Open mike 03/10/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:45 am, October 3rd, 2014 - 156 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 …

156 comments on “Open mike 03/10/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. music4menz 1
    3 October 2014 at 8:01 am

    First post for me on The Standard, but am surprised that Tim Barnett has been able to censor what is and what isn’t posted on this site. Is this an indication of what we are going to see in the future? Not sure that I am comfortable with such suppression of free speech.

    • Zorr 1.1
      3 October 2014 at 8:34 am

      How is it suppression of free speech?

      He probably asked nicely and lprent responded by respecting the request. Sounds pretty reasonable all round to me.

    • mickysavage 1.2
      3 October 2014 at 8:36 am

      It was a polite request and lprent decided to take it down. There was no censorship involved.

      • Cancerman 1.2.1
        3 October 2014 at 8:40 am

        And everyone complains Slater/Farrer are puppets of the National Party. Just more effective puppets it seems.

        • boldsirbrian 1.2.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 8:52 am

          @ Cancerman (1.2.1)

          The concern with Slater and Farrar was that they were working in a clandestine way, receiving privileged information, probably often illegally, attacking other people and politicians.

          What the Standard has done is in no way comparable. A request was made to remove information. Lprent has clearly (very clearly) detailed both that request, and his acceptance. If others want to be titillated by a regretted action that has been apologised for, then they are free to use Google or Slater and Farrar.

          It’s not really a case of puppets. Those trying to seize the action as yet another example of “Gotcha” politics, are better described as muppets.

          • mickysavage 1.2.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 8:54 am

            Agreed. Strange to equate the unpublishing of a post with the smearing of innocent people using beehive sourced information.

            • Cancerman 1.2.1.1.1.1
              3 October 2014 at 8:58 am

              Well the action quite clearly shows influence by the Labour Party over this blog that can not be denied. So who to say that information isn’t past and attacks aren’t made. We just take your word for it I assume?

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                3 October 2014 at 9:07 am

                His word, and the result of the official investigations that are no doubt warranted and you’ll be presenting evidence to. No? No police complaint? Nothing for the SFO to worry about?

                Careful, comrades, Beverley Wakem’s about to kick the door down.

              • Tom Jackson …
                3 October 2014 at 10:36 am

                If we asked you to stop being an asshole, and you agreed because you thought it was a reasonable request, would that be censorship or influence?

                lprent appears to have decided that Barnett made a reasonable request. His autonomy and the autonomy of this blog is in no way compromised by that.

              • adam …
                4 October 2014 at 12:24 am

                So being civil and responding positively to a request Cancerman now means that the standard is a labour party blog and involved in dirty politics?

                Do you read Cancerman, can you read? I mean what’s my politics – ask any labour person my position?

                Have you read anyone else here and their opinions – Oh lets say Karol or Phillip Ure.

                How about Iprent himself? Labour party hack you think?

                Odd, what an odd comment you have made cancerman – it seem to me to reek of desperation. Of an individual who does not like or struggles with polite or civilised society. Or you’re a person who is feeling a little gun shy about voting for a government actively involved in the perversion of politics, morality and the decent society.

                How can it be that a polite request, made to a reasonably fair minded individual, is somehow turned into a grand conspiracy?

                Is politeness, now nothing more than something else the right can attack the left on?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.1.2
          3 October 2014 at 9:03 am

          Yes, that’s what everyone complains about, isn’t it. No? What’s that you say? In Greymouth?

          Now I remember, it isn’t that the National Party has puppets, it’s the things it uses them for that are currently under investigation by at least three independent agencies including the SIS, Ombudsman and Police.

          On balance, I think putting the post up in the first place was a mistake: it’s easy to get caught up in the moment, do we really want politicians families to be fair game?

          Politics being war by other means I think it’s worth recalling how we treat soldiers who shoot civilians.

          PS: yes, yes, I know, we give them medals and a lecture tour, I was speaking hypothetically.

      • Mike 1.2.2
        3 October 2014 at 6:43 pm

        Polite request…Yeah Right!

    • Oh Ho 1.3
      3 October 2014 at 9:01 am

      You need to remember that Labour was led into the last election by a Statesman. The type of message that was censored is not befitting for a Statesman led party. Please understand that censorship is for your own good

    • One Anonymous Bloke 1.4
      3 October 2014 at 9:25 am

      Music4menz, censorship is when an official agency rules that the publication of certain material is illegal.

      No such edict is in force or even enforceable, Open Mike being what it is. No information is suppressed, being in the public domain elsewhere.

      In any case, speech at The Standard isn’t “free” – it costs money to host the site and we inhabitants are subject to its rules and our modern Robespierre, Lprent.

      • alwyn 1.4.1
        3 October 2014 at 10:25 am

        You do remember what happened to Robespierre don’t you?
        Presided over the Reign of Terror and was then deposed and guillotined.
        Surely there is a better comparison? I see him as Christopher Robin, presiding over the residents of the Hundred Acre Wood.

        • Puckish Rogue 1.4.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 4:06 pm

          I see him more as Kermit the frog presiding over a bunch of …think I’ll leave that bit out, not sure what his sense of humour is like at the moment 🙂

    • Murray Olsen 1.5
      4 October 2014 at 12:05 am

      Where have all the Kactus Kate posts on Whalespew gone? Who censored them and suppressed her free speech?

  2. phillip ure 2
    3 October 2014 at 8:23 am

    “..If You Stop Eating Beef – But Still Eat a Lot of Dairy – You Won’t Help Climate Change..

    ..A new study may have you rethinking your eating habits..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.alternet.org/food/eating-less-meat-more-dairy-climate-change

    • The Lone Haranguer 2.1
      3 October 2014 at 9:55 am

      ..A new study may have you rethinking your eating habits..”

      Or not 🙂

      Phillip, I cant see that happening at my house anytime in the near or even long distant future.

      Im still trying to reconcile the local YMCA gym advertising how bad plastic water bottles are, while they have large vending machines full of the stuff in the front foyer.

      And Im not sure if me driving to the gym each day is kosher either. 🙂

      • phillip ure 2.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 3:52 pm

        @ tlh..

        i crack up at the auto-eroticists who drive their bike-laden s.u.v.’s to ponsonby..

        ..park up..unload their expensive-toys..

        and make their lycra-clad way up and down ‘p’-road…

    • weka 2.2
      3 October 2014 at 9:56 am

      Likewise, eating industrial grains and beans courtesy of Monsanto doesn’t help with AGW either.

      It’s not what you eat, it’s how it’s grown that makes the difference.

      • cricko 2.2.1
        3 October 2014 at 12:02 pm

        Get with the programme weka.

        AGW was dropped ages ago, it’s, “climate change” these days.

        That’s because the globe is not warming and anyone who has heard of stuff
        like, say, the ice ages for e.g. cannot deny that the climate does change.

        People are not sucked into AGW any more.
        Much easier to spook the sheeple with just ‘climate change.’

        Do you recall Miss Clark scoffing accross the parliament at the, “Climate change
        deniers.”

        This is just as effective in shutting down your opponents as labelling them racists or homophobes and so on.

        • lprent 2.2.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 1:01 pm

          You have just reminded me that I need to start writing some more posts on climate change. In particular the probable time line and effects of the rapid melting of the WAIS that the drilling over the last few years revealed.

          Thank you… Your ignorant stupidity was inspiring

          • karol 2.2.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 4:28 pm

            On climate change: I saw this on Al Jazeera this morning. Thousands of walrus’s corwding on to the shore on Alaska’s coast. usually they seek ice covered places to go ashore, but that is becoming harder for them to find.

            The Guardian report on it:

            Pacific walrus that can’t find sea ice for resting in Arctic waters are coming ashore in record numbers on a beach in north-west Alaska.

            An estimated 35,000 walrus were photographed on Saturday about five miles north of Point Lay, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
            […]
            In recent years, sea ice has receded north beyond shallow continental shelf waters and into Arctic Ocean water, where depths exceed two miles and walrus cannot dive to the bottom.

            The World Wildlife Fund said walrus had also been gathering in large groups on the Russian side of the Chukchi Sea.

            “It’s another remarkable sign of the dramatic environmental conditions changing as the result of sea ice loss,” said Margaret Williams, managing director of the group’s Arctic program.

            “The walruses are telling us what the polar bears have told us and what many indigenous people have told us in the high Arctic, and that is that the Arctic environment is changing extremely rapidly and it is time for the rest of the world to take notice and also to take action to address the root causes of climate change.”

          • cricko 2.2.1.1.2
            3 October 2014 at 4:53 pm

            Iprent…,

            I guess from your post above that you dissagree with me about AGW and climate change.

            Thats fine, but why do you need attack me personally ?

            Do you find that tactic lends some weight to your opinion ?

            Use of childish invective like calling me ignorant and stupid reveals more about your character than anything else.

            • McFlock 2.2.1.1.2.1
              3 October 2014 at 4:58 pm

              When someone is insensible to logic, one might as well call them the moron that they are.

              It won’t change their opinions or undeserved sense of mental adequacy, but it can be fun.

            • dv 2.2.1.1.2.2
              3 October 2014 at 5:02 pm

              I thought Lpent was gentle with you crick

              • cricko …
                3 October 2014 at 5:33 pm

                Jeez, looks like I’ve innocently upset a few very thin skins here.

                Why do these types personally attack everyone they dissagree with and
                call them names. (Kind of childish way to discuss an issue isn’t it?)

                Perhaps any one of you could explain the difference between AGW and
                climate change ?

                That is a simple question.

                Now I would not call ‘McFlock’, ‘dv’, or even ‘Iprent’ ignorant or stupid so let
                us see if any one of them could prove it and answer that one simple
                question.

                By the way. I would have no difficulty to explain the difference and will do
                so for you if none of you are capable.

                • dv …
                  3 October 2014 at 5:42 pm

                  ‘Much easier to spook the sheeple with just ‘climate change.’

                  ‘This is just as effective in shutting down your opponents as labelling them racists or homophobes and so on.

                  OH I am sorry those comments were meant as intelligent discussion about a serous issue.

                • McFlock …
                  3 October 2014 at 6:12 pm

                  The fact that you are asking a question to which you claim to already know the answer demonstrates that you are not interested in a genuine discussion.

                  So I could talk about how AGW is a type of CC, but really you don’t give a shit. Because you’re a moron.

                  BTW, I don’t personally attack everyone I disagree with. Just fucking morons whose egos write cheques that their braincell can’t cash.

                  • cricko …
                    3 October 2014 at 6:59 pm

                    Hi McFlock,

                    You are right, I do know the answer to that question.

                    The reason that I asked it was to see if you or dv or Iprent knew the
                    answer.

                    So, according to you, I don’t give a shit, I’m a fucking moron, and a bit of extra abuse regarding my ego and braincell thrown in for extra emphasis.

                    Charming, You seem to be a real prince.

                    PS. I’ve never ever personally abused anyone on this blog.
                    I did suggest to weka that the term anthropogenic global warming had
                    been replaced by climate change and got abused by you and abused and threatened by Iprent for my trouble.

                    Can any of you answer the question or not ?

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      3 October 2014 at 7:35 pm

                      You are right, I do know the answer to that question.

                      No you don’t. That’s obvious from ignorant comments and I’m not going to bother to try and enlighten you as it’s obvious that you’ll continue denying reality because it goes against your beliefs.

                    • McFlock …
                      3 October 2014 at 9:39 pm

                      I never said you knew the answer to your question.

                      If you think treating everybody like fucking morons (by making idiot statements and wanking with passive-aggressive questions that you believe you know the answer to) gives you the moral or intellectual advantage over someone honest enough to point out precisely why you are a fucking idiot and which specific comments you wrote demonstrate that you are patently uninterested in good-faith discussion of an issue, then your compass is broken.

                • lprent …
                  3 October 2014 at 9:49 pm

                  Perhaps any one of you could explain the difference between AGW and
                  climate change ?

                  If you want an answer to simple questions, then why don’t you try wikipedia.

                  Start here AGW

                  What you should be looking at is timescales. Most background climate change is done on long time scales.

                  For instance with the houndreds of millions of years ofcontinental drift of Antarctica into the southern polar region from the Cretaceous to the Quaternary that lead to the formation of the southern polar icecap and the circumAntarticia ocean and atmospheric currents that keep it as a fridge for the globe. Or the Milankovitch orbital cycles that operate over 10s-100s or thousands of years and which appear to be closely related to Quarternary glaciation cycles.

                  But these are all pretty long cycles. There are shorter climate change events related to plume events from the earths radioactive core causing larger sustained volcanic events (like the Deccan traps).

                  Similarly short unsustained volcanic events around subduction zones causing ash triggered climate changes, which rarely persist for more than teeny numbers of years – typically 3-4 years.

                  Of the various very short-term (decades) and long term (hundreds of millions of years) solar cycles.

                  But AGW refers to climate change that is both short-term and sustained which is highly abnormal in the geological record and typically associated with large diebacks in the biotic parts of the climate system (large meteorite impacts mostly).

                  For instance the slow cooling of the northern hemisphere in the initial industrial era due to dust (approx 1850-1950) that cause regional effects.

                  But in less than 150 years we have seen some marked changes in the whole earth’s heat balance that are on the scale of the interglacial changes (they’re warming the entire earth’s oceans) but are happening in a fraction of the usual geological process times. These are (>95% confidence) attributed to changes in the composition of the earth’s atmosphere with the human introduction of greenhouse gases.

                  So having given you this extremely basic primer for a moron, could you please look down the links and get your useless brain aware of geological timescales. Then it might be worth training you to up to primary school level.

                  • cricko …
                    3 October 2014 at 10:39 pm

                    Now, far be it from me to resort to the same level of nasty personal abuse and threats that i have copped from Iprent and others on this site today so…

                    excuse me if I ask……

                    Did Tim Barnet OK your 9.49 effort yet Iprent ?

                    You may have to withdraw it if Tim doesn’t like it.

                    You still can’t resist calling me a ‘moron’ and referring to my ‘useless brain’

                    You just can’t help yourself can you.

                    Quite sad.

                    • McFlock …
                      3 October 2014 at 10:59 pm

                      What’s sad is that you keep coming back to make moronic statements and snide innuendo.

                    • weka …
                      3 October 2014 at 11:14 pm

                      Cricko: Thats fine, but why do you need attack me personally ? and PS. I’ve never ever personally abused anyone on this blog.

                      Cricko’s subsequent personal attacks on others:

                      Thinned skinned

                      Childish

                      Sad

                      Beholden to a Labour party puppet master

                      etc.

                    • cricko …
                      4 October 2014 at 12:01 am

                      I gotta go,
                      G’nite all.
                      I leave it to all readers of the above to make up their own minds.

                      PS I do give Iprent a tick for not banning me forever from this site in spite of his threat.
                      Onya Iprent 4 that.

                      Just because he is not able to debate the issue without resorting to personal invective does not mean that he may not have a cogent point. Duh! What !

                      Thing is, based on the above exchanges…….
                      What is his point ?
                      The question was always quite simple.
                      He will be seeking wise counsel from Tim Barnet for some guidence.

                      We await a decision from Tim.

                  • infused …
                    4 October 2014 at 4:00 am

                    We’re not the ones being muzzled by Labour. Good being their lapdog eh? Sure your brain can get around that.

            • lprent 2.2.1.1.2.3
              3 October 2014 at 5:12 pm

              Nope it just expresses what I think about you. It was quite pointed abuse

              That you are quite stupid and and obviously quite ignorant on earth sciences is to me perfectly obvious. No more and no less.

              I even thanked you for reminding me that I have a role in helping to educate those unfortunates who don’t understand the science. When I read your comment I could the weight of unfulfilled duty from my earth science degree calling to me to clear the weight of your ignorance.

              BTW: I’d suggest you read the policy on the site about what is permissible and expected before I get around to doing a moderating sweep. My moderating personality tends to get irritated about people telling other people how they should behave on this site. That is the moderators job.

              • cricko …
                3 October 2014 at 9:30 pm

                Hi Draco T Bastard, hope you are having a nice evening.

                So, you too jump on the personal abuse wagon and accuse me of ignorance.

                And, in your mind I am denying reality . How so ?

                Are all the correspondents on this site incapable of discussion ?

                I suggested that the term AGW had been superseeded by the term climate change.
                Is that wrong ?

                Look at the vituperate reaction that has provoked on this blogsite.
                It’s staggering.

                You join in with glee and tell me what I think and that you wont bother to reply to what you think I think. Jeez.
                So why post anything ?
                Why waste your time.

                Do you know the answer to the question ?

                Are you able to address the question without resorting to childish personal abuse simply because I had the temerity to pose it ?

                Here is your chance to show you have something about you.

                You have the Open mike. Go for it.

                • lprent …
                  3 October 2014 at 9:54 pm

                  That is because we have seen far too many idiots like yourself coming through who haven’t bothered to examine the evidence. Instead you seem to think that your close examination of your pubic hairs whilst wanking is as important as being less self-indulgent and bothering to learn enough to make intelligent conversation.

                  Are you getting the point yet? We have heard all this before from other morons. You appear to be both stupid and ignorant. It simply isn’t worth the effort of explaining how and why you are.

                  Please check out my primer that I carefully wrote and linked for you. Then ask some intelligent questions rather than sending the blood to the wrong organ.

                  • cricko …
                    4 October 2014 at 12:24 am

                    One last observation.

                    Read your risible effort @ 9,54 again.

                    You cite.

                    “idiots like you”
                    “other morons”
                    “examinine your pubic hairs” and
                    “wanking”
                    “You appear stupid and ignorant”
                    ” It simply is not worth the effort explaining”

                    and yet you can’t help explaining.

                    Then you call for “intelligent questions”

                    Just silly.

                    Maybe a huge intellect like, say, Drako T Bastard
                    can explain your point for you.

                    Go Drako………………eh!

                    • McFlock …
                      4 October 2014 at 12:41 am

                      You cite.

                      [proceeds to list half a dozen examples of personal opinion, not a single example of citation to be seen]

                      I love it when idiots try to fake intelligence by using words bigger than they are. And then accuse others of being silly.

                    • cricko …
                      4 October 2014 at 12:54 am

                      Who needs Drako when you have McFlock ?

                      See 12.41 am

                      Gee, McFlock great post, you can really sting. Not.

                      What was that old saying about comming unarmed to a battle of wits ?

                      I had great fun tonight,
                      hope you did too.
                      (and guess what. I did not need to resort to personal invective once to do you like a dogs dinner.)

                      Calling names….call me an idiot….that the best you have ?
                      That your argument ?

                      Pathetic.

                    • McFlock …
                      4 October 2014 at 1:00 am

                      The best I have? Nah.
                      But the unadorned truth is sufficient.

                      Btw, you might want to avoid pwned statements. Even if they are performance-art tributes to the great Surrealists.

      • phillip ure 2.2.2
        3 October 2014 at 1:59 pm

        “..It’s not what you eat, it’s how it’s grown that makes the difference..”

        bullshit..!..complete and utter self-defending/justifying bullshit..

        ..did you even read the link..?

        ..another ‘green’ totally relaxed about both animal-exploitation/cruelty..

        ..and the burning of the planet..

        ..just so they can chew on animal-flesh and/or bye-products…

        ..can’t interfere with that..!

        ..their ‘green’ doesn’t go quite as far as that..

        ..i wonder just how..in their own minds..

        ..they can consider themselves ‘green’ in any way..

        ..animal-eating-green:..the walking-oxymoron..

  3. Saarbo 3
    3 October 2014 at 8:33 am

    I was listening to the Kathryn Ryan interview with Robbie Deans yesterday, Ive always been a Dean’s fan since the 80’s when he competed with Alan Hewson (who couldn’t tackle to save himself).

    Deans reckoned that the critics affect the family/partners the hardest because they have no control, which brought me back to Karen Price’s enlightening tweets on the internal workings of the Labour Party.

    But is David Cunliffe the Robbie Deans of NZ politics. Steve Tew (ABD perhaps) is to Robbie Deans what the ABC’s are to David Cunliffe.

    Just a thought.

  4. Not a PS Staffer 4
    3 October 2014 at 8:40 am

    Naughty Colonial Viper!
    Upsetting Clare Curran! Butter wouldn’t melt on her mouth.
    http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/318024/curran-alleges-dirty-politics#comment-63063

    Will Tim Barnett haul her in for a bollicking for washing clean linen in public?
    This abuse of Twitter by the leading light of Robertson’s team will bring the party into disrepute.

    • weka 4.1
      3 October 2014 at 10:05 am

      Good to see someone standing up and doing something, thanks CV.

      ”This is dirty tricks and dirty politics in Dunedin South,” she told the Otago Daily Times this week.

      Ok, so now ‘dirty politics’ is any time a political opponent opposes you in ways you disapprove of? Thanks Clare, we really needed a career politician on the left to render the concept of Dirty Politics that much less relevant 🙄

      • Puckish Rogue 4.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 10:10 am

        Not wanting to stae the obvious but its things like this that reinforce the notion that Labour are nowhere near ready to lead the country

        You’d think an MP would realise that

      • Chooky 4.1.2
        3 October 2014 at 2:19 pm

        +100 weka

      • Murray Olsen 4.1.3
        4 October 2014 at 12:49 am

        Every time I have seen anything from Curran, she has been shooting Labour in the foot. When we actually have an investigative journalist who actually has uncovered real dirty politics, and NAct has tried to change the definition away from their organised filth, why is a Labour MP giving credibility to the NAct story?

        Go get her CV. Time for a team that cares about more than their seats in parliament.

    • Anne 4.2
      3 October 2014 at 10:28 am

      Aha… thanks NaPSS. Guyon Espinor mentioned it this morning.

      Clare Curran has yet another “moaning, whining, public tanty”.

      There’s a clear pattern developing here. The moaners and attackers bellowing to the media are former ABCers. What does it mean? Is someone coordinating them, or are they merely copying the ‘Dirty Politics’ meme – that is, accuse those who you attack… of doing the attacking!

    • Bill 4.3
      3 October 2014 at 10:31 am

      As a well intentioned Labour Party member with a history of effective community activism…yup…get in touch and count me as ‘in’ Tat. Cheers.

      • left for dead 4.3.1
        3 October 2014 at 11:01 am

        Ditto.

        • Colonial Viper 4.3.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 1:26 pm

          Will do.

          • Roflcopter 4.3.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 2:17 pm

            Good luck CV, always a struggle swimming against the Curran

          • Not a PS Staffer 4.3.1.1.2
            3 October 2014 at 2:59 pm

            Poor Clare is getting a trouncing on-line at the OTD (Otago Daily times).
            http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/318024/curran-alleges-dirty-politics#comment-63063

            I wonder if she is calling on the Editor of the OTD to practice the same type of leadership that she exercised when in control (with Grant R) of the Red Alert?

            There is a very sexy picture of Tat there also. A real vote catching photo!

            • greywarbler 4.3.1.1.2.1
              3 October 2014 at 3:12 pm

              @ Not a PS Staffer
              That’s interesting. Oh good new people joining up to the Party. Ooh the Party in Dunedin didn’t know if they really wanted them. Joining up like that theywould presumably have also been able to vote for the leader. Tat Loo definitely has a good head for strategy and policy. Not one to stay sitting on the whoopee cushion, though he might play a trick with it on one of the other sitting MPs.

  5. travellerev 5
    3 October 2014 at 9:00 am

    I hope that some of you will enjoy this awesome lecture from John Perkins about the secret history of American Empire. John Perkins wrote “Confessions of an economic hitman” and in this lecture given at the Marlboro College in 2009 he tells his student audience about the history of the World Bank and the IMF and how they perform their “Duties”. It is part of my series about the Washington consensus and how John Key and ex-World Bank second in command Graeme Wheeler fit into the system and also how it connects with the policies put into place here in New Zealand.

    The Washington Consensus, A Backgrounder And Yes, It Is Being Implemented In New Zealand Right Now http://wp.me/p638n-4w8

  6. boldsirbrian 6
    3 October 2014 at 9:09 am

    Lets be honest. The Robertson and Cunliffe debate is simply personality politics. Call it for what it is, and vote accordingly.

    It’s really nothing to do with “left” and “centrist” and “core values” and “neo-liberal” and “traitorous”. And I can confidently assert this, because the debate is all about these labels and not about policy substance.

    • anker 6.1
      3 October 2014 at 9:22 am

      6@ boldsirbrian………….

      I am not sure there is anything simple about the situation Labour is currently finding itself in in terms of Labour’s caucus.

      Likely there is a component of “personality politics.

      What I have been reminded of is how powerful the phenomena of “group think” is. How people feel uncomfortable when they don’t concur with the dominant opinion that a group appears to hold.

      And given the issues that some in the Labour caucus are so vocal about I can’t help but wonder if this isn’t what is going on around DC.

      A personal anecdote to illustrate. Some twenty years ago or so I was the leader of a smallish team in a work place of 30. I had to select a small group of colleagues to attend a conference. We travelled to the conference and all bar one of them bunked off virtually for the whole event. I expressed my displeasure to one on the plane going home. When I next went into work (I was part time) out of the staff of 30 (ish) only two people spoke to me.

      They then sabotage everything I tried to do. It was a very unpleasant experience. Fortunately I left and when on to a much, much better job and career wise I have never looked back.

      I hope people on this site will forgive me for a personal anecdote, but I can’t help beut wonder (and it is only speculation) that a similar thing hasn’t happened to DC.

      • boldsirbrian 6.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 9:43 am

        .
        @anker (6.1)

        I am not sure there is anything simple about the situation Labour is currently finding itself in in terms of Labour’s caucus.

        and ……. What I have been reminded of is how powerful the phenomena of “group think” is

        Yes. Great post; Relevant anecdote

        However, looking at the above quotes together ………

        Labour Caucus. It’s easy to throw stones there
        Bloggers at the Standard. It’s harder to self reflect here

        • weka 6.1.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 10:07 am

          “It’s really nothing to do with “left” and “centrist” and “core values” and “neo-liberal” and “traitorous”. And I can confidently assert this, because the debate is all about these labels and not about policy substance.”

          Do you mean the debate here? Because there was been lots around left vs neoliberal. Or do you mean between DC and GR?

          It’s unfortunate that most of the MSM seem focussed on the invidivuals rather than what this represents in terms of left and neoliberal.

          I guess the time is coming for DC to stand up and declare where he really intends to head (if he wins). Second chance won’t become a third one. Make or break time.

    • anker 6.2
      3 October 2014 at 9:22 am

      6@ boldsirbrian………….

      I am not sure there is anything simple about the situation Labour is currently finding itself in in terms of Labour’s caucus.

      Likely there is a component of “personality politics.

      What I have been reminded of is how powerful the phenomena of “group think” is. How people feel uncomfortable when they don’t concur with the dominant opinion that a group appears to hold.

      And given the issues that some in the Labour caucus are so vocal about I can’t help but wonder if this isn’t what is going on around DC.

      A personal anecdote to illustrate. Some twenty years ago or so I was the leader of a smallish team in a work place of 30. I had to select a small group of colleagues to attend a conference. We travelled to the conference and all bar one of them bunked off virtually for the whole event. I expressed my displeasure to one on the plane going home. When I next went into work (I was part time) out of the staff of 30 (ish) only two people spoke to me.

      They then sabotaged everything I tried to do. It was a very unpleasant experience. Fortunately I left and went on to a much, much better job and career wise I have never looked back.

      I hope people on this site will forgive me for a personal anecdote, but I can’t help beut wonder (and it is only speculation) that a similar thing hasn’t happened to DC.

      I have always been aware of how “group think” operates and I speak up and resist it everytime I get a sniff of it.

      • Jim 6.2.1
        3 October 2014 at 10:28 am

        I think that most are buying into a presidential like system as promoted by the main stream media. David Cunliffe did in my opinion do a reasonable job during the election campaign, as would have any of the other candidates for labour leadership in the last few years. There does how ever seem to be a disconnect between the labour party hierarchy and the caucus. Before we deal with the more important issues of party structures and personnel, this leadership issue needs to be resolved to get the media to change focus.

        • boldsirbrian 6.2.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 11:30 am

          @ Jim (6.2.1)

          That’s a really good point Jim.

          Why do political parties (and I’m talking all of them here) buy into the “Presidential” system that suits the MSM?

          For some parties there is no alternative (WinstonFirst, DunneFirst, ActFirst and ConservyLoons). Another Party (DirtyJohn) has one orator who outshines everybody else in the caucus, and they gain advantage in keeping the less able away from public scrutiny.

          But Labour , could, if it so chose, set it’s own path during an election. Refuse to make the Leader the sole spokesperson. Refuse to participate in Leader’s debates, if these are the only Air time available (They actually told us nothing, apart from the fact that Cunliffe is a very good debater, and Key is lovable or hateable depending on your political views.)

          Bring out, and emphasise the team. Less convenient for MSM, but make that their problem. Bring out the Shadow Minister of Health to talk health issues, Education to talk Education issues, and the Finance spokesperson to provide the “gotcha” details on Fringe Benefit Tax. Show the Leader of the Party as exactly that …..somebody who can lead a competent team. Rather than someone simply selected as the best debater.

          I suggest that this may work well for either Cunliffe or Robertson, or actually any other leader.

          It’s an idea anyway?

    • phillip ure 6.3
      3 October 2014 at 9:54 am

      you are wrong brave-brian..

      ..it is entirely about the battle for the direction of the labour party..

      ..does it..under robertson..continue to cling to the neo-liberal policies of the last 30 yrs..

      ..or does it..under cunnliffe..

      ..embrace progressive-polices focusing on poverty-busting etc..

      ..the personality stuff is just a distraction..

      ..and the right/corporate-media know what a crossroads this is..

      ..(hence their vicious-firestorm of a hate-campaign against cunnlife..

      ..they are terrified of the idea of a real labour party..

      ..one shed of its’ neo-liberal aberrations..)

      ..and they also know what they want..

      ..and that is robertson..and neo-lib..

      ..and just that fact should be enough to disqualify robertson..

      ..(and i have figured out why a joke like nash is there..he is there to make robertson look less neo-lib than he is..)

      • boldsirbrian 6.3.1
        3 October 2014 at 11:12 am

        .
        @ phillip ure (6.3)

        Thank you for your post, for you provide an excellent example of what the debate is unfortunately about. And which leaves me to conclude it’s not really of substance and more about the personalities of the contenders.

        I’ll look further into your statements. Full of emotion, but basically a lot of hot air. I assume, suspect, you’ve got some ideas of substance lurking underneath, but until Labour activists start articulating what those are, instead of throwing around labels, the movement is doomed to not achieve what is possible.

        ~~~~

        ..it is entirely about the battle for the direction of the labour party.. ..does it..under robertson..continue to cling to the neo-liberal policies of the last 30 yrs..
        ..or does it..under cunnliffe…embrace progressive-polices focusing on poverty-busting etc..

        “clinging to” emotive bullshit
        “neo-liberal policies of the last 30 years” meaningless claptrap, needing substance
        “embrace progressive policies” emotive bullshit
        “focussing on poverty-busting” Wow. The nearest we have come to something of substance. But still absolutely no details. No evidence of what your hero has done, or said he will do, that your villain will not also do.

        I personally think that inequality and doing something about poverty are issues that are of the highest priority. The very highest. But if anybody is trying to persuade me that one candidate is better than another on the basis of one being good (“embraces progressive”) and not bad (“clinging to neo-liberal”) I’d suggest a course in Sales 101. It’s not that your answer is necessarily wrong. It’s just the justification that is absent. Totally missing in action.

        ~~~~

        ..the personality stuff is just a distraction…….and the right/corporate-media know what a crossroads this is………(hence their vicious-firestorm of a hate-campaign against cunnlife………they are terrified of the idea of a real labour party……
        ..one shed of its’ neo-liberal aberrations..)………and they also know what they want………and that is robertson..and neo-lib……….and just that fact should be enough to disqualify robertson..

        Please just read this again, and again, and again. It’s absolute nonsense. At it’s very best, it’s drivel. It’s easier to say nothing with blank lines. It’s like a TV advertisement for hair shampoo. Trying to convey something?? by repetition. But repetition of a pile of crap, simply makes a bigger pile.

        If these are reasons why you have a hero, and the other one is a villain, I suggest you change shampoos. Or preferably work at a shampoo factory for a week, to get the real detail on the ingredients in each shampoo.

        ~~~~

        ….(and i have figured out why a joke like nash is there..he is there to make robertson look less neo-lib than he is..)

        When two people sit around, and have a common understanding of a problem, it’s ok to chew the fat, and say what you think. But all I understand from this statement (and I understand it well) is that you dislike Nash (intently). And that gets us where, precisely? Is this meant to be another argument that your hero should be elected, and your villain not be elected? I don’t think so.

        • anker 6.3.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 12:21 pm

          Re my earlier comment about group think and the “personality issues”. I think this is (ie. group think) probably a factor, but just one factor.

          I think the other issues are, Who will best represent the party? Who is geniune and capable about reversing policies that have hurt so many NZders, particularly Labour constitutiuants? Rogernomics or call it what you will has been so damaging for so many in NZ. My vote will go to someone who I believe has the will, the determination and knowledge to reverse this.

          At the leadership campaign meeting I went to last year when the candidates were asked what they would like to be known for, DC that was what he wanted to be known for, i.e reversing Rogernomics.

          • boldsirbrian 6.3.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 1:22 pm

            @anker (6.3.1.1)

            Thoughtful comment.

            Another significant issue is of course “Who will best achieve election success for the Party?” (Although your “Who will best represent the Party?” possibly covers this.)

            My concern is that the leader may represent the party’s objectives very well, but his (or her) personal characteristics may turn voters off. I’m not thinking homosexuality here as much as perceptions of sincerity, drive, arrogance, empathy etc. These are all valid concerns along with the issues that you have raised.

            And I appreciate your reference to policies.

            A reference to a NZ Herald article, by Dita de Boni, has already been made – Time for Labour to embrace the left

            Dita starts off with frustrating references to “progressive” values. (Everybody in the Labour Party probably has a reasonable understanding of the term, in their own heads at least. The label may even mean the same thing to most in the Party, but possibly not. But outside the Party in Voter-land, it probably means little.)

            But then Dita immediately redeems herself, and actually starts specifying what progressive means. She picks issues such as “free basic education, a fairer tax system, protecting our ecosystem, better workers and human rights, and a strong health system that does not discriminate between rich and poor”

            These are the things that will appeal to potential voters. They are not detailed policies, but they are a clear vision… She promotes a path: “In following the path of defining a set of core values and sticking with them even when the prevailing conservative chorus is decrying them” She gives good specific advice on how to work with other parties who have specific policies in common.

            Good stuff. Worth reading the full article.

            • phillip ure 6.3.1.1.1.1
              3 October 2014 at 2:21 pm

              shit..!..bold-brian..

              ..apologies for not presenting a full poverty-busting poverty-program..

              ..but hey..!..a financial transaction tax on the banksters wd be a good start..

              ..to get that poverty-busting (’emotive’ i know..but there you go..!..)..to get that underway..

              …heard of that..?

              ..can i suggest you google ‘neo-liberal-‘…?..(that may help enlighten you there..)

              ..’shampoo-references pass me by..

              ..i am part of the shampoo-free movement..

              ..haven’t piled that muck on my hair for years..

              (and yes..thick/luxuriant/shiny enough to make dunne turn green with envy..)

              ..and seeing as you ask..

              ..and aide from nash being such good buddy/buddies with the denizens of the far-right..as in slater/lusk etc..

              ..(you quite relaxed about that..?..)

              ..there is the small fact that he is currently walking around trying to peddle the bullshit that he won the seat of napier because of his all-round skills..

              ..(going so fucken far as to offer to show other labour candidates ‘how’..(!)..)

              ..whereas the facts of the matter are that nash got no more votes in ’14 than he did in ’11..

              ..and the only reason he won napier..

              ..is because garth mcvicar stood for the conservatives..

              ..and hived over 4,500 votes from the national candidate..

              ..had he not done that..nash wd have lost..

              ..so yes..that he seems to be basing everything ‘good’ about him on what is a pile of stinking/steaming bullshit..

              ..i will yell out alarms about him..

              ..and point out what a joke he is..

              • boldsirbrian …
                3 October 2014 at 3:28 pm

                @ phillip ure (6.3.1.1.1.1)

                shit..!..bold-brian..

                Would Mr. Botany (B.) be more politically correct?

                ~~~

                ..apologies for not presenting a full poverty-busting poverty-program…..
                ..but hey..!..a financial transaction tax on the banksters wd be a good start..
                ..to get that poverty-busting (‘emotive’ i know..but there you go..!..)..to get that underway..…heard of that..?..

                I did not claim that “poverty-busting” was emotive. In fact I singled what you wrote there as the best part of your whole post. Seems like we (may) share a common vision of what we think has to be achieved?

                ~~~~

                ..and the only reason he (Nash) won napier….is because garth mcvicar stood for the conservatives….and hived over 4,500 votes from the national candidate….had he not done that..nash wd have lost….

                Yes.

                Cheers,
                Mr. Botany (B.)

  7. yeshe 7
    3 October 2014 at 9:16 am

    More lies from Key and Joyce around their Convention Centre deal… bet their own blind trusts are filled with Sky City shares … even Herald allows it to seem suspect as a hotel “slips” on to land for convention centre only …

    The public purse ripped off by sale of TVNZ land for peanuts below commercial value; lovingly sponsored by Key and Joyce .. now the truth outs .. and it seems Joyce lied in the House as well … ho hum, just another day at the office …

    Corrupt crims, all of them.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11335925

  8. Rosie 8
    3 October 2014 at 9:18 am

    A light at the end of the tunnel?

    (Apologies if this has already been discussed) From yesterday’s Gordon Campbell article on Scoop:

    “…………the chances of the TPP countries pulling a deal together in the next three years are slim. One chronic reason being, the Obama administration has no authority to conclude this deal even if member countries could agree on the content – which they don’t. The US currently lacks the Trade Promotion Authority for Obama to clinch the terms of the deal.”

    http://gordoncampbell.scoop.co.nz/2014/10/01/gordon-campbell-on-the-last-rites-for-the-tpp/

    So if the TPP is really on it’s last legs as the article suggests, we do at least have three years grace at best, with our pro TPP government sidelined perhaps?

    • Chooky 8.1
      3 October 2014 at 10:12 am

      yes great news Rosie!…i heard it the other day on the radio i think…and was relieved at the reprieve…but you can never rule them out pulling something out of the hat at any moment when you least expect it

      • boldsirbrian 8.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 12:43 pm

        @ Chooky (8.1)

        I agree. Great news. (with your reservations).
        Almost what I feared most from this Government.

        The TPPA almost seemed to be the price “we” are being asked to pay, simply to permit another photo opportunity for Dirty John on the golf course.

    • Lanthanide 8.2
      3 October 2014 at 10:45 am

      It’s been on the rocks for at least the last 2 years. That hasn’t stopped various countries and governments from parroting on that they’re working towards the agreement, though.

      Basically it just seems like a waste of taxpayer funds and an excuse to go on overseas trips.

      • Rosie 8.2.1
        3 October 2014 at 11:23 am

        I have heard such comment previously Lanthanide but was reluctant to focus too much energy on it, for the reason Chooky gives above:

        “but you can never rule them out pulling something out of the hat at any moment when you least expect it”.

        All those overseas trips you mention had to be justified so perhaps governments put on a brave fake face in an effort to avoid embarrassment. These are the cowboys of the wild new frontier of global corporate control, taking it further than ever before, they’ve got a reputation to protect. Just a thought.

        • Kiwiri 8.2.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 12:45 pm

          Lots of airpoints and hotel reward points accummulated for those overseas jetsetting negotiations can now be used to take the family on holiday. Nice job if you can get it.

          • travellerev 8.2.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 1:18 pm

            Wow, people really believe it’s off the table? 🙄

            • Chooky 8.2.1.1.1.1
              3 October 2014 at 2:24 pm

              so what is their next move in your opinion?…is this just a pretend “off the table”…while they regroup covertly and present us all with a fait accompli ?

            • Kiwiri 8.2.1.1.1.2
              3 October 2014 at 2:25 pm

              TPP won’t go away, and the accummulation of airports and hotel reward points won’t end.

              TPP will keep coming back, again and again. And it must be opposed again and again. It was being pushed at us as the MAI more than ten years ago. Now, we are battling against the TPP and it won’t stop coming at us more strongly, with another acronym change if that is what it takes to try to dupe people again.

            • Rosie 8.2.1.1.1.3
              3 October 2014 at 3:41 pm

              travellerev. There’s really no need for the rolly eyes. Truth is, I don’t really know what to “believe”.

              I don’t think anyone can relax until it’s well and truly buried. I think if it does go then as Kiwiri suggests, it’s will come back again and again – just in a different format. I’m sure the global corporate powers have many masks and disguises for their intentions.

  9. Whateva next? 9
    3 October 2014 at 9:25 am

    People can say what they like, just not under the banner of a Labour supporting site.
    Reactionary posts are not supporting Labour, if anything they support National by dividing people……very convenient for National that the left do feel free to have robust debates, when done on Twitter or blogs too easy to misconstrue, escalate by MSM and cause fractures.
    For people to suggest this is supression is worrying, almost looking for another battle, rather than focussing on issues that matter?

    • boldsirbrian 9.1
      3 October 2014 at 10:07 am

      @ Whateva next? (9)

      If a “Labour Supporting Site” is simply an extension of the official Labour Party site, it becomes simply a propaganda site. That’s fine, but contributions would quickly dry up

      Robust debates are, or should be, the life blood of all political parties. The benefits far outweigh the possible concerns that others may misconstrue from such discussions. This is politics after all: Those on the other side of every fence are only too keen to misconstrue.

      Ideas are born of robust debate. The strength of this site, that I quickly discovered, is the relative tolerance to such robustness (I’ve been labelled a troll on a couple of occasions here; a badge I’ll wear with pride, as it seems to me the unsupported labelling was more a reflection of the accuser than anything else)

      The discussions here have substance …. and a common vision with intelligent disagreement can only be respected.

      If you want to reflect on alternatives, have a quick look at the drivel that takes place in the discussions on kiwiblog. Lots and lots of comments, but childish substance. Even Farrar is desperately trying to get more intelligent discussion by promoting extra “assistance” and saying that he will accept guest posts from those who disagree with him. (It will never work for Farrar, unless he actually relinquishes most of his personal power, and adopts a format more similar to the Standard)

      • whateva next? 9.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 2:26 pm

        “Ideas are born of robust debate” absobloodyluetely, in an environment that seeks to generate growth and meetings of minds, which social media is not, especially in a tribal climate generated and supported by a right wing MSM

        • boldsirbrian 9.1.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 2:49 pm

          @ whateva next? (9.1.1)

          Lots of truth there. But social media is here, and to stay. I envisage that as time goes on, social media will become more mature and effective, as people learn what works best and what doesn’t.

          Social media does provide an environment where there is “robust” discussion (One or three of my posts have been very blunt). Far more “robust” than in a face to face meeting would ever generate. I can see both advantages and disadvantages with that. It also allows for the participation of many more people with ideas

          I wasn’t too sure about your comment on social media debate being influenced by a right wing MSM. The discussion here is very different than MSM news and opinion, and seems to have formed it’s own style reasonably independently?

  10. philj 10
    3 October 2014 at 9:46 am

    xox
    I used to give credibility to Dr Bryce Edwards blog but he seems to have lost his ‘ balance’ the closer he gets to the MSM. Funny that. Do others at TS feel the same?

    • phillip ure 10.1
      3 October 2014 at 9:59 am

      in my time of observing edwards-the-younger he has said one thing only that made sense..

      ..he said that labour policy was national-lite..

      ..and that labour need to move more left..

      ..most of the time he is a craven apologist for the status quo..

      ..and one whose ambition to be a talking-head on media is palpable..

      ..it almost throbs…that ambition,.

    • Puckish Rogue 10.2
      3 October 2014 at 10:08 am

      Translation: Hes written something I don’t agree with

    • Paul 10.3
      3 October 2014 at 10:52 am

      Yes he’s changed.
      The job at the Herald has had an effect.

  11. greywarbler 11
    3 October 2014 at 10:10 am

    On the trail of active businesses keeping the NZ economy going and what sector, there is an Insight on Sunday on Radionz with Wallace Chapman on the thoroughbred industry. I heard a trailer this morning and I think they feel neglected, not taken seriously and they employ 33,000 people. Let’s hear it for the gee gees!
    Sunday 5/10 at 8.12 a.m. http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/insight

    The heady days when horse racing was king, are gone.
    People are discovering new ways to spent their entertainment dollar and the thoroughbred industry is now having to share the gambling pie with others like lotto and the casinos.
    Racing, along with greyhounds and trotting, still manages turnover nearing two billion dollars and contributes to about one percent of the country’s gross domestic product, but many in the industry say it is getting harder to make a living.

    Radio New Zealand’s Waikato reporter, Andrew McRae talks to all parts of the thoroughbred racing industry from trainers and owners, through to the breeders and jockeys about how it can try to keep pace with its competitors.

    I tried to get some stats on employment in dairying but it’s hard to find for a newbie. There are more details from the dairy companies on cows, opportunities finance, yield of milk and money. Simple employment does not rate highly.

    Some of the pdfs don’t convert to my old Firefox very well. There are all sorts of symbols in the headings.

    Stats NZ is like following a will of the whisp. Every time I got into an area which I think could answer the simple? question of the annual count of employment in the dairy industry. I was directed to some program that would provide it if I pressed this button and spent 10 minutes reading about it.

    And of course there is the proviso of how they changed the employment count in 2003 to give a broad brush over all employment presumably.
    Until 2003, statistics used full-time equivalent (FTE) persons engaged as the business-size measure. From 2003 onwards, FTE was replaced by employee count (EC). Business demography statistics showing EC are available for 2000 onwards.
    I think this means in reality, in use, that they can then count someone doing 1 paid hour per week in employment statistics, but that will require probably an hour’s study on how to use their tables and find definitions.

    An interesting statistic from Min for Primary Industries: New Zealand dairy production has risen 77 percent over the past 20 years … Sources: Statistics New Zealand, DairyNZ, Fonterra Co-operative Group, and MPI. … The parties to the Accord agreed to work together to achieve clean healthy …

    • BM 12.1
      3 October 2014 at 10:58 am

      I agree with everything he write.

      The left is completely out of touch with middle NZ and there’s nothing any party on the left can do to remedy that.

      The problems are far too systemic.

      • Puckish Rogue 12.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 11:49 am

        I suspect the problem has more to do with employment and earnings. When you look at the Labour MPs most of them would struggle to earn 70k a year let alone what an MP makes

        So these MPs are making more money then they ever have before so its only natural that they want to protect the money because they know when they leave they won’t have the same power, unfluence or pay packet

        I mean would T. Mallard or C. Curran get paid in the private market anything like they’re getting now?

        • BM 12.1.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 12:21 pm

          I see the main issue with the left is that they’re creating policies that appeal to the party members not the public.

          Great if you want to be a niche party, not so good if you want to be a major party.

          I agree with you about the labour Mps, which is why they’re so hard to pry off the trough, politics is as good as it gets so they’re not going anywhere without a fight.

          • Kiwiri 12.1.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 12:32 pm

            they’re creating policies that appeal to the party members not the public

            hahaha. try again. your framing there is misleading, mischievous as well as malicious.

            let’s see what those policies are that appeal to party members not the public? abandoning the call for GST to be removed from fresh fruit and vegetables? increasing the super age?

          • Puckish Rogue 12.1.1.1.2
            3 October 2014 at 12:41 pm

            I wonder if maybe the answer is to dro the pay down to 70K for MPs and 150K for the PM

            Take the money out of it and you’ll get people doing it for and staying in longer for the right reasons…maybe

            • Kiwiri 12.1.1.1.2.1
              3 October 2014 at 2:27 pm

              Or give them the kind of National golden parachutes to kamikaze their parliamentary careers.

              • Puckish Rogue …
                3 October 2014 at 2:31 pm

                Who in all seriousness would take on on Labours dead wood? Goff maybe but thats about it

        • Murray Olsen 12.1.1.2
          4 October 2014 at 1:33 am

          How much would Paula Bennett be able to earn? She’s pretty much as useless as Mallard or Curran, as are plenty of other Tories. The only way any of them make heaps is when they’re appointed to bullshit positions as a political reward.

    • phillip ure 12.2
      3 October 2014 at 2:25 pm

      warning..!.it is far-right foamer..du fresne…

  13. Pat O'Dea 13
    3 October 2014 at 10:56 am

    ‘

    “Dear Matafele Peinem, we won’t let you down”

    Just in

    In a victory for local residents opposed to the mine and Auckland Coal Action, The proposed excavation of the Mangatangi coal mine by Glen Coal ltd. just south of the city, at Mangatawhiri has been put on indefinite hold.

  14. Paul 14
    3 October 2014 at 10:57 am

    Dita de Boni
    ‘Time for Labour to embrace the left.

    Instead of trying to appeal to ‘middle New Zealand’, the party should proudly stand by progressive values…….
    I am convinced that the Labour party of today has the same problem. And the advice from well-wishers and nefarious right-wing commentators alike – to “appeal to middle New Zealanders” – is, I believe, misguided.
    The fact of the matter is that “middle New Zealand” currently prefers John Key. They want tax cuts, they want a prime minister they could have a beer with. God alone knows why, but their ideal female politician is Judith Collins, Hekia Parata and Maggie Barry (the “Hyacinth Bucket” model).
    And they don’t care that dirty politics seeps out of every pore of the current administration.
    So be it. Labour, at present, cannot sway these people and is not in good enough shape to take on the right-wing smear machine. But to my mind, it doesn’t have to – right now. It needs to reclaim and reaffirm that it stands for genuine left-wing values and ignore the critics – critics that are often non-voters, or non-Labour voters, egged on by opponents.’

    Read the rest.
    A great article.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11335076

    • Tautoko Viper 14.1
      3 October 2014 at 12:19 pm

      Dita has absolutely nailed it.

    • phillip ure 14.2
      3 October 2014 at 2:27 pm

      @ paul..

      ..”Maggie Barry (the “Hyacinth Bucket” model)..”

      (heh..!..)

    • Murray Olsen 14.3
      4 October 2014 at 2:16 am

      John Key is the type of person I least like having a beer with. He would insist on being the centre of attention and make puerile wisecracks. He’s the sort of guy who would have been better off not drinking in a public bar when they had heavy glass jugs. Something has changed drastically with middle NZ, and I don’t like it. Some people say that social attitudes have changed for the better, but when you see the Rawshark emails and chats, you realise that for a lot of movers and shakers on the right, this is only lip service.

  15. Pat O'Dea 15
    3 October 2014 at 11:05 am

    This is what victory looks like

    http://aucklandcoalaction.org/

  16. greywarbler 16
    3 October 2014 at 1:09 pm

    AN ALERT – Lecture coming up 15 October Auckland.
    Wednesday 15 October, 6.30pm
    Maidment Theatre
    Alfred Street
    The University of Auckland
    The Maidment Bar will open from 5.30pm

    The 2014 Bruce Jesson Lecture
    Mike Joy – Paradise Squandered; New Zealand’s Environmental Asset Stripping

    New Zealand’s lakes, rivers and most of our groundwater are in a critical state. Decades of misguided regulation and a free-for-all on diffuse pollution have encouraged agricultural intensification and driven our increasing reliance on imported feed and fertiliser.
    The inevitable consequences have been devastating environmental impacts as well as increasing economic and biosecurity risks.
    The solutions are many but require a paradigm shift; a move away from dependence on imported feed and fertiliser to keeping nutrients on farm and adding value to products, and strong leadership to move away from short-term thinking that accepts the massive ecological debt we are running up.

    Mike Joy MSc(Hons), PhD in Ecology is a Senior Lecturer in Ecology and Environmental Science at the Ecology Group-Institute of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North. He has received a number of awards, including the Ecology in Action award from the New Zealand Ecological Society; an Old Blue award from the Royal Forest and Bird protection Society; Environmental New Zealander of the Year from North and South magazine and the Manawatu Evening Standard Person of the Year.
    Presented by Politics and International Relations and the Bruce Jesson Foundation
    Wednesday 15 October, 6.30pm
    Maidment Theatre
    Alfred Street
    The University of Auckland
    The Maidm

    • Puckish Rogue 17.1
      3 October 2014 at 2:32 pm

      Yep ACT got a poor result and the leader quits and doesn’t try to run again…theres a lesson there somewhere

      • Te Reo Putake 17.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 2:40 pm

        Cool. In your world, 0.7% and being forced onto welfare is merely a “bad” result.

        • Puckish Rogue 17.1.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 2:44 pm

          Its better then 10% and no MPs in government (and none in nearly 25 years since being formed)

          • Te Reo Putake 17.1.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 2:53 pm

            Um, 10% gets you 12 or so MP’s. But that’s not going to be an issue for National’s Epsom franchise cum charity outreach program anytime soon 🙂

            edit ; I see what you did there! Colour me green with envy at your sly wit.

            • Puckish Rogue 17.1.1.1.1.1
              3 October 2014 at 2:58 pm

              Except that ACTs currently in power and has been in power previously whereas the Greens have never been in power, in fact they’re the only party that’ve never had an mp in government

              Fact is the Greens are nothing less then a disapointment

    • Rosie 17.2
      3 October 2014 at 3:55 pm

      Wow. Rimmer will now get an extra $155,700 as party leader, seeing as he has taken over. (Based on 2011 figures)

      http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2011/0410/latest/DLM4148103.html

      Both him and Dunne were reported as being over the $500K mark on Campbell live once all their perks and bonus salaries were added up. Nice work if you can get it. Over a million dollars for one party that polled 0.22% and one that polled 0.7%.

      • Puckish Rogue 17.2.1
        3 October 2014 at 4:04 pm

        You can get it, you just need enough people to think your party is worth voting for

        • Draco T Bastard 17.2.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 4:17 pm

          In the case of Act and UF neither party got enough votes because no one thought that they were worth voting for but they still got it.

          • Puckish Rogue 17.2.1.1.1
            3 October 2014 at 4:20 pm

            I’d say the Greens could learn something from them but I think they prefer to be martyrs rather then try to ackshully get something done for their voters

  18. Puckish Rogue 18
    3 October 2014 at 2:47 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/better-business/10576464/R-D-grants-stupid-taxpayer-subsidies-Sam-Morgan

    – Morgan reiterated that profitable companies did not need grants, and if a company was not profitable, it had no prospect of paying tax.

    But he then confessed his companies Xero, Sonar6 and Outsmart had also received grants.

    “Maybe I should just shut-up.,” he tweeted.

    “Seems like this grant lark is actually awesome for me.”

    Or don’t accept the grants instead?

    • Draco T Bastard 18.1
      3 October 2014 at 4:02 pm

      Or we could just be far more open about the fact that private success comes only with government subsidies.

  19. Mark 19
    3 October 2014 at 2:56 pm

    Chris Trotter’s latest missive stopped me in my tracks. I felt like I could have written the article from start to finish. ( If I could write)
    A brilliant summary of how people like me still haven’t forgiven or forgotten.

    http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/

  20. boldsirbrian 20
    3 October 2014 at 3:44 pm

    I wonder where Jason Ede and Cathy Odgers are? Have they eloped? Are they helping out at Whaleoil? Or the new “moderators” at kiwiblog? I hope their disappearance is not creating any sort of holdup on the inquiries that have started.

    Mr. Botany (B.)

  21. McFlock 21
    3 October 2014 at 5:05 pm

    lol Jamie Whyte’s resigned.

    I would say “good riddance”, but he was active for such a short time and had such little effect that nobody will really notice.

  22. weka 22
    3 October 2014 at 6:17 pm

    Fuck Russel Norman (I say that as a long time GP member and voter). “Crazies”? Really?

    “I mean we had enough trouble with John Key standing up every day telling all his nonsense about us and on the other had we had to deal with these crazies. Having them on the radio and tv all the time talking their nonsense, it was like ‘Oh god,’ it did make it incredibly difficult to change the Government at that point because a lot of people who might have voted for Labour went ‘Oh god, if a vote for Labour means a vote for Dotcom and Harre, I’m not going to do that,'” he says

    http://www.waateanews.com/waateanews?story_id=ODAwNg%3D%3D

    • Chooky 22.1
      3 October 2014 at 11:39 pm

      i think the Greens lost votes in the last week because it was said by a television reporter ( rightly or wrongly) that Norman was making overtures and was seeking a coalition with Nactional !

      …Unconscionable!…people were confused and shocked…it seemed like an opportunistic betrayal by the Greens who were signalling Labour would not win in their opinion ,so they were ready to do deals with the Nactional which represents BIG BUSINESS and is the biggest violator of the environment!

      • Clemgeopin 22.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 12:26 am

        +1
        Good comment Chooky. Sometimes I think we the ordinary people here have a more honest and clearer view of things than some of these stupid ego driven smart arse dumb political ‘leaders’.

    • Murray Olsen 22.2
      4 October 2014 at 2:28 am

      +1
      You can take the boy out of Brisbane, but you can’t take Brisbane out of the boy. I have to wonder how much his growing up in a white supremacist monoculture made him unable to understand Maori at all. I can’t think why else he would call them crazies, especially when they have a similar political alignment to his party.

      I also think he can go and fuck himself, and Metiria should speak for the Greens. I was going off Norman anyway, with all his talk of fiscal responsibility.

  23. Draco T Bastard 23
    3 October 2014 at 7:25 pm

    Advice from Starbucks veteran:

    But unless I am checking a new store off my list, I would not go there for the coffee.

    And this guy would know after having:

    travelled over 150,000 miles visiting 11,733 coffee shops and spending over $100,000.

    • Chooky 23.1
      3 October 2014 at 11:30 pm

      lol…Starbucks is disgusting

      • McFlock 23.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 11:38 pm

        the one in dunedin gave away free coffees when it opened.
        It lost a bunch of prospective customers that way.

        • Chooky 23.1.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 11:48 pm

          lol….unfortunately for Starbucks New Zealanders have gotten used to good coffee….only young teenagers and Americans like Starbucks

          my friend took me to Palm Beach and I was shocked to find only a Starbucks coffee shop….i refused to drink the coffee she bought me ….but bought her a cake with green icing …she refused to eat her cake….she reckoned the cakes were made from ingredients in rocketry (she looked up the listed ingredients of Starbucks cakes on her laptop and pronounced they were also used in rocket fuel or some such)….ONLY IN USA!

  24. Clemgeopin 24
    3 October 2014 at 8:11 pm

    Just received via email:

    PRIME TIME WITH SEAN PLUNKET
    TONIGHT AT 10 30

    With speculation mounting that he will contest Labour’s leadership, Napier MP STUART NASH will go one on one with Sean Plunket tonight.

    PLEASE NOTE — TONIGHT’S SHOW WILL BE AT THE LATER TIME OF 10 30.

    And we’re surrendering. Tonight we have pundits! BILL RALSTON and BRIAN EDWARDS to take an informed but light hearted look back at the campaign.
    (And yes, we know Brian is a friend of David Cunliffe and a long time Labour advisor and supporter and we also know that Bill worked on the National campaign. That’s why we invited them!)

    • Paul 24.1
      3 October 2014 at 8:26 pm

      If Nash leads the Labour Party, it will have officially become a neoliberal party.

      • adam 24.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 11:41 pm

        What makes you think it is not at present?

        • Paul 24.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 12:21 am

          Fair point.

        • Clemgeopin 24.1.1.2
          4 October 2014 at 12:38 am

          It most definitely is not!
          Just take a look at their policies. Which of these do you honestly think are ‘neo liberal’ policies?

          *100,000 new, affordable homes
          *Free healthcare to under 13s, pregnant women and over 65s
          *Raising the minimum wage to $16.25
          *Ensure every rental is warm and dry
          *Everything paid for, plus we’re in surplus
          *Ensure all Kiwis under 20 are in work, education or training
          *Best Start for Kiwi kids
          *Reduce unemployment to 4% in our first term
          *Lower class sizes
          *Extend paid paternal leave to 26 weeks
          *Ensure that all our rivers and lakes are clean
          *Lowering power bills
          *Convert the dole to apprenticeships
          *Protecting our land from speculators
          *Christchurch recovery policy
          *Capital gains tax excluding family home
          *Increase tax to 36c/$ for incomes above $150,000
          * investments to upgrade regional economies and create jobs
          *Auckland and Christchurch city Rail Link
          *Public Service Television Station
          *Ban shark finning , animal testing of cosmetics, synthetic highs.
          * New ministry for children
          *Restore Adult and community education
          *Kiwi assure insurance
          *Marine reserves
          *Abolition of secondary tax
          *Inquiry into wages and collective bargaining
          *Review of spy laws.

  25. AmaKiwi 25
    3 October 2014 at 10:06 pm

    Bryce Edwards confirms my suspicions: Like Labour, The Greens had a disastrous election result (along with Maori, Mana, and Internet parties).

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11336457

    I think it is time the Left recognized we need a single Left party. It will require a huge amount of compromise on policies and organization. Can we do it or do we individually prefer to remain in the political wilderness?

    • weka 25.1
      3 October 2014 at 10:19 pm

      why bother with MMP then? A single left party would homogenise left wing politics and disenfranchise more people. It might win Labour the govt, but what would be the point?

      • AmaKiwi 25.1.1
        3 October 2014 at 10:40 pm

        Because the Right is doing it and burying us.

        What a different election it would have been if instead of just National there was a farmers party, a small business party, and a real estate developers party.

        • weka 25.1.1.1
          3 October 2014 at 10:57 pm

          with one monolithic left wing party we’d have a left version of National, locking NZ into a centrist/rightist govt long term. So again, what would be the point? Power at all costs?

          Here’s another idea. How about Labour try being a left wing party and seeing if the non-vote comes out again. We’re running out of time though, because not voting will become a hard habit to break.

  26. boldsirbrian 26
    3 October 2014 at 10:24 pm

    Today’s Leunig.

    Seems appropriate with Australia entering the war in Syria and Iraq, and John Key trying to work out how we can get involved.

    Leunig – Today’s Recipe: Cult Pie

    • AmaKiwi 26.1
      3 October 2014 at 10:44 pm

      The rich countries like these kinds of wars: defense companies get richer as expensive ordinance gets blown up. But no troops on the ground to come home in coffins.

      Sorry, Key. We are cannon fodder so if you send our SAS, send body bags, too.

  27. Penny Bright 27
    3 October 2014 at 11:13 pm

    Hi folks!

    Seen this?

    FRIDAY, OCT 3, 2014 10:25 AM NZDT
    The great charter school rip-off: Finally, the truth catches up to education “reform” phonies
    Fraud, financial mismanagement, lousy results: Reports highlight awful charter schools and people are catching on

    JEFF BRYANT

    http://www.salon.com/2014/10/02/the_great_charter_school_rip_off_finally_the_truth_catches_up_to_education_reform_

    ______________________________________________________________________________________

    Penny Bright