Open mike 07/06/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:55 am, June 7th, 2014 - 203 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike 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 …

203 comments on “Open mike 07/06/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. North 1
    7 June 2014 at 8:02 am

    The unhinged one Richard Prebble in the Herald this morning defines Banks’ guilt as a “clerical error”. Watch for the unhinged one to downgrade this with detail little known to the masses that Banks is in fact a cleric.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11269328

    In the same article Mr Higher ShonKey Standards says he’s no more able to give Banks advice about Banks’ resigning than he’s able to give David Cunliffe advice about he Cunliffe resigning. ??????

    Leaving Planet Key and travelling to a somewhat less farcical place – this morning’s Herald editorial: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11269399

    • Paul 1.1
      7 June 2014 at 8:17 am

      I’m sure the media were somewhat different when Mr Field was found guilty.

      • North 1.1.1
        7 June 2014 at 8:25 am

        Field was Labour/Polynesian……..Polynesian/Labour. Both bad but the latter particularly excited the scribblers. Jonolists…….overall not very bright boys and girls who went to a ‘school’ rather than……

        • Kiwiri 1.1.1.1
          7 June 2014 at 8:38 am

          Part of me is thinking – stay, oh dishonest Banks, be true to your real self, please keep planet Key going on its last dying days, you are a boon, a blessing, a treasure, a priceless asset to the National-Act-and-pretend Administration.

    • felix 1.2
      7 June 2014 at 9:41 am

      “The unhinged one Richard Prebble in the Herald this morning defines Banks’ guilt as a “clerical error”. “

      I think you should rephrase that. Prebble described Banks’ crime as a clerical error. Your comment reads as if he described the judge’s verdict as a clerical error.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.3
      7 June 2014 at 11:17 am

      Watch for the unhinged one to downgrade this with detail little known to the masses that Banks is in fact a cleric.

      A cleric for Mammon?

      In the same article Mr Higher ShonKey Standards says he’s no more able to give Banks advice about Banks’ resigning than he’s able to give David Cunliffe advice about he Cunliffe resigning. ?

      Oh, he can give advice but that’s all he can do. Banks stepping down is up to Banks. As he’s an electorate MP no one can force him out. We had this same problem with Philip Field.

      • aerobubble 1.3.1
        7 June 2014 at 11:35 am

        ACT are toast. Robbing a child’s grave!

        On the Nation, the Greens were ready for the nonsense, and immediately cited the statistic for the number of ACT MPs having criminal records.

        And now ACT has chosen a candidate, See More.

        I can see the black humor.

        See More of ACT if you haven’t alredy.

  2. Once was Tim 2
    7 June 2014 at 8:16 am

    FYI …. coming up on RNZ National Nomi Prins at 9am – should be worth a listen

    • greywarbler 2.1
      7 June 2014 at 12:11 pm

      Yes Nomi Prins is worth a listen +100

      Nomi Prins is a senior fellow at public policy think tank Demos, journalist and author whose work focuses on corporate governance, economic policy, Wall Street and the political/regulatory environment. Before becoming a journalist, she served as a managing director for Goldman Sachs in New York and ran the analytics group at Bear Stearns in London. Her new book is All the President’s Bankers: the Hidden Alliances That Drive America’s Power (Nation Books, ISBN: 978-1-56858-749-3).

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday
      Nomi Prins: bankers and power ( 39′ 4″ )
      09:05 Senior fellow at public policy think tank Demos, and author of All the President’s Bankers: the Hidden Alliances That Drive America’s Power.

      • ianmac 2.1.1
        7 June 2014 at 3:02 pm

        Yes. Listened to Nomi/Kim. Very important.
        Weird how the population just accepts the status quo. Meanwhile back in NZ still a worry.

        • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1
          7 June 2014 at 4:27 pm

          Nomi Prins talks further on All the Presidents Bankers

          And how the relationship between big government and the big banks is now more dangerous than ever. (Interview on Democracy Now).

  3. North 3
    7 June 2014 at 9:09 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11269222

    Claire girl, where do you get off implying that Pasifika people’ve fully got the number of Mr Higher ShonKey Standards ?

    That’s how my Samoan house guest reads you anyway. Polite you were however…….unlike my house guest……..no mention of ‘that’ dancing.

  4. phillip ure 4
    7 June 2014 at 9:26 am

    (ever wondered why you ‘hang out’ for junk-food..?

    ..it’s ‘cos yr addicted to it..eh..?..

    ..food-scientists are the new evil/mad-scientists of our times..)

    “..5 Unhealthy Foods Engineered to Be Addictive..

    “..Food scientists use dangerous chemicals to make you eat and buy –

    more junk food..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.alternet.org/5-unhealthy-foods-engineered-be-addictive

    • The Al1en 4.1
      7 June 2014 at 9:31 am

      I haven’t had a wimpy half pounder with cheese in over 15 years.
      I think you are addicted to ‘meat is murder’ musings.

      I’ll go another 15 years without a wimpy if you can go 10 minutes without posting sh!t. Deal?

      • phillip ure 4.1.1
        7 June 2014 at 9:53 am

        i guess ‘shit’ is in the eye/nose of the beholder..eh..?

        ..as your offerings in this forum most certainly have a certain faecal-‘odour’ about them..eh..?

        ..care to give us just one example of anything even remotely useful you may have posted here..?

        ..and pray tell of what possible interest to anyone at all..cd be the timespan since you last ate a ‘wimpy-burger’..?

        ..(do they even still exist as a commercial-offering..?..)

        (and that was 12 mins between posts..so no cheezy-wimpys for u 4 another 15 yrs..eh..?..)

        • The Al1en 4.1.1.1
          7 June 2014 at 9:59 am

          If I’d said 30 minutes you would have failed 😆

          “care to give us just one example of anything even remotely useful you may have posted here..?”

          Modesty (and probably ignorance) prevents me from answering, but as always, I’m happy to leave it to others to decide the worth of my postings, not that I’m driven by popularity contests.

      • phillip ure 4.1.2
        7 June 2014 at 11:05 am

        heh..!..this one is for you..allen..

        “..Here are the foods that will help you fight off aging..”

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/06/anti-aging-diet-_n_5454398.html

        ..i use all of those..bar the fish..

        ..and funny story..!

        ..the link also has 12 of the foods/drinks that make you look old..and for why..for each one..

        ..and i wd bet that all (?) of those are part of yr diet..

        ..eh..?

        ..but you have shown yrslf in the past to be fairly adamant in yr ignorances..

        ..eh..?

        • The Al1en 4.1.2.1
          7 June 2014 at 11:12 am

          “..Here are the foods that will help you fight off aging..”

          Fight off ageing 😆 I wear my wrinkles and full head of more salt than pepper hair with pride.

          “12 of the foods/drinks that make you look old..and for why..for each one
          ..and i wd bet that all (?) of those are part of yr diet..”

          Then you would be as good a fortune teller as you are political pundit. 😆

          “you have shown yrslf in the past to be fairly adamant in yr ignorances”

          I am nothing but the sum of my parts. Ignorance maybe, stupid, not so much.

          “.eh..?”

          That’s what cockney orses eat.

          • phillip ure 4.1.2.1.1
            7 June 2014 at 11:44 am

            “..and full head of more salt than pepper hair with pride…”

            ew..!..have you got dunne-hair..?

            ..(do you run yr fingers thru it..?..as an affectation..?..ew..!..)

            ..this is an ugly picture you are building here..

            ..a very wrinkly dunne..?

            ..am i close..?

            • The Al1en 4.1.2.1.1.1
              7 June 2014 at 11:53 am

              I usually have a number three at the barbers, and from memory Dunne is 100% grey with a bouffant, so like I wrote earlier about your skills as a pundit, not even close :smirk:

              As for very wrinkly, I’ll have to say no. Not a Peter Pan by any means, but mostly they’re laughter lines… Thanks for increasing the count Phil.

        • The Al1en 4.1.2.2
          7 June 2014 at 6:32 pm

          “if you can go 10 minutes without posting sh!t. Deal?”

          So you know Philip, I don’t always think that. Some of your observations are spot on, so keep on trucking them out.

          “Then you would be as good a fortune teller as you are political pundit”
          “your skills as a pundit, not even close :smirk:”

          See above.

          “.eh..?” “That’s what cockney orses eat.”

          I did eat a horse curry once, but it gave me the trots.

  5. The Al1en 5
    7 June 2014 at 10:32 am

    National’s plan to address the housing crisis?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/27729033

    • aerobubble 5.1
      7 June 2014 at 11:56 am

      Its real funny that the major stall to the growth of the economy, is housing.

      Auckland’s need to grow upwards.

      And how regulation is holding back the economy.

      And its all supported by ACT, who loath the idea that the great unwashed will move into
      Epsom in numbers. Apartment numbers.

      • The Al1en 5.1.1
        7 June 2014 at 11:59 am

        “Auckland’s need to grow upwards.”

        Or spread it’s population around the country.

        • aerobubble 5.1.1.1
          12 June 2014 at 2:36 pm

          Costs more, and would be opposite to what has been seen globally. That cities grow upwards and become seeds for future economic prosperity.

          Oh, wait, that’s it, you want prosperity in the rural areas.

          oops, shouldn’t have voted National then. National loath the idea of any competition for dairy.
          I mean Farmers need the shear joy of carrying NZ to sustain them.

          And the bankers need farmers to be heavily indebt, buying and selling inflated priced farmland.

    • joe90 5.2
      7 June 2014 at 3:32 pm

      National’s plan to address the housing crisis?

      Under way.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11268470

  6. adam 6
    7 June 2014 at 10:36 am

    Her comes more the propaganda against the left – look at the photo – and the way this article is structured. It does have the feel of more of the same old women hating BS from the herald.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11269286

    • Stephanie Rodgers 6.1
      7 June 2014 at 10:56 am

      The photo is awful, but I don’t think the article itself is too bad. Though Young notes “anti-abortion groups were quick to condemn the proposal” she hasn’t actually included any of their comments, and sums up the current legal situation pretty well (though she pushes the fact that abortion is still a crime in NZ way down, and that’s something that often surprises people.)

      • weka 6.1.1
        7 June 2014 at 11:19 am

        Interested to see that the GP have made this a party issue rather than a conscience issue. Good move.

        • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1
          7 June 2014 at 11:39 am

          Do you know what proportion of Green members voted to approve this policy? A conscience issue would risk Green MPs not holding the line. Is that the advantage that you see in the House with this approach?

          • Ad 6.1.1.1.1
            7 June 2014 at 11:48 am

            My wife just stopped her Green donation ap and membership over this issue.
            So it’s not for everyone.

            • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.1.1
              7 June 2014 at 12:15 pm

              And there will be many others. IMO the views of abortion liberalisation activists do not correspond to that of the majority of women.

              While the illegitimate death of an unborn child must remain a serious criminal offence punishable by prison time, I am certainly for the decriminalisation of professional, highly regulated and medically performed abortions.

              However in my view any move to significantly relax access to abortions of the fetus all the way up to 20 weeks is absolutely the wrong move. At that stage the fetus is just 10-12 weeks away from being viable as a high probability survival baby. A baby born at 30-32 weeks will require only moderate levels of medical care initially to live a full and complete life.

              But this is simply my personal opinion. IMO because of its potential significance on so many thousands of young lives per year, way more so than the “anti-smacking” legislation, any move to significantly liberalise abortion access all the way through to 20 weeks should also go to a full referendum.

              • Stephanie Rodgers …
                7 June 2014 at 12:59 pm

                I consider myself an “abortion liberalisation activist” and I disagree entirely with your comment.

                Yes, if you just walk up to people out of the blue and say “Let’s kill babies in the womb, good times!!!” you’re probably going to get a negative reaction.

                But, shockingly, that’s not how the discussion goes. Alison McCulloch did a road trip through NZ to promote her book and talk to people about abortion, and she said that many people were quite happy to discuss the issues, and very interested to learn that abortion is still a crime in NZ.

                Every time I’ve seen decriminalisation raised in a political context (i.e. by the Greens this week and at Labour Party conferences) there’s always a few people who don’t realise it’s still a crime. Once we get that message more widespread, I’m sure there’ll be a lot of will to change.

                As for 20 week abortions, as I’ve said on other threads, the idea that pregnant people just go “god, I’m bored of this foetus” at 20 weeks is a complete myth. Unfortunately, things go wrong in pregnancy and late-term abortions are sometimes required to save lives (yes, I know, how ironic 🙄 ) And sometimes – because of archaic, condescending processes like we currently have in NZ – people don’t have access to abortion services earlier.

                If you support the right of pregnant people to choose not to be pregnant – safely, legally, and early – and to access necessary medical care, then you should support decriminalisation, support comprehensive sexuality education and access to contraceptives, and please, stop with the inaccurate and irrational arguments about late-term abortions.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  7 June 2014 at 1:41 pm

                  and please, stop with the inaccurate and irrational arguments about late-term abortions.

                  There’s nothing “inaccurate” or “irrational” with my point of view.

                  1) At 20 weeks the baby is just 60-70 days away from being a fully viable person with a ~90%+ chance of growing up into a full, contributing human being. (And today, medical care routinely saves pre-term babies born at just 26-28 weeks).

                  2) Liberalisation of abortion access all the way to this very late 20 week mark is a step which will affect the lives and deaths of thousands of babies every year. I stand personally against it.

                  3) This is more significant than the “anti-smacking” legislation and should therefore be taken to a full referendum of the people.

                  Every time I’ve seen decriminalisation raised in a political context (i.e. by the Greens this week and at Labour Party conferences) there’s always a few people who don’t realise it’s still a crime.

                  I fully support the decriminalisation of highly regulated, professionally performed and medically appropriate abortion. Involvement in the illegitimate death of an unborn child should remain a serious crime punishable by prison sentence.

                  In my view the Green Party core ethos is one of nurturing, encouraging and supporting the full, healthy and complete development of NZ children into adulthood through whatever difficulties, poverty, economic hardships etc. that arise on the way. I’m not sure this policy is consistent with that.

                  • Stephanie Rodgers …
                    7 June 2014 at 1:47 pm

                    Your concern is noted. 🙄

                    It’s always very illuminating (and transparent) when people keep raising issues which are so rare or exceptional they’re irrelevant to an argument. In this case, you want to keep talking about 20-week abortions, ignoring their extreme rarity, because this allows you to keep pushing the message that abortion law reform is extreme, dangerous, wacky, unpopular – but without coming clean and acknowledging you oppose a person’s right to choose what to do with their own body if that body is pregnant.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 1:54 pm

                      In this case, you want to keep talking about 20-week abortions, ignoring their extreme rarity

                      Perhaps I am mistaken – I thought that the new Green Party policy removes the additional hurdles currently in place for abortions conducted beyond the 12 week mark, and goes so far as to liberalise access to abortions all the way to 20 weeks as being routine and no different to an abortion at the earlier 12 week mark.

                      Is this not the case? I am quite happy to be corrected by you.

                      but without coming clean and acknowledging you oppose a person’s right to choose what to do with their own body if that body is pregnant.

                      There is no such thing as an immutable, unconditional right to take the life of another human being.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:09 pm

                      I pose the question to you again, CV

                      Is it possible that a law could be fair law if it would provide someone other than the pregnant person an unconditional, immutable right to tell that person what can and cannot be decided about their own body and life?

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:14 pm

                      BL. In society, the vulnerable, the voiceless and the very young must always be given additional protections and consideration under the law.

                      if it would provide someone other than the pregnant person an unconditional, immutable right to tell that person what can and cannot be decided about their own body

                      No one has asked for this or suggested that this be the case.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:28 pm

                      “Perhaps I am mistaken – I thought that the new Green Party policy removes the additional hurdles currently in place for abortions conducted beyond the 12 week mark, and goes so far as to liberalise access to abortions all the way to 20 weeks as being routine and no different to an abortion at the earlier 12 week mark.

                      Is this not the case? I am quite happy to be corrected by you.”

                      Given that yesterday you were questioning the GP for not having a policy on contraception when they actually have one, I think the onus is on you to back up your statements (and do your own research). AFAIK the GP has made a policy announcement but the actual policy detail hasn’t been released yet. In other words you are making shit up to support your argument.

                      I suspect that you are in fact anti-abortion and that you understand that in the political circles you move in this won’t work, so you are willing for abortion to be legal as long as women aren’t in charge ie so long as extensive hoops have to be jumped through, and doctors and parliament hold the power. As I have said to you a number of times, I think these conversation would be more productive if you were just more upfront about what you actually think and want instead of prevaricating.

                    • karol …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:34 pm

                      The aim of the policy, as stated by Logie, is to remove some hurdles, so that more abortions will be done earlier in the pregnancy than is now the case.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:35 pm

                      “BL. In society, the vulnerable, the voiceless and the very young must always be given additional protections and consideration under the law.”

                      Ok, so how can you support any law that allows abortion then? If we are talking about killing a human, whatever the gestational age, how do you rationalise that some kilings are ok and others aren’t?

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:39 pm

                      No one has asked for this or suggested that this be the case.

                      It’s the way things are now and you seem to be implying that it should be kept that way.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:47 pm

                      @Draco T Bastard …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:39 pm

                      Yes, that is exactly where I was coming from too.

                    • Stephanie Rodgers …
                      7 June 2014 at 3:56 pm

                      There is no such thing as an immutable, unconditional right to take the life of another human being.

                      🙄 Yes, you’re definitely engaging sincerely on this topic, I should totally waste more of my time doing your homework for you.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 5:01 pm

                      “Take it how you want weka.”

                      Ok, thanks. I now take it that I have permission from you to interpret what you say how I want. In the absence of you being willing to clarify what you think that seems reasonable.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 5:21 pm

                      🙄 Yes, you’re definitely engaging sincerely on this topic, I should totally waste more of my time doing your homework for you.

                      I meant what I said.

                      There is no such thing as an immutable, unconditional right to take the life of another human being.

                      And I’ll go further. In the circumstance where the state is either directly involved in or closely associated with the death of a human being or of its citizens eg. abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, etc, the level of regulation and oversight must be very substantial, very significant and fully transparent.

                    • phillip ure …
                      7 June 2014 at 6:26 pm

                      @ karol..

                      “..There are people who wish they’d never been born..”

                      ..and that is apropos of what exactly..?

                      ..in the context of this conversation/topic..?

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 7:59 pm

                      @ CV,

                      And in one trite sentence you discard a women’s right to choose things for her body and life.

                      Excerpts of Michael Sandel’s arguments to the point you raise:

                      Probing the assumptions underlying the equal moral status view of the embryo, Sandel asks how a person holding that view would behave if confronted with a fire in a fertility clinic. Given a choice between saving a five-year-old girl or a tray of 10 embryos, which would one choose?

                      But Sandel finds further flaws with the equal moral status view. “The fact that all persons were once blastocysts does not prove that all blastocysts are persons. This is faulty reasoning. The fact that every oak tree was once an acorn does not prove that every acorn is an oak tree” — or that we should regard the loss of an acorn eaten by a squirrel as equivalent to the loss of an oak tree felled by a windstorm. George responds that “saplings are not mature oak trees either, but this fact does not make us doubt that infants are equal in human dignity to adults.”

                      http://harvardmagazine.com/2004/07/debating-the-moral-statu.html

                      And from: http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/fetusperson.shtml

                      Ironically, anti-choicers are trapped in a fatal contradiction here—women are undeniably human beings; yet anti-choicers are quite willing to sacrifice the human rights of women in favour of fetuses, whose status as human beings is highly questionable. If they can’t even respect the lives and rights of born human beings, why should we trust their alleged concern for fetuses as human beings?

                      Both articles are well worth the read.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 8:14 pm

                      Probing the assumptions underlying the equal moral status view of the embryo, Sandel asks how a person holding that view would behave if confronted with a fire in a fertility clinic. Given a choice between saving a five-year-old girl or a tray of 10 embryos, which would one choose?

                      Incorrect analogy.

                      The correct analogy is this:

                      if confronted with a fire in a fertility clinic. Given a choice between saving a 25 year old woman who is pregnant, and the same 25 year old woman who is not, which would one choose?

                      And for this

                      If they can’t even respect the lives and rights of born human beings, why should we trust their alleged concern for fetuses as human beings?

                      the correct response is thus:

                      The taking of an invaluable human life shall always be a last resort, not a first choice, and the requirements of our society should reflect that.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 8:23 pm

                      “The taking of an invaluable human life shall always be a last resort, not a first choice, and the requirements of our society should reflect that.”

                      Can you be any more vague?

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 8:24 pm

                      @ CV

                      “The taking of an invaluable human life shall always be a last resort, not a first choice,”

                      Who has been saying pregnancy termination should be the first choice?

                      Noone has been saying that.

                      Sheesh, get with the program.

                    • McFlock …
                      7 June 2014 at 8:25 pm

                      if confronted with a fire in a fertility clinic. Given a choice between saving a 25 year old woman who is pregnant, and the same 25 year old woman who is not, which would one choose?

                      But if the 12wk pregnant woman was equivalent to 2 lives, why wouldn’t you rescue the plate of 25 embryos instead?

                  • karol …
                    7 June 2014 at 2:11 pm

                    You need to look more closely at the Green Party’s interlinked values and policies.

                    Their Health policy/aim:

                    he Green Party want a high-quality health system that is fair for everyone.

                    We believe in a holistic approach to health and well-being that is focused on promoting good health, reducing the risk of illness, and improving quality of life.

                    We are committed to a public health care system that provides the same access and level of care regardless of wealth or income. All the evidence shows that a more equal society is better for everyone.

                    Their population policy:

                    We want to make sure that there is enough for all Kiwis, our Pacific neighbours and all of humanity, to enjoy a decent quality of life.
                    […]
                    Our Population Policy is about understanding the optimal population for Aotearoa, planning for the future, and enabling parents to make informed choices about family size.
                    […]
                    Informed decisions about family size and spacing will be made by the parents concerned.

                    Family planning via birth control, with parents being given to choice betwen the options available, is the preferred option.

                    The abortion policy is aimed at dealing with the practicalities of human reproduction, because it’s not something that can be totally planned for.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:19 pm

                      The abortion policy is aimed at dealing with the practicalities of human reproduction, because it’s not something that can be totally planned for.

                      Definitely. There is a need for good access to well regulated abortion services in NZ.

                      But why do these other Green Party policies treat children as complete people with their own rights, their own needs, and their own agency, but not this new abortion policy?

                    • karol …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:24 pm

                      A foetus does not have agency that can be consulted with.

                      The parent makes endless decisions about what they consider is important for the well being of their child/ren.

                      How are the people opposed to decriminalisation taking account of the potential child as a whole being, if they are not considering the situation a baby will be born into?

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:32 pm

                      Zygote, embryo, foetus, pre-term baby, baby. These are not difficult concepts CV and I know damn well that you have enough medical knowledge to be able to appreciate the differences. Babies don’t generally get aborted except in extreme circumstances.

                    • bad12 …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:36 pm

                      Yeah you are right karol, parents make all sorts of major decisions for/about their children, 99.99% of those decisions tho do not have death as a result…

                    • karol …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:38 pm

                      There are people who wish they’d never been born.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:42 pm

                      CV,

                      Some extracts taken from the Green Policy on Pregnancy Termination:

                      We trust women to make decisions that are best for them and their whānau/family. We want to ensure equal access to all potential options is available to pregnant women.

                      The Green Party supports the right to choose.

                      To prevent coercion either for or against abortion, the Green Party will:
                      Ensure neutral counselling is available (but not mandatory).
                      Discourage non-neutral counselling which provides women with biased, inaccurate health information.

                      To support the freedom to have an abortion the Green Party will:
                      Decriminalise abortion by removing it from the Crimes Act.
                      Allow terminations after 20 weeks gestation only when the woman would otherwise face serious permanent injury to her health, or in the case of severe fetal abnormalities (as is current practice).

                      To protect the freedom to choose to continue a pregnancy, the Green Party will:
                      Provide increased support to vulnerable pregnant women so they feel they can continue with their pregnancy if this is their preferred option.
                      Ensure women are not penalised financially for choosing to keep their child (see Income Support policy).

                      Sound to me like the Greens have considered all angles – as usual – please pay particular attention to the last section in bold with reference to your concerns. i.e. they are setting up systems to encourage continuation of the pregnancy by removing obstacles to pursuing that course.

                      Note your concern re over 20 weeks is false – they are continuing with current practice on that matter.

                      Also:

                      “The Green Party recognises this situation as problematic, because:

                      The time taken to see two consultants means abortions happen later in the pregnancy. This is more dangerous, and it makes it difficult to access medical abortions"

                      link: https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/womens-policy-valuing-women

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:43 pm

                      How are the people opposed to decriminalisation taking account of the potential child as a whole being, if they are not considering the situation a baby will be born into?

                      Perhaps you could ask someone who opposes decriminalisation?

                      I support decriminalisation of well regulated, professionally conducted, medically appropriate abortions. However, the illegitimate death of an unborn child needs to remain a serious crime punishable by imprisonment.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:48 pm

                      Note your concern re over 20 weeks is false – they are continuing with current practice on that matter.

                      I’ve no concerns for the over 20 week situation and have never said that I have.

                      One of my main concerns however is the liberalisation of access past 12 weeks (where AFAIK there is a current threshold of permissibility) all the way through to the 20 week mark.

                      Any change liberalising abortion access through to this later 20 week mark will be far more impactful on thousands of young New Zealanders per year than the “anti-smacking” legislation has ever been and IMO should be put out to a full referendum.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:51 pm

                      “I support decriminalisation of well regulated, professionally conducted, medically appropriate abortions.”

                      Great, so you support the GP policy then. Good to know.

                      “However, the illegitimate death of an unborn child needs to remain a serious crime punishable by imprisonment.”

                      Who has argued for the illegimate killing of unborn children??

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:52 pm

                      In what circumstances can a pregnancy be illegitimate when the women has chosen this course of action that Greens haven’t already addressed?

                      e.g note the excerpts I copy and pasted above under ‘To prevent coercion either for or against abortion, the Green Party will:’

                      I can think of none.

                    • karol …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:52 pm

                      CV, weren’t you the one who wanted to leave immunisation up to the informed choice of the parents? Some would say that could lead to an unimmunised child dying.

                      PS: You’ve redefined decriminalisation – the Green’s policy is called “decriminalisation”.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:53 pm

                      Thanks for finding the detail and links bl!

                    • bad12 …
                      7 June 2014 at 2:54 pm

                      The ones that got away from the abortionist then karol, lets expand the Law into that area then, wishing to have never been born seems a valid reason for the State to sanction the termination of life,

                      Well as valid as a lot of em i have seen in the last couple of days of discussion, seems the ultimate cure for depression, along with child abuse and neglect, constrained career achievement,inability to remember simple things like contraceptives,casual unprotected sex, the list is endless,

                      i cannot quite fathom what my opposition is all about…

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 3:00 pm

                      CV, weren’t you the one who wanted to leave immunisation up to the informed choice of the parents? .

                      Yes that sounds like me 🙂

                      Although I use the term vaccination.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 3:02 pm

                      CV, I’d like the ask the question another way, because I still don’t understand what you are suggesting. If you agree that abortions should be available within the context of regulation and medical supervision, what criteria do you think should be used? eg gestational age alone? Or other criteria as well?

                    • karol …
                      7 June 2014 at 3:04 pm

                      bad, right from conception, the decisions, or actions, that lead to a child being born are usually made by the parents, whether or not they take into account the well being of the child that might be born.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 3:06 pm

                      @ CV,
                      “One of my main concerns however is the liberalisation of access past 12 weeks”

                      Where did you see that?

                      I can’t find it on that link that I provided – which says it is the full policy.

                      @ Weka,

                      Cheers 🙂

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 3:24 pm

                      If you agree that abortions should be available within the context of regulation and medical supervision, what criteria do you think should be used? eg gestational age alone? Or other criteria as well?

                      I expect that it will be a check list of items and review both from the medical standpoint, informed consent etc. and also the social work/government provided support standpoint.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 4:32 pm

                      Ok, so I will again take it that you are supportive of the GP policy, and don’t have any suggestions of your own about how the law should be written.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 4:41 pm

                      Take it how you want weka. Any liberalisation of the abortion access out to a full 20 weeks should go to a referendum.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 4:46 pm

                      I will try that again,

                      Where did you get the bit about liberalizing pregnancy terminations out to 20 weeks CV?

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 4:55 pm

                      I’ve been wondering that too blue, but I suspect that CV either simply doesn’t understand what the problems are with the current law, or is being disingenuous and evasive and in reality wants abortion restricted.

                      Current New Zealand law allows for abortions to be performed for the following reasons, providing the abortion is approved by two certifying consultants and the pregnancy is less than 20 weeks old:

                      to save the life of the woman (even if after 20 weeks)
                      to preserve the physical health of the woman
                      to preserve the mental health of the woman
                      foetal impairment
                      in cases of incest

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_New_Zealand#The_Contraception.2C_Sterilisation_and_Abortion_Act_1977

                      The main changes that the GP are suggesting, as far as I can tell, are to remove the certifying consultant step, and to allow abortions even if the woman doesn’t fit those criteria. What CV seems to not understand is that many women already get abortions without meeting those criteria, but doctors are bending the law to make that possible. The GP wants the law to reflect current practice, because the current law doesn’t work and because the current law means some women can access the health service while others can’t based on things like geography and socioeconomic status (irony alert there for people who follow CV’s politics).

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 5:27 pm

                      Where did you get the bit about liberalizing pregnancy terminations out to 20 weeks CV?

                      Good question…I’ll have to look back at where I picked that up from…hope I haven’t misread something. Anyways IMO liberalising access to abortion beyond the current 12 week marker all the way out to the 20 week mark is a very bad idea.

                      But if that’s not in the GP policy then no probs.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 5:28 pm

                      The law already allows abortion up to 20 weeks.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 5:37 pm

                      Thanks. 20 weeks is only a few weeks (five to six) off a preterm baby with a good chance of survival.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 6:00 pm

                      So? You’ve already made it clear you have no opinion on how the law should be written or where the lines should be drawn. I’m not really interested in debating the various aspects of gestational age and what will happen as medicine increases its ability to keep preterm babies alive. Throughout this conversation you’ve based your comments on incorrect assumptions that you haven’t bothered to check out or even bothered to ask people here who know, and then when you’ve been asked for clarity on your views you’ve been evasive. Poor form dude. I’ll just say it one more time, be honest about what you really think.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 6:37 pm

                      I am quite surprised that they are conducted that late- I would strongly suspect terminations conducted after 12 weeks were linked to health issues arising of either the fetus or the mother – because every site I have been reading states that terminations occurring 12 weeks or less are much safer – therefore my guess is that doctors would be unkeen to conduct them later than that. (it wouldn’t be best practice)

                      I have found a chart that shows the vast majority of pregnancies are terminated under 12 weeks – only approx 5-6% over 14 weeks and 3% at 13 weeks and the rest under that.

                      These stats are a bit depressing, but have supplied the link in case anyone wants to check – you have to scroll down – it is the last table.

                      http://www.abortion.gen.nz/information/statistics.html

                      It would be helpful to have it confirmed that these later terminations were due to abnormality/extenuating circumstances, however I haven’t been able to find any such data in my search.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      7 June 2014 at 7:04 pm

                      Abortion on the Agenda: Thanks Greens!

                      The report (and subsequently the law) ended up deciding which reasons for having an abortion would be legal (not criminal) and which would not. (You can look them up in the Act itself if you’re interested, go to section 187(A)1.) The Royal Commissioners had to do a lot of fancy footwork to pull this off (and tripped over themselves numerous times) but one thing they did not do was ever find out the actual reasons people have abortions. Here, I quote directly from the report: “In New Zealand no authoritative study has ever been made of the reasons why women seek abortions.” (p. 201)

                      I suspect that there’s still a few people around making the same decisions with the same ignorance as the 1970s Royal Commission.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 7:17 pm

                      Yeah, I don’t suppose they would want to document those reasons considering a lot of them I’ll bet have to do with the pathetic state of joblessness and financial poverty some are in, and the pathetic state of high debt repayments and time poverty others are in. All avoidable if we had decent governments who actually cared about the people who vote them in and were governing focused on improving conditions for people not simply on profits for a few.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      7 June 2014 at 8:31 pm

                      I am quite surprised that they are conducted that late

                      Its pretty awful, but thanks for the stats you dug up suggesting that its very rare.

                      I remain opposed to any liberalisation of abortion access if it extends right up to that late stage 20 week mark.

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 8:36 pm

                      🙄 as has been pointed out to you, we already have abortions up to 20 weeks. The GP law change would actually reduce the abortions happening later by enabling better access to abortion earlier.

                      This is starting to reach PG proportions of ridiculous. I’ll try and stay away because I hate having arguments with people I otherwise respect when they are doing stupid shit.

                    • blue leopard …
                      7 June 2014 at 9:27 pm

                      No probs CV,

                      It is good to see there are not many at and above that time – like I said, I have to presume that this occurs in extenuating circumstances – would be good to know for sure though, I also think anything much above 12 weeks is pretty dodgy.

                      @ Weka,

                      Yeah I agree, especially your first point, (yet your second isn’t off the mark either really….)

            • bad12 6.1.1.1.1.2
              7 June 2014 at 12:21 pm

              Yep Ad, my membership will probably go the same way…

          • bad12 6.1.1.1.2
            7 June 2014 at 12:19 pm

            Yep CV, that is an excellent question to be asking, the ”policy” appears to have come out of the blue and i was intending this morning to have a Google round to see if there is any evidence of a Green Party Membership vote on this,

            Bit late to be doing morning stuff now and i will try and get into it this arvo…

            • weka 6.1.1.1.2.1
              7 June 2014 at 1:36 pm

              There was discussion in the GP members’ forum earlier in the year. This is not out of the blue.

              • bad12 …
                7 June 2014 at 2:25 pm

                weka, would you have a link to this discussion in the online forum, i would like a read…

            • Populuxe1 6.1.1.1.2.2
              7 June 2014 at 2:46 pm

              And when you two grow functioning uteri, I shall endeavour to care what you think.

              • Once was Tim …
                7 June 2014 at 5:57 pm

                No doubt Pop, that’ll be around the time you grow a pair of functioning balls, and ones that produce sperm rather than “Pledge – the housewife’s best friend” (brought to you by Salmon and Spraggon)

              • phillip ure …
                7 June 2014 at 6:20 pm

                @ pop..and that is just as silly as me demanding you never mention vasectomies..

                ..”cos you need to grow ‘functioning’ testicles and a penis..

                ..before you can opine..

                ..now..that’s just silly..isn’t it..?

          • weka 6.1.1.1.3
            7 June 2014 at 1:34 pm

            “A conscience issue would risk Green MPs not holding the line. Is that the advantage that you see in the House with this approach?”

            Yes, and it also means that a controversial issue won’t become a derailment. It’s been through due process within the party, so let the policy stand. The GP is a prochoice party. If anyone within the party has a problem with that they need to deal with it privately.

            • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.3.1
              7 June 2014 at 1:49 pm

              I’m sure that individual Green Party members will be doing just that.

            • bad12 6.1.1.1.3.2
              7 June 2014 at 2:05 pm

              what due process was this weka, the online forum discussion you mention perhaps???…

              • weka …
                7 June 2014 at 2:16 pm

                The normal processes the party uses for policy development.

                • bad12 …
                  7 June 2014 at 2:33 pm

                  Are there two weka here??? or just one that keeps so to speak changing the overcoat???

                  Strangely enough, on the Green Party web-site i can find no other mention of abortion except the most recent announcement,

                  What this looks like, note that i do not use a definitive term here, is Jan Logie having engaged in some discussion among some groups of woman across the motu making a top down decision of this is how it will be,

                  Perhaps i am incorrect here, and, there is a slight chance that i missed the email to all members asking for their opinion on this issue,

                  Hell and i was going to give Russell my electorate vote this time round…

                  • weka …
                    7 June 2014 at 2:41 pm

                    Yep was on another computer before.

                    The discussion on abortion policy was in the usual place for members, nothing hidden away.

                    • bad12 …
                      7 June 2014 at 3:11 pm

                      That’s strange weka, even logging in and keywording ‘abortion’ gets me nothing, do you remember the specific title of the particular discussion…

                • phillip ure …
                  7 June 2014 at 4:30 pm

                  policy development in the greens consists of a few policy-wonks drawing it up..

                  ..management signing off on that..

                  ..and then the finished product presented for rubber-stamping..but already having the approval of the party leadership behind it..

                  ..so i think the greens wd never have had a piece of presented policy rejected by members..

                  ..the whole thing in reality is totally top/down..

                  ..if you have the internet party at one end of the membership involvement..with members raising/driving/debating on/voting for policy..after a robust open forum discussion of all the pros/cons etc etc..

                  ..the greens are at the other end of that spectrum..

                  ..a top/down-driven/rubber-stamped by members process..

                  ..when i was a member i refused to sign-into those internal/closed forums..as a personal protest against that secret-practice..i used to argue..’what the fuck are you scared of..?..that national will steal yr ideas..?’..

                  ..and my memories from the green party back then is that there most certainly was not unanimity on wholesale-abortion..

                  ..and i will guarantee that many green party members will be very upset by the (seemingly cavalier) over-riding/ignoring of their beliefs..

                  ..esp. now that official green party policy is to allow no questions asked abortions up to 20 weeks..

                  ..that escalation will horrify many of them..

                  ..late-abortion inflames opponents like abortion on steroids..

                  ..it ramps everything up..

                  ..this policy reeks of the planning/shepherding by the radicals on the other end of this spectrum..

                  ..democratic debate/discussion nowhere in sight..

                  • weka …
                    7 June 2014 at 4:37 pm

                    So what happens to the feedback from members on policy that the policy convenors ask for? I got an email about this last week. Do local areas no longer work on policy?

                    “..esp. now that official green party policy is to allow no questions asked abortions up to 20 weeks..”

                    That’s not what is being recommended.

                    AFAIK in the IP the final decision about policy rests with the exec.

                    • phillip ure …
                      7 June 2014 at 4:43 pm

                      you really/seriously aren’t trying to defend the green party policy-making process as ‘superior’ to that new open-access-to-all-debate policy-development of the internet party..?

                      ..are you..?

                      ..(imagine the loss of ‘control’..eh..?..that wouldn’t do..eh..?..)

                      “..That’s not what is being recommended…”

                      ..isn’t that what viper has been arguing against..?

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 4:59 pm

                      No, I’m not doing that, stop making shit up. How about you answer my pretty straightforwward and easy to understand questions?

                    • phillip ure …
                      7 June 2014 at 5:48 pm

                      what questions..?

                      ..and how about you tell me.us how close my description of policy-making in the greens is..

                      ..and how accurate my call on the lack of pro-abortion-unanimity in the party..?

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 5:56 pm

                      Questions in my comment that you just replied to http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-07062014/#comment-827132

                    • phillip ure …
                      7 June 2014 at 6:05 pm

                      ok..an email may be sent to ask for feedback..

                      ..but who really bothers to reply….?

                      ..once again..u need to make a comparison with what/how the internet prty is doing it..

                      ..now answer mine..

                    • weka …
                      7 June 2014 at 8:17 pm

                      I asked two questions. The first you don’t know the answer to, so I assume the second one you didn’t reply to you also don’t know the answer to. So why should we take your word on how the GP policy development process works or doesn’t work?

                      I don’t know enough about the IP process. I’ve read a bit online about it, and it looks interesting. I’m also interested to see over time how the power actually plays out (I don’t think this is visible at this point).

                      I’m in no way interested in having a pissing contest with you about who is the better party. I find both parties’ processes interesting and I think they each reflect their membership, place in parliament, and their kaupapa.

    • felix 6.2
      7 June 2014 at 11:27 am

      Jan Logie is very beautiful and has the most soothing voice in parliament. I have her looped on my ipod in case I need to calm people down in a civil emergency.

      I would never have recognised her from that photo.

  8. Kaplan 8
    7 June 2014 at 10:59 am

    David’s latest attempt of a go at Stuart Nash is here:
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/06/labour_candidate_seeking_a_poor_person.html
    He’ll probably change it but you’d think if he paused for a second before rushing to post he’d have cropped the image. Based on the data currently shown in the image and less than a two minute search on google and facebook it looks like a staff member in Chris Tremain’s office most likely took the screenshot to pass on to kiwiblog. Just another example of how closely tied National and David are.

  9. fisiani 9
    7 June 2014 at 11:28 am

    Trevor Mallard knows he will lose to National’s Chris Bishop and has announced that he will not stand in Hutt South.

  10. RedBaronCV 10
    7 June 2014 at 11:36 am

    And Stuff are kindly informing us that our High Commissioner to Niue has a second job perhaps??

    “High Commissioner to Niue Mark Blumsky …… Blumsky and his wife have become significant players on the island, running five companies, mainly in tourism. ”

    I wonder if we are paying him as well.

  11. Jenny 11
    7 June 2014 at 11:37 am

    CLIMATE CHANGE!

    Social Welfare or just the same corrupt old greedy corporate welfare?

    “Almost 140 jobs are to be axed at Solid Energy’s Stockton mine, the company announced today.”

    Whatever happened to the $140 million of tax payers money gifted and loaned to Solid Energy purportedly to be to save jobs. And spouted as by both National and Labour apologists as the reason for the bailout?

    For this much tax payers dosh not one single job should have been lost at Solid Energy.

    This exposes this dirty planet damaging bailout for what it really is, corporate welfare for the plutocrats of the fossil fuel industry. The fate of the workers are of no concern of the Labour and National Party supporters of this deal at all, risking workers health and safety and mercilessly letting the coal barons dump them whenever they see fit, to keep this dying industry staggering on. Wrecking the planet by keeping the banksters in the readys is much more important than workers jobs.

    For this sort of money thousands of permanent well paying jobs could have been created by funding projects like THIS!

    Maybe the Green Party’s Gareth Hughes was right all along and that money should have been used to fund a just transition for these workers to jobs that don’t fry the planet.

    Where is the accountability?

    Why aren’t the Labour and National supporters of the bailout jumping up and down demanding some answers?

    Or are they too busy in the committee rooms of parliament forelock tugging to the fossil fuel lobbyists?

    And by the way where is Greg Presland’s AKA mickysavage’s long promised post on the Solid Energy bail out that he said that he was working on?

    Will Jenny get banned again for asking such questions?

    As I accurately predicted Greg Presland would never finish working on his post and if he did ever finish it he would not publish. Then, as now, the Centre Left Authors of The Standard when it comes to challenging the fossil fuel barons prefer to self censor.

    • Colonial Viper 11.1
      7 June 2014 at 11:42 am

      Telling The Standard authors what to write, and then deliberately acting in a way to try and martyr yourself? Clever.

      • bad12 11.1.1
        7 June 2014 at 12:23 pm

        Jenny asking to have Her heart rate sped up again…

      • weka 11.1.2
        7 June 2014 at 1:31 pm

        “Telling The Standard authors what to write, and then deliberately acting in a way to try and martyr yourself? Clever.”

        Or we could consider it a public service 😉

    • mickysavage 11.2
      7 June 2014 at 11:53 am

      Gee Jenny

      I have written 18 posts this year that mention climate change. The Solid energy bail out is a shifting subject that requires more time and head space that I have currently. Strange that you equate one incomplete post with some sort of conspiracy to hide the consequences of climate change.

      • Naturesong 11.2.1
        7 June 2014 at 4:01 pm

        Having seen a few of Jenny’s comments on the standard, I don’t find it at all strange.

      • Jenny 11.2.2
        8 June 2014 at 4:42 am

        “I have written 18 posts this year that mention climate change.”

        mickysavage

        Greg you can write all the posts you like about climate change, but if you refuse to address doing something about it…..

        ….or even support policies that make it worse. Then you are guilty of the worst form of hypocrisy.

        The reason you cannot write about the Solid Energy bail out, and find it such a shifting slippery subject is because by doing so, you would have to take a stand. One way, or the other. There is no escaping it. Better to keep your silence. On the subject of taking a stand on climate change, silence has been Labour’s fall back policy.

        David Shearer was a master at it, never missing an opportunity to refuse to address the issue.

        I hoped better of David Cunliffe, (and still do).

        Climate change is the worst calamity that humanity has ever faced.

        It screams out for us to take action to halt it, or at the very least not make it worse.

        David Cunliffe in his famous Dolphin and Dole queue speech, before he became leader and went all mysteriously silent, said this:

        “How much longer will this paradise last? I’m not sure. I’m very sad to say there’s a very good chance that by the time my two young sons reach adulthood, the safe and healthy world that we all took for granted will be gone. Finished.”

        David Cunliffe The Dolphin and the Dole Queue, June 23, 2012

        In my opinion David Cunliffe was more of a leader before he attained the title.

        National and Labour on climate change

        National are the open partizan supporters of big business, including the polluters, and they make no bones about it. National are beyond the pale. National will never do anything about climate change. In fact National openly promote policies, that will make climate change worse, policies like new coal mines, deep sea oil drilling and fracking, pouring $billions into new motorways while starving public transport of funds, supporting and sustaining the fossil fuel industries with tax payer subsidies and bail outs. National openly support these policies and even boast of them. In this National are representative of how generally conservative governments around the globe ignore the problem of climate change.

        Labour are different, like National Labour also support digging new coal mines, subsidising the polluters, drilling for deep sea oil, fracking and all the other extreme non-conventional fossil fuel technologies that will exacerbate climate change. The only difference you like to keep silent about it.

        Shane Jones was one of the few Labour MPs who was open and unashamed about Labour’s support for the fossil fuel industry. That is why people in Labour were always telling him to shut up. Every time Shane Jones opened his mouth Left voters flocked to the Green Party.

        The fact is Labour are extremely close to National on carrying on the policies that will make our children’s world unrecognisable to us, that you could have trouble putting a cigarette paper between you both.

        Don’t take my word for it, listen to what your Deputy Leader David Parker has to say on the matter:

        David Parker, says his party’s policies on oil, gas and mineral extraction are close to those of the Government.

        “I don’t think we are much different from National,” Parker said. “They’ve continued on with the programme that we started in respect to oil and gas,” he said yesterday after a breakfast for the Mood of the Boardroom survey in which chief executives expressed strong support for mining.

        Labour says views close to Govt’s
        NZ Herald July 27, 2012

        The above is why you keep your silence over the Solid Energy bailout, or deep sea oil drilling or the cancelation of Hauaura Ma Raki, or the betrayal of the Maduro Declaration.

        Monbiot calls people like you fifth level climate deniers, those who admit to the problem and even write treatises detailing its advance, but abjectly refuse to demand action on it even when they are in a position to do so.

        I call you climate change ignorers.

        80% of the population are opposed to deep sea oil drilling.

        Greg you want to know why Labour’s support is so low in opinion polls?

        Labour’s ignoring of the overwhelming popular opposition to deep sea oil is symptomatic of Labour’s refusal to take a stand on anything, including Greg your own refusal to take a stand on the bail out of Solid Energy.

        If Labour had taken a stand against the bail out of Solid Energy this would have created a frisson, a point of difference between Labour and National. People would have said maybe Labour are right and this huge amount of money, would, as Gareth Hughes pointed out at the time, be better spent on paying for; “A Just Transition” for the coal workers “to jobs that don’t fry the planet.”

        And when as now the bail out has proved to be abject failure in saving workers jobs, you would have had something to say on the matter, and people would say yes the government was wrong and Labour were right all along.

        Rare photo of the Labour Shadow Cabinet meeting in camera to discuss climate change

        We have too long maintained a silence that closely resembles stupidity.

    • karol 11.3
      7 June 2014 at 11:55 am

      Try reading the Standard policy on self martyrdom, Jenny.

      • Jenny 11.3.1
        8 June 2014 at 1:58 pm

        I am well aware karol of The Standard’s policy of censorship, self censorship, and resort to Godwin’s Law. All of which Lynn likes to refer to as “robust debate”.

        What this really tells me karol is that not one of the Centre Left authors at The Standard can muster any moral or logical justification for the bail out of Solid Energy, which is the topic of discussion here. And though you are unable to defend the National Government’s bail out of Solid Energy, none of you have the guts to condemn it either.

        The latest lay offs at Solid Energy tore the last shred of the veil of the excuse used by National that the bail out was to save jobs.

        And while we are talking about The Standard’s self imposed silence over this act of corporate welfare in the commission of this climate crime.

        I have not heard one peep from any of you about the cancelation of Hauauru Ma Raki, near Huntly which would have allowed us to close down the Huntly coal fired power station.

        Nor have I ever heard one of you even whisper the words “Majuro Declaration” the treaty which John Key signed with the Island Nations in which we agreed to endeavor to cut down on our CO2 emissions, but which he completely ignored just three weeks after his return from the Marshall Islands Pacific Forum Conference on Climate Change, bailing out Solid Energy to the tune of $155 million, a direct violation of this treaty and a racist slap in the face to the Marshallese and all the other low lying front line Island States directly suffering the consequences of near runaway climate change.

        You may call this telling The Standard authors what to write karol, but when it comes to climate change, I don’t need to tell you what to write, you already know what to write, and what not to write.

        As the saying goes; evil triumphs when good people stay silent, and what greater evil can there be than being complicit with your silence in condemning future innocent generations to having to live with a severely degraded and damaged bio-sphere.

        Just don’t let any commenter point out your blind spot, eh karol, instead resort to threatening to shut then down, or compare them to Joseph Goebbels. Mature, really mature. Yeah right.

        [lprent: Yeah right. I suspect that she was just being kind and warning you about my attitudes about demanding authors do anything except what they want to. But hey, try playing the victim. I really just don’t care.

        I will just increase the martyrdom since you seem hell bent to crucify yourself. Or you could just argue your case without demanding that everyone (especially authors) has to follow the prescriptions of your obsessions. By all means proceed to Calvary. I don’t think that it will help you cause as much as discussing why you think that there is an issue, suffering the disagreements, and learning how to respond coherently. ]

        • Colonial Viper 11.3.1.1
          8 June 2014 at 2:04 pm

          You do know that there is a general election on in 100 days, right?

          • Jenny 11.3.1.1.1
            8 June 2014 at 4:57 pm

            There is?

            Are you suggesting that I should join you in not mentioning climate change in case I upset the results?

            While we are talking, what are the big election issues anyway?

            Can you tell me?

            I think I did see Steven Joyce wittering away on TV saying something about promising to fund some millionaires yacht race. Is this one of the issues that this election you speak of will be fought over? Yawn.

            And I hear that Labour was promising to build a few new $300,000 completely unaffordable to low income earners “affordable” homes. Inspiring stuff? not.

            Are there any other election issues you think I should know about CV?

            If there is please let me know.

            Maybe I was just obsessing just too much about climate change, only the biggest crisis humanity has ever faced.

            I would rush out right now and enroll. Or maybe not, the debt collectors will find out where I live.

    • Ad 11.4
      7 June 2014 at 12:01 pm

      My compassion today is with the workers and their families who lost their jobs.
      Your head is in the clouds.
      Theirs is at the supermarket counter every week, counting out dollar coins.

      • Jenny 11.4.1
        8 June 2014 at 5:10 am

        My compassion today is with the workers and their families who lost their jobs.
        Ad

        Your “compassion” is worthless and therefore insincere.

        Ab what do you think we should actually do about preventing this sort of thing ?

        Do you think that the $155 million from the taxpayer bail out to keep Solid Energy afloat, that has wound up in the banksters pockets would have been better paid to the workers to provide “a Just Transition to jobs that don’t fry the planet”?

        Be aware Ab that the coal mining industry is a dying industry, it is slowly but surely going the way of the asbestos mining industry. The current position of these dumped coal workers is the future of all coal workers and their families, unless we do something now.

        Your head is in the clouds.

        And yours, by denying the reality and urgency of climate change is in a much more uncomfortable and darker place.

  12. Ad 12
    7 June 2014 at 11:43 am

    Cunliffe compelling and on fire at the list conference.

    Worth being here just for that.

  14. Lanthanide 14
    7 June 2014 at 12:01 pm

    Lynn, can you please fix the stripping of numbered lists inside comments?

    For some time now (6+ months) if you make a numbered list in a comment, the numbers are stripped out. For example:

    One
    Two
    Three

    The same list as above, after editing to restore the numbered list:
    1. One
    2. Two
    3. Three

    You can edit the comment and put the numbers back in and they stay, but if you go to edit it again after that they have been replaced by p and li html tags, and saving that 2nd edit will again strip the numbers. It’s very frustrating.

    • felix 14.1
      7 June 2014 at 1:10 pm

      +1 very annoying.

      As a workaround I’ve been using 1: 2: 3: or 1) 2) 3) or a. b. c. etc

    • lprent 14.2
      7 June 2014 at 2:10 pm

      OK. I am spending time at the northern labour list conference most of this weekend.

      • weka 14.2.1
        7 June 2014 at 2:56 pm

        It’s especially annoying when cut and pasting from elsewhere eg party policy. It strips out the list numbers AND the spaces so it all ends up one paragraph.

        I tried writing a single number the other day and it changed into a listed number.

        btw, the day that I got a message saying I didn’t have permission to edit my post I was trying to do pretty much what Lanth described, but I was on the second or third edit.

        • Lanthanide 14.2.1.1
          7 June 2014 at 5:23 pm

          On the subject of editing, it would be nice if the timer could be extended to, say, 10 minutes.

          • lprent 14.2.1.1.1
            7 June 2014 at 5:57 pm

            That one is easy… Done. That is a pretty long time.

            1. Test line 1
            2. Test line 2

            Ok, I just typed that in with just the numbers and it (correctly) changed it to an ordered list with ol + li’s

            What have you been doing?

            • karol 14.2.1.1.1.1
              7 June 2014 at 6:03 pm
              1. hello
              2. test

              So, I couldn’t just type in the numbers, I had to use the ol code.
              Oh, and then the numbers disappeared when I edited and added a comment.

              • lprent …
                7 June 2014 at 6:05 pm

                Was that typed in as

                [number][dot][space][text]
                [number][dot][space][text]

                etc…

                • karol …
                  7 June 2014 at 6:08 pm

                  First time I just typed with the numbers (I don’t get WYSIWYG ready made codes. I edited it by highlighting and adding the ol code.

                  When I went back to edit again, the ol code was still there but with an il code added magically. I added a comment and updated, but found the numbers and codes had disappeared.

                  • AncientGeek …
                    7 June 2014 at 6:09 pm

                    line
                    test

                    • AncientGeek …
                      7 June 2014 at 6:23 pm

                      Test after removing the KSES extender.

                      testing
                      this line

                      What do we get?

                    • AncientGeek …
                      7 June 2014 at 7:03 pm

                      Ok, after adding ol/ul/li to KSES

                      1. test
                      2. this line
                      3. now!

                      Lets see..

                    • lprent …
                      7 June 2014 at 7:06 pm

                      Now lets try as someone not logged in

                      test
                      this line
                      now

                      save and then edit

                      Damn… The edit kills the ol/li. Need a preprocess loader for that. But what filter name?

                    • lprent …
                      7 June 2014 at 7:27 pm

                      Testing with a more direct approach for the theme

                      1. test
                      2. this line
                      3. again

                      Now what do we get

                      And after editing?

                      We are still ok. Try that folks…

                    • karol …
                      7 June 2014 at 7:39 pm
                      1. testing
                      2. testing

                      Yes! Worked without me adding any codes. but i see the codes are there when I go to edit. now, will hit “update”
                      edited fine – on firefox.

                  • lprent …
                    7 June 2014 at 6:11 pm

                    Ok AncientGeek gets the effect. Looks like there is some privileged code for the admin. Explains why I have never seen it myself.

                    Looks like some kind of KSES effect. Maybe firefox?

                    • lprent …
                      7 June 2014 at 6:15 pm

                      This is a test on chrome as someone not logged in

                      test
                      line

                      Ok not firefox

                      testagain
                      for another line

                      From editor?

                      Ok, the editor was happy to add ol/li. Now what happens if I save again.

                      Cute. It strips the ol/li after saving. Has a bit of a sequencing issue. But the problem appears to be filtering out the ol/ul/li

                • karol …
                  7 June 2014 at 6:09 pm

                  text
                  text

                  trying that

              • lprent …
                7 June 2014 at 6:07 pm

                This is a test of just adding the list in

                1. hello
                2. test

                Ok..

                That is weird. Works well for me. Trying as AncientGeek

          • lprent 14.2.1.1.2
            7 June 2014 at 6:03 pm
            1. Line 1
            2. Line 2
          • lprent 14.2.1.1.3
            7 June 2014 at 6:03 pm
            1. One
            2. Two
    • lprent 14.3
      7 June 2014 at 7:34 pm

      Try it now. I added them into the KSES table for

      ol allows start and type
      ul allows type
      li allows align and value

      Let me know if there are others that you’d like and I’ll see if I like them too.

    • Lanthanide 14.4
      7 June 2014 at 9:32 pm
      1. testing one
      2. testing two
      3. testing three

      Editing converts it into ol and li tags, lets see if it survives the save…

      Yay, it’s fixed! Thanks Lynn!

      • lprent 14.4.1
        7 June 2014 at 10:29 pm

        Not too much of a problem. Biggest problem was simply being able to see it – couldn’t see it when I was the admin.

  15. yeshe 15
    7 June 2014 at 12:09 pm

    maybe take 10 mins to watch this … latest video from Internet Party with Key and Obama look-alikes … how to wake young, sleeping voters ! humour, wit and accessibility … I love it …

    • ianmac 15.1
      7 June 2014 at 3:22 pm

      What fun. Kim seems so natural in front of the camera. And John Key is so true to life. And where did they get such a good Obama? Wow!

    • swordfish 15.2
      7 June 2014 at 4:55 pm

      Mind you, I’m not so sure about the actor playing Key. The kind of caricatured less-than-subtle ham-acting all too typical of local (ie Kiwi) attempts at comedy/satire. Like an end-of-the-Pier Panto at a fading British Seaside Resort.

      Less is more. Obvious desperation to be funny is desperately unfunny.

      • JK 15.2.1
        7 June 2014 at 8:39 pm

        Yeah – I thought the Obama was true-to-life but the “John Key” seemed to me to have more than a touch of the Colin Craig about him …. that intense, gaunt look of desperation, maybe ?

      • Lanthanide 15.2.2
        7 June 2014 at 9:36 pm

        The John Key impersonator started out doing monologues to the screen, which were pretty good.

        KDC got in on the act (and Jono and Ben at 10, no doubt others as well) and get him to do acting in these skits, which he’s really not up to.

    • JK 15.3
      8 June 2014 at 8:39 am

      Meant to say Yeshe – thanks for putting up this link. This video is hugely funny. Wonder how many more they’ll come up with during the election campaign.

  16. greywarbler 16
    7 June 2014 at 12:22 pm

    Another good must-see documentary starting on the rounds.

    New Climate Film – Screening Opportunities
    2 Degrees is probably the definitive climate film of 2014. A riveting political thriller set against the backdrop of the UN climate negotiations, the award winning documentary is an emotional ride from the despair of the bureaucratic process to the thrill of tapping into the transformative momentum of people power. Climate justice is a key theme.

    As the world waits in hope for a new dawn on climate change it becomes chillingly clear that we cannot wait for governments to lead the way. So if commitment to act won’t come from above, perhaps the voices and actions of communities will bring the revolution that is needed… 2 Degrees takes to the streets of a small Australian town, and follows the passionate efforts to replace the coal fired power stations with solar thermal power. The formidable, 80 year old mayor of the town leads the charge, and fiery youth walk over 300km to take their message to parliament.

    This film is about to be launched throughout Aotearoa. There is an opportunity for community groups/individuals to host a screening/premiere. Nelson-based co-producer Ange Palmer will be available to attend some screenings. She is an engaging, moving speaker and will share some of her experiences of the film making process, discuss the Eradicating Ecocide campaign and offer insight into how we can respond effectively to the challenges of this time with clarity and strength.

    A good film provides a path for understanding and provokes dialogue. You can use the event to raise funds for your group, raise your profile, enlist new members and educate your community.
    Tour schedule is being arranged NOW. Please get in early.
    Contact angepalmer@gtfilms.com.au 03 5530353/ 0211450334 for details. Online preview available.

    2 Degrees was shot in 15 countries.
    See http://www.2degreesmovie.com

  17. Marius 17
    7 June 2014 at 1:34 pm

    Who is more repulsive – Martin Indyk or John Banks. Discuss.

    • bad12 17.1
      7 June 2014 at 2:40 pm

      Discuss??? any other orders you would also like us all to take note of while you are here your highness…

    • swordfish 17.2
      7 June 2014 at 4:59 pm

      Banks is finished. Indyk’s significantly more dangerous.

  18. Draco T Bastard 18
    7 June 2014 at 2:32 pm

    Don’t you just love capitalists and their attempts to oppress everyone else?

  19. greywarbler 19
    7 June 2014 at 3:33 pm

    The gummint has found some other body they can tax than the rich. Making extra money from the activities needed to repair leaky buildings would seem to be putting the boot in.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11269391

    In revenue terms there would normally be little point in registration. Virtually all the costs bodies corporate incur and levy their members to cover would include GST, generating an input tax deduction to offset the GST on levies. Why impose the compliance cost?

    But the situation changes with leaky buildings.

    Where a body corporate receives a compensation payment and uses it to finance remedial work (the hefty bills for which include GST), if it is registered it is able to claim back the GST. Robin Oliver of tax consultants OliverShaw, a former deputy commissioner of Inland Revenue in charge of tax policy, said that was the right outcome.

    The Government has already received GST when the original faulty work was done. If the repair work was done by the original builders it would not get a second bite of the cherry, whereas under the IRD’s traditional position, which the Government now intends to legalise, it does. That is double taxation and confiscation, Oliver said.

  20. Marius 20
    7 June 2014 at 4:08 pm

    into each…onto each life a little poop must fall

  21. Marius 21
    7 June 2014 at 4:09 pm

    LOL @ your highness.

    • greywarbler 22.1
      7 June 2014 at 7:09 pm

      Was that tough, guys? Or tough guys? Or both. See link – coalition attacks nhs – in joe 90s comment. And think this is about the country that many of our forebears tried to escape, yet now we are following their slide and decline into miserable class distinction and preference.

      In his book, Harry’s Last Stand, Harry Smith 91, says about the National Health Service first set up when Britain was on its knees after WW2 in 1948, now being majorly dismantled:

      The creation of the NHS made us understand that we were in truth our brother’s keeper, and that taxation benefits everyone through maintaining not just our roads and sewers but the health of our children, workers and elderly.

      To me, the introduction of free health care was the first brick laid on the road to the social welfare state. So it has always been difficult for me to listen to politicians, proud possessors of health insurance and shares in private health care companies, when they talk about how the health service that we fought so hard to build must change. The coalition government’s Health and Social Care Act will create a two-tier health care system. This act will see the NHS stripped down like a derelict house is by criminals for copper wiring.
      Ukip has even proposed that A&E patients should have the right to buy their way to the front of the queue,

  23. phillip ure 23
    7 June 2014 at 6:13 pm

    kinda gob-smacked over this avoiding putin at ww2 ceremonies..

    ..when the russian people gave the biggest sacrifice in that war..

    ..and without russia..germany/japan wd have likely won that war..

    ..the debt owed russia/the russian people is huge…

    ..(this is why that inbred royal in britain comparing him to hitler..given how russia saved their sorry arses from hitler..

    ..is..i reckon..beyond fucken contempt..)

    • joe90 23.1
      7 June 2014 at 7:31 pm

      .is..i reckon..beyond fucken contempt..

      Only if you choose to ignore the original intention of uncle Joe and his mate Adolph to roll over Europe and divvy the spoils.

  24. weka 24
    7 June 2014 at 8:26 pm

    Did anyone watch the IP candidate live stream today? Or go to the meeting?

    • Kiwiri 24.1
      7 June 2014 at 8:41 pm

      Google News is pointing to this TVNZ link at the mo (quick summary):

      http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/kim-dotcom-eyes-seat-in-parliament-5994563

      • karol 24.1.1
        7 June 2014 at 8:45 pm

        It was on 3 News tonight too. I needed to take a breath and consider. I was actually hoping that KDC would step back from the IP, and leave it to others. I am not keen on KDC becoming an NZ MP.

        Maybe I’ll just leave this til after the election.

        • Kiwiri 24.1.1.1
          7 June 2014 at 8:53 pm

          I can understand those sentiments.
          I am not really gullible and can be very cynical but having said that, I get a sense that his recent experience might have changed him in some ways.
          In any case, the IP might be a case of wait-and-see plus too-early-to-tell. It is attracting a lot of attention and support, or at least expressions of support, from some interesting quarters – young adult children of staunch Tory parents (ha ha) from the relatively small sample size of half a dozen Nat families that I hang out with.

          • karol 24.1.1.1.1
            7 June 2014 at 8:56 pm

            KDC looks to me like someone who wants money and power. Kind of the mirror image of John key. Right now he is useful to the left, re challenging Key, and encouraging more younger people to vote. But after that, in the medium to long term, I have my concerns about KDC.

            • blue leopard 24.1.1.1.1.1
              7 June 2014 at 9:23 pm

              Yeah, while I really appreciate KDC’s ability to voice some very important messages to New Zealanders, I am also starting to have similar concerns.

            • Colonial Viper 24.1.1.1.1.2
              8 June 2014 at 11:06 am

              KDC looks to me like someone who wants money and power.

              So we already know that he really likes money.

              As for power – what has happened to him in the last couple of years has caused him to reconsider what is truly important in this world and has politicised him.

              I’ll tell you what I like about KDC – he has not ‘born to rule’ attitude or air about him.

        • Stephanie Rodgers 24.1.1.2
          7 June 2014 at 8:55 pm

          I think it was utterly overplayed on 3 News. KDC was obviously asked “Would you want to stand as an MP?” and said “Sure, but obviously I can’t right now, maybe next time.” This was depicted as “KDC overshadows everyone by declaring he wants to be an MP!!!” when it was a very lighthearted comment.

          Laila Harre was also painted as “defensive” just because she told Brook Sabin to stop trying to make her say IMP wants Labour to do a deal in Te Tai Tokerau.

  25. Kiwiri 25
    7 June 2014 at 8:38 pm

    WOW! 180 comments here today.

    I guess this would be a good place to bury this …

    Question: which party “at the very least is more popular than Trevor Mallard”?

    http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=188133&fm=newsmain%2Cnrhl

    Haahhh