Open Mike 07/12/2018

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 7th, 2018 - 133 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 Policy).

Step up to the mike …

133 comments on “Open Mike 07/12/2018 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jenny 1
    7 December 2018 at 6:17 am

    “We go for the head wound. Your side, you have pillow fights.’”.

    Steve Bannon to Mike Moore, on how the Right pulled off the Trump ascendancy

    James Shaw, and Jacinda Ardern announce $100 million Green Initiative package.that includes major protections for fossil fuel electricity generators.

    Hidden in the package is a total stricture against investing in any new electricity generation that might hurt the Huntly Coal fired power plant, or other fossil fuel generators.

    No wonder, no one is talking about it.

    • tc 1.1
      7 December 2018 at 6:28 am

      My what a very dark shade of green that mob have become, almost black in parts now.

    • Dennis Frank 1.2
      7 December 2018 at 7:22 am

      “The new entity – called Green Investment Finance Limited – is being set up with an aim of lowering New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions. It will operate independently from government, and be “market responsive and commercially focused.” Such a fund was posed by the former Green Party co-leader Russel Norman, and taken up by the current co-leader James Shaw who re-announced it as party policy at the Greens’ conference last year.” https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/377540/new-100m-green-fund-launched-by-government

      “It was then secured as part of the Labour-Green Party confidence and supply agreement during coalition negotiations. The government’s putting a $100 million start-up injection into the fund, which it intends to invest with business in low emissions industries.”

      “”New Zealand Green Investment Finance will be a commercially focused investment company which will work to invest with business to reduce emissions while making a profit,” said Mr Shaw in his role as Climate Change Minister. Green Investment Finance would be chaired by Cecilia Tarrant, who has a background in dry stock farming and over 20 years’ experience in international banking and finance, according to Bloomberg.”

      This strikes me as intelligent design, catering for blue-green thinking, and I can’t see why it will not become a bipartisan institution and a foundation for our transition to a sustainable future. Yeah, climate change will proceed regardless, but better to have some kind of life-raft than nothing.

      • Incognito 1.2.1
        7 December 2018 at 7:37 am

        A $100 million start-up injection into the fund might help to influence the “blue-green thinking” into stronger hues of green.

        It effectively has two different goals, which do not sit comfortably together.

        As well as boosting funds flowing into projects which cut the carbon footprint of the New Zealand economy, it also tasked with turning a profit.

        This could create a conflict, not because green technology is inherently unprofitable, but because the company is meant to act as a means to boost projects which the market is failing to back.

        https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/109123122/green-investment-fund-fund-faces-challenges-of-size-and-scope

    • Wayne 1.3
      7 December 2018 at 7:32 am

      Jenny,

      Yes, you are right that the fund is not about new electrical generation tech. But that limitation won’t be about protecting Huntly. That plant is in the last third of its life. It will be closed by 2030.

      I imagine the main reason is that large scale electrical generation is hugely capital intensive. $100 million is much better used for small and medium enterprises.

      The limitation on electrical generation does not exclude small scale clean electricity, so may well benefit new tech in home generation for instance.

      • Incognito 1.3.1
        7 December 2018 at 7:38 am

        Good comment.

        • Antoine 1.3.1.1
          7 December 2018 at 8:54 am

          $100M doesn’t get you a heck of a lot of generation. Makara Wind Farm alone would have been multiple times that

          A.

          • Dennis Frank 1.3.1.1.1
            7 December 2018 at 9:21 am

            Perhaps the rationale is to sail a medial course between old-fashioned state subsidies and the market. Assisting start-ups, for instance, and mandating particular types of schemes. Those which provide local and regional employment while serving regional development would be ideal.

            Auckland University has been operating a nursery for innovative tech businesses for a while now, that’s another useful model. James Shaw commented when he became leader of the Greens that the economy is a hybrid capitalist/socialist process nowadays. Collaboration and consensus on this basis will be essential from now on.

      • Ankerrawshark 1.3.2
        7 December 2018 at 9:21 am

        Wayne, left over from yesterday, I asked you whether you thought mallard was right to throw bridges out of the chamber for saying here comes the protection” or not. You commented in this context that mallard was biased rather than addressing the issue at hand…..

        • Wayne 1.3.2.1
          7 December 2018 at 10:39 am

          Mallard was justified. But it would have been better if he had asked Simon to withdraw and apologise, and that be enough. I am sure Simon would have realised his own error.
          But I recognise the job of speaker is very difficult. It involves a lot of instant decisions, which on reflection may not be the right ones. I think Mallard by personality is a bit impulsive, so sometimes he rushes to judgement, which he seemed to do in ejecting Simon. Leaders of major parties have to be given a bit of slack by Speakers. Things that would cause a lower ranked member to be ejected might be overlooked with leaders, or dealt with differently.
          I don’t think Mallard is deliberately biased against National. But he is inconsistent, and in my view too ready to rush to judgement. But having said that I appreciate that the Speakers role is one of the most difficult in parliament, and not every judgement will be the best possible.

          • Puckish Rogue 1.3.2.1.1
            7 December 2018 at 10:41 am

            Bring back Dr Smith!

          • Gabby 1.3.2.1.2
            7 December 2018 at 10:53 am

            I think he might be biased against wankers wayney. Just a big ol’ onanophobe.

            • Wayne 1.3.2.1.2.1
              7 December 2018 at 1:18 pm

              Gabby

              Well, a speaker who was biased against the leader of opposition would be very stupid indeed, but I guess that wouldn’t worry you.

          • ankerawshark 1.3.2.1.3
            7 December 2018 at 11:01 am

            Thanks wayne for giving your opinion re my question.

            I would have thought withdraw and apologize is more appropriate if Simon or anyone else had of been critizing another politician, but not the speaker.

            • Puckish Rogue 1.3.2.1.3.1
              7 December 2018 at 11:06 am

              My own personal view is that they’re both right. Bridges should have been kicked out for questioning Mallard and Mallard is running protection for the PM.

              • ankerawshark …
                7 December 2018 at 2:01 pm

                Cheers PR. Can you explain for me what you mean by running protection for the PM and what he is actually doing/saying that leads you to conclude that?

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  7 December 2018 at 3:39 pm

                  The impression given is that when the PM gets flustered and pressed Big Trev stands up to protect her

                  People on here say the PM is capable of looking after herself so it’d be nice if Big Trev could actually let her have a go

                  • ankerawshark …
                    7 December 2018 at 3:51 pm

                    Can you give me some examples of Jacinda getting flustered in question time? I watch it a lot and really don’t recall any.

                    Trev stood up recently in response to a question Bridges asked, but the question was problematic, something along the lines is she ducking a diving………………..I will try and look it up. Ms Ardern responded to Simons questions really appropriately in my opinion. He was asking her about operational matters and also something Winston said about the Czek guys former partner being a National Party mate. I am not sure what Ardern was supposed to say about that. That was Winston’s answer and as she said she first heard about the association between the Czek guys former partner’s National Party connections in the news. IMO it was a very dumb line of questioning aimed at keeping the story in the media.

                    I have been astonished with how articulate and to the point Jacinda is. Until she was elected leader I had no idea she was that competent.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      7 December 2018 at 4:03 pm

                      No I can’t because any example I give will be based on my perception and what I see so of course others will disagree with me and then it’ll just be a back and forth

                    • ankerawshark …
                      7 December 2018 at 4:03 pm

                      https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/combined/HansDeb_20181204_20181204_04

                      This was what got the speaker to his feet. It is a dumb question.
                      : Has she entirely washed her hands of anything to do with the Sroubek fiasco, and is she ducking and diving to get out of its way? [Speaker stands] Oh, here comes the protection.

                      SPEAKER: No—the Leader of the Opposition will leave the House.
                      PR example of Trev not protecting the PM

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      7 December 2018 at 4:21 pm

                      Why did he stand to his feet in the first place? Is asking the PM if shes ducking and diving the questions (which she clearly is) something so abhorrent the Speaker just has to end it?

                  • Pete …
                    7 December 2018 at 5:12 pm

                    The speaker’s job is to rule according to the rules. If people are being smart arses or whatever and the behaviour is directed to the PM the speaker should intrude.

                    Him not doing so is a ref allowing a sports team to cheat or commit fouls against the other captain because the captain’s big enough to look after herself.

                    They can’t handle her being PM, they have deep resentment about being on that side of the House. If in his classrooms Gerry Brownlee had to put up with equivalent bullshit behaviour I wonder what he would have done.

        • Jenny 1.3.2.2
          8 December 2018 at 5:33 am

          To get the discussion back on track. Strangely there is link to Trevor Mallard, in that Mallard, when he was the Minister For the Environment, was a big supporter of the wind farm that would have shuttered Huntly coal fired power station.

          https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/wind-farm-proposal-near-raglan-be-called

          “I consider this proposal to be of national significance. It is relevant to New Zealand’s obligations to the global environment in terms of the Kyoto Protocol. In addition, the proposal will have direct physical effects on more than one region – in this case, the Franklin and Waikato Districts and the Waikato region. In terms of security of electricity supply, the proposal will have potential effects beyond these areas,” Trevor Mallard said.

          “This wind farm is expected to meet the electricity needs of about 180,000 households per year….

          ;;;;..Because the minister considers it to be a project of national significance. The minister has made a formal assessment against the following criteria:
          a. The proposal is relevant to New Zealand’s international obligations to the global environment in terms of the Kyoto Protocol, including the proposal’s contribution towards the achievement of the target of 90per cent of electricity generation to be from renewable energy sources by 2025 as set out in the New Zealand Energy Strategy to 2050. The proposal would likely assist New Zealand in meeting its international obligations to the global environment by helping to avoid an increase in carbon dioxide emissions overall on a national scale.

          .

      • Draco T Bastard 1.3.3
        7 December 2018 at 12:14 pm

        That plant is in the last third of its life. It will be closed by 2030.

        It was supposed to be closed in 2018 because it had come to the end of its life.

        And it looks like its closing in 2022 so what makes you say that it will close in 2030?

        I imagine the main reason is that large scale electrical generation is hugely capital intensive. $100 million is much better used for small and medium enterprises.

        True. I, as a member of the Greens, would have preferred the development of our silicon reserves and production of solar panels that Shaw mentioned. That would have been billions of dollars over ten years or more but it would have had the advantage of developing our economy.

        • Wayne 1.3.3.1
          7 December 2018 at 1:25 pm

          Draco,

          The reason why I say Huntly won’t be closed by 2022, is that it provides 1,000 MW, or about 7% of total generating capacity. And it is usable when a lot of other plants are not.

          If there was an obvious plan to build in the next 3 years at least 70MW of capacity that would be available in all conditions, then the 2022 closure would be realistic. At the moment there isn’t, so Huntly’s life will be extended.

          I would expect that the plan for the next big block of generating capacity would be announced in the next 2 or 3 years, but that means it won’t actually be available until 2025 at the earliest.

          • Jenny 1.3.3.1.1
            8 December 2018 at 3:29 pm

            I would expect that the plan for the next big block of generating capacity would be announced in the next 2 or 3 years, but that means it won’t actually be available until 2025 at the earliest.

            Wayne

            Meanwhile Hauauru Ma Raki is in the starting blocks all prepped, and ready to go…..

            It’s now cheaper to build a new wind farm than to keep a coal plant running

            Despite this, we must ensure that, Hauauru Ma Raki never happens.

            Wind Farm Stalls

            The Hauauru ma raki venture, planned for the coast between Port Waikato and Raglan, was expected to inject $180 million into the regional economy, including $115m of household income over a five-year construction period. It was also tipped to create an estimated 1033 jobs once operational and generate enough power for around 170,000 homes, with its 168 turbines dwarfing the 28 turbines at the region’s next biggest windfarm at Te Uku.

            But Contact Energy, after years of indecision on the project, yesterday announced in its annual result that it would completely pull out of the project, leaving its future uncertain.

            Waikato Chamber of Commerce CEO Sandra Perry said the news was just another disappointment for the region, especially for those in the energy sector following last week’s Huntly Coal Mine lay-offs.

            After the announcement that 93 jobs were to go at the Huntly Mine, Ms Perry was hopeful that some of the younger employees facing redundancy could retrain and head into new jobs – like the construction and maintenance of the windfarm.

            “Here was an opportunity for them to retrain in the skills needed for constructing the windfarm and that’s gone now, so it’s another disappointment for the region,” she said.

            Will the government ever allow Hauauru Ma Raki to go ahead?

            The last government blew $256 million on bailing out a badly failing Solid Energy, and lost the lot. Not long after receiving this huge cash injection from the taxpayer, Solid Energy went into voluntary receivership.

            Despite this terrible waste of taxpayers money by the last government, the current government seems to not be able to screw up the courage to give one cent to renewable energy production.

            Instead choosing to have pillow fights around the margins, (Just in case they offend the powerful vested interest tied up with fossil fuels).

            Pandering to the big coal and oil investors is why we are condemned to do nothing meaningful about climate change.

      • Jenny 1.3.4
        7 December 2018 at 9:42 pm

        2030!?!

        You gotta be joking

        Should’ve been shut by now.

        6 Aug, 2015
        New Zealand Herald

        Genesis Energy announced its last two coal-burning electricity generators at Huntly Power Station will be permanently withdrawn from the market by December 2018, signalling the end of large scale coal-fired generation in New Zealand.

        The decision is being hailed as another step towards having 90 per cent of New Zealand’s electricity supply generated by renewables by 2025.

        Chief executive Albert Brantley said the company has been on track to retire the four coal/gas fired Rankine units since 2009.

        And the leg pull continues

        28 April 2016
        Radio NZ

        Today, Genesis Energy announced the plants will operate until December 2022.

        It’s like that old joke about Nuclear Fusion. The closure of Huntly coal fired power station is four years in the future, and always will be

    • Professor Longhair 1.5
      7 December 2018 at 2:16 pm

      THIS is a pillow fight….

      • Puckish Rogue 1.5.1
        7 December 2018 at 3:40 pm

        That music video is cheap, tasteless and demeaning and I watched twice just to make sure

    • Jenny 1.6
      8 December 2018 at 4:56 am

      The closure of Huntly coal fired power station would be a certainty if Hauauru Ma Raki went ahead.

      According to the wind industry association, all the plans are there, it is fully consented. All it requires is some government policy changes and some finance.

      NZ Wind Energy Association Disappointed
      at Exit of Hauāuru mā raki Development
      August 20, 2013

      The NZ Wind Energy Association is keen for Government to put policy behind the 90% target so that the electricity industry can have certainty that will drive investment in renewable generation.

      “15% of NZ’s CO2 emissions come from the electricity sector and it wouldn’t be hard to reduce those emissions by more than 4 million tonnes of CO2 per year. To meet the 90% target we need to phase out of our fossil fuel plant and install some of the renewable generation that is already consented,”
      said Mr Pyle.

      NZ Wind Energy Association understands that there may still be a future for the 500MW Hauāuru mā raki wind farm, which is commonly known as HMR.
      “HMR could also work as set of smaller embedded generation developments,” said Mr Pyle. “The
      project is fully consented and ready for construction, all it needs is the finance.”

  2. James 2
    7 December 2018 at 7:45 am

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/rural/2018/12/farmers-fear-for-safety-after-government-drops-plan-for-24-7-rural-police.html

    Farmers vote national (as a general rule) so I guess labour just don’t care about them.

    • Pete 2.1
      7 December 2018 at 9:07 am

      As a general rule the last part of that is stupid. And quite specifically it is just pathetic.

    • bwaghorn 2.2
      7 December 2018 at 10:16 am

      In the last ten years rural access to doctors has dwindled to ridiculous levels . Your fuck wit nat mates didn’t give a fuck . So you prove yourself to be I sad one eyed git as usual .

    • Gabby 2.3
      7 December 2018 at 10:52 am

      I wonder where the Rural Southland station is jimbo, seems like a big area for just the one station.

    • KJT 2.4
      9 December 2018 at 7:52 am

      Yeah right. After spending millions on MB, increasing border protection, drought and flood relief and farmers mental health. Plus Green policy about assisting farming families to a just transition to sustainable farming. “The Government does not care about farmers”. Maybe you are thinking of National, who pushed farm costs and farm borrowing so high, and wages so low, the dream, for farmworkers, of owning their own land is gone. And corporates own formerly “family” farms.

  3. Robert Guyton 3
    7 December 2018 at 8:04 am

    The decisions are made by the police, not the Government.

  4. Adrian Thornton 4
    7 December 2018 at 8:22 am

    ‘Censorship is unnecessary in a system in which everyone can speak, but only those guaranteed not to say anything worth listening to can be heard.’

    Limits Of Dissent – Glenn Greenwald And The Guardian

    Another very good piece that is well worth your time to read from Media Lens..

    http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=888:limits-of-dissent-glenn-greenwald-and-the-guardian&catid=56:alerts-2018&Itemid=250

  5. Observer Tokoroa 5
    7 December 2018 at 8:32 am

    The Guyon Espiner Show

    Every week day between 6 and 9am, we have to put up with negative sluggish solo effort of Guyon Espiner.

    He is the weakling master of “entrapment” along the lines of “have you stopped bashing your wife now.”

    Radio New Zealand should hire someone capable to do Morning Report.

    • weston 5.1
      7 December 2018 at 9:26 am

      Changing a presenter or two isnt gonna change the totally “mainstream”angle of RNZ news imo .RNZ appears to be joined at the hip with american and uk msm media , yesterdays coverage of bush seniors funeral was a good example , i wasnt expecting them to refer to the two bush family members as lying war mongering pricks but to not include even a speck of reality to their respective presidencies mind numbing to say the least !!

      • greywarshark 5.1.1
        7 December 2018 at 9:39 am

        We want to know what is going on in the USA from Radionz, but the length and breadth of it is breathtaking. Don’t hold your breath either while you wait for them to behave differently. I call it Radio because that is what we need, solid stuff not doctored to make better visuals.

    • Professor Longhair 5.2
      7 December 2018 at 2:10 pm

      Is Selwyn Toogood available?

  6. greywarshark 6
    7 December 2018 at 9:32 am

    Fonterra seling off stable long term asset Tip Top ice cream – tao pay off debt? That is the theme of a buyer of a company which has used leveraged finance. But it appears that Fonterra has squandered money in overseas ventures, and is now selling up reliable old businesses that belong to us in NZ, to pay for their crappy business sense. This is the story of NZ folks. As soon as we have something good we sell it off to overseas interests. Then we go dancing naked in the streets singing What do we want – more and we’ve got it! Then we go and waste that gained advantage, one step forward, one and a quarter back.

  7. greywarshark 7
    7 December 2018 at 9:34 am

    Listen to this when audio is available.
    Filthy rich: America’s Billionaire Bonanza
    Alice and Jim Walton from Wal-Mart Stores are the richest family in America.

    Alice and Jim Walton from Wal-Mart Stores are the richest family in America. Photo: Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Photo by Wesley Hitt, Hitt Photography

    Analysis of the grand fortunes of America’s richest people has found that wealth is concentrating into fewer and fewer hands. In its report, titled, the Billionaire Bonanza the Institute for Policy Studies think tank has shown America’s 15 wealthiest families are worth a combined $618 billion. So what’s the significance of this at a time when economic inequality has become such a major topic of discussion?

    Lynn Freeman talks to report co-author, Chuck Collins, who is the director of the Program on Inequality and the Common Good and who gave up his own inherited wealth when he was in his mid-twenties.

  8. Dennis Frank 8
    7 December 2018 at 9:48 am

    “On Thursday Māori Development Minister Nanaia Mahuta met with about 100 members of the coastal Taranaki community and signed an agreement between the Crown and the Parihaka Papakāinga Trust.” https://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/109139884/9m-reconciliation-package-for-parihaka-announced

    “Mahuta said the trust, in consultation with the community and Te Puni Kōkiri and Treasury, had produced a development plan for the $9m, which begins with a focus on healing and reconciliation and the development of urgent infrastructure.”

    “The Parihaka Reconciliation Bill was passed in 2017 and the Wellington event came 18 months after the long-awaited Parihaka-Crown reconciliation ceremony, He Puanga Haeata, held at the Parihaka in June last year.” So it’s consolidating the resolution process.

    “That event included a Crown apology by the-then Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson for the invasion of Parihaka by government troops on November 5, 1881. In Wellington, Mahuta again acknowledged the atrocities suffered by the people of parihaka and their leaders Te Whiti-o-Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi, who established the community in the mid-1860s.”

    “In the aftermath of the invasion residents were forcibly evicted, unjustly imprisoned, their leaders arrested and held without trial, homes and sacred buildings desecrated, rapes committed and a regime imposed that deprived owners of control and ownership of their land,” she said. “I acknowledge the principles of peace that the Taranaki settlement of Parihaka was based on and the mamae, the pain, of its history.”

    “Mahuta said the purpose of the package was to heal the relationship between Parihaka and the Crown, recognise the historical significance of Parihaka and provide support for the development of the community into the future.” I feel extremely appreciative that our current & previous governments have produced this outcome. It’s an excellent demonstration of consensus politics.

    “Some of the money will be earmarked for acquiring more land and upgrading the water supply, housing and other infrastructure at the site. Other possibilities include the construction of a multi-purpose centre and the creation of increased opportunities for cultural development, former trust chair Puna Wano-Bryant said in March last year.”

  9. Gosman 9
    7 December 2018 at 9:49 am

    An in-depth look at the failed state that Venezuela has become under the Chavista regime.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/06/on-the-road-venezuela-20-years-after-hugo-chavez-rise

    • mac1 9.1
      7 December 2018 at 9:56 am

      Gosman, there seems to be some reason as to why you wish to point out the failings of the Chavista regime. What are you trying to say to us in terms of logical argument by this?

      • Andre 9.1.1
        7 December 2018 at 10:37 am

        He’s trying to pick a fight with someone in that tiny minority of the regulars here (at least a couple of which are currently unable to defend their views) who appear to actually support actions taken by Chavez and Maduro.

        • Gosman 9.1.1.1
          7 December 2018 at 10:42 am

          There are still a number here who are incredibly supportive of the Chavista regime in Venezuela.

      • Gosman 9.1.2
        7 December 2018 at 10:41 am

        I think the failings of the Chavista regime in Venezuela is a textbook example of why hard left Socialism fails to deliver on the promises made (i.e. lifting people from poverty and delivering more equitable and just outcomes for all). Too often left wingers promote policies without regard to the consequences. The right can be guilty of this too but there is also a degree of realism that right wingers tend to have that is missing among many of the left. Hence the acknowledgment that austerity will cause suffering for people (especially those at the lower end of the wealth/income scale) in the short to medium term. That seems to be lacking for many on the left who tend to blame external factors in any negatives that result from left wing policies. Again Venezuela is a good example of this where the collapse of the economy is inevitably blamed on sanctions from the US.

        • Gabby 9.1.2.1
          7 December 2018 at 10:49 am

          I know gozzer, if those silly Venezuelans would just see reason and pay their protection money to the yankers everything would be peachy.

        • garibaldi 9.1.2.2
          7 December 2018 at 11:18 am

          Gosman it is pointless even trying to explain the depth of US interference in the whole of Sth America to the likes of you. Who knows, one day you might begin to understand the underhand machinations of Western Capitalist imperialism, but I doubt that you ever will .

          • Wayne 9.1.2.2.1
            7 December 2018 at 1:31 pm

            Garibaldi,

            It seems like you can’t work out that it is Venezuela’s own policies that are the cause of its problems.

            There are no particular US measures applied against South American nations. That sort of thing ended a good 30 years ago. Since then virtually all South American and Central American nations have become democracies with a wide variety of governments elected during that time. It is just that Venezuela happens to have the worst government in the whole continent. Most of its economic decisions would get an “F”.

            • garibaldi 9.1.2.2.1.1
              7 December 2018 at 2:34 pm

              Wayne if you want to believe in pax Americana then that’s up to you. The more plausible explanation is that the USA empire is dirty to the core.
              Venezuela was never given a fair chance, just like Iran hasn’t been since it ousted the American backed dictatorship.

            • Draco T Bastard 9.1.2.2.1.2
              7 December 2018 at 2:51 pm

              There are no particular US measures applied against South American nations.

              Yeah, right.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%93Venezuela_relations

              On September 15, 2005, President Bush designated Venezuela as a country that has “failed demonstrably during the previous 12 months to adhere to their obligations under international counternarcotics agreements.” However, at the same time, the President waived the economic sanctions that would normally accompany such a designation, because they would have curtailed his government’s assistance for democracy programs in Venezuela.

              Wonder how much those democracy assistance programs helped fuel the unrest of the rich that we see in Venezuela.

              On May 28, 2014, the United States House of Representatives passed the Venezuelan Human Rights and Democracy Protection Act (H.R. 4587; 113th Congress), a bill that would apply economic sanctions against Venezuelan officials who were involved in the mistreatment of protestors during the 2014 Venezuelan protests.[73]

              In December 2014, the US Congress passed Senate 2142 (the “Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014”).[74]

              On March 9, 2015, the United States President, Barack Obama, signed and issued a presidential order declaring Venezuela a “threat to its national security” and ordered sanctions against seven Venezuelan officials.

              So much for not interfering in South American states.

            • joe90 9.1.2.2.1.3
              7 December 2018 at 3:04 pm

              There are no particular US measures applied against South American nations

              Ya reckon.

              There are direct parallels between present-day Venezuela and Chile in the 1970s under Salvador Allende, where the U.S. strategy, in the words of Richard Nixon, was to “make the economy scream.”37 The United States employed the same methods of destabilization, including a financial blockade, and supported the right-wing counterrevolution, likewise manifested in shortages, lines, and street protests, among other forms of disruption. The depressed prices of Chile’s main source of foreign exchange, copper, parallels declining oil prices Venezuela. While the extent of U.S. involvement in Chile’s counterrevolution would not be fully understood until years later, when key documents were declassified, overt U.S. aggression toward Venezuela is already evident in the intensifying economic sanctions imposed by the Obama and Trump administrations, as well as an all-out economic blockade that has made it extremely difficult for the government to make payments on food imports and manage its debt.38 As one State Department representative put it:

              The pressure campaign is working. The financial sanctions we have placed on the Venezuelan Government has forced it to begin becoming in default, both on sovereign and PDVSA, its oil company’s debt. And what we are seeing because of the bad choices of the Maduro regime is a total economic collapse in Venezuela. So our policy is working, our strategy is working and we’re going to keep it on the Venezuelans.39

              https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13855

        • Dennis Frank 9.1.2.3
          7 December 2018 at 1:38 pm

          Yes, that’s my view of it too. Not long since Venezuela was cited as a model of how third world countries were becoming first world countries. Turns out that was a mirage, eh? I don’t blame the yanks for anything other than any skullduggery of the type used historically (Allende, Mossadegh, etc) which I haven’t seen claimed in respect of Venezuela. Poorly-applied socialism seems to be the cause of the problem, combined with poorly-administered capitalism.

          According to Wikipedia “today, Venezuela has the world’s largest known oil reserves”. Furthermore, “populist policies later became inadequate, causing the nation’s collapse as their excesses—including a uniquely extreme fossil fuel subsidy—are widely blamed for destabilizing the nation’s economy.”

          Basically the country is stuffed because a bunch of socialists incapable of both governance and economic management got elected. Blame democracy.

          “The Guardian travels across the nation the late Hugo Chávez dreamed of transforming, to understand its collapse”. Turned out to be a waste of time & money because the writer reported this much understanding: zero. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/06/on-the-road-venezuela-20-years-after-hugo-chavez-rise

    • mauī 9.2
      7 December 2018 at 1:14 pm

      Comparably Venezuela has done better than other small countries with oil that couldn’t protect themselves from richer countries – Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and many African countries.

    • Professor Longhair 9.3
      7 December 2018 at 2:12 pm

      Interesting that this choice piece of black propaganda comes from the British government mouthpiece, the Grauniad.

      Not that a choice fool like you would notice, of course.

    • KJT 9.4
      9 December 2018 at 8:01 am

      Why do you quote Venezuela. Of course decades of right wing corruption has nothing to do with Venezuelan problems, right?

      How about we consider Honduras, Mexico and other right wing ” success” stories. Countries that are in a lot worse State than Venezuela. The reason refugees from them are flooding the US border.
      Meanwhile the “socialist” Costa Rico is quietly doing fine. As is Cuba.

  10. Puckish Rogue 10
    7 December 2018 at 10:15 am

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/12/exclusive-pm-jacinda-ardern-to-review-housing-minister-s-kiwibuild-house-flipping-penalty.html

    ‘Newshub can reveal he didn’t even run that past the Prime Minister, and understands she only found out about it while watching our TV story.’

    “Myself, Grant Robertson and Shane Jones,” was Mr Twyford’s response to who made the call.

    Not told about Labour camp sex scandal

    Knows nothing about the Sroubek case

    What does the PM know (or do?)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability

  11. A 11
    7 December 2018 at 10:55 am

    This child will never trust the system again

    Dangled over the side of a bridge by his father, he made the courageous choice to tell his mother, a teacher, and a counselor.

    Result: Police have done nothing and the son is forced to have ongoing contact with the fruitloop father who knows all about the son’s reporting of the incident.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/109166254/police-surround-school-to-force-boy-to-visit-dad

    • Puckish Rogue 11.1
      7 December 2018 at 11:01 am

      Hopefully the influence of his mom and grandmother will keep him on the right path but yeah thats shit house

    • Anne 11.2
      7 December 2018 at 11:37 am

      This child will never trust the system again.

      Nor will he ever trust his Dad again.

      It sounds to me like it is the father who needs the counselling and attention. To do that to any kid let alone your own is beyond words. It also looks to me like this is one of those situations where the law is a complete ass – or ass***e might be more appropriate.

    • Gabby 11.3
      7 December 2018 at 12:25 pm

      I wonder if the father has police connexions.

      • DJ Ward 11.3.1
        7 December 2018 at 1:05 pm

        I wonder if the police spoke to the witnesses.

        Heard of Parental Alienation.

        • Gabby 11.3.1.1
          7 December 2018 at 6:19 pm

          Put the hard word on them eh wardy?

          • DJ Ward 11.3.1.1.1
            8 December 2018 at 12:41 am

            We have to put faith in the law as it stands.

            So to me I’m guessing from the couples history the judge has quite a large file on the couple. The police may also have knowledge of the couple.

            They decided for some reason to not censure what he has done.

            We don’t know the context of dangling off the bridge.
            We don’t know what the witnesses saw, or recorded.
            We don’t know anything really.

            Judges make mistakes. The police make mistakes.
            Both of them?
            Unless there’s some other info I’m missing, they should be trusted shouldn’t they.
            By the sounds of it, I hope someone can help them resolve the conflicts in there lives. So they can both move on being parents in a positive way.

            Or you could send him to a “man being a idiot transition to normalcy class”. Run by Labour male MPs as doing there bit.

            Did I ever say lawyers are scamming us?
            Here look! the poor serfs are fighting over stupid things.
            How much an hour? But I only get……
            What! Or I don’t get to see my kids, or give them Christmas presents!
            Nope 👎🏼

            Extortion by stealth.

            • Molly 11.3.1.1.1.1
              8 December 2018 at 8:18 am

              “We have to put faith in the law as it stands.”
              It is interesting to see you have faith in the police and court system, when previous comments indicate that you believe these systems to be “gynocentric”.

              I’m guessing it is the faith of the Sunday church attendee who puts all matters and actions of the week away for a couple of hours when it suits.
              So, your faith is informed by the fact that the visits are required to continue.

              However, in your newly found faith you haven’t considered the well-being of the young man. Reading the article, it seems that his early years were spent in a chaotic household with drugs and alcohol abuse present. Over several years, his father was overseas (from personal choice you would suppose) and the supervised visits he was entitled to were not utilised. In 2016, he returns to NZ, and applies and is granted for fortnightly weekend visits. So essentially, you have a ten year old boy with little memory or familiarity with his father that is required to stay with him every two weeks on the weekend.

              “We don’t know the context of dangling off the bridge.”
              It is this context, where the “dangling off the bridge” should be considered. Not the witnesses – or god forbid – the “dangler” who recalls it as humorous, but the perspective of the twelve year old who is on the receiving end.

              Also, note that the boy brought up the incident with a teacher first. His mother has understandably done all the things that any parent would after receiving that information. And most would understand the distress of child.

              It would not be unreasonable to revert back to supervised access until such time as you say the father completes a “man being a idiot transition to normalcy class”.

              Add in the mortification of being taken from school in such a manner by the police. I believe the young man at the heart of this issue, is the one who is carrying the burden, and any errors in judgement in this instance.

              • DJ Ward …
                8 December 2018 at 10:40 am

                So you don’t have a clue how parental alienation works then?

                When’s Stuff doing an example of a male who thinks he has been hard done by, by the family court?

                There isn’t protests outside “specific” judges houses for no reason is there.

                Who said there wasn’t bigotry in the beginning to cause the male to bail. The domestic violence act is a first in system. It is more likely that the domestic violence and even drug use were not exclusive to him. It’s also clear from the article that whatever domestic violence was present didn’t warrant prosecution. Female initiated protection orders are not rejected generally in the first instance. This is a cautionary policy as it’s often very difficult to know what the truth is. A person who is endlessly in the courts trying to exclude the other parent don’t get that cautionary response. The bullshit is more obvious.

                Men get caught out by the cautionary response. So the false accuser acting to gaurantee custody, or the biased, or exagerated cliam affects men. That’s also part of the game. Once a protection order is granted the male has no choice to defend the accusation or he doesn’t get to see his kids again. It’s about $10,000 to use a lawyer to do that, up to $100,000 if orders are not complied with or the male denies the accusation as in this case.

                This was a biased article as we didn’t see the history of the relationship and her actions etc from the males point of view. If he had ever done something nice it certainly would be not mentioned. I would also question the acticles legality as rules apply to family court reporting.

                For men supervised visits are not far off automatic with accusations of violence and drug use. They progress over time to the sexually bigoted concept of male parenting. Every second weekend. And two days a year short of Child Support rules.

                • Molly …
                  8 December 2018 at 10:56 am

                  … and your comment relating to the well-being and perspective of the young man?…. Nothing?

                  If the issue of parental alienation is relevant – then his perspective is still a factor that needs to be taken into consideration in order to deal with it.

                  You – once again – take the view that any lack of connection is solely to do with bias against the father – despite, as you say, lack of evidence.

                  ” It is more likely that the domestic violence and even drug use were not exclusive to him. “
                  I never stated it was or wasn’t.

                  “For men supervised visits are not far off automatic with accusations of violence and drug use. “
                  Which were both present, and decisions are based on the interests of the child, which is why they have their own lawyer appointed – separate from the father or mother IIRC. But even those visits were not utilised while the father was overseas.

                  DJ, think about when you were twelve and how this experience would be for this young man. If the goal is to create a strong relationship between father and son if possible, then the mortification of being removed from school will inhibit this for that young man. The father, meanwhile, has been informed of the police complaint and does not really sound like the type of person … dangling was a joke… that will be able to accommodate this knowledge with a high degree of maturity.

                  Parental alienation is not eliminated by this action – if anything it will be increased. The system needs to provide resources and processes that improve relationships, not harm them.

                  Making decisions about ongoing health and safety for children is not a guaranteed predictive outcome model, it is always problematic. The reason a cautionary response is required is that NZ has such high incidents of child abuse, neglect and homicide by family members that decisions are made – however, imperfectly – with reducing that statistic in mind.

                  • DJ Ward …
                    8 December 2018 at 11:23 am

                    The point of parental alienation is that the child is manipulated to hate everything the parent does.

                    Many men when faced with the situation that occurred at the relationship breakdown walk away. It is simply the case that they can’t handle the psycological trauma that they experience. She may have been the only violent party but he cops the blame, and she gets the child. That’s an injustice that’s hard to comprehend for people.

                    It’s common to hear “I never knew it could happen to me” from men who first experience the protection order system.

                    As I said the judge saw the file. The judge sees the history. Mothers who hate the concept of the father having a relationship will look for any reason how minor to destroy the fathers parenting relationship.
                    I suspect there is this dynamic here. I don’t believe for a second that the mother new nothing prior to the child going to the councillor. The child was likely interrogated when he arrived home. The Judge is actually protecting the child. Or the Judge would not have made a best interests of the child decision to ignore the attempt to ban the father from giving the kid Christmas presents this year, let alone see him.

                    If the parental alienation continues Judges, although very rare, can reverse custody. Because it’s not in the interests of the child to be a pawn in vindictive parental behavours. My ex was told to not do it again, and the bulshit stopped.

                    • Molly …
                      8 December 2018 at 12:02 pm

                      “The point of parental alienation is that the child is manipulated to hate everything the parent does.”
                      Yes. And my question is – how is this addressed by humiliating a young man in front of his peers, and not even allowing him to speak directly to a police officer regarding the incident before closing the file.

                      The way the system is addressing this is not going to improve the relationship. There should be better resources and processes available to the family court.

                      “Many men when faced with the situation that occurred at the relationship breakdown walk away. It is simply the case that they can’t handle the psycological trauma that they experience. She may have been the only violent party but he cops the blame, and she gets the child. That’s an injustice that’s hard to comprehend for people.”
                      And the situation happens in reverse. That’s a reality you choose to ignore. And children are harmed and killed – by a person who is supposed to care for them.

                      ” Because it’s not in the interests of the child to be a pawn in vindictive parental behavours. My ex was told to not do it again, and the bulshit stopped.”
                      The interest of the child should be paramount, as they are in a greater position of vulnerability. I see no problem with this.
                      Your personal experience is only that – not evidence that all concerns raised at family court are malicious or vindictive. Some will be justified concerns that need addressing.

                      I have criticisms of the Family Court process that don’t depend on the decisions they make. Your previous criticisms have been suspended in this particular case, because the judgement aligns with your bias. You should recognise this in your support for the judge and the police in this matter – given your vocal disapproval of the systems in many previous comments.

                    • Molly …
                      8 December 2018 at 1:29 pm

                      Taken a bit of time to try and find studies supporting your comments and have discovered that although the use of the term in court has increased in recent years, the concept of Parental Alienation was discredited by the American Psychological Society way back in 1994 and they consider that there is no scientific evidence of such a “syndrome”. In fact, the evidence suggests that the mis-use of this term has resulted in negative outcomes for children, particularly those who have been abused.

                      As Dr. Julie Ancis, who has conducted extensive research about such cases, has noted:

                      [Richard] Gardner [who invented PAS] claimed that many reports of [child sexual abuse] in the context of divorce cases were false allegations. In this connection, it is important to note that Bala and Schuman (1999) found that only 1.3% of mothers’ allegations of abuse by their children’s fathers were deemed by civil court judges to be intentionally false, in contrast to 21% of cases in which fathers had made such allegations against mothers. And Meier (2009) reports after reviewing the research that it is a mistaken belief that mothers’ allegations in child custody proceedings that fathers have sexually abused their children are usually false. [2]

                      Gardner not only thought up this label but also condoned adults’ sexual assaults on children and said that reports of child sexual abuse were elevated because sexually voyeuristic social workers made them. [1,2] Despite the fact that some judges have quite rightly forbidden the use of the term in their courts, it remains widely used in other courts and sounds more impressive coming from the lips of a testifying mental health professional than “She’s just a lying, angry woman.”

                      Ancis writes further:

                      Gardner’s (1998) questionable ethics and clinical judgment are reflected in (but are by no means limited to) the following: (1) he recommends joint interviews with an accused father and child in which the father directly confronts the child about the allegation, and (2) he interprets a child’s overt expression of fear of possible retaliation by the father as evidence of the child’s embarrassment about lying rather than as possibly a valid fear of a truthtelling child whose father is abusive.

                      The construct of PAS is unscientific, composed of a group of general symptoms with no empirical basis….

                      In regards to this case, what you describe as alienation requires more accurate definition – perhaps fear, discomfort, dislike. All emotions that are reasonably expected and understandable. To blanket any child reluctance under the term alienation – removes the child’s voice from consideration.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      8 December 2018 at 2:15 pm

                      In a survey at the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts in 2010, 98% of the 300 respondents agreed with the question, “Do you think that some children are manipulated by one parent to irrationally and unjustifiably reject the other parent?”.

                      https://i.pinimg.com/736x/51/1c/92/511c92d09f434196ffdd7c291055484e.jpg

                      Brasil and Mexixo have made parental alienation a crime. So should we.

                    • Molly …
                      8 December 2018 at 2:33 pm

                      Thanks for your gif link, which you have taken time to post, and for your report of some people saying something somewhere at sometime. Maybe, the evidential links will be forthcoming?

                      Here’s one from 2017 for you: Mapping Gender: Shedding Light on Family Courts Treatment of Cases Involving Abuse and Alienation.

                      Putting paid to your assertions of (overseas) Family Court bias towards mothers:

                      Win rates when abuse was claimed
                      Overall, fathers who were accused of abuse and who accused the mother of alienation won their cases 72% of the time; slightly more than when they were not accused of abuse (67%). When mothers alleged domestic violence, fathers won 73% of the time; when child abuse was alleged, fathers won 69% of the time. Child sexual abuse allegations increased fathers’ likelihood of winning to 81%. When there were mixed abuse allegations, fathers won 54% of the time.

                      In the study, introducing the concept of alienation increased the fathers bid for sole custody even when the allegation was found to be untrue

                      This Huffington Post article puts some of the findings in perspective:

                      One three-year study is looking at thousands of cases involving abuse, custody and alienation. A preliminary examination of 238 cases indicates that fathers accused of abuse (adult or child), who in turn accused the mother of alienation, won their cases 72 percent of the time. They won 69 percent of the time when child abuse was alleged and 81 percent of the time when child sexual abuse was alleged. In the seven cases where judges credited both abuse and alienation in the ruling, the father won every time. When the court credited abuse but not alienation, fathers only won 16 percent. The researchers defined winning as any time the litigants received some or all of what they requested, ranging from more visits to full custody.

                      As the author study comments, the protection of the child should be paramount:

                      ““Assess the abuse first. Put alienation completely to one side,” she said. “If it happened or if it may have happened, you have no business going on about alienation…You can talk about it, but don’t talk about it as a way of denying abuse.”

                      Thanks for making me take the time to look for studies on alienation. I will refrain from using that term from now on, as it is one that has been rejected by the psychology profession. I would not have looked further if not for this discussion.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      8 December 2018 at 5:54 pm

                      So 72% of the time when accused of abuse, and the father cliams it’s a alienation behavour, the courts examine both sides of the argument and conclude the evidence supports his cliam.

                      Wow.
                      Lying about being on the pill, dishonesty. Abuses the child.
                      Paternity fraud, dishonesty. Abuses the child.
                      Abuse allegations, dishonesty. Abuses the child.

                      Looks like a trend.

                    • Molly …
                      8 December 2018 at 6:56 pm

                      Your framing of the issue of court bias as towards women for custody is incorrect.

                      Parental alienation is not a recognised syndrome by psychologists, although the justice systems uses it in court cases, where it is used to benefit many accused of child abuse.

                      Did you even look at the link?:

                      ”
                      (ii) Win Rates by Gender
                      The gender parity evaporated, however, when analyzing the
                      impact of alienation claims on outcomes. First, fathers were more than twice as likely as mothers to win the case when claiming alienation. This represents a statistically significant bias in favor of fathers; a father merely alleging parental alienation was 2.3 times as likely as an alleging mother to receive a favorable decision. 59 Bias toward fathers was even more evident when alienation was credited. In these cases, fathers won almost every time (95%), while mothers whose alienation claims were credited won only 80% of the time. This was a statistically significant benefit to fathers — they were 4.3 times
                      as likely to win as mothers.”

                      The study investigated cases and produced findings as opposed to your links that are essentially opinion pieces. This study looked at the custody hearings and decisions and found that despite preconceptions – there was not a bias for mothers to get custody of a child. And if a claim of the scientifically rejected premise of alienation was submitted, the bias towards the male’s custody preferences increased.

                      “Wow.
                      Lying about being on the pill, dishonesty. Abuses the child.
                      Paternity fraud, dishonesty. Abuses the child.
                      Abuse allegations, dishonesty. Abuses the child.

                      Looks like a trend.”
                      Refers to a non-scientific concept to justify prejudice.
                      Provides links to non-verifiable sources and cherry picks data.
                      Accuses all systems for bias against males until such systems deliver outcomes that provide the male in the incident with support – and then trust is expressed that all is working as it should.
                      Paternity denial is not considered fraud. Male contraception or responsibility is not accepted.
                      Consider the use of the aforementioned ‘alienation’ concept to be a success because the male wins in court. No consideration for the child.

                      There is a trend. And your repeated memes and failure to connect to evidence when you disparage women on this site is it.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      8 December 2018 at 9:07 pm

                      Parental alienation is not recognised as a mental disorder. Nearly got added recently.

                      But it is recognised as a behavour. It has underlining illnesses like sycopaths, narcissists, borderline personality disorder. Like I said it is also recognised as a crime in 2 nations as it should be in NZ.

                      It’s child abuse.

                      If what your saying is correct about men winning all the time.

                      Explain disputed custody in NZ being 94% women 6% men.

                      They may win…sorry fend off being banned from ever seeing there child. They may get the token men only version of shared custody, every second weekend. But the nightmares the victims suffer is no win.

                      The only winners are lawyers and those who get away with it, and those that make there former partner suffer through the process of clearing there name and being allowed to be a parent again.

                      Feminists hate this subject because they desire complete power and control. They wish accusations are automatically believed with no right of challenge. Hence our protection order system designed by feminists. If feminists had there way as Ang Jury wishes, protection orders would be automatically granted to all women in relationships. When the man says no or misbehaves he can be automatically imprisoned.

                      You are doing the misrepresenting and cherry picking Molly. You picked a Dr, nobody in there right minds listens to and blatantly uses propaganda techniques to misrepresent her “yes she’s a feminist” argument. You have tried to say parental alienation doesn’t exist. That’s simply an absurd cliam.

                      These cases occur at the ratio of about 10:1 so guess who wants alienation removed as a defence? Guess who’s lives get destroyed by this abusive power and control behavour?

                      Like describing paternity fraud as not fraud. Lying on a legal document is not fraud if a woman does it. Got to love feminist thinking.

                      Hey ladies. You can make any cliam you like. You can instantly remove a father from a child’s life with a bulshit protection order. Even if you are exposed as lying you will not be held to account. Having got full custody with the protection order, if your attempt to permanently ban him from parenting fails because he spends tens of thousands lining lawyers pockets don’t worry. Just demand a psychologist report to give a big delay. He is likely to only get supervised visits for quite a while. If he is a good boy he might even get men’s custody which is every second weekend, a big win for men. Don’t worry however as you can always make something up and have another try. By then your brainwashing the child will be perfected and the child will be old enough and able to reject the father using Lawyer for Child.

                      https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vFA556no1Ys/WXSipUwTbyI/AAAAAAAABdw/XNvo5S4HBgguWd4CXOdrt_PeX5TZJUHowCEwYBhgL/s1600/enablers.jpg

                    • Molly …
                      8 December 2018 at 9:27 pm

                      “You are doing the misrepresenting and cherry picking Molly. You picked a Dr, nobody in there right minds listens to and blatantly uses propaganda techniques to misrepresent her “yes she’s a feminist” argument. You have tried to say parental alienation doesn’t exist. That’s simply an absurd cliam.”

                      I linked to a published study that looked at the actual statistics in actual custody cases. Any links you have provided are to self-authored, non-reviewed websites or blogs. When I visit them, they also do not link to any peer-reviewed research.

                      The research disputes your continual claim of bias towards mothers in custody cases.

                      You don’t actually link to any research or evidence, and repeat statistics as if that should be enough. It isn’t.

                      You have shown yourself as a person with no regard for truth, balance or integrity.

                      Link to your stats – or don’t include them.

                      Explain how a child abused by a parent – male or female – is protected by the legal use of parental alienation. If you read the study, even when abuse is confirmed, the defence of alienation often overrides the child’s natural inclination to avoid further abuse.

                      Whenever I have time, I will ask you for the answers you don’t seem to have, because the damage done to families by your perspective is immense. I don’t have time for your extreme view of the female sex which relies on wilful blindness to reality.

                    • Molly …
                      8 December 2018 at 11:58 pm

                      Finally DJ! A link to an site that links to an official document, which is here by the way. Better than nothing.

                      I’ve had a look at the OIA response and can’t see what your point is.

                      The data provided is not detailed enough to make conclusions from.

                      What is it that you are extrapolating from this response?

                      Because none of this information requested actually is in regards to children and their wellbeing, which is telling.

                      Oh. Just looked further and send that Zane Collins just keeps sending OIA requests. Has he a purpose, is the data collated? Looked again at that is all it is – people posting their OIA requests to share.

                      Link to the information that supports your statements. I’m not going to look for them for you. For a while there, I thought you might have linked to something of substance.

                • Molly …
                  8 December 2018 at 11:57 pm

                  Sorry, duplicate to wrong thread. Have corrected and deleted.

    • JanM 11.4
      7 December 2018 at 2:19 pm

      I simply don’t understand how a system can get so badly off track that the child’s earnestly expressed desires cannot be paramount in this situation!

      • DJ Ward 11.4.1
        8 December 2018 at 6:48 pm

        Where do you draw the line in the sand?

        The child’s earnestly expressed desires.
        In this situation.

        What desires must be complied with?
        What situations?

        We could very easily end up with a nation of little Hitlers bossing adults around.

        But as long as Lawyers make a killing representing children bossing adults around everything will be perfect right?

        One of the stupidest things we ever did was get coned by the legal Proffesion into creating Lawyer for child.

        Anybody that thinks stealing a great big pile of money from parents is in children’s best interests is an idiot.

        • Molly 11.4.1.1
          8 December 2018 at 7:02 pm

          “One of the stupidest things we ever did was get coned by the legal Proffesion into creating Lawyer for child.
          Only if you disagree with the preferred outcome being in the best interests of the child.

          This particular case has a father that dangled his twelve year old son over the side of a bridge for a “joke.”

          You then call the child’s perfectly normal response – alienation. Which is – as mentioned – a commonly used legal term – but one refuted by psychologists.

          Firstly, if the person who is at the receiving end does not genuinely believe it is funny – it is not a joke.

          Secondly – unlike adults, children are compelled to how they spend their time. It is the adults that should ensure that they are secure and not fearful. This adult – instead, acted for his own reasons – not his son’s.

          If that young man feels dislike, fear or any other negative emotion in regard to this incident towards his father – that is a natural response – not alienation.

          “Anybody that thinks stealing a great big pile of money from parents is in children’s best interests is an idiot.”
          (BTW, a lot of the websites and support groups you have mentioned seem to spend a lot of time talking about money, their anger, disparaging past partners and railing against the system. Have yet to see someone speaking about their children from the child’s perspective. Perhaps, as you indicate, it is not about the best interests of the child for them.)

  13. marty mars 13
    7 December 2018 at 11:42 am

    RIP Pete

    “Pete Shelley, lead singer of the punk band Buzzcocks, has died aged 63, his bandmates have said.

    “It’s with great sadness that we confirm the death of Pete Shelley, one of the UK’s most influential and prolific songwriters and co-founder of the seminal original punk band Buzzcocks,” the band said on Thursday evening.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/dec/06/pete-shelley-lead-singer-of-buzzcocks-dies-at-63

    • gsays 13.1
      7 December 2018 at 2:55 pm

      Yep, getting to the age where your musical heroes start to pass away.

      Mark E Smith now Pete Shelley, a couple of great punk/post punk innovators.

  14. Herodotus 14
    7 December 2018 at 1:21 pm

    When our Min of Education lies and tells us there is no more $$ available to pay teachers what they deserve (and many other deserving workers who are being feed the same lie by the government) Perhaps he should be made aware what the priorities really are.
    https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/2018670594/chris-hipkins-to-teachers-there-is-no-more-money
    Then explain this
    “Essentially this is the situation with overseas-based student loan borrowers (OBB) who, at June 30, were $1.2 billion in arrears”
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/108970059/inland-revenue-loses-track-of-thousands-of-kiwi-student-loan-debtors-in-oz
    Now I accept this govt is better than the last, yet it is fast becoming just another govt that under delivers and breaks their promises (The list of broken promises is starting to lengthen)🤥

    • Bewildered 14.1
      7 December 2018 at 5:27 pm

      Can we start a list, was a very popular repeat post here for the last government Maybe Mickey can administer it if he has time to focus on the COL ineptitude rather than fossicking around in National’s dirty laundry Eye patch would need to come of though😊

  16. Tony Veitch [not etc.] 16
    7 December 2018 at 5:29 pm

    Just heard on the 5 o’clock news – they’re going to toss the whole inefficient and ideologically driven ‘Tomorrow’s Schools’ crap in the waste basket!

    It’s only taken nearly thirty years! The whole stupid neoliberal bullshit of treating schools as businesses and forcing competition between them, to the foreseeable detriment of the poor, hopefully will be trashed!

    If this coalition government does nothing else, this will be a lasting improvement and benefit to this country!

    • Puckish Rogue 16.1
      7 December 2018 at 7:25 pm

      Thats good, one of the things I recall from that time was the general run down of trades and apprenticeships in favor of the belief that university was the way, the only way to get ahead and NZs been suffering ever since.

      Bad from Labour for implementing it and bad from National for continuing it

      Mike Rowe talks a bit about it from an american point of view:

      • joe90 16.1.1
        7 December 2018 at 8:26 pm

        run down of trades and apprenticeships in favor of the belief that university was the way

        Arse. The decline in apprenticeships is on the rationalisation and shuttering of government departments and local bodies by Prebble, Douglas, Birch and their successors.

        https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/3dc0b914-df6e-43a1-945b-04cbb1f5d5da.png

        https://canterbury.royalcommission.govt.nz/documents-by-key/20120813.4973/$file/ENG.SCA.0002.RED.pdf

        • Puckish Rogue 16.1.1.1
          7 December 2018 at 8:34 pm

          Ok the reason is debatable but I’m sure we can both agree the outcome was very bad and if the government can, somehow, bring trades and apprenticeships back to equal footing with tertiary training then that’d be a very good thing and the government would, rightly, receive all the kudos

          • joe90 16.1.1.1.1
            7 December 2018 at 9:14 pm

            Bring back state funded national trade schools*.

            Apprentices recruited by businesses spend a year at three term, full time, industry specialised schools, returning to businesses as full time employees during term breaks.

            Thereafter, for the duration of their indenture, they’re full time, distance learning, employees of the recruiting businesses, attending as required bi-annual/quarterly block courses and skill specific secondments.

            ( I spent a year at the old NZED school in Ladies Mile as a fitting apprentice, along with electrical apprentices and NZCE cadets.)*

  17. eco maori 17
    8 December 2018 at 10:33 am

    I know that it is a group like these two who are funding the Paris riots thats is plain to see . The fund the ALTIdiot movement in Europe to. People like the Koch brothers are poisoning not only our environment they are poising the worlds weak minded people with proper gander and lies why they have more money than one could count in million lots and the GREEDY are still not satisfied they are drunk on POWER and so little time left for them they don’t care about OUR decedents future enviroment or mother earth all the people who denie climate change now or in the past can be linked to these old muppets ragan bush bush trump . Ana to kai.
    Is this the extent of the Koch brothers’ involvement with groups based in the UK? Who knows? I have not yet had a response from the Charles Koch Foundation. But I see these payments as part of a wider pattern of undisclosed funding. Democracy without transparency is not democracy.

    • George Monbiot is a Guardian columnist
    How US billionaires are fuelling the hard-right cause in Britain.
    That Spiked magazine’s US funding arm received $300,000 from the Charles Koch Foundation suggests a hidden agenda Until now, there has been no evidence that Charles and David Koch have funded organisations based in the UK. But a few weeks ago, a reader pointed me to one line he found in a form submitted to the US government by the Charles Koch Foundation, which showed money transferred to a company that appears to be the US funding arm of a UK organisation. Once I had grasped its significance, I set up a collaboration with the investigative group DeSmog UK. We could scarcely believe what we were seeing.Dark money is among the greatest current threats to democracy. It means money spent below the public radar, that seeks to change political outcomes. It enables very rich people and corporations to influence politics without showing their hands.
    Among the world’s biggest political spenders are Charles and David Koch, co-owners of Koch Industries, a vast private conglomerate of oil pipelines and refineries, chemicals, timber and paper companies, commodity trading firms and cattle ranches. If their two fortunes were rolled into one, Charles David Koch, with $120bn, would be the richest man on Earth.
    we can thank these 2 for trump as well as others brexit is desined to let the altidiots to sweep into power in Europe and its working ka kite ano
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/us-billionaires-hard-right-
    britain-spiked-magazine-charles-david-koch-foundation

    • eco maori 17.1
      8 December 2018 at 1:08 pm

      Here is proff that the Justices system of the world are made by the wealthy to serve the wealthy to rob an suppress crap on the 99.9 % manly the minority cultures .This idiot knows that the ultra wealthy can break all the laws of the land and they will be able to buy themselves a get out of jail free card . Why else would the rich trump behave like he is above the law because he has got away with breaking laws his whole life its not ROCKET SCIENCE to work that out tangata
      So often, the President would say here’s what I want to do and here’s how I want to do it and I would have to say to him, Mr. President I understand what you want to do but you can’t do it that way. It violates the law.” ana to kai he pours bad stuff on the common poor people and does not give a stuff .

      https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/07/politics/donald-trump-rex-tillerson/index.html

  18. eco maori 18
    8 December 2018 at 3:32 pm

    Eco Maori can see the altidiots are using there billions again to distort our reality by suppressing the storys about the school children striking for action against climate change there were heaps of storys on this subject just 2 days ago I will keep everyone motivated to combat the carbon idiots who suppress our reality ka kite ano P.S Eco Maori is proud of the school children striking for climate 2

    The school climate strike was a new generation’s activism – and I’m so proud
    Naaman Zhou
    Naaman Zhou

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/30/the-school-climate-strike-was-a-new-generations-activism-and-im-so-proud

    Climate change strike: thousands of school students protest across Australia

    ‘Strike 4 Climate Action’ brings thousands of students together in defiance of prime minister’s warning

    The best banners from the strike day

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/30/climate-change-strike-thousands-of-students-to-join-national-protest

  19. eco maori 19
    8 December 2018 at 3:39 pm

    P.S we know that some rich neo has a grip on someone’s hip pocket his hypercritical views changes like his undies the brown person who wants to be white ana to kai

  20. eco maori 20
    8 December 2018 at 6:38 pm

    Kia ora Newshub there you go Melisa the altidiots are using there money to set up proper gander around the world and Paris.
    Anglia Merkel served her country well ka pai .
    Ka pai Newshub the food companies just cannot help there selves in pursuit of profts
    we all not that the more sugar and salt you put into food well up goes sales & there profts.
    sugar is a bad prouduct killing millions .
    The Grammys is controlled by neo capitalist money its a sham don’t watch the manipulating bull——-I can see that a mile away just by the nominees who have been nominated they manipulate everything .
    james fields deserves what he got ka pai running over peasfull minority protesters and killing them .
    Well one would not get away with that scam in Aotearoa as there is a assistant in the auto check outs. scientist why not come up with tec to get the worst thieves in our society as well the white collar crimes rip trillions from our society.
    Those poor children from Yemen its a tragedy proxy wars.
    I seen that video of the Australian boxing match wild life v man lol I know they can be dangerous the man and Kangaroos .
    Niki I think the last time the Black Caps Won against Pakistan there were riots in the stadium and streets Ka pai Black caps .
    Ka kite ano