Open mike 02/03/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, March 2nd, 2016 - 94 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

94 comments on “Open mike 02/03/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    2 March 2016 at 7:10 am

    If there is a vote to change the flag, we will be saddled with even more costs as the present flag will have to be replaced with the beach towel everywhere.
    That won’t be cheap.

    • Rosie 1.1
      2 March 2016 at 8:10 am

      It’s a big IF Paul. We have a fairly solid chunk of society opposed to something that affects their sense of national identity. People from all political camps are opposed to change – I like it, it’s quite a good leveller. We are experiencing a moment of unity for once in our increasingly divided land.

      Maybe have faith that we can pull this off?

      Here’s a question for readers. As much as I dislike our current flag, mainly for reasons that Te Reo Putake pointed in his butchers apron post in regard to the Union Jack symbolism of colonial oppression (and descending from people who fought against that flag) I am still voting to retain it because a) the alternative is nothing but an ugly sport logo and b) I will not contribute to the Key Vanity Project.

      Would I be a hypocrite to print out our flag and attach it to my front fence as fingers up to Key?

      • te reo putake 1.1.1
        2 March 2016 at 8:30 am

        I don’t think putting up the current flag on your fence would be hypocritical at all, Rosie. For a lot of people its simply the dead rat option. Not ideal, but better than letting Key have his way.

        A couple of good things have come out of this referendum. One of them has been the discussion about the current flag’s provenance and historical meaning. The other has been the tarnishing of John Key’s image. I’m looking forward to him waking up a loser on the day the result is announced.

        • Sabine 1.1.1.1
          2 March 2016 at 8:36 am

          Well i hope that you are going to vote.
          No one is going to win by abstaining.

          • te reo putake 1.1.1.1.1
            2 March 2016 at 8:51 am

            No, I’m not voting. Though I was impressed by the arguments you and others put up on the Butcher’s Apron post. However, I’m confident the change will be rejected by those that do actually vote. I still think that the lower the turnout, the worse it makes National look.

            • Sabine 1.1.1.1.1.1
              2 March 2016 at 10:00 am

              no you are effectively giving your vote to National.

              but what evs, its your choice.

              • Karen …
                2 March 2016 at 10:24 am

                I agree with Sabine. Not voting in the first referendum was a reasonable approach, not voting in this one could mean we end up with that hideous alternative. By keeping the flag we have we may get a chance to get a new one in a few years but if it is changed now we’re stuck with the tacky beach towel.

            • Tim 1.1.1.1.1.2
              2 March 2016 at 1:31 pm

              For some reason I feel compelled to add my voice (again) to the chorus of people basically pleading with you at this stage to vote.

            • kenny 1.1.1.1.1.3
              2 March 2016 at 6:21 pm

              Key is not worried about the voter turnout, only that he wins. If only 60% of those eligible to vote do so but those who vote for change have a larger % of that 60% then they win.

          • Southern Man 1.1.1.1.2
            2 March 2016 at 9:20 am

            I believe the polls indicating support for the status quo are being deliberately manipulated to lull opponents of the flag change into a false sense of confidence. I don’t trust the Government and their celebrity and media shills. TRP and others who don’t intend to vote need to rethink their strategy – a very high turnout and rejection of the proposed flag will send the most compelling message to John Key that cannot be spun.

      • Sabine 1.1.2
        2 March 2016 at 8:35 am

        There are quite a few people that fly the NZ Flag at the moment, in front of their houses, on their cars.
        Its your flag, fly it.

        No one has an issue with the All Black Silver Fern when rugby is on.
        John Key has no one but himself to blame for this charade.

        • Rosie 1.1.2.1
          2 March 2016 at 9:15 am

          Cheers trp and Sabine.

          Might just do that. I was inspired by the street in Invercargill where each resident is flying the NZ flag in their front garden.

          And yes, it is the dead rat option. I have no affiliation or attachment to our current flag but am happy to see it be flown as a symbol of resistance against Key.

      • Smilin 1.1.3
        2 March 2016 at 8:11 pm

        Yes when you get down to it
        Its the top down not the bottom up wanting this therefore in principle its not democratic no matter what the machinery or chicanery

    • maui 1.2
      2 March 2016 at 8:18 am

      Its not going to happen, evidence being I saw someone driving a holden around yesterday with NZ flags flying above both windows and blasting KISS at full volume. The natives are restless.

    • greywarshark 1.3
      2 March 2016 at 10:19 am

      But a new flag will offer commercial opportunities. The guy who designed one of the contenders has already made a decent sum in sales.

      We probably should change our flag every three years after the election. The first year the public’s attention could be taken up with deciding on colours and shapes etc. and that will keep us busy and amused so we won’t even care if our house, or the neighbour’s falls down or costs more than their life savings to repair and they commit suicide, or whatever.

      And the rights to the commercial opportunities using the flag should be held by government. Now we have a commercial government it can profit from our brands. The past governments could not get their heads around owning the Kiwi brand, or buying it off the shoe polish people and since then there has been a USA airline using it and no doubt others.

      The new flag would go well on men’s and women’s underpants, shorts, and of course tea towels, beach towels, sun shades for cars etc. Just a few places it could be used, perhaps tattoos as well, look good on white patriot guys for instance.

      /satire

    • Herodotus 1.4
      2 March 2016 at 1:44 pm

      The flag will be changed sometime in the future IMO, and hopefully under an improved process that will result in a flag design that many will accept and will be far superior than our current option. If we vote for this flag, the chance of another change when nz moves towards being a republic will be lost, at least by supporting the current flag there will be another opportunity for change.
      Also many selected names that are used under the change the flag campaign comment on the need to change but none have come out that this is their 1st choice, and that this is the best design we can come up with, all we get is that the existing flag is confusing when we play against Australian teams.

  2. Rosie 2
    2 March 2016 at 7:55 am

    This one’s for you Cowboy. You raised the issue of staff resignations at Todd Barclays office last week. Bill English is putting on the front that he aint bovvered about his former seat and it’s all ok:

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/297819/bill-english-unfazed-by-staff-resignations

    Have you been speaking with people in your electorate and getting a feel for how they view this and is there any suspicion about Barclay being an unsuitable MP to represent his constituents?

    • Graeme 2.1
      2 March 2016 at 9:09 am

      There’s no way Boy Wonder’s appointment was a risk free strategy, that was obvious and pointed out at the time. The local Queenstown paper gave him a good smacking at the time.

      http://www.scene.co.nz/queenstowns-clueless-shooin-mp-says-mayor-who/316733a1.page?print=yes

      The Nat electorate committee stood by the appointment at the time in the face of some pretty strong questioning. Now they are resigning. Generational change? Yeah, but the electorate isn’t getting younger. Biggest export here is our young, and especially in Queenstown. Most of Barclay’s generation here can’t, or don’t, vote in New Zealand.

      There might be an opportunity for a non Nat candidate who can get the confidence of both Queenstown, and it’s environmental constraints, and the prudent conservative business practice of rural Southland. It would be a very special candidate, but it could easily go.

      • Colonial Viper 2.1.1
        2 March 2016 at 9:19 am

        Would have to be someone with exceptional and broad name recognition in and well around Queenstown (eg extending out to Gore and beyond), to have any chance.

        • Stuart Munro 2.1.1.1
          2 March 2016 at 10:37 am

          Shadbolt managed it – might be worth picking his brains.

          • weka 2.1.1.1.1
            2 March 2016 at 11:50 am

            Invercargill and Southland are not the same constituencies. Although Shadbolt is pretty conservative these days so who knows.

      • Rosie 2.1.2
        2 March 2016 at 9:21 am

        There might be an opportunity for a non Nat candidate who can get the confidence of both Queenstown, and it’s environmental constraints, and the prudent conservative business practice of rural Southland. It would be a very special candidate, but it could easily go.

        • Rosie 2.1.2.1
          2 March 2016 at 9:48 am

          Oh! That was meant to be quoting Graeme and the rest of my comment disappeared. I was wondering about a NZ First candidate for the electorate. They pulled it off in Northland. May be able to do in the South?

          • Graeme 2.1.2.1.1
            2 March 2016 at 4:56 pm

            It’s not really a party thing, more the right person. A business orientated Green could easily pull Queenstown and Te Anau, but Gore and Lumsden could be a different story. But you never know, had a farmer mate complementing James Shaw for a comment about farmers focusing on profitability rather than production. Shaw’s comment related more to emissions than finances, but the sound bite went both ways.

            The electorate is used to having a top notch MP. Queenstown has been represented by Warren Cooper, David Parker and Bill English. Jackie Dean never really got any respect here and there was relief when Bill ended up as MP through boundary change.

            There’s huge growth here right now and another change must be coming soon. Could see a return to a Central Otago electorate. That would be an interesting demographic / political mix

            • Rosie 2.1.2.1.1.1
              2 March 2016 at 9:15 pm

              Thanks Graeme. Thats interesting. Always good to get the local perspective. Interesting to hear feedback from locals too, like your farmer friend.

              As an aside, I partially listened to a radio interview today about education and what changes have occurred in the last thirty years as education shifted towards a marketable commodity. Turns out the person they were interviewing was James Shaw. The language he used made him sound very accessible. I see what you are saying about a Green of a business orientated persuasion being a possibility for certain parts of your electorate.

              Wait and see I guess.

    • cowboy 2.2
      2 March 2016 at 11:30 pm

      Hi Rosie

      Thanks for the shout out. Sorry been too busy today to follow events.

      I am in the electorate and don’t know anyone who is particularly happy about having such an inexperienced individual as our MP but people down here have given him the benefit of the doubt to date.

      What’s interesting is the Southland Times seem to be all over this like a dog with a bone so they obviously know there is plenty of discontent behind the scenes. I know some of the resignees who are all highly regarded so there is obviously something badly amiss. The feeling is he is putting building towards his personal cabinet ambitions ahead of being prepared to take a stand on local issues.

      He has a 14k majority so it would take a massive swing to unseat him but he got those votes by default. Now there is an actual measure of his ability and character and his vote will be based on his merit, which appears to be negligible.

      Labour ran a seemingly good candidate, Liz Craig, a health professional as I recall, I was surprised at the time she didn’t get closer. Someone like that could do well again given the shambles in the southern DHB.

      NZ first are pushing the regional theme and should be a beneficiary of those true blue Nats that would never vote labour. If they get a strong rural focused candidate they should do well im picking but whether that transfers through to Queenstown appeal is the issue?

      • Rosie 2.2.1
        3 March 2016 at 8:52 am

        Cheers for the view cowboy.

        “The feeling is he is putting building towards his personal cabinet ambitions ahead of being prepared to take a stand on local issues.”

        That wouldn’t surprise me, he is a kid after all, of a self interested persuasion. That kind of principle something salt of the earth types have no time for.

        Keep us up to date of any new developments.

  3. repateet 3
    2 March 2016 at 8:46 am

    I see Slater’s done his PR job for Judith today. Just the gang sticking together I guess.

    • Mike C 3.1
      2 March 2016 at 9:38 am

      @Repateet

      There is a bit more to that arse licking post than meets the eye.

      Today is going to be a great day … just wait and see.

      • Puckish Rogue 3.1.1
        2 March 2016 at 10:26 am

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/77406691/andrew-little-dines-with-drug-company-executives-months-before-adopting-keytruda-stance

        Oh I’m sure Judith Collins will be very forgiving and understanding over this, she won’t hold any grudges or be looking for payback

        I mean sure it look a little suspicious but I’m sure its nothing 🙂

        • mac1 3.1.1.1
          2 March 2016 at 11:00 am

          So, PR, do your job properly, and instead of hinting at impropriety, in the words of Bob Dyan, “Why don’t you just come out once and scream it?”

          Then, we can answer your sleazy half-masked allegations and condemn them to the dustbin of history.

          BTW, this has been a thread in yesterday’s Daily Review 01/03/2016.

          • Puckish Rogue 3.1.1.1.1
            2 March 2016 at 11:53 am

            Hey I’m not saying that Littles in the pocket but its funny that Little says on one hand he can’t remember meeting with them but he later remembers that he didn’t discuss political donations or it didn’t influence their current position on Keytruda?

            Its not like john Keys ever accused of forgetting things

            • McFlock 3.1.1.1.1.1
              2 March 2016 at 11:56 am

              I’m not sure John Key’s ever been accused of remembering a damned thing…

            • mac1 3.1.1.1.1.2
              2 March 2016 at 12:55 pm

              Bollocks, PR. You insinuate.

              What on earth has not being in someone’s pocket got to do with memory recall?

              You’re continuing the sly allegations, just on a different issue.

              “I’m not quite sure whether drug companies were represented there,” said Little. That really says a lot about the impact that the drug company lobbyists made upon Little.

              A person who never takes bribes does not have to remember if he took a bribe on a particular occasion. A person who knows why he has a position on a particular issue also knows he wasn’t influenced by someone’s views.

              And don’t compare Key’s long list of lies, obfuscation and loose use of language with Andrew Little. That’s truly desperate condemnation by association.

              • McFlock …
                2 March 2016 at 12:56 pm

                A person who never takes bribes does not have to remember if he took a bribe on a particular occasion. A person who knows why he has a position on a particular issue also knows he wasn’t influenced by someone’s views.

                Faboo.
                Damned right.

              • Puckish Rogue …
                2 March 2016 at 1:15 pm

                I’m sure it’ll come to nothing 🙂

                • mac1 …
                  2 March 2016 at 1:22 pm

                  So does debating with you. 🙂

                  But others do read what is written.

                  And this moving hand, having writ, shall indeed move on……………..

        • Gabby 3.1.1.2
          2 March 2016 at 11:48 am

          Is Andrew Little married to someone who stands to benefit financially from a close relationship with foreign bsinesspeople?

          • Puckish Rogue 3.1.1.2.1
            2 March 2016 at 12:03 pm

            Is Andrew Little the leader of a party that stands to benefit financially from a close relationship with Big Medicine?

            • Stuart Munro 3.1.1.2.1.1
              2 March 2016 at 12:36 pm

              When we see the audit of Cabinet Club we’ll humour your innuendo.

              • McFlock …
                2 March 2016 at 12:53 pm

                bets on whether that happens.
                If only we could place that bet on one of Sky City’s new pokies…

              • Puckish Rogue …
                2 March 2016 at 12:58 pm

                What innuendo? Little was at a meeting with Big Medicine (that market Keytruda) he can’t remember but does know they didn’t talk money and six months later Labour kicks up a stink about funding Keytruda

                Theres absolutely nothing dodgy about that at all

                • McFlock …
                  2 March 2016 at 1:10 pm

                  What happened at this meeting to distinguish it from any other dinner meeting?

                  was he helicoptered in?
                  were they global industry presidents rather than typical lobbyists?
                  did he request an extensive detour to the other end of town in order to attend the funtion?
                  Is his partner director of one of the companies, and therefore there’d be a conflict of interest for him to remember?
                  Was his meeting used in company advertising brochures contrary to party policy?
                  did he happen to replace a bottle of wine labelled “Labour Leader’s Lambrusco” that turned out to be part owned by his supposedly blind trust?
                  Were there 100,000-odd shares in pharmaceutical companies that he forgot to declare?

                  • Puckish Rogue …
                    2 March 2016 at 1:17 pm

                    Shame that politics doesn’t work that way eh 🙂

                    • McFlock …
                      2 March 2016 at 1:27 pm

                      Actually, it does.

                      Note that I was asking if there was anything particularly memorable about the meeting.
                      see, tories, especially key, seem to forget things that should be very memorable. Key does it a lot.

                      Little seems to have a fairly good memory, but I’d expect he has a lot of similar meetings

                  • alwyn …
                    2 March 2016 at 1:24 pm

                    I asked Little that. He put on his best imitation of a Sergeant Schultz face and told me “I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing!” .
                    Seems about right. I doubt if he is ever going to answer your questions.

                    • McFlock …
                      2 March 2016 at 1:29 pm

                      So, to recap, Little did not immediately remember a meeting that seems to have had pretty much nothing particularly memorable about it.

                      Key, on the other hand, can’t remember how a mate managed to walk randomly into being head of one of our intelligence services.

                  • mac1 …
                    2 March 2016 at 1:27 pm

                    Good questions, McFlock, but beyond PR’s PR writ, and wit, to answer.

            • Craig H 3.1.1.2.1.2
              2 March 2016 at 11:50 pm

              No.

  4. rod 4
    2 March 2016 at 9:59 am

    Wow, The Herald is going into overdrive for the change the flag lobby and of course thier boss, John Key, They have even got some lame Aussie outfit’s corny advert on board today. No doubt part of the Crosby Textors dirty politics brigade.

    Who’s next Granny?

  5. pat 5
    2 March 2016 at 10:18 am

    RNZ flag poll running at 7-1 against change currently.

  6. greywarshark 6
    2 March 2016 at 11:13 am

    I read a sly twisted piece of RW maliciousness on some wrapping newspaper of recent vintage. Liam Hehir, solicitor, writes for Fairfax and gets into quite a few papers as a result. What a cheap way of getting political coverage for a party to reach people of their mindset and beliefs. It is interesting to note at the end of the Opinion piece that there is no description of the writer, his expertise or interests, that would underpin the value of his thoughts, and the right the newspaper has extended to use its publication to broadcast them to us all.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/opinion/77118558/opinion-right-wing-resistance-agenda-reprehensible

    This one is about some guys in black jackets calling themselves the ‘Right Wing Resistance’ handing out brochures about their favourite hates. There are two columns noting their targets and Hehir’s opinions and suppositions about their characters and mentality. And he takes the opportunity to comment on their prejudice against Jews, because that opens the way to an attack on the Labour Party. The ‘RW Resistance even took the time to make positive reference to infamous anti-Semitic slur used against Key by a Labour candidate in the last election.’

    I looked this up on Google and note this is an example of how much can be made of something small so that it registers as large, and then can be alluded to in vague terms for the next decade if not longer. Note that ‘the Labour candidate’ is of Jewish descent himself.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/251915/candidate-warned-over-shylock-slur
    The candidate, [Steven Gibson] who is of Jewish descent himself, has apologised and said on Monday he didn’t actually understand what the term Shylock referred to, and was repeating what a constituent had said about Mr Key in the context of a bad deal.
    “I was only repeating what a constituent had said to me. And it’s only now that I realise the connotations of it. To me it was like a Shakesperian reference. I’m sorry people have been offended and I’ll take the post down – that’s all I can do.”

    Hehir in this Firing Line piece manages to fit in a snide comment about The Standard. The “RW Resistance is also dead set” against the PM changing the flag to a “brand label”, and their “overall themes and prose style” shared much more with the anonymous commenters on the Left-wing blog, The Standard than the centre-Right, Kiwiblog. Then followed some more musings of his tainted RW beliefs about attitudes of “your garden variety left-liberal”.

    How about having a go at Opinion writing yourself now you have got interested in The Standard. It’s a democracy, everyone has a chance to speak!
    Here is some NCEA-guided advice.
    http://www.studyit.org.nz/subjects/english/english3/4/subjectcontent/opinionwriting.html

    • ianmac 6.1
      2 March 2016 at 11:24 am

      Yes Greywarshark. Read that spiteful piece by Liam Hehir in our local paper. Not his first pro Key piece either.

  7. The lost sheep 7
    2 March 2016 at 11:15 am

    Maybe even the Far Left is beginning to understand the crushing effect of the dogmatic and intolerant shift in LW culture over the last few years….

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/why-this-radical-activist-is-disillusioned-by-the-toxic-culture-of-the-left-a6895211.html

    ” I would go as far as saying that the politically correct mafia on the left perpetuates a form of bigotry on its own because it alienates and “otherises” those who do not share their ways of thinking and speaking about the world.”

    “But without freedom of thought, speech, and expression, no other freedom can exist. Bigots and hateful people in general will make fools of themselves, and again, our freedom to speak means that we can and definitely should challenge and outsmart them. But the idea of being so self-righteous that we think we deserve to be authority figures in all of this is soul-crushing.”

    • Gangnam Style 7.1
      2 March 2016 at 12:28 pm

      I saw ‘far left’ then switched off. You sound like a conspiracy nut.

    • Stuart Munro 7.2
      2 March 2016 at 12:42 pm

      You need to be a bit more realistic if you don’t want to be written off as a nut. Within the next few years our bankrupt ultra-right government will come for the health system. Most New Zealanders are opposed to that. But gulags are not part of our political tradition.

      Keep stealing our stuff and they will be.

    • swordfish 7.3
      2 March 2016 at 1:57 pm

      While you’re probably out to create mischief here, TLS, I will say that I agree with some core aspects of that activist’s critique. But it’s important to emphasise that we’re talking about a particular niche section of the Left – the Uber-Politically Correct faction: largely synonymous (I’ve increasingly come to realise) with the Authoritarian Left.

      Probably associated most with certain (Rik from The Young Ones-style) middle class Uni students and that small faction of younger feminists (particularly in my own city of Wellington), newly-armed with First Class Gender Studies Degrees and seemingly more than keen to adopt the Trotskyite modus operandi of the 1970s Radical Lesbian Feminist Movement – an inherently aggressive approach, divisive/destructive Entryist tactics, the use of cult-like techniques for control and exclusion, with a healthy dose of self-martyrdom thrown in for good measure.

      We’ve seen some pretty obvious examples on social media over the last few years, with various insane mob-job pile-ons, the angrily self-righteous working themselves up into a mouth-frothing fervour as they attack some unlucky woman journalist or erstwhile left-wing commentator for not strictly following their dogmatic sensibilities. By no means pleasant.

      One of the more recent examples being the nasty and quite bizarre personal attack on Sacha Dylan on a Hard News thread. This most liberal and progressive of blokes was deemed Unsafe, Notorious, Misogynist and almost persona non grata (big black mark down on the old McCarthyite Blacklist run by these nutjobs) for committing the heinous crime of calling someone “a twat” a few times on Twitter.

      Personally, I think these New McCarthyites with their teen-like pettiness and uber-precious self-martyrdom tendencies have been far too indulged by both the broader feminist movement and the broader Left in general.

      So, there you go, TLS, you’ve got your bite. But I wouldn’t have bitten if I hadn’t thought it needed to be said. And it’s good to see sections of the Left drawing a line and moving into push-back territory.

      • The lost sheep 7.3.1
        2 March 2016 at 2:51 pm

        The ‘mischief’ I am trying to cause is to trying to get the Left looking honestly into the reasons it has been out of Govt. for 3 terms heading for a 4th….

        I agree with much of what you say, but I disagree that it is a niche issue. Having been a staunch and active Leftie since 1960, I can tell you there was a distinct trend from the early 1990’s on for the whole of LW culture to become more dogmatic and stridently intolerant of differing views.
        It doesn’t need to be overt to be stifling. It only needs to be the subtle pressure of knowing that some ideas are not up for question, and anyone doing so will meet with an automatic condemnation.
        For me, and many others I know, the Left simply became an unpleasant place to be.
        I think that has a massive amount to do with the reason why the LW is failing to win back support, and why the Left cannot generate a new vision and the leaders to sell it…but obviously not many here want to hear that.

        • McFlock 7.3.1.1
          2 March 2016 at 2:59 pm

          Having been a staunch and active Leftie since 1960

          lolz
          Compared to whom?

          • North 7.3.1.1.1
            2 March 2016 at 8:21 pm

            Yeah, hubristic stoats always claim they were pheasants……once. Rob Campbell…….Ports of Auckland and serial director. In my VUW days that guy frightened the shit out of me. Unease, maybe two decades prematurely. Only explanation – a vainglorious wanker – then or now. A la Trollwyn.

        • Puddleglum 7.3.1.2
          2 March 2016 at 4:15 pm

          “there was a distinct trend from the early 1990’s on for the whole of LW culture to become more dogmatic and stridently intolerant of differing views”

          Assuming that was the case, why do you think it happened then? Had anything else of political note occurred, say, from the mid-80s to the mid-90s?

          What generally precedes radicalisation?

          Or is it all just mercurial intellectual ‘fashion’ that is behind this kind of thing?

          (BTW, I’m not conceding the truth of your claim, just following the questions that arise from it.)

        • Anne 7.3.1.3
          2 March 2016 at 9:14 pm

          It doesn’t need to be overt to be stifling. It only needs to be the subtle pressure of knowing that some ideas are not up for question, and anyone doing so will meet with an automatic condemnation.

          There is an element of truth in that and it started well before the early 1990s.
          I dropped out of [old] Labour in the 1980s because of it. Some of those ardent feminists of the 70s and 80s were bullies who isolated anyone who wasn’t prepared to strictly conform to their narrow views. When I returned to Labour 15 years later, I found most of them had either moved on of their own volition or had been ‘encouraged’ to move on. The current L.P. is now a much more tolerant and broad-based party with a pleasingly large number of ethnic minorities actively involved. I’m proud to be a member of the [new] Labour Party.

      • North 7.3.2
        2 March 2016 at 8:33 pm

        A Sword’ masterfully wielded ! Provoking The Lost Sheep to prattle on about how she/he was a liar/wanker then/now……a la Mad Dog Prebble, The Norton-ish Bassett, the suffocating up his own arse Moore.

        Listen up Lost Sheep……if you wanna come home ya better show some respect……mouthing your own dick ain’t respect !

      • Rosie 7.3.3
        2 March 2016 at 9:19 pm

        Oh I call folks twats all the time. (not to their face, don’t worry) Should I stop?

  8. Sabine 8
    2 March 2016 at 11:32 am

    might be some truth in there
    the article is about australia, but could very well be nz or many other places in the anglo saxon world.

    https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2016/march/1456750800/richard-cooke/boomer-supremacy

    “Quote: “Somehow young workers need to be both agile and traditional, team players and self-motivating, in search of a good job and willing to work a job that isn’t paid at all. To be grateful, and, most importantly, to wait their turn.”
    “they are synergistic attacks on millennials, Gen Y and Gen X. They’re almost elegant in their efficiency: their motivator is youth’s use of public space, already diminished as the public square makes the declension to the shopping mall. They increase the price of already valuable properties further, and accelerate gentrification.
    They also act as part of a wider attack on wages and conditions in hospitality, perhaps the single most critical source of well-paid employment for the young. They then deny those same workers the chance of a civic social life after they’ve finished their shifts, or even the chance to get something to eat.” Quote end.

    Quote: “”The whole stretch from Darlinghurst to Surry Hills seemed to be empty, the greasy spoons shut, a couple of bars of last resort unpatronised apart from their gaming rooms. These are exempt from the lockout – they can remain open as long as patrons only gamble and don’t drink. I walked all the way to the casino, which is exempt from everything – early closing and plastic glasses and no entries and all the other shackles of the legislation – even though it’s one of the most violent venues in the state. If opponents want to have the lockout revoked, the surest method is not to campaign against the laws but to insist they cover the casino. But even The Star’s bars were almost deserted. The city couldn’t have been emptier if it were under curfew. Quote End.

  9. Ovid 9
    2 March 2016 at 12:55 pm

    China just laid off 1.8 million people. If commodity prices weren’t enough of a sign, the growth in China’s economy is pretty much at an end.

  10. Morrissey 10
    2 March 2016 at 4:45 pm

    Send him to the Hague! Tony Benn on Blair’s ‘war crimes’

    Long after his war-mongering, opportunist son has been consigned to a distasteful memory, Tony Benn will still be honoured for his courage and his integrity…

  11. Mike C 11
    2 March 2016 at 4:55 pm

    @Prentice

    You apparently have a lot of expertise in technical stuff to do with the Internet.

    Are you able to tell me how easy it would be to manipulate up votes and down votes in Georges Word Press YourNZ Blog?

    Somebody did it a few weeks ago … and I would like to know if that sort of viral technology can continue to be utilized within the blog once it has been uploaded on there?

    Many thanks for your time.

  12. Morrissey 12
    2 March 2016 at 5:16 pm

    Donald Trump actually seems decent in comparison to Nevil “Breivik” Gibson, Jordan Williams, Barry Corbett, Michael Bassett, Neil Miller, John Bishop, David Farrar, Stephen Franks, Denise L’Estrange-Corbet, Jacqueline Rowarth, Tau Henare, ad nauseam…..
    The Panel, RNZ National, Wednesday 2 March 2016
    Jim Mora, Jeremy Hansen, Ellen Reid, Zara Potts

    About 4:25 p.m., following a discussion about the Super Tuesday voting with Professor Steve Hoadley from Auckland University, host Jim Mora read out a listener’s response….

    JIM MORA: “Is it possible,” asks Neil, “to have someone on your program who SUPPORTS Donald Trump?”

    JEREMY HANSEN: Ha ha ha ha!

    ELLEN REID: [in a mock peremptory tone] No it’s not possible, Neil. Go away.

    JIM MORA: [nervously] Ha ha ha. We do not instruct any of our guests what to say about Donald Trump, but I don’t think we have had anyone on who would admit to supporting him.

    From that little exchange, one might infer that, morally, the guests on this program were of a higher than average calibre. Sadly, however, that doesn’t survive any serious scrutiny. Long-time sufferers of The Panel may not have actually heard any of the guests endorse Donald Trump, but plenty of them have made obnoxious and vicious statements live on air, without the giggling, sighing host uttering a word of demur….

    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-23082014/#comment-872149

  13. Smilin 13
    2 March 2016 at 7:25 pm

    I wonder who is paying for all the Key flag badges its supporters are wearing in parliament and actually should they be allowed in the house?

  14. North 14
    2 March 2016 at 7:52 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11596250

    Oh Audrey…….you crone and baggage. It was never a simple fucking vote. It was always the man-child pulling his pud’. And you and ilk waiting waiting waiting with gobs expectantly wide open.

    You’re a disgraceful suck-arse. Can’t help it. So fuck off with your haughty shit. No one owes any explanations to you as an archetype of everything that’s pathetic about the New Zealand MSM.

    You do realise that you and ilk are laughed at in places where quality is thick on the ground. Khandallah Man you ! Fuck you’re barely literate.

    • vto 14.1
      2 March 2016 at 8:08 pm

      Is Audrey Young a member of the National Party or something?

      The lack of objectivity is off the planet.

    • Expat 14.2
      2 March 2016 at 8:36 pm

      Yeah, but doesn’t Murdoch own a large piece of the Herald, any paper owned by him is not worth the paper it’s printed on, it costs News Corp (Sydney morning Telegraph)
      $30M a year to spread his bull shit.