Open mike 05/02/2012

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 5th, 2012 - 87 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…

87 comments on “Open mike 05/02/2012 ”

  • Comments are now closed

    • lprent 1.1
      5 February 2012 at 9:31 am

      As DV points out below. A good example of climate change.

      You seem to chant global warming over and over again like a mantra without ever engaging your brain to think what that means in the real world. Which is why you find weather disconcerting.

      I suspect from your previous comments that you’d prefer the the wold operated on simple models like black body radiative models or daisyworld that have no real world equivalents. Then you don’t have to consider that increasing warmth in the artic (the polar regions are those that are warming fastest) provide the energy to push colder air masses to lower latitudes. This is the process of atmospheric and oceanic thermal mixing. It is chaotic and you have to deal with itin terms of probabilities.

      Oh and whoever is in the way of a warming polar region pushing out cold air masses will get colder than usual weather..

      Dumbarse.

      • Oscar 1.1.1
        5 February 2012 at 4:55 pm

        I think it’s you that are the dumbarse Lprent. Blind to your own ignorance of the cycles of this planet. The circumventing going on at the Polar Regions is nothing more than an after effect of the axial tilt of the earth changing as we go through precession.

        Eventually, the polar regions will move to a different area in the northern hemisphere. The way that it’s going means that Greenland will probably become ice free again, but another landmass will no doubt replace Greenland as an ice covered region.

        How about opening your blinkers and looking at the long game. Global warming is DEAD. Climate Change is a crock of shit with those two words being bandied about by scientists and people like you, who really have no idea. You can talk all you like about feedback loops and radiative models, but when you ignore the biggest thing that makes us human, intuition, then you’re losing out on quite a bit more that science can’t explain. I’m going to stake my flag quite firmly and say that this country will get a second snowstorm similar to last year again this year.

        Did you hear about the Black Sea freezing? How do you corroborate that to CO2 causing freezing. Dick.

        It’s useless trying to educate those like you, who believe they’re all knowing just because they got a degree in Earth Science in the 1930’s. Newsflash: The Sun is the biggest driver of temperature in our Solar System. Of course you’ve already poo pooed that idea, so I’d love to hear where you think our temperature rates on this planet come from.

        Perhaps you should read up a little bit more about precession and axial tilt which causes ice ages and interglacials. It’s no coincidence that the poles have both moved so far from where they originally were a few thousand years ago, and still were until recently. Read here, and get a bit more open minded

        • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1
          5 February 2012 at 4:57 pm

          Good Star Trek script mate.

          Still, I think that general economic collapse will sort out greenhouse gas emissions more effectively than 10 Kyoto Protocols.

        • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1.2
          5 February 2012 at 6:00 pm

          It’s not so much “Read here, and get a bit more open minded” but Read here, and lose all tough with reality. I’d suggest you lay off the mind altering substances but it’s obviously already far too late.

        • lprent 1.1.1.3
          5 February 2012 at 6:15 pm

          Have you looked at the time period that earth’s orbital precession takes? Something like 25k years. Now explain to me how we can see effects in decades? I expect that your “intuition” tells you that it happens almost daily…

          Did you read my answer to grumpy about why they’re getting cold air masses moving further south? It is the same reason as it has happened before. Umm here is a post from 2009 A note to the idiots. Weather is not climate. and this was the polar view chart of oddities of heat that month.

          Notice that then there were higher than usual temps in the polar areas and colder than usual areas in the continental landmasses adjacent? That is what happens when a pile of cold air gets pushed south at the north pole.

          Rather than expending all of that energy on ‘intuition’ and getting my attention. Why don’t you exert enough effort that I don’t have to point out stuff I wrote two years ago.

    • Jenny 1.2
      5 February 2012 at 10:59 am

      Peak Oil – Climate Crisis vs. More Motorways

      “Yes. Do Panic about Global Warming”

      Suzanne Goldenberg reports for ‘The Guardian’:
      (Forwarded from the respected website, ‘Common Dreams’.)

      The The Wall Street Journal has received a dressing down from a large group of leading scientists for promoting retrograde and out-of-date views on climate change.

      In an opinion piece run by the Journal on Wednesday, nearly 40 scientists, including acknowledged climate change experts, take on the paper for publishing an article disputing the evidence on global warming.

      The offending article, No Need to Panic About Global Warming, which appeared last week, argued that climate change was a cunning ploy deployed by governments to raise taxes and by non-profit organisations to solicit donations to save the planet.

      It was signed by 16 scientists who don’t subscribe to the conventional wisdom that climate change is happening and is largely man-made – but as Wednesday’s letter points out, many of those who signed don’t actually work on climate science.

      In major blow to the fossil fuel industry roading lobby in this country, the Labour Party has just issued a press release attacking the concept of continueing to build more motorways.

      Press Release – New Zealand Labour Party
      The Government’s ‘roads of national significance’ are tipped to become increasingly insignificant as high oil prices take their toll on road use, Labour’s Transport spokesperson Phil Twyford says.

      http://auckland.scoop.co.nz/2012/02/road-use-falling-yet-roading-a-major-priority/

      This is a definite policy shift for Labour, considering that when they were in office, they approved the $billions for the unloved Victoria Park tunnel and the, still to be built, gigantic Waterview motorway and tunnel project.

      We should praise the Labour Party when they stand up to corporate lobbyists to advocate for sensible public policy.

      But as well as this, we have a duty to call on Labour to go a little bit further. And agree to take this new policy direction into the real world.

      Now would be the perfect time to get Labour to agree to scrap the Waterview tunnel, and advocate for the $2 billion put aside for this project, to be instead used to fund free and frequent public transport.

      This would achieve three public goods.

      1) Protect the local community and environment from the wholesale destruction caused by the construction of a motorway and tunnel through houses and sensitive wetlands.

      2) Get tens of thousands of Aucklanders out of their private cars, dramatically cutting traffic congestion and fossil fuel use at the same time.

      3) Create permanent ongoing jobs

      Though Phil Twyford’s concern is peak oil, the need to cut back fossil fuel use intersects with the environmental destruction caused by continued use of fossil fuel.

      The Un-aligned Left, Greenpeace, the Green Party and concerned locals, all opposed to the Waterview motorway extension need to link up with the Labour Party to finally drive a stake through the Waterview motorway extension project, and divert the $2 billion already put aside for this project, into public transport, instead.

      The Waterview Motorway extension is one of the Roads of National Significance, or RONS that the powerful roading lobby who call themselves “The Well Connected Group” want the taxpayer to shell out for.

      Already the self serving “Well Connected Group” have got the public to shell out half a $billion for the boondoggle, that is the Victoria Park tunnel. (The unloved, gold bricked tunnel to nowhere, except under a relatively small corner of Victoria Park.) Even if you like motorways, for a fraction of the cost they could have gone over the surface.

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

    • james 111 1.3
      5 February 2012 at 1:15 pm

      Grumpy sure doesnt look like Global warming to me (your words) LMFAO

      • grumpy 1.3.1
        5 February 2012 at 8:53 pm

        Time to catch a plane to Berlin – my work here is done…………

        Talking to people here, Berlin -16c, by the way, they realise they have Ben conned and taxed in the name of global warming.

        They are not stupid and see through the rising defensive hysteria of the wealth distribution/global warming activists and their attempt to rename as climate change.

        • lprent 1.3.1.1
          5 February 2012 at 8:57 pm

          Oh give it a rest grumpy….have you read any of my replies? Or have you reverted to your bad old days of being a fire and forget troll. You know what happens….. Responded to at least some of someone’s replies

          Be aware that I am making allowances for the pain of access whilst travelling…

          • grumpy 1.3.1.1.1
            5 February 2012 at 10:11 pm

            Thanks for your indulgence lprent, but working, living and travelling in -16c conditions does make AGW/Climate Change/Weather/Climate issues float to the top of the heap (as it were).

            BTW Waitangi Day made the news over here again. Just finished convincing half a dozen to come over for Christmas but had to do a bit more work after that news item!!!!

            • Hateatea 1.3.1.1.1.1
              5 February 2012 at 10:15 pm

              Why, were they planning on going to Te Tii with John Key next Waitangi Day?

              If it is better weather, it is difficult to believe that Christmas in Summer needs the hard sell to anyone in Europe this week 😉

              • Vicky32 …
                6 February 2012 at 9:02 am

                If it is better weather, it is difficult to believe that Christmas in Summer needs the hard sell to anyone in Europe this week 

                It’s all relative, hey? I was up at 05.00 to get my friend Daisy on to the Welly train this morning, and she was wearing a massive parka – she’s just returned from a year teaching in Brazil. It’s Feb 6 and we were both freezing cold. “Summer” this year has been spent in jumpers and coats, even the mosquitoes have found it too cold to appear for the past 3 years (I am thankful, but still, some warmth would be nice!) Ah, but it’s global warming isn’t it? 😀

            • lprent 1.3.1.1.1.2
              5 February 2012 at 10:19 pm

              *grin*

            • RedLogix 1.3.1.1.1.3
              5 February 2012 at 10:20 pm

              Try and think of it like this grumpy. The AGW argument hinges around relatively slow climate temperature trends in the order of about 1 degC/decade.

              Right now Europe is many 10’s of degC lower than normal… that’s not climate. It simply means that on average while it’s cold in Europe it MUST be warmer than usual somewhere else. Probably the Arctic.

              I trust you also understand Conservation of Energy?

            • lprent 1.3.1.1.1.4
              5 February 2012 at 10:35 pm

              And last year there were heat waves and massive peat and grass fires throughout the north. Amazing how extreme the weather gets when quite small amounts of energy are added to the system….

            • rosy 1.3.1.1.1.5
              5 February 2012 at 10:39 pm

              An Economist article from the last cold snap in Europe…

              Europe’s cold winters and the warmth of the planet as a whole might even be linked. There is some evidence that the summer heat stored in the newly ice-free seas north of Siberia may induce shifts in the atmosphere’s circulation, when the heat is given up to the air in subsequent autumns and winters. Those shifts might in turn encourage seasonal patterns in which the Arctic is warm and the continents below it cold, as in early 2010. Since the sea-ice area looks likely to go on shrinking, such a link, if indeed it exists, would probably mean more cold winters in Britain and much of Europe.

              Other analysis of weather patterns show that while it’s cold, it’s not as cold as it might have been.

          • grumpy 1.3.1.1.2
            5 February 2012 at 10:13 pm

            …and, BTW……I do know how an evaporative chiller works 🙂

            • lprent 1.3.1.1.2.1
              5 February 2012 at 10:33 pm

              Yeah but this isn’t like that. That is black body type system.

              You have to think vertically and with average densities in the air column. Strong warm air systems tend to push cold air because of evaporated water densities in warmer air are higher in the column. But unlike a evaporative cooler there is also a horiziontal mechanism as well

              So rising heat in the poles locks heat in water particles and physically pushes relatively cool air masses down latitude. All driven by the heat locked in water particles

  2. Dv 2
    5 February 2012 at 7:56 am

    Yes that is an excellent example of the CLIMATE CHANGE the earth is experiencing.
    Well picked up.

  3. Pete George 3
    5 February 2012 at 8:10 am

    This subject has been raised here so for those who are genuinely interested Peter Dunne explains:

    UnitedFuture on Asset Sales

    I see some are suggesting that UnitedFuture has abruptly changed its position on asset sales since the election, having previously been opposed to all such sales. This is simply not true.

    (detailed explanation)

    UnitedFuture’s confidence and supply agreement, negotiated with National after the election, confirms all these points and is therefore consistent in every regard with our pre-election policy. That is why UnitedFuture will support the Government’s plans to introduce a mixed-ownership model for the four energy companies and Air New Zealand.

    Consistency explained. If the usual suspects are consistent here they will attack people and party and ignore facts. Futile facing facts.

    • The Voice of Reason 3.1
      5 February 2012 at 8:45 am

      Meh. It’s no surprise that the Hair was committed to selling out Kiwis before the election, Pete. I think that was pointed out to you on a daily basis.

    • mickysavage 3.2
      5 February 2012 at 8:48 am

      I am not sure of anyone here Petey who thought that the coiffured one had changed his position.  I had always thought that his position was supportive of the selling off to overseas interests of our assets it is just he was being a bit disingenuous by suggesting that because only 49% would be sold that things would not change.  So your angsty complaint is a bit misplaced.

      I see that Dunne is suggesting that this is to allow the power companies to raise capital.  So Petey which of it is it?  Are the share sales to:

      1.  Reduce debt,
      2.  Be spent on schools and irrigation schemes,
      3.  Allow the power companies to raise capital? 

      Which is it?

      Signed
      Confused, Auckland 

    • mikesh 3.3
      5 February 2012 at 8:48 am

      Peter Dunne changed his position, albeit prior to the election, not out of personal conviction, but to accommodate National. He should change his name to Dr Faustus.

      • Lanthanide 3.3.1
        5 February 2012 at 11:50 am

        Yip. Dunne is on record as saying he personally doesn’t agree with asset sales, but is going to go ahead with them anyway. Because that way he gets a nice ministerial salary.

        • Pete George 3.3.1.1
          5 February 2012 at 12:11 pm

          This is what he is on record as saying:

          While wholesale asset sales are not UnitedFuture policy, we had as long ago as the 2005 general election promoted selling shares in selected state assets to promote their expansion. This was similar to the mixed ownership model National was to promote at last year’s election.

          I don’t know what record you are claiming.

          • Colonial Viper 3.3.1.1.1
            5 February 2012 at 12:26 pm

            Dunne is in favour of a Ministerial BMW.

            • Pete George 3.3.1.1.1.1
              5 February 2012 at 12:37 pm

              Fallacy. I’ve travelled with him in his car, it’s not a BMW.

              • The Voice of Reason …
                5 February 2012 at 12:50 pm

                How did the chauffeur’s uniform fit, Pete?
                 
                All Crown Ministers have access to Beemers, by the way, so I presume you are being typically disingenuous and you were riding in one of his privately owned vehicles at the time, not the Ministerial one.

                • Pete George …
                  5 February 2012 at 1:04 pm

                  I don’t know if he uses the BMW service much or at all.

                  I do know for a fact he self drives a supplied non-BMW. The BMW accusations so far are nothing other than unsubstantiated dissing.

                  • fender …
                    5 February 2012 at 1:54 pm

                    How much does Dunne pay you to cruise the web making apologies for his selfish choice of policy support? Must be more than just the odd road trip in his car, or is the opportunity to be in the presence of your hero enough?
                    Hes got you under a spell PG…WAKE UP!

                • james 111 …
                  5 February 2012 at 1:16 pm

                  Hulun and Heather Simpson signed us up to the BMWS if I remember correctly

                  • mickysavage …
                    5 February 2012 at 1:20 pm

                    Those were the cheap really fuel efficient ones that were remarkably cheap to run.

                    BTW your spelling is atrocious. 

                    • The Voice of Reason …
                      5 February 2012 at 1:36 pm

                      James doesn’t like powerful women. They might take his todger away and leave him nothing to think with.

          • McFlock 3.3.1.1.2
            5 February 2012 at 12:39 pm

            If it’s been “promoted” since 2005, why is the only quote he has from last year?
             
            And the only quote he has is for “expanding the capital base” of the companies, not paying down needless debt.
             
            And, more importantly, why does that quote not actually state whether United Future would support partial asset sales?
            He’s done what you do, Pete – asked a number of questions, provided banal answers, and the tried to point out that all the other parties had said pretty much the same thing. This does not indicate a policy platform.
               
            So the question I have is: are you two kindred spirits, or did you pay to go to a Pete Dunne’s Say A Lot But Mean Fuck-all Training Seminar?
              
             

            • Pete George 3.3.1.1.2.1
              5 February 2012 at 12:45 pm

              Gordon Campbell on Peter Dunne’s casting vote on asset sales

              As the late Roger Kerr pointed out in 2005, Peter Dunne went into the election that year advocating the 40% selldown of the government’s stake in most SOEs. So Dunne can hardly be accused of not being a consistent advocate of the partial privatisation model – he could more accurately claim that it was his idea in the first place.

              Referencing: http://m.nbr.co.nz/article/privatisation-a-third-rail

              You may recall that United Future was in coalition with Labour from 2005-2008.

              • McFlock …
                5 February 2012 at 1:46 pm

                Faboo.
                Your half-arsed attempt (as a former #3 on list candidate) at providing evidence of party policy pissed me off so much that I actually trawled through scoop – amazingly, you are correct.
                      
                Back in the day when United Future had more than one MP, it sold out on policies then, too.
                   
                Now, some of us love to follow the minutae of policies and press releases from every single party over the last 2 or 3 elections in order to determine our vote for the upcoming, but I’m not sure many people are like that. Many people tend to follow what people say during the current campaign on the lead issues of the campaign.
                   
                SO as a former candidate and current party activist, what indications did United Future give as to their support of National’s asset sales plan during the 2011 election campaign? As far as I can tell, Dunne promised to be a moderating force and drew a line in the sand, as it were (a line that was, luckily, beyond what Key had proposed).
                  
                How is providing the single needed vote to pass irreversible policy unaltered going to “keep a government to a reasonable, centrist path“?
                   
                 
                 

                • Pete George …
                  5 February 2012 at 2:22 pm

                  what indications did United Future give as to their support of National’s asset sales plan during the 2011 election campaign?

                  Read the link that was at the start of this thread.
                  http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/unitedfuture-on-asset-sales/

                  (as a former #3 on list candidate)

                  Another incorrect claim.

                  • McFlock …
                    5 February 2012 at 3:41 pm

                    Link summarised previously as “And, more importantly, why does that quote not actually state whether United Future would support partial asset sales?
                    He’s done what you do, Pete – asked a number of questions, provided banal answers, and the tried to point out that all the other parties had said pretty much the same thing. This does not indicate a policy platform.”.
                     
                    And, bugger me – number 8? My apologies. Obviously, at number 8 on the list, we wouldn’t expect you to know a damned thing about what your party explicitly promised during the campaign.
                     
                     

          • Lanthanide 3.3.1.1.3
            5 February 2012 at 9:44 pm

            Didn’t take too long to find it, Pete:

            Yesterday, he acknowledged he had campaigned on saying that “in principle we were not in favour of the sale of assets”.

            “We don’t as a principle think the case can be made across the board for selling state assets.

            “But we recognised that the Government had nominated the energy companies and Air New Zealand for partial sale and, on that basis, we said provided there were controls around the level of ownership and the level to be sold, we would support them.”

            http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6123338/Dunne-holds-key-to-asset-sales-vote

            In principle he doesn’t agree with asset sales, but because the government has chosen specific things and is only going to sell some of it, he’ll go along with the ride (because he’ll get a ministerial salary out of it).

        • Treetop 3.3.1.2
          5 February 2012 at 12:19 pm

          “Because that way he gets a nice ministerial salary”

          A friend said to me the other day that Dunne has to be being paid to not go against asset sales. They lived in his electorate for 25 years and everytime they saw him, they raised the run down Johnsonville Mall and Transmission Gully.

    • ianmac 3.4
      5 February 2012 at 12:28 pm

      Interesting that the Key Group laud the 51% as maintaining control of State Assets.
      Yet it is said that Mrs Rheingold in buying 5%+ of Fairfax with the belief that she will have influence over this media. She paid over $200 million in spite of a falling share price. Wonder what she would be able to do with 49% influence?

  4. Carol 4
    5 February 2012 at 8:12 am

    So National and its supporters continue to beat up the racism/xenophobia angle on the Crafar farms sale. How did we get to this, and why hasn’t there been a more considered and in-depth public debate about the sale of NZ land, especially productive land, to wealthy foreign individuals and corporations?

    So today Stuff is beating up the racism angle.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6368089/Who-is-really-buying-New-Zealand

    Fears that China is gobbling up New Zealand land are misplaced, official figures show.

    Americans, Canadians and even Liechtensteinians are buying far more land.

    Figures released by the Overseas Investment Office show that of the 872,313 hectares of gross land sold to foreign interests over the past five years, only 223ha were sold to Chinese.

    People from the landlocked principality of Liechtenstein had purchased 10 times more land than the Chinese – 2,144ha in the same period.

    The top buyers were the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia and Israel. The United States had 194 purchases for a total of 193,208ha.

    The figures do not show if there are any New Zealand ownership shares involved.

    I am appalled that this much productive NZ land is being sold to wealthy foreign interests, whether it be Liechtensteinians, Canadians or Israelis.

    But I also think we should look more closely at the differing impact on NZ from sale of non-productive compared with productive land; and to wealthy individuals versus big coporations; to expats setting up home and business in NZ versus people continuing to live elsewhere; and to independent individuals/organisations compared with sales subsidised by powerful foreign governments.

    The big question for me is NOT why Crafar has resulted in such an outcry, but why there hasn’t been similar criticisms of some of the other sales?

    As far as I’m aware, there are some specific issues that have resulted in the Crafar sale getting media attention. Some of it is likely related to be anti-Chinese attitudes from some. But also, there have been some Kiwi farmers who were a little peeved they they were not able to buy one of the farms, beacuse they were sold as one job lot.

    But also, there was a fair bit of media attention a while back, because the first main contender to buy the farms was a dodgy Hong Kong based outfit that misrepresented themselves.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/6286635/Third-arrest-over-failed-Crafar-farm-bid

    The alleged web of lies a Chinese consortium wove to try to buy up 16 North Island farms then sell them for a profit has become more tangled, with a third arrest yesterday.

    […]
    Wang acted as the face of Natural Dairy in New Zealand when trying to buy the former Crafar farms from receivers through her own company UBAH. She and Chen allegedly conspired to purchase them and on-sell them, for a profit, to Natural Dairy.

    Hong Kong officials say Yee worked with Wang and Chen to fudge the earnings of Crafar farms, proffering fake documents to Natural Dairy showing that the farms had made a profit of $18.5 million in the year to May 2009. They actually made a loss of about $30m.

    On the basis of this allegedly false financial information, Natural Dairy made a $230m bid to the Overseas Investment Office for the properties.

    But lets have more in-depth and critical public debate about the benefits and damages to NZ of the sale of different kinds of land, productive land and other assets to wealthy foreigners, which ever country they are from.

    • Bill 4.1
      5 February 2012 at 9:21 am

      Does what benefits or damages NZ (whatever that construct might actually be) have a corresponding positive or negative impact on you and me? Surely that’s the first question that needs answered.

      My initial response might be based on a cursory glance at the impoverished state of British people at the height of empire when Britain was enjoying enormous benefits. Or then again, I might consider the lot of the majority of US citizens given that the US is the worlds most succesful economy. And the conclusion would have to be that what’s good for a country (ie an economy) does not automatically bestow corresponding benefits on a citizenry.

      I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again…it doesn’t matter two hoots who owns land. We are excluded from any and all say over the use of the land and its resources regardless of who the owner is. And all owners (restrictive legislation aside and whether state or private entities) are generally in it for the money.

      And that money and any benefits that may flow from it are under the control of the owners (and the state insofar as taxes are paid) We simply don’t have a look in.

      So all this stramash about who should own what comes down to expressions of mere emotive preference for particular masters. But aren’t they all more or less the same in the end? And isn’t the position of any and all of them illegitimate in the final analysis?

      • Carol 4.1.1
        5 February 2012 at 9:57 am

        Bill said:
        Does what benefits or damages NZ (whatever that construct might actually be) have a corresponding positive or negative impact on you and me? Surely that’s the first question that needs answered.

        Yes, good question. As a non-land owner, I do tend to assume that “good for NZ” means good for all the citizenry. IMO, there’s something wrong with an economic analysis or theory that is used to show that a country is economically successful, when there is no widespread benefit to all or most of the people living in that country.

        However, as well as the international divisions between the ruling elite and the rest, there is an overlapping and intersecting hierarchy of more and less powerful/wealthy nation states. The results is that there is an added impact on struggling Kiwis (in a country that is somewhere in the middle of the global hierarchy) when wealthy foreigners push up the price of land (and subsequently rents, while lowering wages, employment etc), and siphons off profits overseas.

        While globalisation has weakend the power of nation states, it’s still largely through national political processes and struggles that the relatively powerless majority can exercise any influence and control over their circumstances.

        But, I agree, such local struggles are set within a wider global struggle against the transnational elites.

      • Draco T Bastard 4.1.2
        5 February 2012 at 2:01 pm

        But aren’t they all more or less the same in the end?

        Yes they are. Privatisation and capitalism is the cause of the growing poverty that we see in the world.

    • Huginn 4.2
      5 February 2012 at 6:40 pm

      +1 Carol

      . . . and thinking of the way that Ironbridge loaded Mediaworks with debt to finance their purchase, it might also be a good idea to have a look at how overseas buyers structure these investments after the sale goes through.

      Are these sales actually contributing to the country’s high levels of private overseas debt that are being used to justify further asset sales to overseas buyers?

  5. The Voice of Reason 5
    5 February 2012 at 9:59 am

    A nice shout out from Hillary Clinton:
     
    Secretary of State Waitangi Day Statement
     
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    Office of the Spokesperson

    For Immediate Release
    February 4, 2012
    2012/167

    STATEMENT BY SECRETARY CLINTON

    New Zealand Waitangi Day

    On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to send best wishes to the people of New Zealand as you commemorate the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, Te Tiriti o Waitangi, this February 6.  This is a time to reflect on New Zealand’s rich history and promising future.

    The United States and New Zealand share a vibrant partnership, shaped by the Wellington Declaration and our years of friendship and cooperation.  We look forward to continuing to deepen our relationship in the coming year as we work together promoting peace and stability, protecting the fragile Pacific environment, expanding economic opportunity, and standing up for global human rights.  The United States stands by New Zealand as you continue to face the challenges brought by earthquakes in the Canterbury region.  Your resilience and strength have set an example for the world.

    As you observe this special day in New Zealand and in places around the world, I wish all New Zealanders a happy Waitangi Day, and a year filled with peace and prosperity.

    • Pete George 5.1
      5 February 2012 at 11:08 am

      A pity then that most of the shouting here is disgraceful, and overshadows any good that some are trying to achieve with it.

      The bitch spiral seems out of control in Waitangi. Have to look elsewhere for positive aspirations.

      • Colonial Viper 5.1.1
        5 February 2012 at 11:29 am

        A pity then that most of the shouting here is disgraceful, and overshadows any good that some are trying to achieve with it.

        Disgracful? Yeah, and that’s without the pitchforks, torches, guillotines and gallows!

      • Draco T Bastard 5.1.2
        5 February 2012 at 2:04 pm

        Not quite as disgraceful as those who are trying to shut the conversation down.

        • Pete George 5.1.2.1
          5 February 2012 at 2:27 pm

          Not sure what ‘the conversation’ refers to – the protest of the moment? Bbut who is trying to shut conversations down? Those shouting over invited guests?

          I suspect those involved in organising the events at Waitangi get a bit sick of their conversation being hijacked. Free speech is principle that should be applied evenly, yes?

          • Draco T Bastard 5.1.2.1.1
            5 February 2012 at 3:30 pm

            You can’t have a conversation if only a few are allowed to speak. Or, to put it another way, if only those who were organised to speak spoke then there wouldn’t be a conversation.

            Maybe those shouting over others are pissed off that they’re not being heard any other way.

  7. Colonial Viper 7
    5 February 2012 at 12:06 pm

    Good one Herald – Rahui Katene does NOT hold the seat of Te Tai Tonga any more: You got the Wrong Maori!

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10783561

    Activist Tame Iti and the Maori Party’s Te Tai Tonga MP Rahui Katene accompanied Labour leader David Shearer onto the marae after 11am, by which time most of the protesters had left. Mr Shearer was joined by Labour MPs Parekura Horomia, Shane Jones, and Andrew Little.

    I wonder if it may have been Rino Tirikatene, Labour MP for Te Tai Tonga since Nov 26, who was walking with Shearer.

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

    • The Voice of Reason 7.1
      5 February 2012 at 12:23 pm

      Well spotted, CV, that’s a classic. I also like this quote from Key after he was forced to cut and run:
       
      “I come to pay my respects to the elders of the marae and at the end of the day I’m just not a Prime Minister that cuts and runs.”
       

      • Craig Glen Eden 7.1.1
        5 February 2012 at 12:28 pm

        when he had done exactly that cut and run!

        • Jackal 7.1.1.1
          5 February 2012 at 1:29 pm

          John Key said he wasn’t going to cry… that’s because he ran away instead. Key also said he hadn’t run away because he was scared, however people attending Waitangi said they’d seen fear in his eyes.

          • Treetop 7.1.1.1.1
            5 February 2012 at 2:01 pm

            Oh dear when that nice Mr Key wants to speak at Waitangi he is unable to be heard due to creating a backlash by not respecting section 9 of the SOE legislation. When he sits in a public cafe and converses he gets upset when he can be heard.

            Were there covert police cameras operating at Waitangi?

            I personally would not have used my invitation to go to Waitangi to discuss section 9 of the SOE legislation as this was not appropriate. Only a desperate impatient person would be so stupid.

      • james 111 7.1.2
        5 February 2012 at 1:19 pm

        Great that Key said he will return!! because he wont let a few activists put him off. Seem to remember Hulun not returning to Waitangi ,and you guys supporting her fully. Slightly hypocritical one would have to think

        • mickysavage 7.1.2.1
          5 February 2012 at 1:29 pm

          Go on post a few links showing that the Standard’s writers supported Helen’s decision not to return to Waitangi.  Go on, I dare you …

        • mik e 7.1.2.2
          5 February 2012 at 1:44 pm

          Key has learned from Dr Maori brash[bash] bad publicity is good publicity get the red necks on side.
          Divide and conquer.

          • The Voice of Reason 7.1.2.2.1
            5 February 2012 at 1:56 pm

            Dunno if its working, mik e. The rural red necks down my local have started calling the PM some nasty names of late, mostly variations on Egg Foo John. That’s the most polite one, the others are much less tasteful.

      • Draco T Bastard 7.1.3
        5 February 2012 at 2:07 pm

        I’ve seen him cutting and running from the House when he couldn’t/wouldn’t answer the questions put to him by the opposition.

    • Hateatea 7.2
      5 February 2012 at 4:32 pm

      Goodness me. It isn’t as if they look very alike, I mean, there is the obvious gender difference, then there is the height and …..

  8. The Chairman 8
    5 February 2012 at 12:46 pm

    Joyce is trying to lead a debate to gain greater acceptance of foreign investment

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10783089

    So let the debate begin:

    Offshore investors rob local investors of opportunity and resources.

    Offshore owners rob control and increase political influence that can lead to local law changes.

    Offshore investors also borrow money locally, crowding out and limiting funding for local businesses.

    The more profitable the project, the smaller the net inflow of foreign funds and the larger the outflow of profits.

    Profits repatriated by offshore investors tend to exceed total funds invested. Exacerbated by transfer pricing and other forms of creative accounting. Often offsetting any claims of large local tax benefits eventuating.

    Offshore owners tend to restructure and layoff staff.

    In many cases, jobs that are created would be created whether or not the project was offshore or locally owned.

    The only benefit seems to be it encourages the transfer of management skills, intellectual property, and technology. However, they can also be bought, hired or developed.

    • DH 8.1
      5 February 2012 at 2:20 pm

      If foreign investment was as good as Joyce claims then he’d be able to prove it with facts & figures from existing foreign investment in NZ. After all, there is over $300billion already invested in this country by foreigners. Perhaps someone should tell Joyce we can see for ourselves how wealthy it has made us all & how the economy is roaring alone because of it.

      How much more overwhelming evidence does Joyce want before he wakes up that it’s not doing us any good? Is $400billion enough, maybe a $trillion?

      (NB – Aussie investment alone is said to be +$100billion, overseas lenders have invested over $150billion so the final tally must be well over $300billion.)

  9. The Chairman 9
    5 February 2012 at 12:49 pm

    A new economic recovery tax to address our capital shortfall?

    If the Government were to introduce a new economic recovery tax at say a mere one dollar a week, that would produce around two million dollars a week, 8 million a month, or around 100 million a year, to invest in new value added exporting ventures.

    A two dollar a week tax would double that amount with most workers not even noticing the loss from their pay.

    This would stimulate the local economy (jobs) and generate new wealth while reducing our over reliance of foreign capital.

    • ianmac 9.1
      5 February 2012 at 1:11 pm

      Three things about that Mr Chairman:
      1. It would deny the Government the excuse to make further cuts.
      2. It would be too easy.
      3. How would the rich get richer.

      • Colonial Viper 9.1.1
        5 February 2012 at 1:38 pm

        Much better to hire some investment banking consultants to draw up the contracts you need to sell off the country, you don’t even need your own Ministery staff to do that work, so you can gut the public sector out at the same time.

        That’s what I call efficiency!

        • mik e 9.1.1.1
          5 February 2012 at 1:48 pm

          And all the foreign Banksters money will never be seen in this country again and you can bet your bottom dollar they come from countries that are deliberately keeping their currency low[printing or devaluing theirs + subsidising fuel and agriculture]!

    • Ten Miles Over 9.2
      5 February 2012 at 3:12 pm

      There ain’t 2 million net taxpayers in NZ

  10. The Voice of Reason 10
    5 February 2012 at 2:32 pm

    The New Black: is Cut and Run going to be this year’s Smile and Wave?
     
    Political obituaries often feature moments like Key’s cowardice this morning as being pivotal in public perception. Given the inevitability of Key’s departure to Honolulu in this term, I’m picking that we will see the phrases ‘John Key’ and ‘cut and run’ in close proximity right up until the plane leaves. Hell, the title of the cash in biography writes itself: From Smile and Wave to Cut and Run; the John Key story.

    • Anne 10.2
      5 February 2012 at 2:54 pm

      Can someone find the TV video clip of John Key ridiculing Helen Clark for refusing to return to Waitangi Treaty celebrations after her experiences? It was well aired at the time – was it 2007? It would be pleasurable to watch again after his ‘cut and run’ this morning!

      I bet he blames it on his minders. He will say they made him do it.

      • Ten Miles Over 10.2.1
        5 February 2012 at 3:15 pm

        Please John Key – just take tomorrow off. There’s nothing to be gained by going back to Waitangi.
        Let the rich Maori explain to the poor Maori how they’re going to reduce inequality among their own people. Give them their sovereignty and let them do to each other what their warrior customs proscribe.

      • Lindsey 10.2.2
        5 February 2012 at 3:57 pm

        Helen Clark was verbally abused by that convicted violent criminal Titiwhai Harawira. You know, the one surgically attached to John Key the minute he steps onto the Marae.

  12. rosy 12
    6 February 2012 at 12:45 am

    The national party’s favourite donor and secret visitor might have to defend himself against financial skullduggery again

    an investigation by a court-appointed liquidator into the relationship between Johnston’s parent company, a plethora of interlinked companies and Ashcroft’s British Caribbean Bank (BCB), is raising as many questions as it answers. Even MPs are taking an interest in an obscure company that only a few weeks ago they had never heard of.