs and higher incomes.
      ETC ETC!

    • amirite 1.4
      1 September 2013 at 5:35 pm

      Does he know something that we don’t know?

  2. Saarbo 2
    1 September 2013 at 7:32 am

    In the HOS, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11117623

    “Grant Robertson promising to introduce a “living wage” of more than $18 an hour for all government workers.”

    Robertson (Shearer MKII) heading Left to get support, just as Shearer did. But in the end of the day a really good policy. Cunliffe to announce the same according to this article.

    Does anyone know if all people contracted to Govt Departments are included?

    • Paul 2.1
      1 September 2013 at 7:49 am

      Framed by the Herald as ‘Rivals’ costly vows lure votes.
      Note the language ‘lure’ …
      Also living wage has been placed to quote marks to infer it’s not really true.
      Other language used by right wing puppet Trevett in an attempt to tarnish the policy.
      “The pork barrels have been rolled out”
      She notes..”The policy will give National further ammunition for painting Labour as the big-spending party.”. She saves the Nats the bother and as a corporate shill, uses this, ammunition’ to attack Labour herself.

      Pity she did not read her own paper’s editorial.
      “When a major political party decides to hold its leadership election in public, we should hear something of substance from the candidates. ”
      For the editors , the living wage is an idea. You obviously don’t like it as you pay your puppet jonolists to attack them, but at least aim for a consistent line!

      What a dreadful newspaper!

    • Lefty 2.2
      1 September 2013 at 8:35 am

      They seem to be talking about core public sector employees at a cost in the low tens of millions of dollars. Most core public sector employees are probably already earning close to the living wage anyway, which is why the cost is so low.

      But even with this low cost they say it will be introduced over time.

      Not much going on there for all those employed on minimum wage for contractors to government departments.

      The $15 an hour minimum has been policy for some time and would certainly be an improvement for many workers.

      • Saarbo 2.2.1
        1 September 2013 at 11:02 am

        Yes Lefty, if it does not include contractors and contracted people, then it is pretty much a waste of time, because as you point out, most directly employed people will be on over $18 per hour. Also if it does not include contractors and contracted people then this policy could see councils increase outsourcing to save money. Need to look into the detail.

        • phillip ure 2.2.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 2:58 pm

          i’m pretty sure i heard cunnliffe or robertson say that contractors to councils would be included..

          ..and cunnliffe had a good one..saying those companies seeking any central govt contracts would have to be paying the living-wage..

          ..what cheered me was jones chewing into the supermarket duopoly..(anyone else seen recently arrived tourists/returning expats/benificiaries walking around supermarkets with a look of shock on their faces..?)

          ..and what was really depressing..was no mention of fighting poverty..neither child nor adult..

          ..not a fucken word…from any of them..

          ..once again..those most in need..ain’t getting it..

          phillip ure..

        • QoT 2.2.1.2
          1 September 2013 at 5:33 pm

          From today’s Q&A transcript:

          DAVID … I’m absolutely committed to seeing the sixth Labour Government roll out a living wage as a minimum for public servants and as we can afford it, through our contracting process.

          …

          GRANT What I was talking about yesterday was the fact that at the moment the person who cleans John Key’s office gets paid just over $13.75 an hour. I think that’s wrong, and I think what the Government can do is show some leadership and say, ‘We’re going to set a timeline for all people who work for the government and the contractors who contract to the government to pay that living wage.’ It’ll take a little bit of time, but it’s setting the standard, setting the direction and the Government showing leadership.

    • bad12 2.3
      1 September 2013 at 9:23 am

      Yes i find that pretty bloody weak from Grant Robertson,(and i actually like him), Labour going to the voters next year with a policy of the ‘living wage’ for Government workers will do exactly what for the low waged demographic in the economy???

      That is exactly the limp,insipid,weak sort of policy that has the average worker out there wondering just who the likes of Grant Robertson represent,

      So low waged Government workers will be moved by Robertson onto the ‘living wage’ and the tens of thousands of low waged workers outside of Government employment can go sing for a crust???

      Is such Policy going to move the wider electorate??? like hell it is, where is the Labour Party policy to move ALL low waged workers onto a ‘living wage’ in the first 3 year term of the next Labour Government…

      • phillip ure 2.3.1
        1 September 2013 at 3:07 pm

        bad..i think i have heard robertson/cunnliffe promise minimum wage of $15 per hour..

        ..and when quizzed on how it would hurt corner-shops/small businesses..

        ..it was pointed out that (save for the glaring example of the pittance paid those who clean john keys’ office)..that in the main it is those big chains that are paying those shit-wages..(whereupon jones once again barked about the supermarkets..)

        (personally..i’d like to see jones as minister-for-kicking-the-crap-of -the-supermarket-duopoly..in future labour govt..

        ..then you could aim him at whoever else needs it..(he’ll be busy..!..)

        ..but i agree with you..that living-wage must be for all..

        phillip ure

      • srylands 2.3.2
        1 September 2013 at 3:57 pm

        “Yes i find that pretty bloody weak from Grant Robertson,(and i actually like him), Labour going to the voters next year with a policy of the ‘living wage’ for Government workers will do exactly what for the low waged demographic in the economy???

        That is exactly the limp,insipid,weak sort of policy that has the average worker out there wondering just who the likes of Grant Robertson represent,

        So low waged Government workers will be moved by Robertson onto the ‘living wage’ and the tens of thousands of low waged workers outside of Government employment can go sing for a crust???

        Is such Policy going to move the wider electorate??? like hell it is, where is the Labour Party policy to move ALL low waged workers onto a ‘living wage’ in the first 3 year term of the next Labour Government
”

        Bad bad Bad12. If it happens it will destroy jobs and put up prices – simple.

        • bad12 2.3.2.1
          1 September 2013 at 4:10 pm

          Rubbish, ‘business’ needs labor to enable business to make the profits it does, the profits made by ‘business’ in the past 30 years from increased productivity have grown at a pace which far outstrips growth,(in the low waged economy) of those on low wages,

          please prove that increasing the minimum wage destroys jobs, the Clark Government increased the minimum wage yearly and unemployment dropped,

          Prices being put up never seems to bother the middle class nor the rich, the living wage along with low income workers being guaranteed a maximum payment of rent from those wages of no more than 25% of income will in fact give the low waged economy a large discretionary spend as a % of income much the same as the middle class has…

          • srylands 2.3.2.1.1
            1 September 2013 at 4:31 pm

            ” profits made by ‘business’ in the past 30 years from increased productivity have grown at a pace which far outstrips growth,(in the low waged economy) of those on low wages,”

            What productivity growth?

            http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/economic_indicators/productivity/prod-faqs/prod-faqs-intern-comparisons.aspx

            You do realise that “minimum” wages are indeed “minimum”. The labour market does deliver much high wages for most people. Do you think you can just dial up higher living standards for workers by passing laws? 🙂

            Anyway I’m sick of pushing shit uphill with you lot. I see I am not alone in that experience.

            Sadly, it will take the implementation of the policies to kill them.

            What you will see during the next Left government is many people winding back effort. They will reduce work, head offshore, and wait. Fore those with low debt levels they will simply return after the economy has tanked (and the Government has been thrown out in 2017 or 2020) and buy up more assets at a discount. And the workers will ratchet down further in their living standards.

            • bad12 2.3.2.1.1.1
              1 September 2013 at 6:06 pm

              Do i think i can just dial up higher living standards by just passing laws, in a word yes, for the low waged working demographic yes,

              Productivity in New Zealand 1978 to 2007,

              ”Out-put growth in the measured sector averaged 2.6% per annum from 1978 to 2007”,

              ”The main driver of this out-put growth was labour productivity of 2% per annum”

              http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/tprp/08-02/05.htm

            • KJT 2.3.2.1.1.2
              1 September 2013 at 6:51 pm

              Even treasury, through gritted teeth, had to admit that minimum wage rises had no descernable effect on employment levels.

              I didn’t notice nay winding back of effort, Sryland, when we were paying half our income in tax in the early 80’s.

              In fact only an ideological idiot would turn down a rise in income just because they have to pay a bit of it to their source of income, their employees.

              And the traitors who do take money out of NZ will be back quickly, just as they were back during the last Labour Government, when the economy improved with more left wing policies, as usual.

              • srylands …
                1 September 2013 at 7:37 pm

                “And the traitors who do take money out of NZ will be back quickly, just as they were back during the last Labour Government, when the economy improved with more left wing policies, as usual.”

                So you think that the 900,000 New Zealanders who live outside the country – many of them showing zero sign of coming back – are “traitors”?

                • Colonial Viper …
                  1 September 2013 at 7:42 pm

                  Gee shitlands that’s a really stupid distraction, even for you.

                  Australia is going downhill, so you can imagine that a fair number of Kiwis are going to be coming back in the next 12 months.

                  • srylands …
                    1 September 2013 at 7:43 pm

                    it is “srylands”

                    More rude behavior.

                    • srylands …
                      1 September 2013 at 7:44 pm

                      and at least I am not fat and bald 🙂

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      1 September 2013 at 7:48 pm

                      You gotta admit, it was a pretty fucking stupid distraction you tried to run there. KJT was talking about the movement of financial capital but you tried to make it something it wasn’t.

                    • framu …
                      2 September 2013 at 7:52 am

                      “and at least I am not fat and bald”

                      and you have the nerve to complain of rude behaviour?

                      your an over precious hypocritical little liar, who never seems to bother engaging with any rebuttal.

                      Its all distraction with you isnt it?

                  • infused …
                    1 September 2013 at 9:11 pm

                    Glad someone finally sees that.

        • Draco T Bastard 2.3.2.2
          1 September 2013 at 4:16 pm

          Cost of living goes up but the people should be paid the same?

          • srylands 2.3.2.2.1
            1 September 2013 at 7:44 pm

            yes

            • Paul 2.3.2.2.1.1
              1 September 2013 at 7:48 pm

              Zzzzz

            • Draco T Bastard 2.3.2.2.1.2
              1 September 2013 at 9:12 pm

              And there we have it, the reason why we have poverty is because arseholes like srylands think that people shouldn’t be paid enough to live on.

              • Paul …
                1 September 2013 at 9:14 pm

                They’re called sociopaths

              • Neoleftie …
                1 September 2013 at 9:15 pm

                My household income is in top 7 percent, we are comfortable just, we budget and save, I have know idea how other people cope on less.
                Time for more to share the wealth created by the hard labour of the many…
                Labour talks about a few dollars more per hour I talk about the transfer of real wealth to the many.

        • Murray Olsen 2.3.2.3
          1 September 2013 at 6:19 pm

          You must destroy a lot of jobs every time your exorbitant salary gets paid, sorrylands. As must the CEO of Air New Zealand. And the overpaid executives all over the Auckland Council. Or is it some weird effect that only happens at the bottom?

          You want to be richer and can only see it happen by driving others into poverty. At least be honest about it. You care no more about jobs than Roger Douglas or Simon Bridges does.

          • KJT 2.3.2.3.1
            1 September 2013 at 6:41 pm

            Politicians and big business managers a short time ago said, “New Zealand cannot afford wage increases”, then they put their own up 17% and paid themselves a bonus.

            Of course it only “destroys jobs” if those on the lowest wages have increases. LOL.

        • KJT 2.3.2.4
          1 September 2013 at 6:20 pm

          Actually. Srylands, every time Labour put the minimum wage up, jobs increased.

          As employees are also customers, raising the minimum wage also raised spending, and business income.

          The experience internationally, has been an increase in employment and business activity as wages are raised

          Also more money stays in the economy because the main payers of minimum wage are large corporate chains, not small business, who tend to value their employees more.

          That increasing wages decreases employment long term is yet another self serving piece of BS from the RWNJ’s.

        • Tim 2.3.2.5
          1 September 2013 at 6:47 pm

          “Bad bad Bad12. If it happens it will destroy jobs and put up prices – simple.”

          Sry – you missed out a bit.

          Should read:

          “Bad bad Bad12. If it happens it will destroy jobs and put up prices – simple, end of story, there is no alternative.” (NOT)

          Please – face Mecca, put your head between your knees, and pray (that’s pray – not prey)

  3. travellerev 3
    1 September 2013 at 8:08 am

    While our governments do not conspire because they are our true representatives and elected by us and they would never ever take us to war, unless it is to help poor brown people, who just accidentally happen to live on big piles of oil and gas, get rid of their evil dictators, who just happen to allow women to go to school, give away free healthcare and get people of all religions to live in peace and harmony for decennia but who, for inexplicable reasons, all of a sudden start to gas their own people or so our trustworthy elected representatives tell us, here are a few links you might want to read up on about the CIA helping Saddam gas his own people, how al Qaeda rebel troops in Syrian <a href=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcYH-5uz91k”>announce their intention to gas Syrians they don’t like and in fact admit they used the gas on children. (Possibly on children they first abducted from Assad supporting strongholds). And it appears they really, really don’t like Christians amongst others

    Oh, and did I give you that link where it appears these rebels who like to eat the hearts of Syrian soldiers they were receiving weapons from Saudi Arabia and the US to do all these nice liberating things?

    But conspiracies. No sir, NEVER!!

  4. Paul 4
    1 September 2013 at 8:13 am

    The media’s coverage of the Labour leadership contest continued.
    More fair and balanced coverage from a media owned by large corporations keen to maintain the neo-liberal paradigm.
    Fairfax Media’s Stuff website
    “Gloves off in Labour battle.
    They promised it would be a clean fight, but the gloves came off in the fight to be Labour leader yesterday.”
    And a photo attached showing Shane Jones and David Cunliffe squaring up as if for a boxing match. The photo was a picture of them exchanging a hongi and was labelled as such; however by placing the photo by the inflammatory heading’ the intention of the editors with the photo was clear.

    If you actually read the article in detail, you wonder how they managed to extrapolate that heading from the actual story. Clearly the editors at Fearfax twist a story to match the message they want their ‘New Zealand consumers’ to get.

    • North 4.1
      1 September 2013 at 8:48 am

      Must say Paul that I could find no conection between Vance’s article and the headline above it. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9111934/Gloves-off-in-Labour-battle

      The role of these so-called journalists seems to be to assist in pushing that if there’s no blood on the floor the whole contest is boring, and if there is then the whole contest is a cock-up.

      Honestly, a bunch of brightish 17 year olds could do better.

      The one constant, the one very low common denominator, seems to be that it’s a handful of same same corporates which employs, owns them all. Their duty is to write facile shit to fill in the space below the corporates’ headline of choice. Factually connected to the headline ? Doesn’t matter.

  5. Paul 5
    1 September 2013 at 8:15 am

    George Carlin said the following about the media, politicians and corporations.

    “The real owners are the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they’re an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don’t. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They’ve got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you hear. They’ve got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying ­ lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else.”

    “But I’ll tell you what they don’t want. They don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. That’s against their interests. They don’t want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they’re getting ******** by a system that threw them overboard 30 ********years ago.”

    The Labour Party in New Zealand threw us overboard 30 years ago when the Douglas/Prebble coup was secretly launched unwittingly on the people of NewZealand. If the Labour Party has any hope of recovering its place in the country as a progressive party, they have to prove that they are interested in getting these people back on board. Or have they, as Carlin, just been put there to give the idea that New Zealanders have freedom of choice? Are they just neo-liberal lite?

    Is there going to be a real alternative to the neo-liberal nightmare?

  6. karol 6
    1 September 2013 at 8:30 am

    When did the FB “Likes” button first appear at the bottom of posts? Has it been there for a while & I failed to notice?

  7. Clement Pinto 7
    1 September 2013 at 9:02 am

    MAN BAN QUOTA:

    In my opinion there should be no discrimination based on gender, but there also should be no quotas based on gender. Each one should be selected on the basis of merit and the local electorate circumstances.

    I have no problem if the party ends up with 65% Women and 35% men or vice versa; or, 40% gay, 40% women or 20% men or any ratio mix as long it happens without a stupid pre arranged quota system.

    I have two questions for the advocates of quota method :

    (1) What will you do if in a few years time we find ourselves with consistently ending up with around 75% elected women MPs and around 25% elected men MPs? Change the quota accordingly to help improve the men pool irrespective of their quality/merit as MPs?

    {2} If certain electorates are reserved for women, will that not be discriminatory against men?

    • Pasupial 7.1
      1 September 2013 at 9:56 am

      CP

      Enabling WOMAN ELAN is a better phrasing than “man ban quota”.

      1. Changing candidate selection criteria to reference gender balance would lead to male candidates being approx 50% of the caucus. So in the unlikely event of female dominance of Labour, then; yes, men would be preferentially selected for electorate &/ or list positions. However, this would be part of wider requirements and not; “irrespective of their quality/merit as MPs”.

      2. If the current system selects more men than women is that not in itself discrimination? The attempt to invigorate Labour through increasing Woman Elan is an attempt to address this structural discrimination.

      I know that your questions are rhetorical (if not spurious), but there is a slim chance that others may have been sucked in by your BS. If you want a say in how a party selects its caucus; join that party, get selected as a delegate to its conference, and make your case there.

      I’m a Green member, so this doesn’t really affect me – as we use alternating gender in our list selection. But once we start winning electorate seats again, it may become an issue.

      • Clement Pinto 7.1.1
        1 September 2013 at 10:25 am

        A few points:
        (1) I am a Labour voter and a party member
        (3) You state :”I know that your questions are rhetorical (if not spurious)” You know that how?
        (3) Just because my view is different from yours does not mean it is BS as you state.
        (4) You say that preferential gender based selection for electorate &/ or list positions would be part of wider requirements and not “irrespective of their quality/merit as MPs”.
        That is the real BS if there was one. How do you judge ‘quality/merit’ over gender? What if there were overwhelmingly meritorious men in number and not many meritorious women or the other way about?
        (5) It makes no difference to me that you are a Green member. Not the issue. The gender based selection issue does not affect me personally too, not because I am a ‘Green member’ either.

        • Pasupial 7.1.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 1:46 pm

          In your first 3rd point (tip – the number between 1 and 3 is; 2):

          “(3) You state :”I know that your questions are rhetorical (if not spurious)” You know that how?”

          I know that because the questions are not addressed to any particular individual. Asking a question to no one in order to state your own position is a rhetorical technique.

          • Clement Pinto 7.1.1.1.1
            1 September 2013 at 4:07 pm

            You could not or did not address any of the points I made.
            There is a two word phrase for people like you : Clever Dick. Aka, Smart Arse.

            • Tim 7.1.1.1.1.1
              1 September 2013 at 7:01 pm

              Tip for Clement – I’ve noticed the dickheads on this site (those equipped with egos the size of a bus, and prepared to argue to the death) – usually have what they think are clever handles.
              I won’t bother to list them ‘cos I think you probably already have a perfectly good bullshit detector

              • Pasupial …
                2 September 2013 at 8:07 am

                Tim

                You think CP has “a perfectly good bullshit detector”? I think he has a malfunctioning bullshit distributor (probably due to all the sewerage he’s been cramming in there).

                Cheers to QoT for picking up the beating head against wall thread with CP. It didn’t seem worth my while continuing.

    • QoT 7.2
      1 September 2013 at 4:18 pm

      Change the quota accordingly to help improve the men pool irrespective of their quality/merit as MPs?

      It’s the bolded section that really proves how sincere your questions are. It really is.

      • Clement Pinto 7.2.1
        1 September 2013 at 4:42 pm

        I take it you are in agreement with my view? I am a little confused about my understanding of your post.

        • QoT 7.2.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 5:45 pm

          No, I’m not, because I don’t believe you’re asking genuine questions, or your questions are not based on an informed opinion about quotas.

          They’re not about promoting people “irrespective of their quality/merit”.

          And until you understand that the point of quotas is to overcome institutional biases, you’re not going to comprehend why it’s missing the point to suggest that a majority-female caucus is a problem needing to be rectified with a male quota.

          • Clement Pinto 7.2.1.1.1
            1 September 2013 at 6:27 pm

            I don’t agree with you at all. The situation of institutional bias is a red herring describing the days gone by or describing the situation in certain other countries such as Saudi Arabia or Somali, but not in NZ, and especially not in the Labour party. If that were the case we wouldn’t have nearly 45% women MPs in the Labour caucus now. We had the 1st elected female PM and now the president of Labour is a woman too. Things are evolving as more women are participating in all fields, including politics. In fact certain professions such as teaching and nursing are over overwhelmingly dominated by women. I mean what I said regarding it doesn’t worry me if most Labour MPs are women. I am against the method of pushing/selecting women on some kind of perceived bias against them and treating a more meritorious man unfairly with some cunning cry puss silly imaginative justification. Can Ban Man.

            • QoT 7.2.1.1.1.1
              1 September 2013 at 7:07 pm

              The situation of institutional bias is a red herring describing the days gone by or describing the situation in certain other countries such as Saudi Arabia or Somali

              … and at this point you’d hit every square on my anti-feminist bingo board so I stopped reading.

          • Neoleftie 7.2.1.1.2
            1 September 2013 at 7:16 pm

            Your raise a perfect point QoT…labour in some area are very institutionalised and anyway society still has an inbuilt bias towards men. It will take another conservative effort, some kind of polarised societal shake up or direct action hence the balancing of the bias in the selection process.

  9. Sable 9
    1 September 2013 at 9:03 am

    I wonder, aside from myself how many Wellingtonians HATE Wellington City Council?
    Aside from obscene rates increases and constant harassment by parking wardens at a time when people are facing economic hardship I see the good ol council is now refusing to pay damages for losses to small business owners in Kilbernie due to their cocking up roadworks which limited public access to businesses. This is not the first time this council has caused misery to small business owners and refused to pay compensation.

    I’m not one of these unfortunate people but I did work for myself for 14 years so I know how hard running a small business is. I know we talk a lot about central government and its shortcomings but its strikes me that the unwillingness to behave fairly also extends to local government too.

    Shame on you Wade Brown, if you were standing for the Greens I’d not give you my vote.

    • Colonial Viper 9.1
      1 September 2013 at 9:12 am

      Exactly. It’s a pretty crappy time economically, so for your Council to inflict additional damage to a group of businesses for a period of days/weeks can be enough to have doors closing.

    • bad12 9.2
      1 September 2013 at 10:03 am

      Yes what an amazing f**k-up the Council, or more to the point, the Wellington City Council contractors made of the Kilbirnie shop’s street up-grade,

      In the year it took these clowns to complete what should have taken mere months i simply stopped going there and can well imagine the chagrin of those trying to run a business amidst the construction,

      Obviously the Council must ultimately take the responsibility for the Contractor they chose to do the work and the Miramar shops street up-grade certainly proved that lessons have been learned, fixed from go to wo in what seemed a mere month…

    • Draco T Bastard 9.3
      1 September 2013 at 11:08 am

      Aside from obscene rates increases

      You can’t get anything for less than it costs no matter what you think.

      That said, the upper bureaucrats could be paid far less than what they presently get which would probably cut rates a small amount.

  10. North 10
    1 September 2013 at 9:38 am

    More of the anti-Cunliffe narrative from Watkins?

    “Mr Cunliffe, on the other hand, is formidable when on form. It is the off-form Cunliffe, the man whose performance can come dangerously close to parody, that worries his colleagues. So he too comes with risks.”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/columnists/tracy-watkins/9110417/Popularity-not-policy-key-to-contest

    Examples of the parody you refer to Tracy ? Never heard you have a go at the parody of ShonKey Python’s Flying Circus.

    • Treetop 10.1
      1 September 2013 at 1:18 pm

      I don’t know of anyone who gets it right all the time.

      Hard to lead when you are not in the actual position of leader.

      Exciting times ahead for Labour in many ways.

  11. AsleepWhileWalking 11
    1 September 2013 at 10:34 am

    Fairfax turns attention to “bludging” doctors:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/9111852/Doctors-dine-out-on-9m-of-unlimited-food

    How anyone can portray someone who works junior doctors hours at low pay is beyond me. Doctors deserve more, not less in the way of payment and a little respect wouldn’t go amiss either.

    • AsleepWhileWalking 11.1
      1 September 2013 at 10:37 am

      The Sunday Star-Times, visited Christchurch Hospital’s cafe and witnessed a resident doctor buying lunch.

      His deluxe corned beef sandwich, yoghurt, sausage roll, tomato sauce sachet, large chocolate-chip cookie and Diet Coke cost $17.80.
      Hmmm…could it be the hospital itself that is the real cause of the issue? Even at a dairy that lot would be cheaper.

      • Colonial Viper 11.1.1
        1 September 2013 at 10:43 am

        Bet you that’s a private outfit running that cafe.

        The neoliberals are gunning for the middle class professionals now. First the blue collar workers, then the white collar workers, now the professionals.

    • RedBaron CV 11.2
      1 September 2013 at 2:46 pm

      Looks like they need healthier menu choices, further reductions in work hours, and frankly if I had their level of student debt I would be eating free food too so I could pay back my student loan.
      Also,why on earth are they still working such long hours?

    • Murray Olsen 11.3
      1 September 2013 at 6:43 pm

      What a filthy article, AWW. Junior doctors work their arses off, and probably end up with a huge student loan as well. I assume journalists have a lunch allowance. I wonder how much that is? I’d put money on the cafĂ© being private and note that the prices are better than in Australia, and with the added advantage that Kiwi sausage rolls are edible.

      I also suspect it’s part of a campaign. In this case they’ll also be trying to slash public health. Any doctors in private clinics doing chin enhancement on young Tories will continue to be well paid, while public hospitals will become increasingly overcrowded and understaffed, but left to pick up the expensive stuff that private profit centres can’t or won’t do. Hello US and A!

  12. chrissy 12
    1 September 2013 at 10:37 am

    Is key off his meds? Heard recording of his ramblings in Parliament last week. Using Parliament as a vehicle for his supposedly funny antics, encouraged by those poor deluded people in the Gods who obviously have been ordered to bray as loudly as possible whenever he gets to shrieking pitch. (What is the deal with upston and those wide open possum eyes when key is about to deliver a killer line) Anyhow he is absolutely the most embarrassing pm we have ever had and he utterly demeans the whole Parliamentary process. When I heard him say “this is too much fun” and break into hysterical giggles I could not believe what I was hearing. The man is a raving looney!
    I heard the tail end of Robertsons speech where he concluded with the line “john key is the weakest link” in the nat party I couldn’t help but agree.

    • fender 12.1
      1 September 2013 at 10:53 am

      +1

      Key is as you say “…..a raving looney”. He gets worse by the day, his supporters need to take a serious look at his immature behaviour and re-evaluate their reasons for backing him. Even the Speaker seems to be losing *some* patience with this 3rd form (year 9) *humour*. NZ deserves better than this.

    • joe90 12.2
      1 September 2013 at 12:30 pm

      Is key off his meds?

      Nah, the behaviour is that of the Spotty Green Braying Oik, also known as the antipodean drunken arse, a sub of the Greater Braying Oik whose usual habitat across the western world is clubs and restaurants although on occasion they are found in legislatures and board rooms, is classified in the genus Oik (Latin for “arse”) with at least two other species of western arse, the Bullington Braying Oik and the Westminster Braying Oik.

      In all environments The Greater Braying Oik ekes out an existence living large on other peoples backs.

      Compared with other members of its genus, the Spotty Green Braying Oik (antipodean drunken arse) has a short body, big knees, shitty feet, a pin head and a coat of choleric and, dependant on last nights effort, green around the gills* appearance.

      It has thinning brownish grey hair over some of the head, dark markings on the chin and throat, a pale pudgy abdomen and a rather large stripe down the back.

      (an aid to predation)*

      .

  13. Greywarbler 13
    1 September 2013 at 10:39 am

    Drone use by the USA especially over Pakistan.
    a very informative interview is on radionz this morning.
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ideas
    Two types of drone strikes – personality strikes after an individual who is regarded as a threat to the USA and the signature strike – locating on patterns of behaviour, observed meetings, behaviour that is decided to be suspect are decided to be taken out. The killers don’t know who the people are, but feel suspicions about them so the group will be taken out as a pre-emptive strike in case people at the target might be enemy.

    But there is a fail-safe method of reporting successes in dealing with enemies. The USA consider that any male of military age that is killed, to have been an insurgent. Full stop. So whatever man they kill goes into the stats of dead enemy if they seem of military age.

    But at one time they killed all the leaders of local communities who had come together to discuss a political matter, who had notified the Pakistan authorities of this meeting, its purpose, and its location, and who were mostly the older men of importance there. So it must have seemed a good opportunity for a big kill for the eager beaver warmongers at the end of the drones.
    Unbelievable. And it is estimated that now 70% of Pakistani people are anti-USA, while they chirp away about Pakistan being a great ally and friend of the USA.

    10:06 Ideas UAVs – A force ‘for good and evil’
    UAVs or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, or drones as they’re commonly known, are suddenly everywhere. Conservationists and academics are using them to map our rivers; engineers surveyed the interior of the earthquake damaged Christchurch Cathedral with one; and then, of course, there’s the military drones used to such lethal affect in Pakistan and Yemen. Ideas visits Palmerston North’s Skycam UAV – New Zealand’s leading manufacture of UAVs;

    talks to the interim president of the Association of Unmanned Operations – a union of US drone pilots; and Professor James Cavallaro tells us about the findings of a report he co-authored: ‘Living Under Drones: Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan.’ Produced by Jeremy Rose.

  14. phillip ure 14
    1 September 2013 at 11:02 am

    ew..!..brian edwards has come out as a farrar fanboy..

    ..(and is contemptuous of most other ‘blogs’..)

    ..he just gushed all over him..on the nation..

    ..it was quite the unseemly-sight..

    phillip ure..

    • Paul 14.1
      1 September 2013 at 12:15 pm

      Fox News always used the faux or weak left spokesperson to pretend they were ‘Fair and Balanced.’
      e.g. Colmes and Hannity.
      In New Zealand user the same trick to try to persuade people they are watching/listening to balanced reporting.
      e.g. Josie Pagani is a spokesperson for the left on ZB, Brian Edwards on The Nation. (JP is actually advocating for intervention in Syria!)

      These people are in many ways worse than Farrar and Slater as they pretend to be something they are not.

  15. Saarbo 15
    1 September 2013 at 11:33 am

    Cunliffe owning the q&a debate…but also good to see the way the 3 candidates are debating…a credit to Labour. Well done.

    Good to hear Robertson stating that contractors are included in the living wage 🙂

  16. Tracey 16
    1 September 2013 at 11:40 am

    On Q & A:

    If you just read a transcript of Jones, and didnt know who he was, you could be forgiven for thinking he was standing for National or United Future.

    • Saarbo 16.1
      1 September 2013 at 11:45 am

      Yes, not sure why he is part of the Labour Party and is shamelessly selling himself on his right wing credentials…interesting approach. Robertson already has much of the Labour “right” tied up and is selling himself as “left” to take some of Cunliffes vote.

    • Virginia Linton 16.2
      1 September 2013 at 1:03 pm

      Shane is a Tory. He’s in the wrong party. He couldn’t even bring himself to talk about higher taxes for the wealthiest people (his Tory mates wouldn’t like it) but he would look at regulating the grocery sector, which about sums up the contradictory Mr Jones. Then there are the statements about having a Leader’s office filled with the best, brightest and most professional; if the past is a precursor to the future, what a scary thought. Grant and David did well, they sounded like Labour people on Q+A. Good luck to them both. Why does the media persist though in booking such weird combinations of ‘commentators’?

      • Anne 16.2.1
        1 September 2013 at 1:23 pm

        Why does the media persist though in booking such weird combinations of ‘commentators’?

        That was deliberate and intended to produce the usual Right leaning responses.

        First you have the regular political scientist (name escapes me) who has a penchant for sitting fair and square on the fence. He gave it to Shane Jones because he sounds good (until you analyse what he’s actually said) and he’s ‘safe’ to choose because he’s not going to win.

        Second you have jolly Josie of Pagani fame. A former Shearer fan whose political views seem rather shallow and contradictory and who is almost certainly following ABC instructions and voting Robertson even if she pretends it to be otherwise.

        Finally the knee jerk, apparently going a bit senile Richard Prebble of ACT fame whose vengeful response is to rubbish everything because it’s coming from Labour.

        • Ant 16.2.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 5:59 pm

          Prebble was absolutely disgusting, that bit about Cunliffe losing New Lynn and then claiming Mt Albert is anything but a safe seat was mad crazy.

    • GregJ 16.3
      1 September 2013 at 4:47 pm

      Actually Tracey I always thought Jones would be a great leader for New Zealand First when Winnie finally retires, dies, or achieves apotheosis! 😛

      • Chooky 16.3.1
        1 September 2013 at 5:44 pm

        @ GregJ….no too slimey ! NZ First voters would not vote for him!….He belongs to Nact….that is his natural home…He should jump ship and join John Key….

    • Murray Olsen 16.4
      1 September 2013 at 6:54 pm

      If you read a transcript of Jones, and know who he is, you could be forgiven for thinking he should be standing for National or United Future.

  17. William Joyce 17
    1 September 2013 at 11:51 am

    We have $10 Million to recover the bones of some dead people to appease families who were so short-sighted that they were not prepared for the day that their loved one, engaged in a dangerous occupation, may be lost in a mine – forever.

    But we don’t have $8.5 Million to help living people to put their disaster behind them and rebuild their lives. Offering people a fraction of the worth of their properties, under the duress of a take-it-or-lose-it deal, is nothing more than theft by the state.

    Obviously the issue of moral hazard selectively applies Christchurch home & section owners – but not to the clients of South Canterbury Finance (among others the government has bailed out).

    …..and don’t get me started on how much money we have will have stump up for the Nova Pay scandal.

    • bad12 17.1
      1 September 2013 at 1:30 pm

      The first paragraph of your comment above is absolute Shit on too many levels for me to even attempt to answer without resorting to open abuse of you as the commenter,

      The reason 29 men died in the Pike River Mine, not just a few as you cravenly insinuate, are down to safety standards, the responsibility of those who owned and managed that mine, which were as Shit as your comments surrounding those dead and entombed miners are…

      • bad12 17.1.1
        1 September 2013 at 2:05 pm

        As an afterthought to the above comment, and, on the off chance that the ‘leadership contenders’ might well have the odd peak into the pages of the Standard, i would like to add that it is not only the safety standards of industry that need re-regulation,

        As was exposed by the Court’s decision when ordering compensation, the Pike River Mine families will receive none of what the order contained, yet, the Pike River Mine itself was reportedly insured for some 100 million dollars, and no matter how big or small the actual insurance payment was, this was allowed to be disbursed among the major shareholders of that mine,

        This malady, this injustice if you will, is only so glaring because of the large amount of publicity given to the Courts decision at the time, such injustice is in fact a ‘feature’ of today’s labor relations or should i say lack of them,

        Weekly Tribunals the length and breadth of New Zealand make orders where an employer or employers are ordered to recompense the harm they cause employees via monetary recompense, and weekly such orders are merely scoffed at by the simple ruse of the business having had a name change (with someones Grandmother suddenly becoming the material owner),

        There are two points to be made in conclusion here, (1), there should be in industrial law a provision for cases such as Pike River where it is obvious that Court action will follow such a disaster that liquidation cannot disburse the companies assets befor such Court procedures are concluded and that such Court procedures should put those with a call on the companies assets at the head of the queue of creditors,

        (2), All orders of Tribunals and Courts in relation to incidents where a company has a responsibility attached to it by a Tribunal or Court to monetarily compensate anyone should identify the material owners of that business and attach such orders not only to the company in question but to the material owners as people named by such orders…

        • William Joyce 17.1.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 9:49 pm

          The issue of safety standards is a separate issue – and needs to be pursued.
          Reciting safety standard issues and court ruling does not change the basic facts of life.

          Much of life is about risk management. Any human activity has certain risks. Most people do not fully think through the risks they might encounter. Consider those Christchurch companies who did not have data backups and off site storage, contingency planning for establishing in a new location or insurance against interruption of their business.

          Accepting employment in underground mining has its particular risks. Those risks have to be thought through and acknowledge by all parties – miners and families included. The best safety practices in the world WILL NOT guarantee that there will NEVER be a disaster in a mine and in that event their bodies may NEVER be recovered.

          This is a risk both the miners and the families take when their loved one goes into the mine. It is not lacking in compassion to say so.

          All things may be possible but at some point they become unrealistic due to the level of logistics required and the financial commitment involved.

          Technically the bodies of the passengers of flight of Air France 447 could have been recovered from the bottom of the Atlantic. But the cost of the operation, the need to marshal specialized equipment from all over the world and the very depths in which they would operate makes the body recovery unrealistic.

          My argument is that $10m just to recover the bodies is a bridge too far.

          And despite what Bernie Monk has said, the families to do not “have a right” to have the bodies recovered.

  18. Tracey 18
    1 September 2013 at 11:52 am

    Yup. he referred to the other two as “diplomats” and saying Clark said it was one thing he isnt… wrongly portraying himself as some kind of ordinary bloke when his history is student until his late 20’s and bureaucrat and politician since.

    can someone please tell me the last private members bill introduced by Jones, Robertson or/and Cunliffe?

  19. Penny Bright 19
    1 September 2013 at 12:08 pm

    FYI
    ______________________________________________________________________________

    AUCKLAND ‘DEMO FOR DEMOcracy’ details:

    Sunday 1 September 2013

    Auckland DEMO 4 DEMOcracy

    Gather at Britomart at 2pm for a march at 2.30.

    Walk to Albert Park via Wellesley St and Princes St.

    Gather at the band rotunda for speeches and music.

    Each participating organisation can have stalls to promote their information.

    FURTHER KIWISCONNECT INFORMATION – HERE:

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151875098144524&set=gm.379715958821259&type=1&theater

    http://kiwisconnect.org.nz/action/
    _____________________________________________________________________________

    Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright to speak at today’s ‘KiwisConnect DEMO for DEMOCRACY’ – how to stop corrupt corporate control!

    “The main reason why I am standing as an Auckland Mayoral candidate is to STOP corrupt corporate control,” says ‘anti-corruption/anti-privatisation’ campaigner, Penny Bright.

    “The sad reality is that New Zealand is actually a corrupt, polluted ‘tax haven’.”

    “In order to achieve a genuinely ‘clean, green, open,transparent and democratically-accountable’ New Zealand, we must ‘seek truth from facts’, and base our understanding on ‘reality’, not ‘perception’.”

    “I will outline my policy, in more detail today, about how, as mayor of Auckland, I will use that office to work for the public majority, not a corporate minority.”

    “For those who are interested in finding our who really controls the Auckland region, and how they do it – try googling http://www.committeeforauckland.co.nz/membership the $10,000 per year, invitation-only, hugely powerful private business lobby group, which is the equivalent of the former NZ Business Roundtable, on STEROIDS – in my considered opinion.”

    “Check for yourselves the interconnections between Committee for Auckland members, and Auckland Council and Auckland Council ‘Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs).”

    “How many Auckland Council and Auckland Council ‘Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) contracts are being awarded to member companies of the Committee for Auckland?”

    “We don’t know, because ‘the books’ are NOT open, and the public are not given the ‘devilish’ details – ie: the NAMES of the consultants/contractors, the SCOPE, TERM or VALUE of these contracts.”

    “On my watch, as Auckland Mayor – the ‘books’ WILL be open, so the public will be know where every dollar of public monies are being spent, invested and borrowed.”

    “Unless an independent ‘cost-benefit analysis PROVES that the use of private sector consultants or contractors is a more cost-effective use of public monies, Council services will be returned ‘in-house’.

    IT’S TIME TO CUT OUT THE CONSULTANTS AND PRIVATE CONTRACTORS!”

    For more information, please check out http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

    particularly http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ANTI-CORRUPTION-WHITE-COLLAR-CRIME-CORPORATE-WELFARE-ACTION-PLAN-Ak-Mayoral-campaign-19-July-2013-2.pdf

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright
    ‘Anti-corruption /anti-privatisation’ campaigner

  20. Clement Pinto 20
    1 September 2013 at 1:12 pm

    NEXT LABOUR LEADER and DEPUTY :

    Based on today’s performance on Q & A and other factors, I am inclined to think that perhaps the following will be good for the Labour party:

    LEADER : DAVID CUNLIFFE.

    CO-DEPUTY LEADERS :
    SHANE JONES and JACINDA ARDEN.

    Note:
    This is my tentative idea. I think a Labour ticket with the three candidates I mentioned above will be a vote winner for Labour at the next election. Robertson is very good too, but perhaps in some other high ranking front bench ministerial post. What are your thoughts on this?

    • dave 20.1
      1 September 2013 at 1:52 pm

      Arden seems to be extremely popular so I like the idea. It’s a good mix of people too that covers most areas.

    • Pasupial 20.2
      1 September 2013 at 2:18 pm

      Louisa Wall for deputy Labour leader!

      But for that to happen would probably take some action at November’s conference expanding the Party & Affiliates input into the deputy selection procedure. Since that’s currently in the gift of caucus, I imagine we’ll be seeing Robertson as deputy.

      • Clement Pinto 20.2.1
        1 September 2013 at 2:51 pm

        Louisa Wall as Deputy will bleed a lot of votes away from Labour at the election. She is a polarising extremist candidate lacking experience or political wisdom. Bad move, except for a section of the party or the country. We need a party to run the country and not a party of social crusaders of narrow primary focus.

        • QoT 20.2.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 5:49 pm

          polarising extremist candidate

          Evidence, please. She’s a former double-international sports representative who won Manurewa – one of those “conservative” “brown” South Auckland electorates – with a majority of 8,000, and who campaigned for a law with international acceptance which passed the House by 77 votes to 44.

          • Chooky 20.2.1.1.1
            1 September 2013 at 6:02 pm

            +1 QoT

            • Rhinocrates 20.2.1.1.1.1
              1 September 2013 at 7:57 pm

              She’s exactly the sort of person Labour needs right up front – someone who really leads – by taking a risking and convincing others to follow, not some focus-group driven jellyfish who will appease “the markets”.

              Louisa Wall has succeeded in making New Zealand better while Adern and Robertson have done nothing but make themselves comfortable.

              People should try to remember what real leadership is: it’s seeing what needs to be done and getting people to make it happen. Louisa can do that.

              There is no such thing as “identity politics” – dismissing any cause as “identity politics” is repressive. If one person is denied the rights enjoyed by everyone else, then society is unjust and that should be everyone’s concern – otherwise a party is simply a means of ensuring one’s own privileges just like National and ACT.

              And the argument “don’t demand your rights, they’ll be sorted after I’ve got my privileges first” is hypocritical at best, repressive at worst. “Divisive” means “not MEEEEEE”.

              Labour for years has been all about overweight middle-aged men serving their fantasies to support their sense of entitlement. Well I’m one of them. I’m one of the most priveliged people in the history of humanity, and I even have far better dental care than I would have in the court of Louis XIV.

              I’m also a minority, and the more accurately you describe me, the smaller my minority becomes… so this balding, overweight, middle-aged white man who’s the son of a somewhat famous rugby player in the 50s might not really be the most important person in the world.

              I want a representative Labour Party, one that embraces the people who are my friends who aren’t like me at all.

          • Clement Pinto 20.2.1.1.2
            1 September 2013 at 7:03 pm

            Ok, (but the sports prowess is of no consequence to me). So, what else does she have to offer apart from damaging divisiveness and polarising stuff? Economics? Law? Science? Social Science? Education? I don’t rate her. She is a fulcrum of dissent and dissatisfaction. I know she is passionate about gay and lesbian causes and possibly one of the MPs that were not supportive of Mr Shearer. Is that enough?

            • QoT 20.2.1.1.2.1
              1 September 2013 at 7:10 pm

              So, what else does she have to offer apart from damaging divisiveness and polarising stuff?

              You still haven’t established what this “damaging divisiveness” is, CP.

              And given you don’t apparently understand the huge amounts of mana (deserving or not) our top-ranking sportspeople are accorded, I might humbly suggest you stop presuming to comment on political or social issues in New Zealand.

        • Murray Olsen 20.2.1.2
          1 September 2013 at 7:07 pm

          Clement, you rubbish Louisa Wall, who has achieved something worthwhile, in favour of Ardern, who has achieved nothing that I’m aware of. More importantly, as long as she relies on Mallard for advice this is unlikely to change. Then you say that Louisa lacks experience or political wisdom, but you promote Sealord Jones, whose main experiences seem to be solitary eroticism in motel rooms, promotion of slave labour on fishing boats, and rubbishing of the main coalition partner.

          My thoughts are why are you a member of the Labour Party? And what does Ardern have besides being better looking than Judith Collins? For the life of me, I can’t understand her popularity on the “left”.

          • Clement Pinto 20.2.1.2.1
            1 September 2013 at 9:04 pm

            Murray, I will try to explain my view as best as I can here : First of all, I am not anti feminists, gays or lesbians. I do have reservations about gay marriage as in my opinion it dilutes the traditional understanding of marriage. Any way, that is not the debate here as it is done and dusted.

            Among the people I admire most are Annie Besant, Aung sen suki, Harriet-beecher-stowe, Emmeline Pankhurst, Florence-nightingale, Wangari Maathai, Margaret Fuller, Mother Theresa, Boudicca, Joan of Arc, Anne Frank, Aung San Suu Kyi, Marie Curie, Rosa Luxemburg, Helen Keller, Mary-wollstonecraft and our own Kate Sheppard and Dame Whina Cooper. It does not bother me if any of them was a lesbian.

            Of course Louisa Wall spear headed the gay marriage and succeed. In my opinion, it was a premature measure at this as it did not and does not have universal overwhelming support among the people of the country. It is a divisive polarising law. Even among the MPs there was division. Such social laws should not be rushed in before there is more general understanding and more acceptance in society. Until that time, the Civil union laws should have continued.

            As a political activist with the interest of the party upper most in my mind, I think As a deputy leader of the Labour party Louisa Wall be a polarising personality among the general voters at this time. Many votes may bleed to National, The Conservatives or New Zealand First and Labour may lose or be hamstrung to form a coalition government.

            Jacinda Arden is not controversial. She is well liked by voters, intelligent, a smart politician and is popular in Auckland, a crucial city for votes.

            In my opinion, Cunliuffe as leader and Jones and Arden as co-deputy leaders would be a great ticket to go to the polls.

            But of course, I may be completely wrong in my view and you may be completely right. Cheers!

            • Pasupial 20.2.1.2.1.1
              2 September 2013 at 9:32 am

              CP

              If that is a list of the women you admire most, how come you spell so many of their names incorrectly? It’s almost like you’re trying to bolster your arguments through an appeal to authority. Plus; Joan of Arc, and; Anne Frank, seem a bit out of place (though I see you spelled; Aung San Suu Kyi, right the second time).

              “…I may be completely wrong in my view and you may be completely right.” It’s not always an either/ or choice – maybe both of you have some valid points and can’t agree because of the confrontational mindset.

              “[with Wall] Labour may lose or be hamstrung to form a coalition government”: I really can’t see Labour getting over 50% just because Jones/ Arden are acting as joint-deputy, so there’ll be a coalition government anyway.

  21. RedBaron CV 21
    1 September 2013 at 2:38 pm

    Yes I like the idea too – and had had some vague thoughts about blogging on it.
    2 co-deputies would signal that a range of interests would be catered for, Jacinta appeals to some women and younger people but possibly not women on benefits with children. Shane -is he the best to appeal to south Auckland and Grant a signal to more diverse groups? Who would bring out the non-voters?

    I certainly se Little, Robertson and Sherer as good quality Ministers along with a number of others.

    • bad12 21.1
      1 September 2013 at 3:06 pm

      Shane Jones the ‘best’ to appeal to South Auckland, based upon what please???, if that was a joke from you it is very funny, if serious i would suggest that you do not know the people of either South Auckland or Porirua who would have this to say about Shane Jones,

      ”Expletive deleted, Expletive deleted, Expletive deleted”….

      • Chooky 21.1.1
        1 September 2013 at 4:58 pm

        bad12 +1…smirk…Shane Jones is best suited to Nact and the Corporates

        David Cunliffe needs a Deputy that will support him….not stab him in the back….the Labour Party needs the 50%women’s vote…..so a feisty woman with ability would be ideal as Deputy…. a few months back it would have been Lianne Dalziel ….but today ….who better than Louise Wall?

        Robertson would make a good Minister

        • Rhinocrates 21.1.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 7:18 pm

          A good minister…. OK, I propose a very special cabinet position in which he reports to no-one and no-one reports to him: Minister of Stuffing his Pie Hole at Bellamys and Dressing Up as Napoleon. There, that should do it.

          • Chooky 21.1.1.1.1
            1 September 2013 at 8:24 pm

            @ Rhino…smirk….well seems like a good idea…you know him better than me, because I dont know him at all….except from what you have told me( and from what I have read and seen…and my surmisations) ..and you sound like a good judge of character…one that us chooks out in the provinces could trust…at very least you make an entertaining case….what should he be Minister of?…(apart from what you have already suggested)…Consumer Affairs?…or Internal Affairs?…not Foreign Affairs …unless one wants him out of the way…and Winnie wants that job reserved for himself

        • Clement Pinto 21.1.1.2
          1 September 2013 at 7:19 pm

          Having Louisa Wall as deputy will certainly please a section of Labour, Greens and a certain section of the country, but a smallish section overall. It will be a big mistake for Labour to have her as deputy leader after her aggressive role in the Gay marriage act. Remember Labour needs the votes of the majority of the nation and the workers and not just the gays and their fellow sympathisers. I don’t believe it is a wise move for Labour to risk committing political harakiri. It will be a case of ‘so near, yet so far’!

          • Pascal's bookie 21.1.1.2.1
            1 September 2013 at 7:26 pm

            You mean that private members bill that passed quite easily with even Judith ” look at me, I’m Thatcher” Collins seeing which way the wind was blowing and voting for it/

            that bill? The one which on its final reading had its opponents mostly hiding away from the chamber or offering mewly mouthed speeches about how mean people had been to them and that they weren’t a fucked up pack of bell ends honest? That bill?

            Why do you think it played like that?

            If it was such an actually divisive thing then the people with access to the best issue based polling on the country would have been putting themselves firmly on the record and vowing to repeal. But nope. not 1 squeek about repeal was mentioned. It’s honestly not a vote winner to be on the wrong side of this, even for the bloody tory party. So why the fuck should the labour party pander to this shit?

      • RedBaronCV 21.1.2
        2 September 2013 at 12:34 pm

        Sorry Bad12 grovel – I did put a ? after that sentence. Perhaps I should have stuck “I like the idea -lets use it to appeal to a wide range of members”

    • Clement Pinto 21.2
      1 September 2013 at 3:07 pm

      The following in the present caucus will be good and able Ministers/Associate Ministers.[Not in any particular order]

      David Cunliffe, Shane Jones, Jacinda Arden, Grant Robertson, David Parker, Phil Goff, Annette King, Trevor Mallard, David Shearer, Phil Twyford, David.Clark, Su’a William Sio, Damien O’Connor, Clare Curran, Megan Woods, Andrew Little, Moana Mackey, Iain Lees-Galloway, Carol Beaumont, Rino Tirikatene, Meka Whaitiri

  22. ianmac 22
    1 September 2013 at 4:16 pm

    I wondered a week or so that David Shearer might be ill. Anyone know where he is at the moment? (No smart remarks please.)

    • Ant 23.1
      1 September 2013 at 5:45 pm

      Looks like NZF will be National’s only option come 2014…

    • bad12 23.2
      1 September 2013 at 6:25 pm

      Doesn’t quite make sense, why would a couple of % of the Labour vote suddenly decamp for NZFirst,

      My view if NZFirst were to have received such a boost in the polling it would/should have occurred last time when National took that large hit in it’s %, voters on the right not being entirely stupid now realizing that they have to have NZFirst in the next Parliament to have any chance,

      The laugh here is that the more of them that shift their vote from National to try and shore up a likely/maybe coalition partner for National the more the National vote will be cannibalized,

      Good to see the Green Party vote holding up, my party vote for the Mana Party while the Green vote holds is looking more likely…

      • srylands 23.2.1
        1 September 2013 at 7:33 pm

        “Good to see the Green Party vote holding up, my party vote for the Mana Party while the Green vote holds is looking more likely
”

        That doesn’t actually make sense.

        You really vote for the Mana Party?

    • Te Reo Putake 23.3
      1 September 2013 at 8:29 pm

      The polling period was mostly pre-Shearer’s resignation, for what it’s worth. Translated to seats, if all parties currently in parliament retain their current electorate seats, its Lab/Green 55, NACTM 58. NZF get to choose who governs.

  24. Ron 24
    2 September 2013 at 3:04 pm

    On the subject of a living wage. I note that France were looking to impose on all state controlled companies a limit for wage ratio of 20 to 1. In other words the CEO cannot earn more than 20 times what the lowest worker in that company earns.
    If we applied these figures to government with cleaners getting around 13.75 per hour $26000 per year then the highest paid political figure would get around 500,000 per year and all the rest would be graduated down from that figure. If we accept the Governor General as the top of the Parliamentary Process down though the Chief Justice and then the prime Minister it would have John Key on about where he is but as you progress down some serious adjustments would be needed. Just imagine what would happen to SOE’s and other government companies. Some CEO’s salary would be seriously downgraded. I would imagine that it would start to level out society with this sort of policy. There would be a rush to upgrade salaries of the lowest workers.
    Read from last year http://world.time.com/2012/05/31/hollandes-justice-frances-leftist-leaders-seek-to-cut-public-sector-ceo-salaries/

    • Clement Pinto 24.1
      2 September 2013 at 4:27 pm

      I think it is a great idea to help close the gap between the low waged and high waged to make our society a little more fair. One point:
      The big business and corporates will try to circumvent the spirit of the law by paying their honchos in the top echelons in kind by way of various forms of perks etc. There need to be mechanisms to prevent this kind of abuse.
      I wonder if that ratio, (min)1:(max)20 will work well in all organisations? I think it will. What do you think?