Open mike 03/02/2013

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 3rd, 2013 - 144 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…

144 comments on “Open mike 03/02/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. kiwi_prometheus 1
    3 February 2013 at 7:59 am

    NZ power prices have increased at twice the rate of every other developed country the last 30 years:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10863135

    “…Energy Minister Simon Bridges ducked the issue yesterday while spokesmen for Mighty River Power and Genesis Energy declined to comment…”

    On the side, why are we pretending we are still a developed country?

    • bad12 1.1
      3 February 2013 at 10:38 am

      Lolz, i think the best descriptive would now be- an ‘un-developing country’, not quite 3rd World but having a successive series of Governments making a valiant effort to get us there…

      • Lanthanide 1.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 3:42 pm

        We’ve been living beyond our means for years and years, as evidenced by the current account deficit.

        • beatie 1.1.1.1
          3 February 2013 at 5:43 pm

          I haven’t been living beyond my means ‘for years and years’. But as a disabled person who is unable to work full-time I’m going to pay for others selfish greed, and be demonised as a bludger.

    • geoff 1.2
      3 February 2013 at 11:02 am

      Thanks, Max Bradford, you utter, utter prick.

      • millsy 1.2.1
        3 February 2013 at 9:19 pm

        The whole industry is fucked up. Trust me. I work in it.

        Almost everything is contracted and subcontracted out. Different companies do different tasks in different areas for different companies. The power meter you have at home is not actually owned by your network company, so that leaves a whole lot of ticket clipping going on.

        It would have been better to bring in private involvement in the electricity industry by simply allowing private companies to build power stations to connect to the national grid, and allowing small generators to sell their surplus power back to the network.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.3
      3 February 2013 at 2:29 pm

      Yeah, that’s what happens when you put in place a fictitious competitive market pushing up costs, over pay the top management and then demand huge profits so that direct taxes can be kept low.

  2. locus 2
    3 February 2013 at 8:09 am

    Meanwhile in Switzerland, US, Germany and UK……

    “Of the top 100 Swiss companies, 49 give shareholders a consulting vote on the pay of executives. A few other countries, including the United States and Germany, have introduced advisory ‘say on pay’ votes in response to the anger over inequality and corporate excess that drove the Occupy Wall Street movement.

    Britain is also planning to implement rules in late 2013 that will give shareholders a binding vote on pay and ‘exit payments’ at least every three years.”

    In Switzerland there is a public referendum in March which is predicted to successfully:

    “force all listed companies to have binding votes on compensation for company managers and directors, and ban golden handshakes and parachutes. It would also ban bonus payments to managers if their companies are taken over, and impose severe penalties – including possible jail sentences and fines – for breaches of these new rules”

  3. chris73 3
    3 February 2013 at 8:23 am

    Random question and I’m not sure anyone will be able to answer it but…is there any particular reason Titewhai Harawira escorts the pm onto grounds at Waitangi? Is it a tribal thing or is it up for vote or how does it work essentially… (sorry the question sounds a bit vague)

      • chris73 3.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 10:40 am

        Ok so shes an attention-seeker but but why is she allowed to by the rest of the tribe? I’m assuming its do with the tribe? I mean there must be any number of respected kuia so why her in particular?

        • QoT 3.1.1.1
          3 February 2013 at 10:49 am

          marty: “It’s about mana”

          c73: “Ok so she’s an attention-seeker”

          ‘Nuff said.

          • chris73 3.1.1.1.1
            3 February 2013 at 11:30 am

            Just from that article:

            Marae trustees were appointing their own “kuia of esteem” to escort Key on to the marae. He said Harawira went “ape shit” when told about the plan and her resistance had made appointing a successor difficult.

            Harawira has no doubt over who would fulfil the job: “There is no confusion. It lowers my mana to even respond to something that isn’t true.” In other words, it’ll be her.

            Harawira’s role as the self-appointed prime ministerial escort at Waitangi has rankled marae elders in the past – in 2009, they attempted to replace her with Nellie Rata, the widow of the late Matiu Rata.

            Taurua said Harawira physically elbowed Rata out of the way as Key arrived.

            “We thought we would give [Nellie] the opportunity of doing that, out of respect for Matiu. But when it came to the day Titewhai objected. When the prime minister came on, Nellie went to greet him and Titewhai kicked her off.”

            Yep no attention seeking there BUT still doesn’t answer my question as to why she does it/allowed to do it etc etc

            • JK 3.1.1.1.1.1
              3 February 2013 at 3:46 pm

              Chris 73 – because they’re all too scared to shut her up – and find it impossible to do so , if they try.

            • marty mars 3.1.1.1.1.2
              3 February 2013 at 10:02 pm

              It does answer your question but you can’t see/get it. Think about this – how did she get the gig in the first place – could you walk on to a marae and do anything like that – no. Why is that c73.

              Anne below – bully? obviously you know little other than what you have been spoon-fed by the media about this mana wahine – that’s your loss.

              JK – scared is not correct – once again it is about mana, which is derived from a number of areas including Gods, ancestors, personal acts and the community a person lives and works in – with mana it is impossible to shut someone up because they are speaking on behalf and with the support of others.

        • Anne 3.1.1.2
          3 February 2013 at 8:47 pm

          Because she’s a bully and they’re scared of her… scared of the trouble she can cause. Don’t blame them. Bullies have that effect on people. However it looks like some of them plan to stand up to her. Could be interesting.

  4. KhandallaViper 4
    3 February 2013 at 8:48 am

    Tomorrow your Labour MP will have the duty to cast a vote on the Confidence Motion at Caucus. It is not a Challenge.
    They can withhold their vote and that will lead to all the Caucus, Members and Unions engaging in a series of debates around the country with Shearer and any other candidates.
    Then we collectively select/endorse the Leader under the 40/40/20 rule.

    There are a number of reasons MPs should withhold their Vote in the Confidence Motion.
    These reasons have been well documented over the past 9 months or so in The Standard.
    They all come down to a few recurring themes, IMO.

    1. Senior MPs being driven by ego rather than members input. Trevor’s stupid failed ruse to get the Speaker role is a recent example.
    2. Form over Substance. The continual efforts to select a “Persona” for Shearer to appeal to various demographics rather than letting real values, passion and personality show through. The recent Brian Edwards story documents this. Shearer may work with Ian Fraser on his delivery style: it is a pity he has not worked with the members and unions on the CONTENT. We will win with intelligent ideas and focused energy.
    3. Separate Planets. The recent Roy Morgan poll showing that we have achieved zilch, zero, SFA, in the polls since the ABCs took over, despite the recent best efforts of Keys band of twits. This shows that the public, represented by our members and unionists, do not relate to the Labour messages.
    4. We need to Be THE Challenger: those 16+ who will vote first time in 2014, what are we doing to make Labour their Party of Choice rather than the Greens or National? The emigrants, the unemployed, the alienated: what are we doing to make Labour their Party of Choice?

    These are my reasons, communicated to my MP, as to why Confidence should be withheld from Shearer on Monday. I want a country wide debate on what Labour should be doing, followed by a 40/40/20 vote.

    • Colonial Viper 4.1
      3 February 2013 at 10:26 am

      Caucus needs to make a choice. A choice to give the members and the affiliates their party back. A choice to re-ignite a fire under the ass of the Labour Party so that it deserves its historic name. A Labour Party dedicated to improving the situation of those most ignored and powerless in our society, and by standing fast against the neo-liberal structures set up by the most powerful and wealthy in our society.

      Received wisdom is that Labour has to pander to the solid income earning, home owning middle class to win, and without a win Labour cannot do all those good things.

      Well consider this: your strategy is failing. Not suddenly, not abruptly, but gradually. Perhaps in ways beneath your immediate notice. But it is failing. A persistent erosion in not just the electoral results that Labour can achieve, but also in its ethos and purpose and drive.

      Any strategy to continue to deliberately drive away the Left Wing of your own party and of your own membership will lead to this ever increasing electoral failure. Electoral “wins” which are nothing more than tepid, compromised pyrrhic victories.

      It’s time to change the game, caucus. Display your judgement for the entire country to see on Monday.

      • Socialist Paddy 4.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 10:34 am

        Aye

        The party has had four years of decline and despite this current government being the biggest load of tosspots in the history of tosspots they are 15% ahead in the polls.

        It is time to try something different. A four week speaking tour of the country would settle for once and for all if Shearer is up to the job.

        Bring it on.

      • Olwyn 4.1.2
        3 February 2013 at 11:16 am

        +1 Colonial Viper. It is one thing to win members of the middle class over to your way of thinking, as the Greens have done, and quite another trade off or dilute Labour’s core values in the hope that the middle class will approve.

        With “appeal to the middle class” generally being code for BAU, this move gives reason to fear that Labour foresees itself implementing a period of austerity, and wants to reassure the middle class that they will be safe. Which of course gives rise to mistrust among people who would normally vote Labour. I do not say that the above is true, but so long as Labour fails to establish trust such fears will persist. A vote on the leadership would go along way toward reversing this mistrust, since it would oblige contenders to show and defend their stance.

    • David H 4.2
      3 February 2013 at 10:49 am

      I have 2 teens that are or will be able to vote in 2014 And I have been trying to get them interested and get out and vote. All I got was why bother, as the OLD guys don’t listen. I am still trying I have pointed out the Greens as being a younger party, but in the end it’s their decision and I don’t hold out much hope. So there’s 2 votes lost there. Nice one Trev.

  5. joe90 5
    3 February 2013 at 9:09 am

    The ocean’s canary?. If so there’s an awful lot more at stake than a paua industry.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8256622/Acidic-oceans-threaten-shellfish-industry

  6. Tiresias 6
    3 February 2013 at 9:54 am

    A look at the way multi-million dollar executives are driving a once-great company into the ground despite the best endeavours of what remains of its workforce:

    http://firedoglake.com/2013/01/31/late-night-unfriendly-skies/

  7. travellerev 7
    3 February 2013 at 10:09 am

    Here is an interesting read for those of you wanting to know more about ow the hell John Key sprung into political existence not so long ago.

    From internationally renowned US journalist Wayne Madsen:

    The United States has successfully installed two America-compliant leaders as the heads of government of Australia and New Zealand, Washington’s two most important Asia-Pacific regional allies. Both leaders, Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard and New Zealand Prime Minister John Key, rose rapidly within their respective parties, a sure sign that they had outside support, likely from the Central Intelligence Agency, which has historically meddled in the domestic affairs of Australia and New Zealand…

    Read more

    • Tiresias 7.1
      3 February 2013 at 10:32 am

      Madsen seems to have made something of a career pandering to the paranoid by picking up and running a little way with some plausible conspiracy theories while wisely avoiding the more lunatic ones – and with a rather blunderbus approach may even sometimes have hit something:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Madsen

      Whether he’s hit something here I’ve no idea but correlation doesn’t always, or even often, mean conspiracy. Personally I can’t see why getting John Key into the Leadership of the National Party was worth any effort given the fact that any of National’s Front Bench would volunteer their services if Obma ran out of loo paper. It would be more intelligent of the CIA to try to make sure Labour became unelectable by, for example, getting Phil Goff or David Shearer into the leadership.

      Oh.

    • Anne 7.2
      3 February 2013 at 10:34 am

      That was an interesting read, but the author is a bit liberal with some of the facts. Take David Lange for example. He wasn’t ousted, he stepped down of his own accord. We didn’t know it at the time, but his health was already starting to fail.

      Edit: “oh” says Tiresias. Quite.

      • chris73 7.2.1
        3 February 2013 at 10:44 am

        Yes but conspiracy theories are almost always interesting, like the nut bars who think 9/11 was an inside job

        • Colonial Viper 7.2.1.1
          3 February 2013 at 10:52 am

          What’s wrong with conspiracy theories? They force lateral thinking and make people look at things from different perspectives. Life is full of conspiracies and subterfuge.

          • rosy 7.2.1.1.1
            3 February 2013 at 11:01 am

            Yeah, I read the article knowing full well how the CIA have intervened in South/Central American elections. But – I still couldn’t see it, and in the end agree with the Australian commenters on the article, especially this bit:

            And while I agree that the rise of these neo-liberal power clubs are a major danger, eleborate recruitment schemes are not necessary – any of these characters would be happy to screw over the others if it gets them ahead – any of them will happily grab onto whatever scheme being sold which looks like giving them the greatest advantage.

            Tiresias: +1

          • chris73 7.2.1.1.2
            3 February 2013 at 11:37 am

            Nothing wrong with them as long as you treat them as entertainment, the problem begins when people start to add 2 + 2 and come up with 5 (this is a problem that crosses political boundaries)

            • muzza 7.2.1.1.2.1
              3 February 2013 at 11:53 am

              Notice how any of the established systems required to support the well being of NZ, and its people are almost exclusively broken, try naming one that’s not, or thats currently being dismantled because its not!

              These is the conspiracies people claim don’t exist!

              The *nutbars* are those who accept *theories* which the corporate controlled, military/intelligence backed propganda media outlets, and their political/financial etc, talking head puppets have been rolling out, for so long, people can’t decifer even the most blatant of lies!

              • McFlock …
                3 February 2013 at 2:51 pm

                Yes.

                TV3 gets daily instructions from the CIA on how to report about child poverty. /sarc

                • CV - Real Labour …
                  3 February 2013 at 3:11 pm

                  A flippant comment which masks the underlying reality of how corporate boards (although not usually the CIA haha) set editorial lines for media all over the world.

                  • Pascal's bookie …
                    3 February 2013 at 6:57 pm

                    Lol.

                    The hilarious thing about this discussion is that the guy Eve cites spent waaaay more years working with and in US intel services than he has as a journalist.

                    Now, maybe after all those years he just decided, out of the blue, that he was going to start exposing the REAL TRUTH. But decided to do so after he no longer had access to anything that could verify what he was saying.

                    Or maybe he got the bums rush and is using his former job as credibility for rubes who don’t think too straight. say shit, get paid.

                    Or maybe he pushes shit to distract ya’ll. Say shit, h=get ya talking about rubbish to discredit ya’ll.

                    Can’t be known; he’s got fuck all docs, (which he could have had if he was legit about exposing what goes on).

                    So ignore the prick. Discount to zero.

                    • CV - Real Labour …
                      3 February 2013 at 10:08 pm

                      Now, maybe after all those years he just decided, out of the blue, that he was going to start exposing the REAL TRUTH. But decided to do so after he no longer had access to anything that could verify what he was saying.

                      Think about the real world for a second, a world of consequences. And then you’ll be less flippant in how you might choose to act during the reign of a US administration who has prosecuted more whistleblowers than every other President in history put together.

                      Also, human beings rarely do anything “out of the blue”, as you well know.

                    • McFlock …
                      3 February 2013 at 11:54 pm

                      Think about the real world for a second, a world of consequences. And then you’ll be less flippant in how you might choose to act during the reign of a US administration who has prosecuted more whistleblowers than every other President in history put together.

                      Fair enough.

                      But that of course does mean that his word is still worthless. Or is his lack of evidence somehow evidence of his truth?

                  • McFlock …
                    3 February 2013 at 11:41 pm

                    But corporate interference in NZ editorial policies doesn’t actually go so far as “military/intelligence backed”. That was the line that was drawn by M.

          • McFlock 7.2.1.1.3
            3 February 2013 at 2:47 pm

            what’s wrong is that the “lateral thinking” mutates into “all possibilities are equally likely”. So you have decorators unknowingly spraying the inside of the Twin Towers with nano-thermite (while demo teams secretly work nights to install undetectable charges) for months before aircraft drones fly into the buildings and four planeloads of passengers all disappear into secret military airfields, and the entire event is orchestrated by a shadow government that will will frame Afghanistan-based Saudis for the job so it has an excuse to invade Iraq.

            And that’s regarded as being equally as plausible as 19 guys with boxcutters going all post-modern with the terrorism gameplan.

            • CV - Real Labour 7.2.1.1.3.1
              3 February 2013 at 3:37 pm

              And that’s regarded as being equally as plausible as 19 guys with boxcutters going all post-modern with the terrorism gameplan.

              btw a few of those 19 guys you refer to were found to be fine in their home countries, and complained that they had been made media scapegoats in something that they had nothing to do with.

              • McFlock …
                3 February 2013 at 5:27 pm

                Nope.

              • McFlock …
                3 February 2013 at 5:37 pm

                Or to be more specific, news reports in the immediate aftermath of major events take a while to gel out. Taking them as gospel truth indications of a coverup is unwise.

                • fatty …
                  3 February 2013 at 5:54 pm

                  true, especially with rolling news and the desire to be ‘first to call it’.

                  My problem with 9/11 is that I don’t believe the MSM at the best of times.
                  The MSM’s reporting of 9/11 gave contrasting evidence and way too much questionable information…but my real problem with believing the MSM’s version of 9/11 is that the event has been used as justification for 2 wars, so that oil can be secured.
                  I don’t flatly believe what we have been told and I’m amused when people say they are. Don’t ask me what happened in the months leading up to 9/11…but I can give you a run down of what happened after 9/11 – that’s why I’ll never believe CNN’s story, its just too convenient.

                  • McFlock …
                    3 February 2013 at 9:17 pm

                    As to conflicting reports, I’d be suspicious is after a major event like that the media all delivered from the same song sheet.

                    And the MSM (except fox) questioned the connection between Iraq and 911. But then the US cooked the books on WMD for that.

                    Do I believe I know everything about 911? Nope.
                    Is the hijacking explanation by far the most likely in my opinion? Yep.
                    Do I think that, because the MSM are shite, everything they say is necessarily false? Nope.

                    • fatty …
                      4 February 2013 at 7:51 am

                      Do I believe I know everything about 911? Nope.
                      Is the hijacking explanation by far the most likely in my opinion? Yep.
                      Do I think that, because the MSM are shite, everything they say is necessarily false? Nope.

                      I agree with all that.
                      I’m just too jaded from misinformation to believe in much these days

                • CV - Real Labour …
                  3 February 2013 at 7:59 pm

                  I didn’t say anything about a coverup McFlock. Just that a number of the so-called hijackers were found alive after the fact, far away and having had nothing to do with the hijackings.

                  • Pascal's bookie …
                    3 February 2013 at 9:01 pm

                    Do go on.

                    Every time this comes up it goes quiet after a short back and forth.

                    1) Are you talking about the 19 final names, or are you talking about initial reports from the first 1-2 days that had some spelling errors and such like?

                    2) Are any of the ‘still alive’ one of the 15 Saudi citizens who the Saudi government finally acknowledged were their citizens? They initially denied Saudis would be involved, but after checking had to admit that the names the FBI had were Saudis, were missing, and presumed dead.

                    3) Are any of the ‘still alive’ the same guys on the ’19 matyrs’ propaganda videos AQ released?

                    • CV - Real Labour …
                      3 February 2013 at 10:08 pm

                      Nah.

                    • marty mars …
                      3 February 2013 at 10:10 pm

                      + 1 Pb. This one pisses me off too. Yes I saw the graphic showing all the hijackers were in Cairo or whatever but I’ve never seen any of them show their face in public – why is that?

                      If evidence of deliberate misinformation is needed this is a smoking gun imo

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      4 February 2013 at 5:18 am

                      “it goes quiet “

                    • muzza …
                      4 February 2013 at 8:49 am

                      Too big for people to comprehend, understandably, with the the consequence of what it would mean to their belief system (not to mention their world view), should they accept that it was the biggest false flag in history. The false flag continues even now, having spread into North Africa, and it will continue, we are living with the outcomes from 911, and will continue to do so, quite likely as long as we all live!

                      Arguing over the details, of which there is much confusion, changes nothing. The guys in the caves, DID NOT do it!

                      By their actions, you shall know them!

                      [OTH below is correct – muzza is currently on a ban – moderators please take note. But someone cleared this comment, so I’ll leave it up. r0b]

                    • One Tāne Huna …
                      4 February 2013 at 9:00 am

                      🙄

                      I thought we were going to be spared this clown’s drivel for a couple of weeks

    • Draco T Bastard 7.3
      3 February 2013 at 3:59 pm

      To be honest, I’ve always considered it obvious that John Key was a US plant. He’s not there for NZ but for the ruling clique in the US.

      • Olwyn 7.3.1
        3 February 2013 at 4:12 pm

        A modern-day colonial governor perhaps.

      • higherstandard 7.3.2
        3 February 2013 at 5:56 pm

        To be honest I’ve always found your comments to be fucking drivel.

        • bad12 7.3.2.1
          3 February 2013 at 6:02 pm

          To be honest no one round here really cares what ‘Wing-nuts’ like you think and you should F off back to the ‘Sewer; from whence you crawled out of…

          • higherstandard 7.3.2.1.1
            3 February 2013 at 7:47 pm

            To be honest I’ve always found your comments to be fucking drivel also.

            • bad12 7.3.2.1.1.1
              3 February 2013 at 11:53 pm

              To be honest, which is why you should take the advice proffered and stick to the Blubber-boy sewer where you can all sit in the magic circle sexually self-fulfilling, you wont have to read em then see…

    • rosy 8.1
      3 February 2013 at 11:27 am

      Definitely a hmm moment. Penny should get Frank to write all her releases 😉 It’s worth reading the submission that he’s referenced as well.

    • Rogue Trooper 8.2
      3 February 2013 at 3:27 pm

      Legs, and she knows how to use ’em

  9. PlanetOrphan 9
    3 February 2013 at 10:32 am

    So this is my last Comment on the Standard, it’s been fun.
    To Carol, James, Rob and Irish and all the rest, I say GoodBye.

    LPRent in his / her / Jan’s wisdome have blocked the Mac address of my machine without comment or warning.

    Spineless.

    And as I always say to the spineless, Your Loss M8!

    CYA’S 👿

    • Te Reo Putake 9.1
      3 February 2013 at 10:43 am

      Er, are you sure it isn’t just a glitch?

      • Anne 9.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 11:03 am

        I can’t see lPrent blocking an address without first telling you and the reason why. He’s a ‘he’ btw.

        I think you will find it’s a glitch….

        • PlanetOrphan 9.1.1.1
          7 February 2013 at 2:22 pm

          Which one Lyn or Lynn ? , I Know I Know no more comments …..

          Or maybe the Fwits that asked me what name they should use for this bloggggg 8years ago ?

          Ya should just have called it Bel-Tarc again M8!

          😈

      • bad12 9.1.2
        3 February 2013 at 11:27 am

        Possibly the same one i have been experiencing, when i post a comment the site is kicking off my computer and i get a ‘server error 500 contact LPrent at such and such email’,

        I have to shut down and re-boot to come back onto the Standard, the posted comment still appears on the page tho,

        So, nothing but a bit of an annoyance and hardly meriting the above toy toss…

        • PlanetOrphan 9.1.2.1
          7 February 2013 at 2:25 pm

          The 500 error means someones trying to stack smash ya machine

          One of Jans (My Maggot Foster Brother) favourites from what others have been saying ….. how do I know ?

          Coz I told him how 8 years ago M8!

      • PlanetOrphan 9.1.3
        7 February 2013 at 2:23 pm

        Yup, Mac address blocked , How did I leave this comment ? … different MAC address.

    • bad12 9.2
      3 February 2013 at 10:47 am

      So, if your blocked from commenting can i ask how you managed to put up this comment, sounds a bit bovine defecation to me and calling those who built the platform upon which you comment names is in my opinion an open invitation to be given a spanking…

    • Lanthanide 9.3
      3 February 2013 at 3:48 pm

      Surely you mean IP address, not MAC address?

  10. VivaciousViper 10
    3 February 2013 at 10:32 am

    Today many poor souls are facing the dire need to apply for a benefit for various reasons
    mainly for job losses and illness.
    National and Labour over the years have stripped away the foundations of what was
    once a decent,respectable system for the citizens of NZ.
    Benefit levels are now below poverty levels approx $10.000 – $14,000 per year, the
    bluster by politicians that the ‘benes’ are just lazy bludgers’ who don’t want to work
    is continuing to look pathetic, when jobs are lost left,right and centre,their own
    incompetence has created the problem,they have failed and that is a derelict of duty to
    all NZ’ers.
    Governments on both sides have given scant regard for the future in creating steady,
    long term,well paid jobs, instead they have wrapped their arms around overseas countries
    and encouraged their communites to come and work in NZ.
    National and Labour have also been successful in creating a division between NZ’s
    citizens by their petty rhetoric against those recieving benefits.
    All this while politicians happily take the above dollar amounts and more for a taxpayer
    paid ‘accommodation allowance’ while beneficiaries have that amount to live on
    365days a year, where is the justice ?
    There needs to be a Universal Benefit, (that has been touted by some), the UB needs to be
    set in stone to stop politicians from using their favourite kicking ball to score political points.

    • kiwi_prometheus 10.1
      3 February 2013 at 11:45 am

      ” instead they have wrapped their arms around overseas countries
      and encouraged their communites to come and work in NZ.”

      Whenever I point out the crazy open flood gates immigration policy for 3rd worlders, I get accused of racism by the pro multiculturalism crowd.

      • millsy 10.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 9:11 pm

        Close the immigration floodgates, youth unemployment will drop overnight.

      • fatty 10.1.2
        4 February 2013 at 9:45 am

        Whenever I point out the crazy open flood gates immigration policy for 3rd worlders, I get accused of racism

        Can you explain this so called open flood gates immigration policy for 3rd worlders…perhaps some stats…cheers

  11. Herodotus 11
    3 February 2013 at 10:36 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10863086
    Finally after what should have been done by labour policy strategist regarding the price to construct a “300k” house we are getting to what the cost will be. Why was this not done I house befor ethe policy was announced ? Then we could have concertrated the discussion on the merits of the policy, and how it could be improved. IMO building HNZ stock and then maintaining an equalibium on our state balance sheet, ie increase borrowing for an offsetting asset, but common sense and KISS has escaped from the labour caucus and strategists.

    • bad12 11.1
      3 February 2013 at 11:13 am

      Yes and at 4 bedrooms Habitat are talking 200 square meters when Labour are talking about building mostly 2 bedroom 100 square meter homes,

      Given that Habitat build them one at a time and i assume their estimated labour costs are for certified builders doing all the work there’s a mile of savings to be gained from mass production where the building crew could be as large as 3 certified builders supervising 3 apprentices and 7 labourers working on 10 townhouse type constructions at a time,

      Given that Fletcher Building have already said that this is possible a major contractor could be expected to have 50 odd crews on the ground building in a year the land issue is a nonsense as the Government already has hundreds of hectares of land locked up in the HousingNZ estate which can be re-designed and rebuilt upon without the likes of the recent fuss occurring around the eviction of tenants in Auckland’s west…

      • Herodotus 11.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 1:49 pm

        Be careful of large organisations willyness !!
        With some experience on tenders etc that the base cost may comply but with variations to specific site conditions, delays from councils, engineers etccost esculations and I imagine that there will be CPI adjustments based on the busing sector ( which have been greater than inflation) that what was once &300k will creep upwards.
        And as response to an earlier post on the subject re FBP ability to do this and still make a good profit, then why is in not already being done as there is a customer base there to be satisfied.
        Also H for H do it as a social service CPUs will expect a return from their perspective they are not on it for charity

        • bad12 11.1.1.1
          3 February 2013 at 5:16 pm

          100,000 houses??? Fletcher Building don’t have access to any land in Auckland that i know of where more than a few properties can be built at a time,

          Housing is a tiny part of Fletcher Building the bloke from Fletcher Building i seen on the TV1 news the other night was saying that they are currently building about 300,

          Most of the house building in Auckland at the moment is at the behest of ‘Developers’ who make the maximum amount of profit possible from the parcels of land they have got by building 200 square meter edifices,

          That’s a situation that has been going on for quite some time, as the middle class family has shrunk over the years from Ma, Pa and 4 kids down to an average 1.2 kids the size of the build of housing, especially in Auckland, has risen from 100 to 200 square meters, simply a waste of resources,

          I only have to look across the valley from where i live to understand how costs can be designed out of housing, there’s a row of 10 townhouses across there 3 stories with lined garages as the ground floor, lose the garage out of the build and that’s probably 20% of the cost gone already…

  12. millsy 12
    3 February 2013 at 11:04 am

    Rodney Hide still stuck in 1988

    “Our education model is a top-down, Wellington-knows-best system. There is no school autonomy and parents have no say over the schooling of their own children. It’s run by Wellington dictate”

    I am sure that, as associate education minister, Hide would have come across the Picot report at some point in time, as well as had a good grounding in the Education Act 1989.

  13. Tony P 13
    3 February 2013 at 11:06 am

    So Wynton Rufer wants a charter school now.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/8256624/Rufer-pushes-for-football-playing-charter-school
    And just for good measure indulges in a spot of misguided union bashing.

    • Te Reo Putake 13.1
      3 February 2013 at 11:13 am

      He’s a bit of a sad case nowadays. It’s been over a decade since he was last relevant in NZ footy and he burnt all his bridges with NZ Football at the time. His inability to compromise and his failure to listen damned him to crank status. So perfect for running a charter school then!

      • chris73 13.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 11:40 am

        His inability to compromise and his failure to listen is also probably what took him to the top

        • fatty 13.1.1.1
          3 February 2013 at 12:01 pm

          Yes, very much so. Those traits are great for sport, but shit when examining the pro’s and con’s of having the State or corporations regulate a human right.

          Rufer’s backing of corporate schooling should be seen as another reason to forget about letting businesses control the minds of school children. Not that I think Rufer is nasty…actually the opposite. I was lucky enough to meet Rufer when I was young. He is a very nice person from what I remember. Sent family members football memorabilia after chatting with us for 5 mins, because that family member was involved in community work.
          Rufer has a heart of gold from what I’ve seen…he burnt his bridges in the NZFA…but if I was him I would have blown up that bridge and walked away years before. The NZFA makes the Labour Party look competent.

          It would be a shame if we just wrote this off as an idiot wanting to promote christian education. Instead, the left should examine why some like Rufer (who has unique skills and contacts and wants to work with kids) would see corporate schooling as a better vehicle for his community work, compared to State schooling.

    • joe90 13.2
      3 February 2013 at 12:02 pm

      Mr Dawkins, take it away….

    • millsy 13.3
      3 February 2013 at 3:22 pm

      Nothing to stop him from starting his own ‘soccer school’ under the Education Act 1989.

      I am sure he would have a few contacts in the Bundesliga in Germany who would stump up with the funding.

    • North 13.4
      3 February 2013 at 10:04 pm

      Christian !

  14. Tim 14
    3 February 2013 at 2:43 pm

    As I walked down Willis Street today, there was a NEW face. Sat near ‘New World’ – as in the NEW WORLD, he had a sign that read – “No Income, No Money, Can you Help?”.
    … yet another! I’m a bad judge of age – but the guy was probably a 20-something. I’m picking he didn’t comply with a Pulla Bent way of the world.

    I was secretly hoping he was a con-artist, fleecing the gorgeous people and tourists trotting that neck of the woods but a fear not.

    I’ll chuck him a blanket next time I pass and chastise him with a “we don’t know how lucky we are”

    • Tim 14.1
      3 February 2013 at 2:50 pm

      Oh yea, and when I do (chasitise him), I’ll tell him the Uncle Trev from Wainui, and Aunty Fag Hag from Hoitoittoi ‘know hoe ya feel brutha’ (Like Fuck!)
      Christ this Labour Party has become SERIOUSLY fucked hasn’t it? SERIOUSLY!

      • bad12 14.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 5:39 pm

        Lolz a 50/50 that your beggar was out at the ‘7’s Party’ last night and spent the rent, although on the other side of that 50/50 is the horror story of the Minister from removing people from their entitlements,

        A more clever means of cutting the cost to Government of benefits than the Neanderthalic clubs used in 1991 by Richardson and Shitly tho the ‘reasoning’ and the intent are the same,

        Having blown a hole in the Governments revenue of a billion dollars with it’s tax switch and being unable to fill it by imposing additional taxes on various products the Slippery lead National Government has come full circle and come up with a plan to spend less upon benefits in an effort (vain) to gather this lost billion dollars,

        National have a figure in mind of 40,000 less beneficiaries so as to balance the Governments books by 2014 and they don’t much care how those beneficiaries are removed from the roll or where they then end up,

        How this tho figures in your attack on Labour i am at a loss to see, from where i sit the Labour Opposition looks just like the same one that Helen Clark lead and the one prior to that lead by David Lange…

        • Tim 14.1.1.1
          3 February 2013 at 7:08 pm

          it was actually fairly obvious it wasn’t a night after the 7’s – much more likely that he was a former beneficiary (probably sickness) – definately ill in some way. Which is partly why the disillusionment with current Labour. I don’t recall Helen’s ‘team’ ever being so base as to see beneficiaries as fair game, as Shearer has been. The worst I’d accuse Helen of is deciding to have a lay down in her third term and not getting rid of some of the dead wood. Other than that, I’d have to class her as one of NZ’s better PMs

          • bad12 14.1.1.1.1
            3 February 2013 at 11:44 pm

            Comprehension fail there my friend, ”as you walked down Willis street today” unquote, so like i said your beggar on a 50/50 chance might have been out celebrating at the 7’s party and spent the rent,

            Then you do a Dave Shearer and without having ‘found out’ you attach to the bloke a couple of labels, former beneficiary and definitely ill in some way,

            Helen Clark champion of the beneficiary you reckon???, that’s pretty naive of you is what i think,

            Suppose you don’t see Helen saying that Working for Families was for people who had jobs and beneficiaries not being included would encourage them to get a job as an attack on those beneficiaries and their children???,

            Depends a lot i suppose where you sit on the political and income spectrum, i expected great things from Clark and the only thing She actually delivered through interest free student loans and working for families was welfare served up to the middle class who until Labour run out of gimmies for that middle class and Slippery upped the ante with tax cuts to be followed by asset sales to spend the loot on can be said at best to have given Labour 3 election wins and if there was any socialism involved in those 3 terms it was the socialism of,for,and by the middle class,

            It’s why i am slightly amused and even a little bemused by the current ructions over the Labour leadership, to me Labour is a Party full of middle class people with a Parliamentary team of middle class MPs and although i might be wrong of all those MP’s i cannot personally identify one that has either really had to struggle one iota in life nor one that has ever raised a sweat to raise the monies needed to put a roof over their head or food on the table…

            • Tim 14.1.1.1.1.1
              4 February 2013 at 1:20 am

              I don’t think I suggested Helen was a ‘champion of the beneficiary’ – simply that I don’t recall her ever as overtly pandering to the anti-beneficiary brigade as Shearer has with his roof painter episode.
              And secondly my impressions of the guy came from speaking to him. As it transpires since the initial comment, he is someone a relative has been involved with in the past.

              We’re probably more in agreement than not. My point is that its shameful to be seeing more and more people on the street with bugger all options other than to beg, or even go on the game out of necessity.

      • The Fan Club 14.1.2
        3 February 2013 at 9:24 pm

        Yo is anyone going to pick up on the blatant homophobia here? Cause it’s super not cool.

        • Tim 14.1.2.1
          4 February 2013 at 1:03 am

          Fair cop – now I think about it, there’s no reason why LGBT people can’t be homophobic. The spectrum is certainly capable of mysogeny.

  15. VivaciousViper 15
    3 February 2013 at 3:59 pm

    There is a story on Yahoo about Monday’s vote for leadership,it also mentions Cunliffe’s
    ‘failed’ coup and the 100% expected endorsement of Shearer, both i find rather annoying,
    unless Shearer has demanded total obediance of his caucus and they wimper in agreement,
    ‘yes master’ can be heard somewhere behind the cone of silence, then this nonsense has
    to stop,each and every mp now has the Labour Party’s future in their hands, they
    either join in the wide opinon that Shearer doesn’t cut it and vote accordingly/ abstain, or they
    may face a harsh backlash in the 2014 election and the Greens pick up the slack.
    Nothing Shearer say’s now can be taken seriously because he is doing serious damage
    to the Labour Party brand.
    Blaming commenters and posters shows a weakness to accept the undeniable truth that
    is so obvious to so many.
    Sorry can’t link to Yahoo.

    • Tiresias 15.1
      3 February 2013 at 6:55 pm

      I would be disappointed if there is a 100% endorsement of Shearer (though I expect to be disappointed.) That every single member of the Labour caucus really thinks like Shearer and believes Shearer to be the best of them to lead the party beggars belief, and a 100% endorsement would in fact indicate to me that some of the caucus are being devious and dishonest.

      What I really want is an ‘honest’ open vote with the understanding – which lies at the very core of the democratic process – that the winner of the vote by a majority gains the right to represent all SUBJECT TO a responsibility to listen to and give serious consideration to the views of the minority.

      Too much to ask from the professional politicians though – except maybe the Greens, who I still regard as reluctant politicians rather than professional ones.

      • CV - Real Labour 15.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 7:22 pm

        A vote tomorrow for the membership and affiliates to have a say is the only way to energise and unite Labour going into 2014. It’s a referendum on how inclusive caucus is going to be with regards to the rest of the party. Will us ordinary Joes be listened to? Who knows?

      • Anne 15.1.2
        3 February 2013 at 8:00 pm

        …a 100% endorsement would in fact indicate to me that some of the caucus are being devious and dishonest.

        .
        Not devious and dishonest Tiresias. There will be quite a few Labour MPs who are not happy with things as they stand, but they are unlikely to stick their heads above the parapet at this stage. All that will happen is their heads will be lopped off with relish by the ABC club, and that’s no help to any of us. They are wiser to wait until the climate within Caucus has changed and who knows when that will happen. I hate to say it, but it may not be until after the next election.

        Edit: it would be wonderful to discover that Shearer and co. have already had a change of view, but I’m not holding my breath.

        • Tiresias 15.1.2.1
          3 February 2013 at 9:57 pm

          “Not devious and dishonest Tiresias. There will be quite a few Labour MPs who are not happy with things as they stand, but they are unlikely to stick their heads above the parapet at this stage.” – Anne

          And that makes them not devious and dishonest how?

          Oh, I know dissention in the ranks will be leapt on by the media and National. Those of whom we speak will console themselves and hide behind the excuse that they are sacrificing their integrity for the greater good – telling themselves that fooling the public is necessary to preserve a fiction of party unity.

          The problem is that we, some of us, know they are ‘sacrificing’ their integrity, and in my book integrity is like virginity – very hard to get back once it’s gone. It will be obvious to those who follow these things that an attempt was made to fool them and as the saying goes, ‘fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” Like virginity, trust is very hard to get back.

          The implication of a unanimous vote no-one believes in says volumes to me about the state of the Labour Party, and it ain’t pretty.

      • The Fan Club 15.1.3
        3 February 2013 at 10:00 pm

        A vote of confidence isn’t a vote to say Shearer’s the best person possible. The question is: shall we have a leadership spill now? And it’s perfectly possible to think Shearer’s a bit rubbish but not want a spill right now.

        Also of course Shearer has the numbers (because duh the idea of having a leadership spill now is cray-cray) and there’s no point burning yourself when there’s no realistic prospect of winning. So Shearer’s going to be leader until the next election, and if we win then for a fair bit after.

        If we lose he’ll resign and we’ll have a rather grim contest as all the contenders run around pandering to the activist left of the party while carefully planning how to swing as far right-ward as possible once in Leader’s office in order to take an idealised middle-NZ’s votes. So yeah. Let’s not do that guys.

        [Also yay for weird slut-shaming metaphors about integrity. WTF guys wtf.]

        • The Al1en 15.1.3.1
          3 February 2013 at 10:05 pm

          “because duh the idea of having a leadership spill now is cray-cray”

          Prove it now, or wait ’til mumble f*ck loses in 2014 and do it then.
          Your call.

          • The Fan Club 15.1.3.1.1
            3 February 2013 at 10:18 pm

            Well actually my side kinda has already won this argument. That’s why y’all are wandering around in the wilderness along with various people who think it’s hilarious to insult Annette King for talking to gay men, that the Truthers have a point, and, most bizarrely, that Julia Gillard’s a CIA operative. That’s why Shearer’s going to be unanimously endorsed tomorrow, and lead Labour into the next election. (We won, you lost, let’s do lunch, as Cullen so nicely put it.)

            I suspect that if Shearer loses in ’14, we’ll be back here again (by the way will y’all promise not to try and roll Shearer in ’15 if he wins? You really should, just to even it up) and we’ll win that fight too, ’cause y’all appear to organisationally incompetent. Depressingly, you’re also sucking up all the oxygen on the left of the party but that doesn’t bother you because as a collection of ultra-leftist infantilists you don’t actually see beyond this week’s current outrage.

            • The Al1en 15.1.3.1.1.1
              4 February 2013 at 6:14 am

              To be fair, you don’t win when you’re still stuck in second place, loser.

            • The Al1en 15.1.3.1.1.2
              4 February 2013 at 7:19 am

              There seems to be some thought that you are an mp, but as speculation about users ids is not permitted here, I’m lucky in always taking as I find, so you could quite easily be a genuine no direction caucus fan club devotee, or just a sharp one taking the piss. Makes no odds to me.

              Firstly, it’s a bit unfair to link my comment to homophobic comments and conspiracy theorists. I understand politics and linking the thing you attack with known toxicity is a often used ploy, but being so see through, predictable and in this case quite poorly executed, I’m going to have to question your authority to call infantile.

              While were at “infantilists” what’s this about sucking all the oxygen. I don’t need you to be quiet to make my points of view known, how odd you feel you can’t be heard if others are talking. If you have something you want to share in the way of policy, ideals comradeship, then you sing your heart out, like I do. You’ll find that rather from being a rag tag outfit of self interested, self absorbed extremists and wannabe radicals, most here at the standard are genuinely inclusive and great exponents of core Labour/Left wing principles.

              It’s not our fault, whoever’s fan you really are, that the 2008-2013 caucus is an ineffective pile of shit.
              But go on, come again. Tell me why I should shut up and let them suck unopposed?

              Loser.

              • Pascal's bookie …
                4 February 2013 at 8:02 am

                No chance it’s an mp.

                I’d say, without giving a shit about identity:

                Polsci student, young labour, looking for the main chance post graduation; don’t rock the boat; infatuated with teh game; but doesn’t get, yet, that the game is a means to an end, and that ‘how’ you win determines what you can do when you win.

          • David H 15.1.3.1.2
            3 February 2013 at 10:23 pm

            If we have to wait until 2014 then the NACTS will have sold off everything that was not tied down, hidden under ground, or under the sea. ALL with detrimental effects for now, and the next 50 years. And our children, and grand children, will be paying for it in Spades.

        • Elizabeth Bourchier Real Labour 15.1.3.2
          3 February 2013 at 10:29 pm

          The same rationale was used during Phils time. And we all regret following a leader who we knew was going to loose .
          Déjà Vu?
          Now is the correct time to make a fundemental change in the leadership coterie of the party.
          We can not, should not, will not repeat the same mistakes. Loosing in 2014 is not an option.

          The Fan Club: loosing is imprinted in everything you write.

  16. George D 16
    3 February 2013 at 7:10 pm

    Can you (the individual authors of The Standard who contribute to a collective, who are not a borg or machine) sort out your email issues?

    George

  17. North 17
    3 February 2013 at 9:30 pm

    Just watching the thing on Holmes.

    Say what we like about him (and I have many times), what a fuck’n’ old bitch is/was that Thatcher !

    • The Al1en 17.1
      3 February 2013 at 9:38 pm

      State burial will be face down in ditch at a crossroads with a steak through the heart.
      People will line up in their thousands, tap, jazz and ballet shoes at the ready to dance on her grave.
      Mental old hag.

      • North 17.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 10:26 pm

        Mental Old Hag. Love it !

        Never forget when Pinochet got caught in London by a distinguished human rights barrister, forget his name, read his excellent book, who got a High Court order confining the murderous bastard to some estate in Surrey or somewhere.

        There it was on the tele’, all the modern day fascists gathered in support. The Mental Old Hag, craned over, fat arse out, handbag over arm trying to be The Queen, tottering around this huge country estate sitting room, directing which fabulously upholstered couches each of the fascist bastards should sit on. And in their dribbling dotage each of the mongrels was taking her orders.

        Modern day Britain for Christ’s Sake…….

  18. Elizabeth Bourchier Real Labour 18
    3 February 2013 at 10:39 pm

    Why didn’t we call some of our MPs to account for their Electoral Performance, especially in the Wellington Region?

    Annette King in Rongotai got a Labour Party vote in 2005 of 50%, 2008 was 42% and 2011 was 34%. Methinks she is doing as poor a job, just like Hipkins in the nearby Rimutaka: 48%, 41% and 33%.
    The performance of our Party Election Strategist, Lord Trevor of Wainouimata in Hutt South is equally worrying: Party vote in 2005 48%, 2008 43% and in 201- 36%.

    That is why we did not call out poor performance. The Leaders do not feel accountable to the Members, or the Unions.

    They would not get my Confidence Vote at Caucus. If I had one.

    • KhandallaViper 18.1
      3 February 2013 at 10:55 pm

      The same pattern in Wellington Central sadly. Heir apparent, Grant Robertson, led Labour to third place there. In 2005 we had 43%, 35% in 2008 and only 26% in 2011. Sh*t.

      And these are the people from Wellington from whom the hapless member for Mt Albert is getting Election Strategy.

      Get out of the way. You are way past your sell-by date.

      • North 18.1.1
        3 February 2013 at 11:01 pm

        Seems very obvious.

        • CV - Real Labour 18.1.1.1
          3 February 2013 at 11:44 pm

          Consider the impenetrable Labour “stronghold” of Dunedin South.

          In 2005 Benson Pope achieved a party vote of 57.1%.
          In 2008 Clare Curran achieved a party vote of 46.7% (-10.4%)
          In 2011 Clare Curran achieved a party vote of 35.0% (-22.1%)

          That’s an eye watering two-fifths drop in party vote.

          The Fan Club is quite right to ask us to pause and consider what the nation-wide swing over that time was, however.

          I believe that his point is simple: that Labour is being led to irrelevancy on a nation-wide basis, not just electorate by electorate, and that the performance of Labour has been in decline for several years and it still doesn’t know how to change what it is doing.

      • The Fan Club 18.1.2
        3 February 2013 at 11:39 pm

        Hang on. What’s the national swing? What’s the electorate vote? How did other seats perform? How did other prominent MPs supporting Shearer do? Because as far as I can tell you’re cherry picking data in a pretty transparent and at this late date desperate attempt to smear MPs you don’t like for other reasons.

        [If you want accountability for electorate MPs, that’s a role for the LEC & the region. That’s the point of our federated party, where head office doesn’t run everything.

        • KhandallaViper 18.1.2.1
          3 February 2013 at 11:59 pm

          So Trevor’s Strategy role was unnecessary? Wellington was not responsible for their own massive failures?
          Go to bed The Fan Club. You are clutching at straws.

          • The Fan Club 18.1.2.1.1
            4 February 2013 at 12:31 am

            Hey if I was running the ’11 campaign I’d have put Mallard on cycling leave. But I wasn’t. And that has nothing to do with the fucking obvious point, you complete idiot, that Labour got shellacked all over the country, and that individual MPs are quite at the mercy of national swings. The party vote especially follows the national trend.

            Wellington Central was the one seat that the Greens ran a serious electorate campaign in. And it worked, basically.

            • CV - Real Labour 18.1.2.1.1.1
              4 February 2013 at 12:40 am

              Wellington Central was the one seat that the Greens ran a serious electorate campaign in. And it worked, basically.

              fingers crossed they don’t start doing that in too many places then.

            • rosy 18.1.2.1.1.2
              4 February 2013 at 3:25 am

              And with comments like that TFC, you do absolutely nothing to confirm to worried Labour membership that Labour strategists are in touch with what they say, take it seriously and that the Labour hierarchy has a modicum of respect for anyone outside the parliamentary bubble.

              Cheers.

  19. Benghazi 19
    3 February 2013 at 11:47 pm

    TV3 has an article up this evening about the confidence vote. It too suggests a 100% endorsement is likely. In my view the article misses the point that the internal friction within Labour is not a Shearer vs Cunliffe thing. Rather, it is about the wish of the Labour grass roots to have more say in how the Party is run, the widening gap between the Party members and the Caucus old guard, and genuine concern that Shearer will have trouble matching Key in a campaign. Those issues don’t go away just because Cunliffe has made clear he is not challenging. Those issues remain and need to be resolved.