Open Mike 08/11/2017

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 8th, 2017 - 240 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 …

240 comments on “Open Mike 08/11/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Nick 1
    8 November 2017 at 6:20 am

    Have a great day all!

    • tc 1.1
      8 November 2017 at 6:46 am

      Yeah stay safe folks it’s been smashing down overnight my ways. Extra care required on our shockingly maintained state highways.

      Councils aren’t much better with theirs but they get away with it more by no carrying the oversized trucks as much.

    • Cinny 1.2
      8 November 2017 at 7:14 am

      You too Nick 🙂

    • lprent 1.3
      8 November 2017 at 11:36 am

      Up in Auckland I looked out of the window this morning at a vertical river of water. After I read the news about down country wind speed this morning I decided that this was a good day to not to ride my bike to work…

  2. Ed 2
    8 November 2017 at 6:48 am

    After yesterday’s adoption of the Republican’s tricks by the National Party, no prisoners.
    Don’t bother with the niceties of select committees, drive the laws under urgency.
    Bridge and Joyce and the Nats have shown they’ll play dirty, just take them out of the picture.

    • tc 2.1
      8 November 2017 at 6:52 am

      It’d only be fair given their disdain of select committees and overuse of urgency to slam shoddy legislation through over the last 9 years.

      Not that fair has any meaning to national, the party of entitled rules breakers, cronyism and sociopaths.

    • Sanctuary 2.2
      8 November 2017 at 7:40 am

      The bottom line here is Labour were idiots. They trusted National to keep it’s word without making sure if they didn’t they could win a vote.

      Still, hopefully lesson learned. Now to teach National a lesson – I would renege on the deal made in the house yesterday to increase select committee numbers. Deals made under threat of blackmail have no force.

      • RedLogix 2.2.1
        8 November 2017 at 8:38 am

        The bottom line here is Labour were idiots.

        Yes they were duped, but they’re the victim of National’s bluff … labeling them idiots for accepting National’s prior assurance of support for Mallard’s election, an assurance they promptly reneged on for a breathtakingly hypocritical partisan purpose … deflects from the real idiots here.

        Nor as the media portrayed was it a question of the Govt not knowing it’s numbers; the members absent all had prior permission from the House. But what Hipkins could not have known in advance was that Bridges would so comprehensively break with convention and use this to try and force a vote for the Speaker.

        It is my understanding the Speaker is normally elected unopposed as a gesture of respect for their non-partisan role. (Maybe someone can inform us if such an election has ever been forced or threatened in the past?) This was a highly confrontational break, signalling right from the outset National will offer no respect for the role of Speaker. This is going to have seriously disruptive consequences as the session proceeds; Mallard will not forget this in a hurry, trust has been badly dented here.

        If the vote had gone against Mallard, it would in practical terms have amounted to a vote of no confidence in the Govt. It is of course one thing to have legitimate numbers to pull such a vote, but failing to reveal that National too lacked the numbers, also due to absence, to claim they could win such a vote in these circumstances was a gross deception.

        Essentially Bridges blackmailed the Govt into accepting a deal extorted under false pretences. There are several options, one is to refer Bridge’s blackmail and extortion to the Privileges Committee. I think he should be removed from Parliament. And secondly I agree Adern should harden up and simply repudiate a deal made in bad faith.

        When faced with a Republican Party set on the same course of obdurate obstruction, Obama made the fatal error of continuing to seek consensus and cross party support. That merely saw him depicted as weak. Failing to learn that lesson really would make Labour idiots.

        • Sabine 2.2.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 8:43 am

          +1

        • Bearded Git 2.2.1.2
          8 November 2017 at 8:45 am

          +100 RedLogix. English, Bridges, Joyce, Collins Bennett, Brownlee, Barry etc etc they are as nasty and duplicitous group of people as you could ever find.

          The odd thing is that National appears to believe they can get elected next time with the same bunch-no chance. So let them continue to play these silly games-the public will see through it.

          • cleangreen 2.2.1.2.1
            8 November 2017 at 8:56 am

            Yep bearded git,

            National are compulsive liars;

            That has always been their tool to push conyism changes for their own paid lobbyists.

            National are not trustworthy that is simply ther truth and Labour coalition must force ‘urgent legislation’ to pass all those promised changes agreed to under all policies that the coalition partners had deliberately all agreed to.

            For HB/Gisborne; we need our regional rail freight/passenger service back after a five year wait, as all three parties promised in their ‘policies’ and in the three local papers also.

        • James 2.2.1.3
          8 November 2017 at 8:51 am

          Hipkins nominated mallard against carter for speaker. So your understanding is wrong.

        • Anne 2.2.1.4
          8 November 2017 at 9:23 am

          Spot on RL.

        • Draco T Bastard 2.2.1.5
          8 November 2017 at 11:38 am

          There are several options, one is to refer Bridge’s blackmail and extortion to the Privileges Committee. I think he should be removed from Parliament. And secondly I agree Adern should harden up and simply repudiate a deal made in bad faith.

          Both need to be done ASAP. We need our new government to show that we’re not going to put up with National’s lies any more.

        • joe90 2.2.1.6
          8 November 2017 at 12:54 pm

          When faced with a Republican Party set on the same course of obdurate obstruction

          Gingrich, the architect of obdurate obstruction.

          https://www.thenation.com/article/how-newt-gingrich-crippled-congress/

          http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4443.htm

          • RedLogix 2.2.1.6.1
            8 November 2017 at 2:27 pm

            A solid linky as always joe. It makes for a grim read though; it’s all material I think most of us would have been aware of at some point, but to see it all in one place is sobering.

          • RedLogix 2.2.1.6.2
            8 November 2017 at 4:46 pm

            And on re-reading it I have to cut and paste this para:

            All together, Gingrich’s emphasis on partisan warfare über alles sped the demise of the comity that is essential to the functioning of Congress. If the parties refuse to work together, little can be achieved without super-majorities. It was Gingrich who made winning, rather than good governance, the chief currency of success.

        • rightly or wrongly 2.2.1.7
          8 November 2017 at 5:46 pm

          The only issue is that National were following the precedent set by Labour in 2014 when they challenged David Clark being elected as Speaker.

          Sauce has to be good for the goose as well as the gander.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2.2
        8 November 2017 at 8:50 am

        Yes to all of this.

        I bet Labour will follow Obama’s disastrous naivety instead.

        • RedLogix 2.2.2.1
          8 November 2017 at 9:09 am

          Sadly I have to agree. The problem is they will be damned either way, branded weak if they seek consensus and compromise, labelled negative and ‘anti-democratic’ if they play hard ball.

        • The Fairy Godmother 2.2.2.2
          8 November 2017 at 5:55 pm

          Obama’s situation had parallels to that of Len Brown. He was a president of the left with a right wing congress who had the majority, making it very difficult for him. The coalition government and its support partner has a majority. If national farts around too much they have the power to call urgency or rule by executive order. Nope the situations are not the same.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2.2.2.1
            8 November 2017 at 6:30 pm

            The situations are not the same, and yet the desire to appease the National Party persists.

            After Oravida, and Cameron Slater, and Simon Lusk, and Jason Ede, and “pretty legal”, and Morally Whitney, and the attacks on human rights and the rule of law, and <ithe last nine years, the NZLP is still prepared to touch Simon Bridges’ hand, nay, not just to touch, but to shake.

            The National Party is an existential threat to the citizens of this country, and that’s the way the government should treat them.

      • tracey 2.2.3
        8 November 2017 at 11:28 am

        It is not like National has no history of lying. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.

        What is the evidence Nats agreed to support Mallard ? Have they denied it?

    • tuppence shrewsbury 2.3
      8 November 2017 at 9:51 am

      I know it’s an oddity unseen in 7 years in parliament, but a resourceful and capable opposition holding the government to account is one of the fundamental underpinnings of the westminster parliament. It helps prevents governments abusing their entrenched powers or further entrenching them.

      Advocating that Labour led government should just ignore these conventions and react badly because the National opposition are doing their job kind of makes anyone who supported Labour and pals as they were more honest than National a hypocrite.

      • RedLogix 2.3.1
        8 November 2017 at 10:03 am

        I know it’s an oddity unseen in 7 years in parliament, but a resourceful and capable opposition holding the government to account is one of the fundamental underpinnings of the westminster parliament.

        You’ve lost me there; on exactly what point of principle was National “holding the government to account” here?

        The one where they gave an assurance of support for the Speaker, but reneged on it?

        The one where they claimed to have the numbers to effectively force a vote of no confidence, but didn’t?

        Or the one where they used the resulting confusion (a standard conman technique) to bluff their way into repudiating a deal they themselves had proposed, and voted for unaminously, while they were in govt?

        Otherwise exactly what was your point?

        • tuppence shrewsbury 2.3.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 10:14 am

          So the government isn’t capable of governing while the opposition is being very capable of being opposition

          Ask me again where i’ve lost you?

          • RedLogix 2.3.1.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 10:30 am

            You claimed National was merely doing it’s job ‘holding the government to account’. I’m curious to know how you thought this was being achieved by this silly farce.

            • tuppence shrewsbury 2.3.1.1.1.1
              8 November 2017 at 11:08 am

              The opposition has negotiated more places for itself on select committee’s.

              The opposition has traded it’s symbolic vote for speaker of the house for real power in the engine room. So not merely doing it’s job, forcing the government to understand there is a real opposition now. not the half baked one of the last 7 years.

              You may consider it a silly farce, but it’s important the forms and rituals of parliament are observed. They are there for all members benefit, so it’s probably best the government gets on top of them.

              • RedLogix …
                8 November 2017 at 11:26 am

                The opposition has negotiated more places for itself on select committee’s.

                Again selectively leaving out the critical information. It’s like stealing your wallet at the point of a gun and calling it a ‘negotiation’. Cute but not impressive.

                but it’s important the forms and rituals of parliament are observed.

                Which in this instance National clear shat all over. If they had any genuine concerns over numbers, the correct place was to bring it up in the Business Committee which is where Parliament deals with these things expiditiously.

                It is absolutely routine for members to be absent for all manner of good reasons, and in order to ensure orderly governance there is established procedure to ensure this does not cause disruption. Or enable opportunist scams as we saw yesterday.

              • tracey …
                8 November 2017 at 11:32 am

                IF Nats said they would support Mallard and then withdrew that promise to action the SC plan are you ok with that?

                • Freddo …
                  8 November 2017 at 4:03 pm

                  Trouble is Tracey (and others), Hipkins said yesterday that Labour had no explicit agreement from National that they would support Mallard unopposed. He said that Labour had approached the Nats with a proposal to have Mallard as Speaker and Tolley as deputy, but he didn’t say in that video interview I saw (I think it may have been on Stuff) how or even if National ever actually accepted that deal in a formal way. He added that another time he would make sure he got such a specific assurance given what happened yesterday. So Hipkins confirmed there was no withdrawal of a specific promise from the Nats.

                  They, and particularly Bridges, simply made Labour look like fools with a very clever tactic, whether we like it or not. Even Bryce Edwards says as much today, explicitly, and he is no Nats fan in any way. We need to just suck it up, hope Labour learn from it, and not underestimate the bloody Nats. They have shown they will be formidable in opposition. In my opinion that means a top class performance will be needed from all of Labour, Greens, and NZF, every single day, not us moaning about the Nats just doing their job in opposition.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    8 November 2017 at 4:26 pm

                    but he didn’t say in that video interview I saw (I think it may have been on Stuff) how or even if National ever actually accepted that deal in a formal way.

                    Even accepting informally is acceptance which they then went back on.

                    In my opinion that means a top class performance will be needed from all of Labour, Greens, and NZF, every single day, not us moaning about the Nats just doing their job in opposition.

                    Yes, such performance is needed but National aren’t doing their job as they’re lying and misleading.

                  • Tracey …
                    8 November 2017 at 5:44 pm

                    Then I stand by my comment yesterday that Chippy is incompetent and as a senior MP and former party whip this is inexcusable.

          • Draco T Bastard 2.3.1.1.2
            8 November 2017 at 11:43 am

            National weren’t opposing – they were lying and should thus be fully removed from parliament.

            • Grantoc 2.3.1.1.2.1
              8 November 2017 at 3:39 pm

              Your comment suggest that you don’t believe in democracy DB. You sound like a poor loser who prefers dictatorship rather than democracy because your team got outwitted.

              In a democratic parliament oppositions oppose using whatever tactics are legitimately available to them.

              There was nothing illegitimate let alone illegal about yesterday’s events. It came about though negligence and poor management by labour, which led to them being out maneuvered.

              It can be argued that Hipkens created the situation in the first place by trying to deny National their democratic right to be fully represented on parliamentary committees in accordance with their percentage of the vote.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                8 November 2017 at 4:23 pm

                Your comment suggest that you don’t believe in democracy DB.

                I believe and support democracy. National, by their actions and lies, have just proven that they don’t. Your support of National’s immoral actions prove that you don’t either.

                In a democratic parliament oppositions oppose using whatever tactics are legitimately available to them.

                Lying is not a legitimate tactic in a democracy – ever.

                There was nothing illegitimate let alone illegal about yesterday’s events.

                Wrong. National said that they would do one thing and then did another. In a democracy and, in fact, any working society trust is essential and National just proved that they cannot be trusted.

                It can be argued that Hipkens created the situation in the first place by trying to deny National their democratic right to be fully represented on parliamentary committees in accordance with their percentage of the vote.

                As I understand it there was still going to be proper representation on those boards. It was even a National Party initiative.

                • Grantoc …
                  8 November 2017 at 5:10 pm

                  Politicians lie all the time; unfortunately. They frequently call it spin. Even Saint Jacinda lies/spins. Look at her effort yesterday trying to justify her shambolic management of parliament. Hipkens continued the desperate lieing/spinning on Morning Report earlier today. Even Espinor was left incredulous by his remarkable and audacious spin effort.

                  I’m sure you know all this and you’re just being cute DB.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    8 November 2017 at 7:43 pm

                    Politicians lie all the time; unfortunately.

                    That is no reason to accept it but a very good reason to make it illegal.

                    That’s what laws are supposed to do – limit immoral behaviour.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                8 November 2017 at 4:33 pm

                There was nothing illegitimate let alone illegal about yesterday’s events.

                That depends. If the Nats agreed to elect the speaker unanimously, as some have suggested, their going back on the deal might cause them some Privileges Committee type problems.

                I question the wisdom of going down that road, but the possibility remains.

                If your glorious leaders really intend to go full Tea Party I can see the government having to be a bit more forceful. “Hardball with spikes” as Matthew Whitehead put it.

                But I think the real punishment would be delivered by the electorate. So please, National Party, be true to your values. The real ones, not the ones you pay lip service to.

              • Tracey …
                8 November 2017 at 5:47 pm

                Hipkins was suggesting the SC arrangement brought in by Bridges SC pre election. FIFY

        • TootingPopularFront 2.3.1.2
          8 November 2017 at 6:56 pm

          Splendid exposition of National’s modus operendi – thanks very much!

      • tracey 2.3.2
        8 November 2017 at 11:30 am

        You seem to have forgotten Gerrys multiple bulnders as House Leader.

        • tuppence shrewsbury 2.3.2.1
          8 November 2017 at 3:43 pm

          Lol not at all. it was about the only time the opposition looked competent then too.

      • KJT 2.3.3
        8 November 2017 at 3:59 pm

        At what point is playing silly little boy dick waving games, part of “holding the Government to account”?

        • Tuppence Shrewsbury 2.3.3.1
          9 November 2017 at 6:22 am

          I know this will really pass right over your head, but if the opposition had been halfway competent during the last national government, do you think you have had as much to complain about as you did?

          “Dick waving games” you may think that are. Fascination with phallic symbols and metaphors is very immature though.

          Holding the governments feet to the fire is the job of an opposition. Just because the previous lot sucked at it doesn’t mean this lot should

          • KJT 2.3.3.1.1
            10 November 2017 at 2:43 am

            Obviously you have no clue about ethics, responsibility and honesty. But why should we expect any better from National.

            After all lying, bad faith, playing silly games and treating parliament like a pissing contest, has been a feature of the last nine years.

      • Gabby 2.3.4
        8 November 2017 at 6:50 pm

        What’ll be their next masterstroke tuppy, withdrawing pairs with no notice?

  3. Carolyn_nth 3
    8 November 2017 at 7:01 am

    Good heavens! a Stuff OP from John Minto – critical of capitalism, in praise of socialism:

    So why does a worker on the minimum wage pay a much higher tax rate than a rich lister? Because rich listers have far greater political influence than the rest of us.

    Capitalism is not the force for good its advocates claim. At heart it’s a mechanism for the few to amass wealth at the expense of the many.

    Human beings are social beings. We are more naturally co-operative than competitive but capitalism is based on the reverse.

    The alternative is socialism (not the totalitarian state capitalism of the old USSR or China – misnamed as socialist or communist) whereby we cooperate together to ensure everyone has the ability to live lives of dignity and self-respect. That’s where our best future lies.

    • Incognito 3.1
      8 November 2017 at 7:36 am

      The comments to that OP are most revealing.

      • ianmac 3.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 8:42 am

        Very revealing Incognito! If you have something to loose, shoot the messenger. Some mean people on Stuff.

        • Adrian 3.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 8:55 am

          So National needed the Spy That Lied, ( the very definition of a spy ) to attempt an advantage.
          The left need to go hard on this illegitimate imposter.

      • RedLogix 3.1.2
        8 November 2017 at 8:48 am

        The interesting thing about those comments, all so blithely assuming capitalism is superior to communism, are overlooking the rise, rise and rise of China. While a large part of that rapid rise to global dominance is because it sought an intelligent balance with market mechanisms to build it’s economy; socially and politically it remains at core a communist state.

        Assuming capitalism won because the USSR collapsed may yet turn out to be a premature call.

        • Andre 3.1.2.1
          8 November 2017 at 9:39 am

          China communist at core? Hmm, not a description I’d ever use.

          Politically it’s closer to totalitarianism than anything else.

          Economically it has elements of a planned economy and elements of crony capitalism. The planned economy/crony capitalism aspect has worked well-ish for them in spurring massive economic growth. Which I suspect is a result of choosing leaders that have been trained in technical professions.

          Socially they appear to be working towards providing the kinds of protections we take for granted (even after 9 years of Nats trying to brutalise them). Bet their successes are patchy, overall they’re in the “yet to achieve” category.

          https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/apr/23/china-welfare-system-inflexible-unfair

          • RedLogix 3.1.2.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 9:50 am

            Go back and reconsider Xi Jinpeng’s 3 1/2 hr speech to the CCCP Congress this year.

            https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/18/xi-jinping-speech-new-era-chinese-power-party-congress

            In essence the West started post WW2 from a position of a balance between capital and social interests, and have staggered away from it. While China started with a gross imbalance towards socialism, and have progressed towards the balance we used to enjoy.

            • Andre 3.1.2.1.1.1
              8 November 2017 at 10:21 am

              I don’t see anything in that article suggesting Xi has any plans to move towards true communism:

              “In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, “common, universal”)[1][2] is the philosophical, social, political and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money[3][4] and the state.[5][6]”

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

              Didn’t spot anything suggesting any planned changes away from their mix of planned economy and crony capitalism. Why should they? It’s worked well for them.

              The article suggests Xi intends strengthening the totalitarian aspects of their one-party rule:

              “Xi was similarly uncompromising on China’s overall political model, offering no hint that democratic reform was on the horizon or that the party was considering loosening its grip on power. “No one political system should be regarded as the only choice and we should not just mechanically copy the political systems of other countries,” said Xi, who has overseen one of the most severe political chills in recent Chinese history. “The political system of socialism with Chinese characteristics is a great creation.” ”

              It also suggests Xi wants to grab a slice of global leadership. That should be easy since the Trumputang seems determined to give away the leadership position the US had.

              ” Xi, who has sought to portray himself as a strong and stable international statesman since last year’s election of Donald Trump, also painted China as a responsible global power that was committed to tackling shared dangers such as climate change.

              “No country alone can address the many challenges facing mankind. No country can afford to retreat into self-isolation,” he said. ”

              Didn’t spot anything about any plans they have around improving welfare systems. But that is something they have been quietly improving as they have become wealthier.

              • RedLogix …
                8 November 2017 at 10:35 am

                I don’t see anything in that article suggesting Xi has any plans to move towards true communism:

                My point above exactly. China is not being so successful because it is a ‘true’ socialist state, but because it has progressed towards a balance between socialism and capitalism. Like all human works it’s less than perfect; but manifestly working better than the West which has steadily walked away from socialism towards a purely rapacious capitalism.

                • Andre …
                  8 November 2017 at 10:47 am

                  Ok, I don’t see that we’re disagreeing on anything substantial about where China’s at.

                  But I’m still missing what you were trying to convey with that part of your initial comment at 3.1.2: ” … socially and politically it remains at core a communist state.”

                  • RedLogix …
                    8 November 2017 at 10:54 am

                    Your quote would be easier to understand if you expanded it to include:

                    “it sought an intelligent balance with market mechanisms to build it’s economy; socially and politically it remains at core a communist state.”

                    And given they remain a one party state, I think it fair to claim their version of socialism is more communist than democratic.

                    • Andre …
                      8 November 2017 at 11:05 am

                      Are you using the word communism in the caricature version used mostly as an epithet? As in, the USSR used to be called communist?

                      Because as I understand it, in political science circles, communism describes a social and political structure quite different to what was actually happening in states that called themselves (or were called) communist.

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

                    • RedLogix …
                      8 November 2017 at 11:17 am

                      I think it no accident that both the USSR and China’s attempts rid their societies of markets and create a ‘pure socialist’ solution, both ended up in totalitarianism. (And yes I’m using the word ‘communism’ as a short-cut caricature in this context.)

                      Yes we might dream of a better world where this was not so, but every nation that has attempted either an imposed socialism (or an unconstrained capitalism for that matter) has ended in tears before bedtime.

          • KJT 3.1.2.1.2
            8 November 2017 at 2:20 pm

            Modern China made Capitalism work by initially charging 100% wealth taxes.

            Not that I approve of the death penalty, even for kleptocrats. But they did get rid of the pernicious damage done by the power of generational wealth.

        • Tiger Mountain 3.1.2.2
          8 November 2017 at 5:08 pm

          “Assuming capitalism won because the USSR collapsed may yet turn out to be a premature call.”

          some of us bloody well hope so! and frankly the future of humanity comes down to ‘socialism or barbarism’

    • Puckish Rogue 3.2
      8 November 2017 at 10:12 am

      Jeepers an article from Minto that allows comments, he must be going soft in his old age

  4. eco maori 4
    8 November 2017 at 7:19 am

    The Reserve Bank act at the moment is designed to stimulate our economy with its main focus being inflation . So when peoples trading slows they lower interest so cheaper money trading picks up this is good for people with money. But for people with out big money this is bad if one is unemployed it would be good for interest rates to go down to lower the mortgage service cost and create jobs.
    In my view the way the ACT is setup now is to benefit big money and there is no consideration for people without money as these people are most likely to lose jobs( no stake in the business) and be servicing a mortgage , OUR economy can create economic activity without creating jobs the way it is set up now and this create more in equality . And yesterdays teething problem is nothing look at all the good new policy they are introducing Ka pai

    • greywarshark 4.1
      8 November 2017 at 9:10 am

      @eco maori
      Low interest rates help people with resources to buy housing, a relatively safe investment in these uncertain times. They also encourage people to spend rather than save. Consumerism itself is one of our biggest money swirlers. Retail spending is very important as the government has opened the doors wide to overseas goods,and our manufacturing has collapsed under the weight of world competition. So there has to spending and people encouraged to spend even if they are on low incomes with fewer jobs because of the lack of old-style
      manufacturing for us, the people in NZ, rather than export. Our living conditions and life in general has been sacrificed to assist us to export, because that is where the big money is to be made, and the foreign baubles that we desire are sourced.

      Many older people are more budget pressed than expected because of the low interest rates. Then they are encouraged to put money into shares some of which can earn a 9% dividend. But the government’s talk about people not saving forcing government to borrow overseas is just a subterfuge. There is an economic term called the Savings Paradox that draws attention to the fact that if too much money is withheld from the economy by saving, the economy is not stronger, but starts to diminish because too few people are buying anything.

      That is now a feature in the world, many people/private equity firms/corporations have gained a huge proportion of the world’s finances and hold it in tax havens – they don’t need to worry much about interest rates on their holdings because they don’t have to pay tax on it. They just want the exchange rates to stay the same so their funds hold their buying value. But there is insufficient money available to people who want to buy basic things, and run small businesses.
      The Paradox of Saving (or hoarding) affecting the world.

      In NZ, many people are in poverty, or financially stressed, but conditions grow harder by the week. Government has introduced tough regulations on selling used electrical goods so that it is harder to find cheap second-hand ones, they become more expensive to repair and we are encouraged to buy new so making businesses profitable and keeping more money flowing. Each time you do something, buy or repair through a business the government gets a whole 15% adding to the total cost. Save your money and they take I think 17.5% minimum off your interest. Then there is income tax, user pays on government services.

      It’s no wonder many people don’t vote, the government certainly isn’t interested in them, they pay the most tax as a proportion of their income which cuts down on their available money for basic needs. The wealthy may pay more in taxes, because of their higher earnings, and can pay it out of their pocket money, their funds for holidays, new car, new computer, furniture, expensive schooling with overseas trips etc.

      However the government doesn’t want a happy stable economy with workers earning well, paying mortgages which is a sort of saving which therefore takes money out of the economy. They have time to do repairs and make things for themselves if they have stable employment with perhaps a day in the weekend off. If shops shut down for half a day even, so Sunday afternoon off, that cuts down on business activity, and government opportunity as middlemen, clipping the ticket. So people are taught to think of buying new rather than repairing old ones, and not encouraged to live simply and well with little debt beyond the mortgage. Even if people can’t afford new stuff, they can be induced by no interest offers, they can borrow on their credit card etc. for a while, but now we have an indebtedness rate of an average 161% of income. Saw that on one of the NZ links but can’t remember at moment.

      • halfcrown 4.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 10:06 am

        A great analysis Grey

      • tracey 4.1.2
        8 November 2017 at 11:34 am

        Wow. Great insights Grey. Thanks.

        • greywarshark 4.1.2.1
          8 November 2017 at 11:48 am

          Thanks tracey and halfcrown
          I think we all have trouble to see what is going on and don’t get the full picture of what swirls around us all day every day.

          But someone who has the training in socio-economics? and wants to put the record straight about something please feel free. (Except 3steps – I’ve seen enough of him to think what a w….r – fill in the gaps with your favourite denigration.)

      • eco maori 4.1.3
        8 November 2017 at 11:54 am

        +100 GREYWARSHARK

  5. eco maori 5
    8 November 2017 at 7:30 am

    They set the reserve bank act like this because they were conned that what is good for big money is good for a society( NOT AT ALL) Kia Kaha

    • eco maori 5.1
      8 November 2017 at 8:38 am

      It’s good to see the rubber ring has finally been put on him Kia Kaha

      • eco maori 5.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 9:05 am

        You got It. I’m lucky with my mokos it’s different I come down to there level and talk and observe them all the time. I tell them what they are doing wrong and what there bad behaviour does to there sibling or whom ever. And the best part of mokos is we get them for 4 days tops and off home go they whew back to piece and quiet LOL Ka pai

        • eco maori 5.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 9:11 am

          To John day from the Rock I forgot to mention you well your a funny Kiwi bugger to m8 Ka pai

          • eco maori 5.1.1.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 9:30 am

            Gees I hate to see what happens when I fart lol my support I get from my tupuna is my code of conduct that I live by so as they will be proud of me. Those people can not help them selves got to spin everything which is what I expect from them. Kia kaha

            prou

  6. Cinny 6
    8 November 2017 at 7:40 am

    The wind here last night was fierce, fence to repair. Looks like we didn’t get hit as bad as some in our district.

    If the wind is heading to yours and you have a trampoline you might want to flip it over so it doesn’t get airborne.

    • The decrypter 6.1
      8 November 2017 at 8:00 am

      Cinny. Only tories own trampolines, please don’t pamper to them.

      • veutoviper 6.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 9:06 am

        LOL, but RNZ Morning Report reported that some of the power outages in the top of the South Island were indeed caused by flying trampolines! So why should others suffer from tory trampolines.

        • The decrypter 6.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 9:33 am

          At the least tory trolls like james can’t live under trampolines –if they blow away. Some consolation I suppose.

          • AB 6.1.1.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 2:15 pm

            Have you noticed how the grass under trampolines dies slowly? Only to be replaced by rapacious weeds that invade everywhere else.

          • James 6.1.1.1.2
            8 November 2017 at 8:03 pm

            Still obsessed with me I see. You make me laugh.

      • Cinny 6.1.2
        8 November 2017 at 5:08 pm

        Lmao, you crack me up Decrypter. Turned out a lefty friends tramp was found in the neighbouring orchard this morning, they were smiling as they told me, funny as.

  7. Andre 7
    8 November 2017 at 8:43 am

    Carter Page spills his guts on yet more Trump campaign-Russia contacts that weren’t public previously.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/06/politics/carter-page-testimony-released/index.html

    Some of his testimony is so nutso that even Trey Gowdy (yes, he of the Benghazi inquisitions) seems to go WTF??!

    https://www.salon.com/2017/11/07/carter-pages-testimony-is-crazy-and-big-trouble-for-trump-camp/

  9. The decrypter 9
    8 November 2017 at 8:55 am

    Paddles dead. hit by a car .Bugger

    • veutoviper 9.1
      8 November 2017 at 9:12 am

      NO! Unfortunately it appears to be true – Paddles was hit by a car and died on Tuesday. Confirmed by a spokesperson for the PM.

      http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2017/11/jacinda-ardern-s-cat-paddles-has-died-after-being-hit-by-car.amp.html

      Also https://twitter.com/FirstCatofNZ

      • tracey 9.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 11:37 am

        Collins and Slater doing a drive by!

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 9.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 11:38 am

          Gareth Morgan was spotted fleeing the scene

          • tracey 9.1.1.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 11:46 am

            Chuckle

          • Andre 9.1.1.1.2
            8 November 2017 at 12:10 pm

            Right on cue, Gareth can’t help but make an obnoxious prick of himself.

            https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/98670017/gareth-morgan-questions-pms-value-of-native-wildlife-after-her-cat-paddles-killed-by-car

            Clue for the clueless, Gareth, have a bit of decency and empathy and wait a few days before putting that boot in.

            • veutoviper 9.1.1.1.2.1
              8 November 2017 at 12:19 pm

              “Clue for the clueless, Gareth, have a bit of decency and empathy and wait a few days before putting that boot in.”

              The same applies to some of the commenters on this very thread here, Andre.

              • Andre …
                8 November 2017 at 12:58 pm

                Well, yeah. But here we’re just a bunch of politics tragics ranting at each other in an obscure corner of the internet. Gareth has a megaphone to spew nastiness all over New Zealand. Including directly on Jacinda and Clarke.

                • veutoviper …
                  8 November 2017 at 1:47 pm

                  Too true re a bunch of political tragics! But sadly also true re Gareth’s situation.

                  My reply re commenters here was not directed at you .- in fact your ‘clue for the clueless’ expression was exactly what was needed to deflect me from replying (very rudely) to some of the classless attempts at humour in the thread. So thank you.

                  I volunteered for the SPCA *for decades, had many pets over the years, and know how much it hurts when they die. In fact my latest cat (a 12 year old neutered male ginga) died just two months ago of wounds inflected by a neighbour’s cat. I heard and saw the fight, my cat disappeared and died before I could get him to the vet when I finally found him four days later. I feel for Jacinda and Clarke as they obviously both doted on their young cat who was not even one year old. Paddles featured a lot on Clarke’s Twitter feed.

                  And cats can be taught not to go for birds etc, I also have hard beaked parrots who know exactly how to teach cats that “all birds bite and it hurts!”. I often use them to train other peoples’ cats, at their request.

                  * I also worked for Dept of Conservation.

                  • Andre …
                    8 November 2017 at 2:02 pm

                    I’m a bit touchy about losing pets at the moment too.

                    I’ve got an 18 year old cat whose symptoms of kidney failure become obvious a couple of years ago. He’s had quite a few episodes where he’s been sick and unhappy for several days and I’ve thought if he doesn’t pick up tomorrow it’s time for the final trip to the vet. So far he’s always perked back up, but jeez it’s tough.

                    When his sister died suddenly a few years back in many ways it was easy to deal with, it just happened and it was done.

                    • veutoviper …
                      8 November 2017 at 2:24 pm

                      Understand where you are at only too well. The big lump in the stomach, is today the day? etc.

                      About 15 years ago I took on a female (unspayed) Corgi dog as she was 6 years old (found out later she was actually 8) as her owners were going overseas that very day, and she did not fit the criteria for rehoming via the SPCA. She was a real handful, but got put in her place by my other dogs and cats, and ended up fitting in well. At 12 she was diagnosed with Cushings syndrome and basically given about a year to live with or without surgery. The vet and I decided to treat the symptoms rather than the cause.

                      Well she finally died naturally at home in her basket at the age of 19 years and four months old of two quick strokes in a matter of five minutes. I and my other dogs were at her side. In fact she was the only pet I have ever had that died naturally.

                      So don’t give up, and don’t beat yourself up. You and he will know when the time is right. Kia kaha

            • weka 9.1.1.1.2.2
              8 November 2017 at 2:45 pm

              Wow.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2
      8 November 2017 at 9:18 am

      Who will be the first National MP to use it to attack the Prime Minister in the House?

      • veutoviper 9.2.1
        8 November 2017 at 9:42 am

        Would not surprise me at all. Paddles had become quite a celebrity worldwide through her (Paddles) twitter account. Articles have appeared in overseas media including Vanity Fair, NYT etc.

        Clarke will also be devastated as prime Paddles carer.

        But the bloody Herald – their article on Paddles’ death mentions that Jacinda’s grandfather’s funeral was the day before the election. It was not her grandfather; it was her grandmother.

        Have just sent the Herald a very rude email message.

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11941627

        • veutoviper 9.2.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 10:09 am

          Herald article now corrected to ‘grandmother’. Hope they also do a personal apology to the PM and her (maternal) family.

          • tracey 9.2.1.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 11:47 am

            If it were Key they woukd have covered the funerals and had them embedded in their minds 😉

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 9.2.2
        8 November 2017 at 11:37 am

        A literal “Dead Cat” this time?

      • James 9.2.3
        8 November 2017 at 8:06 pm

        Who will be the first leftie to blame it on someone from “the right”. Oh hang on tasteless bullshit is already happening.

        And some think it’s funny.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2.3.1
          9 November 2017 at 8:11 am

          Well yes, of course the moral equivalent of a National Party MP is an anonymous blogger.

    • mauī 9.3
      8 November 2017 at 9:28 am

      Wow, thought you were talking about Richard Hadlee for a second.

    • Puckish Rogue 9.4
      8 November 2017 at 10:10 am

      Always sad when a pet dies

    • tracey 9.5
      8 November 2017 at 11:35 am

      I thought you meant richard hadlee

    • Morrissey 9.6
      8 November 2017 at 4:28 pm

      Chester Borrows behind the wheel?

  10. greywarshark 10
    8 November 2017 at 9:32 am

    I was thinking about Parihaka on Nov 5th, their day not defunct Guy Fawkes day, but didn’t get this in promptly but here it is for thinking about. And hopefully, accepting the date for commemoration of things NZ each year.

    Taking Parihaka’s message onward in our minds and our hearts.

    Graham Cameron in his blog First We Take Manhattan – Thoughts that are too long for Twitter – has put the main points of his sermon on November 5th reflecting on the date and it’s importance to New Zealand, being the date that in 1881 Parihaka was over-run by colonials, and also it is the date of All Hallows’ Eve (Halloween), with a glance at Guy Fawkes which event is marked with common pleasure and fireworks. The sermon prompts thought, presents information and a great image of Maori with poi that seems to speak of the people who met the forces with respect and determined moral behaviour.
    https://firstwetakemanhattan.org/2017/11/05/all-saints-all-souls-or-all-parihaka-connecting-allhallowtide-to-aotearoa/

    The accompanying image resonates with me because I went to a Dawn Ceremony at 6am on 5th November organised by the marae with local people of the Peace persuasion and thought that remembering Parihaka was an important, even necessary action. I did not see a newspaper write-up about it, was advertised lightly, I think mainly by poster and on-line and few people turned up. The attendance reminded me of that of Waitangi Day in Nelson in the days before the marae opened up andnow holds a commemoration and hospitality day which gets a large attendance, (though I have noticed at the powhiri that many were overseas visitors).

    I also notice that a small proportion of New Zealanders labour on to try to keep our progressive spirit and responses alive and expanding. Also to grow cohesive community embracing bi-lateralism, and to welcome those from other cultures who want to enjoy our culture and ways, and enrich our mutual knowledge. Sometimes they amend some of their own ways that are negative, and some of our own similarly negative. The spirit of Parihaka and its example, offer us much and should be remembered by more than a few dedicated Maori, and the few big-hearted people who turn out to respond to its message, and acknowledge what Maori are trying to tell us in the 21st century that we didn’t understand in 1881.

    DonMcLean’s words about sensitive, moral Vincent van Gogh resonate.

    Starry, starry night
    Portraits hung in empty halls
    Frame-less heads on nameless walls
    With eyes that watch the world and can’t forget

    Like the strangers that you’ve met
    The ragged men in ragged clothes
    The silver thorn of bloody rose
    Lie crushed and broken on the virgin snow

    Now I think I know
    What you tried to say to me
    And how you suffered for your sanity
    And how you tried to set them free

    They would not listen, they’re not listening still
    Perhaps they never will
    AZ Lyrics.

    An account of the colonial attack on the peaceful Maori and their property from Graham Cameron’s sermon.
    Frustrated, the hawks in our Parliament prevailed and plans were drawn up to wipe Parihaka from the face of the earth. On the Fifth of November 1881, led by Native Affairs Minister Bryce, a contingent of 1,500 constabulary marched from their camp above the pā, arranged cannons on the small hill Pūrepo, and rode on horses towards Toroanui, where the people were meeting in the centre of the village.

    As they entered, the children sung in welcome on the road, holding the raukura out before them. Forcing their way past, the constabulary rode in to be greeted by women with freshly baked bread for their guests. They found Te Whiti and Tohu exhorting their people to stand strong in their commitment to non-violence and to expect their hopes of peace to be realised. The two rangatira were arrested. For the next two weeks Parihaka was occupied. The constabulary evicted people from other tribes, tore down the houses and burnt them, destroyed the crops and chopped down the trees. They raped and assaulted the women left in the pā.

    Remembering New Zealand’s poignant, painful but historic, ‘finest moments’ can help in the healing process needed to overcome the losses to us all by past lack of integrity in our behaviour and adoption of coercion and violence to get what we wanted.

    • marty mars 10.1
      8 November 2017 at 10:21 am

      Nice post – contemplation is often underutilized and underrated in our society but I recommend it highly. Thanks grey for your thoughts.

    • tracey 10.2
      8 November 2017 at 11:42 am

      Thanks so much for this and the link. We commemorate a loss in Gallipoli but not this which is close to home and poignant even today… with peaceful protesters disdainfully labelled rent a mob and so forth for having a contrary world view to those in power.

  11. veutoviper 11
    8 November 2017 at 10:26 am

    Reminder – State Opening of Parliament

    Already underway with Maori welcome in grounds of Parliament; then moving inside at 10.30am

    Live streaming on Parliament website
    https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parliament/

    Also on Parliament TV and livestreaming on RNZ website.

  12. patricia bremner 12
    8 November 2017 at 10:29 am

    May todays opening ceremony go well, and Tamati Coffey maiden speech enrich us.

  13. Andre 13
    8 November 2017 at 10:42 am

    A catalyst to make conventional plastics from biomass sources. The kind of “green” tech that’s probably a step backwards rather than forwards.

    https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/07/new-catalyst-unlocks-industrial-chemicals-making-plastics-biomass/

    The problem with conventional plastics is the damage discarded plastics do in the environment and ecosystems. Due to the length of time needed for them to break down.

    If we accept, for the sake of argument, that the conventional plastics we use now are a necessary evil, then fossil fuels are a fairly low-impact source for the raw materials. Using fossil fuels as the raw material for necessary hard goods is also a much more defensible use of a finite resource than burning it for heat and heating up the planet.

    If we change to devoting large areas to growing crops for hydrocarbon raw material we used to get from small holes in the ground, that’s just going to accelerate losing wild areas to monoculture and damaging big ag.

  14. Puckish Rogue 14
    8 November 2017 at 11:13 am

    Do it Jacinda, think of whats best for NZ and sign! 🙂

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11940926

    • One Two 14.1
      8 November 2017 at 12:01 pm

      Agitators are bottom feeders..

      ‘Thinking’ is not an agitators trait..

    • Draco T Bastard 14.2
      8 November 2017 at 2:01 pm

      Signing it is bad for the country. Same as signing all the other trade deals have been bad for us as we’re finding out.

      Time we put a stop to this following of failure.

      • Puckish Rogue 14.2.1
        8 November 2017 at 3:02 pm

        Signing is good for the country, I know it, Helen Clark knows it and now that shes actually in power Jacinda knows it

        Its whats best for the country

        • James 14.2.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 8:10 pm

          Yep she will sign it – and I think that’s hugely funny.

          The labour government who a lot here voted in are going to sign in something they have been campaigning against forever. They (in their words) are going to sign away “our sovereignty”.

          You have been taken as fools.

          Remember all the promised bottom lines on tppa? Don’t see labour mentioning them anymore.

          • weka 14.2.1.1.1
            9 November 2017 at 8:25 am

            Labour aren’t signing the agreement the way National wanted, so you’re basically making shit up.

  15. adam 15
    8 November 2017 at 12:26 pm

    Just in case you missed it, we would have woken up today 100 years ago – to find out a second revolution would have happened in Russia.

    And despite all it’s flaws, which there were many.

    It is still a great day to remember and celebrate, as a day when working people and peasants decided they had the power and ability to rule their own lives.

    Socialism is the answer, not liberal capitalism.

    • Puckish Rogue 15.1
      8 November 2017 at 2:55 pm

      Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty then any other type of political system and will continue to do even while other countries crash and burn because they’ve adopted socialist policies

      • Robert Guyton 15.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 3:21 pm

        Is poverty a capitalist measure, Pucky?
        Were the bushmen of the Kalahari living in poverty? Where the indigenous peoples of the rainforests living in poverty, or did poverty accompany the rise of capitalism?

        • Puckish Rogue 15.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 3:30 pm

          Didn’t say it was perfect but i’ll take capitalism over socialism anyday

        • Gabby 15.1.1.2
          8 November 2017 at 6:21 pm

          They lived nasty short lives bob, call it poverty or noble naturesnuggles.

          • Robert Guyton 15.1.1.2.1
            9 November 2017 at 7:02 am

            I don’t believe that’s true at all, Gabby. Do you really think of the lives of people in cultures other than Western/modern as “noble naturesnuggles” – a touch arrogant, don’t you think?

      • adam 15.1.2
        8 November 2017 at 3:38 pm

        Put down the crack pipe, and pick up a book or two Puckish Rouge.

        Because sad news for you history ended types – capitalism is a dog, which only serves the interest of the capitalist class. Socialist of all ilks made capitalism work for poor people. But the real kicker was that big old workers state which made sure the liberal capitalist west actually didn’t leave it’s people behind.

        That said, go back to wishful thinking and your own warped mythology, bit like your poll debate, and 4th term national government, utter bs.

      • KJT 15.1.3
        10 November 2017 at 3:23 am

        Keep saying that. Someone may even believe you.

        The state of most of the third world, apart from China, shows you are wrong.

      • KJT 15.1.4
        10 November 2017 at 3:24 am

        Keep saying that. Someone may even believe you.

        The state of most of the third world, and even parts of the USA, UK and New Zealand, shows you are wrong.

    • Psycho Milt 15.2
      8 November 2017 at 4:51 pm

      It is still a great day to remember and celebrate, as a day when working people and peasants decided they had the power and ability to rule their own lives.

      Well, it would be, if that was what happened. But it wasn’t. I don’t feel like celebrating the “great day” a disciplined bunch of totalitarian ideologues took over a country and subjected it to decades of murderous idiocy.

      • Morrissey 15.2.1
        8 November 2017 at 5:19 pm

        …a disciplined bunch of totalitarian ideologues took over a country and subjected it to decades of murderous idiocy.

        Are you talking about July 14, 1984?

      • In Vino 15.2.2
        8 November 2017 at 5:36 pm

        It happened in a country that had a culture of repressive, tyrannical leadership, and, unfortunately, Stalin put Russia back into that category. Almost inevitable – same thing followed with China.
        I will agree to Pockish Rouge’s claim that he will take Capitalism over Socialism any day when he can point me to a rich, industrialised country that has tried Socialism and failed. He can’t, because it is not allowed. Only poor countries can try it (the USSR was big, but never rich) and the rich capitalist countries (US in the lead) make sure that the Capitalist system prevails.

        And please don’t quote Argentina. Primary industry made that country rich – it was never heavily industrialised, and primary industry gives little security in our perverted economic hierarchy.

        The nearest proof of socialism being good are the current happiest-in-the-world countries in Scandanavia, who actually tax the rich, and try harder than us to make an egalitarian society.

      • Bill 15.2.3
        8 November 2017 at 5:43 pm

        The totalitarian ideologues were resisted up until about 1921. But yup, they (the Bolsheviks) secured power and put “the left” back 100 years (and counting).

        So maybe a commemoration? And perhaps a commitment not to make the same mistakes again; to learn from the past?

      • adam 15.2.4
        8 November 2017 at 10:28 pm

        I like how you missing out the sentence before that to make one of your snarky comments Psycho Milt. I said, to remind you – “And despite all it’s flaws, which there were many.”

        Here a free history lesson, when the whole thing turned to custard it was the anarchists who informed the world how bad the revolution had gone. Emma Goldman with her book “My Disillusionment in Russia” was the go to reference of everything that went wrong during and after the civil war.

        You might want to look up what it was like for those months before the Whites attacked. It was not perfect, but it was democratic, it was free, plus workers and peasants were in control.

        So yeah, I feel we can celebrate that – or you can be a negative nelly and hate on working people.

        • Psycho Milt 15.2.4.1
          9 November 2017 at 12:11 am

          I said, to remind you – “And despite all it’s flaws, which there were many.”

          A sentence similar to many I’ve seen written by apologists for the Nazis, to whom apologists for the Bolsheviks are in no way superior.

          • adam 15.2.4.1.1
            9 November 2017 at 1:34 am

            When did I support the bolsheviks with what I said? I talked about the revolution, from a worker and peasant perspective. When have I ever supported authoritarianism in any fashion?

            But sure make stuff up, it seems to be the new normal on this forum.

    • Macro 15.3
      8 November 2017 at 7:15 pm

      My dad was Ice bound in Murmansk on this day 100 years ago. The ship was part of a convoy supplying Russia during the WW1. He would tell me that he saw the Naval Cadets march though the city streets. The ship had caught fire and was destroyed and for around 3 months they ships crew were stuck in Murmansk. Finally, the ships compliment were repatriated back to the UK. On their return, the were discharged in South Hampton. But because they had signed on in Liverpool the company would not pay their wages – this lead to one of the first seaman’s strikes. Of course because it was war time, they were vilified. Being young (18) dad and one of his mates decided that they had had enough, and signed up for the Army, where he posted to France and in June 1918 was promptly shot through the left arm suffering permanent damage to the tendons of his left hand. On his medical discharge the MO said he would be good enough to wash dishes. That was enough to tell him that there would be no future for him in the UK and he promptly emigrated to NZ where he became an electrician and subsequently a rubber worker and for around 20 years was President of the Rubber Workers Union.

      • Anne 15.3.1
        8 November 2017 at 9:14 pm

        Fascinating story Macro. My Dad was in Murmansk in 1920. He was part of a small group of soldiers who were sent there to rescue members of the aristocracy including the Grand Duchess Olga, sister of Tsar Nicholas. They were ice bound in Murmansk over the winter months then moved on to Archangel aboard the SS Czar to collect their human cargo and sail back to England. The whole operation was conducted in secret and on the journey home they sailed in and out of the Norwegian fjords so as to remain undetected. My father was 18 years old and just doing what he was ordered to do. When they reached England Queen Mary was waiting on the dock to welcome her Russian relatives. Dad was in charge of lowering the gang plank for her but misjudged and came within a hairsbreadth of knocking her into the drink. He spent 24hrs in the brig for that mishap.

        He, too saw no future in England (and he knew WW2 was on the way) so he brought his young family (not me I came later) to NZ in the late 1930s. In the 1950s he joined the NZ Labour Party and stayed loyal to them up until the end.

      • Psycho Milt 15.3.2
        9 November 2017 at 12:56 am

        On their return, the were discharged in South Hampton. But because they had signed on in Liverpool the company would not pay their wages – this lead to one of the first seaman’s strikes.

        Good old Blighty, always on the lookout for ways to make Bolsheviks look the lesser of two evils! Still, at least he wasn’t shipped over to make Russia safe for feudalism again, which was I shit you not something that happened. Like most conflicts, it sure should be remembered. but exactly how to remember it is a motherfucker of a question.

  16. The Chairman 16
    8 November 2017 at 1:18 pm

    Remember the public uproar Labour faced last time they tried pushing lightbulbs and shower-heads?

    How do think the general public are going to feel about the Greens homeowner housing warrant?

    While the notion of warrants on rentals is more widely accepted, applying this to general homeowners is going to come across as nanny sate on steroids, thus I expect there will be voter resistance and backlash.

    And that will be directed at Labour and the Greens, which Labour will be looking to duck, hence will happily blame the Greens as it is their initiative.

    Therefore, it’s something for the Greens to seriously consider before pushing further ahead.

    [please link to the Green Party policy on homeowner housing wof, so that people can understand what the GP are suggesting and what they might be intending to act on. – weka]

    • Robert Guyton 16.1
      8 November 2017 at 3:18 pm

      Public uproar?
      Hardly.
      Right-wing commentariat frothing, more like.

      • In Vino 16.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 5:38 pm

        Aye, but such genuine concern!

        • Robert Guyton 16.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 5:45 pm

          The likes of Farrar and Slater, I thought back then, needed a big shower-head for a decent sluice-down, given the nature of their day to day activities.

          • In Vino 16.1.1.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 6:01 pm

            Not trickle-down ones??

            • Robert Guyton 16.1.1.1.1.1
              8 November 2017 at 6:15 pm

              Ideologically, they yearn for such a rose, but realistically? On carcasses of those dimensions? Ever seen the sluice-guns used by the gold-miners of yore?

      • The Chairman 16.1.2
        8 November 2017 at 11:51 pm

        So no worries then, Robert?

        The negative feedback I was receiving at the time wasn’t coming from right-wing commentariat.

        • Robert Guyton 16.1.2.1
          9 November 2017 at 7:08 am

          Worried about ideas being floated, Chair? No, ideas are for floating; I was more concerned about whipped-up faux-indignancy and spin-doctor-induced hysteria – you?

          • The Chairman 16.1.2.1.1
            9 November 2017 at 11:25 am

            And you don’t think a housing WOF (which goes way beyond shower-heads and lightbulbs) would also lead to more “whipped-up faux-indignancy and spin-doctor-induced hysteria”?

            No concerns for the poor, Robert? Or the potential voter backlash towards the Greens ?

            My concerns have already been stated.

            • Robert Guyton 16.1.2.1.1.1
              9 November 2017 at 12:07 pm

              With National and her flunkies in and around Opposition, Chair, yes, I certainly do expect “whipped-up faux-indignancy and spin-doctor-induced hysteria” around every progressive idea the Government considers, floats, proposes, introduces; do you think that should stop the Government from acting progressively? I suppose you must. I don’t. Go for gold, Labour, New Zealand First and The Greens! Make ’em froth!

              • The Chairman …
                9 November 2017 at 1:55 pm

                “Do you think that should stop the Government from acting progressively?”

                No. My concern is the potential voter backlash. But more importantly, the potential negative impact it may have on the poor. Which could be counterproductive to them acting in a so-called progressive manner.

                Thus, would like to see how this will be overcome.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  9 November 2017 at 1:57 pm

                  I reckon they’ll factor both those potentials in to their plans, if they have them, Chair. Rest easy.
                  You worry that “a housing WOF” would lead to this and that, but there isn’t one. Do you mean discussions around a potential housing WOF might lead to etc.? Because it sounds as though you are jumping the gun, creating angst (mostly in your own head) and presenting your guesses in a manner (breathless) to try to create anxiousness in others. So, be still, Chair, you’re frothing.

                  • The Chairman …
                    9 November 2017 at 2:56 pm

                    No, Robert.

                    All we know at this stage is there is one (a homeowner housing WOF).

                    There has been nothing released to suggest otherwise.

                    We know it will be comprehensive, but as there are no other details, we don’t know where it will lead and how it will look on the ground.

                    We can only assume it will be similar to their rental WOF.

                    And keep in mind I didn’t create this situation, merely commenting on what the Greens have publicity stated and the concerns that raises.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 November 2017 at 3:02 pm

                      All we know at this stage is there is one (a homeowner housing WOF).

                      No, we don’t.

                      We know the broad idea was floated before the election by a coalition partner.

                      We don’t know that there is such a thing in the pipeline.
                      What suggests otherwise is that the party of the candidate who floated the idea got 6%, and neither of the other parties that comprise the majority in parliament have campaigned on or advocated the idea in any form.

                      Let alone whether it will be mandatory, houses condemned, or fines imposed, or just whether it’s a box to tick for house sales, beside “en suite for master bedroom”.

                      When you wrote “All we know at this stage is there is one (a homeowner housing WOF)”, you were explicitly making shit up.

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 November 2017 at 4:17 pm

                      @ McFlock

                      “No, we don’t.”

                      Yes, we do. Their social housing spokeswoman alluded to it.

                      Therefore, when I wrote it, I was alluding to that.

                      “We don’t know that there is such a thing in the pipeline”

                      We know a warm, dry, secure home, whether rented or owner occupied is one of the goals the Greens agreed to work with Labour on in return for their support (Confidence and Supply). Moreover, those aims (a warm, dry, secure home) align with the aims their homeowner housing warrant is the mechanism for.

                      And as they haven’t announced a new mechanism to achieve those aims, one can only assume they plan on using the one initially stated.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 November 2017 at 4:30 pm

                      The thing about allusion is that it’s not clear, and rests on the audience to make a connection. But that does not mean that every connection an audience makes was the intended one, and it’s even a guess as to whether the comment was an allusion to a specific thing at all, as opposed to a vague comment on a general issue and summarised by a journalist.

                      You are entirely responsible for the assumptions and inventions that spring forth from your bland and suppurative concerns.

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 November 2017 at 4:39 pm

                      But with Davidson stating the Greens would bring in a comprehensive Warrant of Fitness for houses to make sure every property – not just rentals – were warm, dry and safe, what she was alluding to (a WOF) is rather cut and dry.

                      And I’m not responsible for what she says.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      9 November 2017 at 4:42 pm

                      You are boring, Chair.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 November 2017 at 4:48 pm

                      You are responsible for attempting to sow concern and discord based on one paraphrased statement from one mp during a campaign that resulted in that MP’s party being the smallest partner in a coalition government.

                      Green policy makes no mention of a wof for owner-occupied homes. Your concern is that the Greens will bypass literally their entire manifesto in order to force a policy onto the government that you are concerned might be controversial.

                      Take your concern-trolling and shove it up your arse.

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 November 2017 at 6:52 pm

                      @ McFlock

                      I’m not attempting to sow concern, I’m telling you people are concerned. And I expect more will be as they become aware.

                      We know the Greens have no policy detail on this but we also know Davidson alluded to one (there being a comprehensive WOF).

                      There is a possible explanation for this. The details of their housing WOF may just be the same as their rental WOF?

                    • McFlock …
                      9 November 2017 at 7:05 pm

                      But I thought you were just asking whether we thought people might be concerned about the thing that does not exist but might one day because before the election a candidate for the junior coalition partner said something that was paraphrased by a journalist.

                      Now you’re actually telling us that people are already concerned, at this early stage.

                      Gosh.

                      Who?

                      ps: another possible explanation for this is that the Greens will work on implementing the policies that are actually in their manifesto before tacking on extras.

                      pps: another possible explanation is that the candidate or journalist in question had a slight brain fade that was too unimportant to bother correcting.

                      ppps: another possible explanation is that the wof will be another checklist with no enforcement status whatsoever, but might affect resale value like any other amenity or home improvement.

                      pppps: the most likely explanation is that you’re just a concern troll making shit up.

    • The Chairman 16.2
      8 November 2017 at 11:43 pm

      @ weka

      As I told you the other day, asking for the actual policy is futile as we both know the policy is still being worked through.

      All we know at this stage is the objective has been mentioned (homeowner housing WOF) and it is part of the deal the Greens struck with Labour. As was highlighted here in a post the other day.

      https://thestandard.org.nz/the-green-party-goals-for-government/#comment-1410644

      • McFlock 16.2.1
        9 November 2017 at 12:18 am

        So you’re asking people how they think voters will react to a policy that literally nobody has seen yet?

        Good-oh.

        Without you raising such important, serious, and pressing concerns as this, the nats would most certainly still be in government. Thankyou for your service. Without you, democracy would not exist in our fair land.

        • The Chairman 16.2.1.1
          9 November 2017 at 12:41 am

          I’m asking how they think voters will react to warrants for owner occupied homes, which most would assume will be similar to rental WOFs.

          Regardless of the policy details, I think many will find just the notion of it offensively condescending. As if homeowners need the state to tell them what repairs they require to do on their own homes. Others (those doing it hard) will be worried they will be forced to sell as they won’t be able to cover the cost.

          Landlords aren’t exactly lining up for Wellington’s voluntary scheme and I’m guessing homeowners will be far less enthusiastic. And that risks blowing back on the Greens.

          • McFlock 16.2.1.1.1
            9 November 2017 at 2:46 pm

            Oh, so you’re actually asking us how we think voters will react to what we think they might assume about policy that nobody has ever seen yet.

            I think it would be offensively condescending to hazard such an opinion in a complete absence of actual facts.

            • The Chairman 16.2.1.1.1.1
              9 November 2017 at 3:55 pm

              A policy never seen but one the Green’s social housing spokeswoman alluded too.

              It’s not too hard to imagine what such a policy will look like (similar to their rental WOF one would assume).

              Moreover, it’s not my fault that other than stating it will be comprehensive, the Greens have been rather vague alluding to a policy with no detail.

              • Robert Guyton …
                9 November 2017 at 3:58 pm

                alluded, shmalluded. It’s not too hard to imagine…nor to foment. It’s boring now.

              • McFlock …
                9 November 2017 at 4:23 pm

                It’s not hard for you imagine a labgrn policy resulting in a zombie apocalypse.

                What is difficult is making those imaginings at all accurate or reliable.

      • weka 16.2.2
        9 November 2017 at 12:24 am

        So the Greens don’t have any actual policy on this, good to know.

        The C/S agreement says,

        “13. Aim to end energy poverty in New Zealand and ensure that every New Zealander has a warm, dry, secure home, whether they rent or own.
        a. Budget provision will be made to substantially increase the number of homes insulated.”

        Not seeing anything there about a WOF for home owners. Maybe that is something they will do, I don’t know. At the moment you are asking people to get all angsty about something that is theoretical. Which is not necessarily a problem except you are talking about it as if it’s actually real.

        I’ve said before, go do some research on this and bring it back, we might learn something.

        edit, snap McFlock.

        • The Chairman 16.2.2.1
          9 November 2017 at 12:46 am

          As was also mentioned (by me) in the other thread

          “Davidson said the Green Party would bring in a comprehensive Warrant of Fitness for houses to make sure every property – not just rentals – were warm, dry and safe.”

          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/health/news/article.cfm?c_id=204&objectid=11913852

          So from that we know they (the Greens) want a comprehensive Warrant of Fitness for homeowners.

          • Psycho Milt 16.2.2.1.1
            9 November 2017 at 12:58 am

            From that, we know the outrageous extent you’re willing to make inferences from what someone says to a journalist. There’s a difference.

            • The Chairman 16.2.2.1.1.1
              9 November 2017 at 1:05 am

              Not just someone.

              A Green MP (the Green Party’s social housing spokeswoman) speaking to a journalist on what the Greens want to bring in. It’s pretty cut and dry.

              • Psycho Milt …
                9 November 2017 at 1:27 am

                A spokesperson for a party with 6% of the vote maybe (if we accept your interpretation) thinks homeowners should be subject to a WoF. Explain to us again why homeowners should be shitting themselves? Because I just inspected my underwear and there was nothing in particular to report.

                • weka …
                  9 November 2017 at 1:38 am

                  It’s not just homeowners, it’s voters and what they will blame on Labour or the Greens in Lightbulb/Showerhead 2.

                  Knowing some of how the Greens operate but also what their values are, my guess is that because the rental wof looks likely to happen they’re also looking at problematic housing that is occupier owned where people can’t afford to improve them.

                  In that situation I doubt the Greens want to legislate to force people living in poverty to fix their houses when they can’t afford to. What would the government do if they didn’t, fine them?

                  Much more likely is that the Greens will push for extensions to the insulation schemes e.g. subsidies for low income people to insulate their houses. Davidson also talked about heating. Both of those are big issues in housing that is occupier owned by people on low incomes. The heating I expect to be tackled by addressing electricity regulation.

                  • The Chairman …
                    9 November 2017 at 4:05 am

                    “In that situation I doubt the Greens want to legislate to force people living in poverty to fix their houses when they can’t afford to. What would the government do if they didn’t, fine them?”

                    They may do a Morgan and force them to borrow against their homes, to be repaid (with interest adding to the cost) when they either die or sell. Later robbing them (or their next of kin) of the equity build up in their home.

                • The Chairman …
                  9 November 2017 at 3:50 am

                  @ Psycho Milt

                  Those doing it hard will be worried they will be forced to sell as they won’t be able to cover the cost.  

                  Others won’t appreciate the intrusion of the state into their own homes. As a number of voters displayed when Labour tried to introduce shower-heads and lightbulbs.

                  Thus, both risk voter discontent potentially being directed at the Greens.

              • weka …
                9 November 2017 at 1:29 am

                Where did Davidson say this? What was the context? We don’t know that Davidson was speaking to a journalist, maybe it was in a public meeting.

                The date tells me it was during the election campaign.

                You really should go do some research on this. A single sentence from a reporter about something a GP MP said during the election campaign, is hardly “part of the deal the Greens struck with Labour.”, especially since you’ve been unable to find anything else to support it.

                Your problem here is that there is literally nothing to comment on other than your own reckons about something that barely exists. Do some proper research and then you might get taken more seriously on this.

                • The Chairman …
                  9 November 2017 at 3:30 am

                  Where this was stated is largely irrelevant as it doesn’t detract from the fact the Green Party’s social housing spokeswoman (Marama Davidson) said the Green Party would bring in a comprehensive Warrant of Fitness for houses to make sure every property – not just rentals – were warm, dry and safe.

                  Which aligns with the aim of “13” (in the Green’s agreement with Labour). A warm, dry, secure home, whether they rent or own.

                  Moreover, Davidson’s comment informs us of the mechanism (a comprehensive warrant) to deliver that aim.

                  “ Much more likely is that the Greens will push for extensions to the insulation schemes e.g. subsidies for low income people to insulate their houses”

                  I have no doubt they will also push for those things. And if Davidson didn’t state they wanted to also bring in a warrant, I may be inclined to accept your reasoning (perhaps that’s all they will do).

                  Unfortunately, she did, hence the cat has been let of of the bag.

                  I really hope you are right and things have changed since the comment was made.

                  The context of Davidson’s comment is in the link provided. It was in relation to deaths linked to unhealthy homes.

                  • weka …
                    9 November 2017 at 7:51 am

                    Yes that’s all your reckons. Unfortunately all you have to go on is single sentence from a journalist during the election campaign. The rest you are making up.

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 November 2017 at 11:16 am

                      Are you implying Davidson was misleading voters? She go it wrong? Or that the Greens have changed their minds?

                      And what is your evidence for your position?

                      Surely their values and how they operate hasn’t changed between when the comment was made and now?

                      And if she didn’t get it wrong, wouldn’t it be logical to assume a warrant is still how they plan to meet their aim (13)?

                      Additionally, if she was mistaken or things have changed since the comment was initially made, shouldn’t there have been a correction/press release from the Greens that you could point too?

                      After all, it’s a policy with wide implications. Therefore, surely they wouldn’t want voters getting concerned over a policy desire that has now changed, thus would ensure their new positioning was well known?

                      While I may only have a comment from their housing spokeswoman, what concrete evidence do you have to show it no longer applies?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      9 November 2017 at 12:11 pm

                      “Are you implying…”
                      Nah, The Chairman is indulging in dish-water-weak trolling with his butter-wouldn’t-melt- in- this mouth, wide-eyed questioning trolling. He’s a determined one, but patterns of behaviour speak louder than mealy-mouthed passive/aggressive troll-talk 🙂

                    • weka …
                      9 November 2017 at 12:26 pm

                      “While I may only have a comment from their housing spokeswoman, what concrete evidence do you have to show it no longer applies?”

                      1. I haven’t said it no longer applies. But you’ve claimed that it’s in the C/S agreement and it just isn’t.

                      2. you don’t have a comment from MD. You have a journo reporting that MD said something. In fact you basically have three words (“not just rentals”) and nothing else.

                      3. if you want to be taken seriously, do some research and present some evidence. Your reckons are guesses extrapolated more from your own mind, values and beliefs than GP ones or parliamentary processes.

                    • weka …
                      9 November 2017 at 12:27 pm

                      @RG, feel free to show me some more pleasant pastures to encourage me elsewhere 🙂

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 November 2017 at 2:18 pm

                      The deal the Greens have struck with Labour has the same aims as their home owner housing warrant. And as they haven’t announced a new mechanism to achieve those aims, one can only assume they plan on using the one initially stated.

                      @ Robert

                      My concern, thus questions are genuine, Robert. Hence, I don’t appreciate your false accusations.

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 November 2017 at 2:40 pm

                      “You have a journo reporting that MD said something.”

                      That’s correct. I linked to a report where a journalist has quoted her.

                      “In fact you basically have three words (“not just rentals”) and nothing else.”

                      No. She also indicated it would apply to every property.

                      I presented the evidence, which apart from you downplaying, have failed to produce anything concrete to counter it.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      9 November 2017 at 3:03 pm

                      Hi, weka. Pleasant pastures? Pastures usually hide a dirty agricultural secret, weka, so instead I’ll convey some good news from the forest 🙂 I’m spending much of today making a clearing in the trees big enough for the teepee to be set up in preparation for any visitors who might call by over the summer months. It’s a lovely space, beside the creek, wrapped in native trees and nearby to the nectarine orchard. It’s sunny there and completely sheltered from any wind. I may move in myself, when there are no guests. Cooking is on an open fire; smoke goes out the flaps at the apex, and the skin is canvas, so smells like a holiday. Enough to take your mind off The Chairman’s mischief?
                      Hope so 🙂

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      9 November 2017 at 3:06 pm

                      Wait till there’s something substantial, rether than speculative, for you and us to get our teeth into, Chair. Then you’ll get answers, rather than return speculation. Are there not enough real issues for you to nip the heels of?

                    • weka …
                      9 November 2017 at 3:12 pm

                      Kirsty Johnston didn’t quote Davidson (look again, there is no quote), she reported something Davidson had said. Maybe it was an interview, maybe it was a speech, maybe it was a tweet, we don’t know.

                      That’s all you have, those three words. I don’t think Davidson lied, and I think that there being literally nothing else to go on means that we have nothing else to go on. You’re refusing to do further research, and instead you just want people here to seriously consider your theories about might happen to owned houses. Problem is we have nothing to base consideration on other than your theories, and it’s not actually a surprise that no-one wants to do that.

                      I actually think there probably is other mentions of this by the Greens, which I would be interested to see. But I have zero interest in you mis-using their words and position like you have done here to further your own hobby horse. It’s fundamentally dishonest. Instead you could have put up your own ideas and stopped trying to beat the Greens with it. Until you know there is something to critique, there is nothing to critique apart from you not knowing.

                    • weka …
                      9 November 2017 at 3:22 pm

                      ha ha! Perfect Robert, sounds wonderful all round. I just watched this short video last night, very industrial compared to a teepee, but the man had a through-provoking sensibility about living in small spaces and ones that are shared by different people over time.

                      https://faircompanies.com/videos/berlin-architect-turns-silo-into-spaceship-esque-home-as-art/

                    • The Chairman …
                      9 November 2017 at 6:29 pm

                      @ weka

                      She was quoted in the article, however that particular sentence was reported as what she said.

                      What we know so far:

                      We know Labour and the Greens have agreed to work on a number of goals.

                      We have goal 13 with its similar aims and desire to cover homes rented and owned.

                      We know the Greens planned to address those aims with a comprehensive housing WOF.

                      We also know a WOF is the mechanism being touted to achieve those aims in the rental sector.

                      But that’s cool, we can leave it till more comes to light.

                    • McFlock …
                      9 November 2017 at 6:41 pm

                      We know the Greens planned to address those aims with a comprehensive housing WOF.

                      No we don’t. We know one green mp might have floated the idea to a journalist during the campaign.

                      But without knowing that, the rest of your points are irrelevant to your concerns.

    • KJT 16.3
      10 November 2017 at 3:29 am

      More of an MSM uproar.

      A fuss about showerheads, and not a word when, big brother National, gave spies, and police extra powers to hassle those who disagree with them.

  17. weka 17
    8 November 2017 at 2:40 pm

    Antoine, you around?

    I found this last night while looking for something else, wondering what kind of hat you have?

    Antoine
    22 February 2017 at 3:11 pm

    Think you’ll find the MoU is covering over a certain amount of ill feeling

    If the left wins the election, the coalition building process will be very telling

    I’ll eat my hat if the Greens get several significant Cabinet posts and a chance to implement large chunks of their policy agenda

    https://thestandard.org.nz/kaupapa-pakeha/#comment-1302440

    • Robert Guyton 17.1
      8 November 2017 at 3:17 pm

      Tin foil sets your teeth on edge, when you chew.

      • Antoine 17.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 3:26 pm

        What are you snarking at me for Robert? I never said anything rude to you so far as I am aware.

        A.

        • Robert Guyton 17.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 5:33 pm

          I wasn’t meaning to snark, Antoine and I’m sorry my flippant comment read that way; I was trying to initiate an amusing sub-thread about inedible hats, but my attempt has gone as flat as a beret.

    • Antoine 17.2
      8 November 2017 at 3:25 pm

      By chance I am.

      Obviously my hat is safe as the Greens secured no Cabinet posts at all.

      It’s good that they did manage to secure some of their policies in the coalition agreement. More would have been better.

      A.

    • Robert Guyton 18.1
      8 November 2017 at 3:02 pm

      You need to debarkel your speaker, James; the giggling emanating from it is making you appear helium-headed a light-weight.

      • Puckish Rogue 18.1.1
        8 November 2017 at 3:09 pm

        Come now Robert wheres your sense of whimsy 🙂

        • Robert Guyton 18.1.1.1
          8 November 2017 at 3:16 pm

          It’s well located, Pucky, in a place that James-style humour can’t easily reach. I did find yesterday’s theatre in the house entertaining though, and instructive. Fancy National pulling a swifty, aye! Who’d have thought??

          • Puckish Rogue 18.1.1.1.1
            8 November 2017 at 3:38 pm

            It will make for an interesting three years thats for sure, Hipkins better have a calculator on hand from now

            • In Vino 18.1.1.1.1.1
              8 November 2017 at 6:09 pm

              Or an abacus? I am a Leftie, but I wonder about Hipkins. You have to know what to put into a calculator.. or an abacus, for that matter.

        • Psycho Milt 18.1.1.2
          9 November 2017 at 12:14 am

          Come now Robert wheres your sense of whimsy

          Good job you put a smiley face on that comment to Mr The-Standard’s-top-sense-of-whimsy Robert Guyton!

    • The decrypter 18.2
      8 November 2017 at 3:23 pm

      I doubt if anyone can even get james to consider
      “political options” available to Kiwis to improve all of our welfare.

  19. One Anonymous Bloke 19
    8 November 2017 at 4:24 pm

    It isn’t good enough to stop using the Tory hate machine.

    If the National Party manages to form a government again, they must find the hate machine not just mothballed, but inoperable.

    Suggestions on a postcard.

    • AB 19.1
      8 November 2017 at 4:32 pm

      Fantastic – put the boot into social investment and reveal it for what it is. I have previously called it Victorian moralising disguised by a gloss of science – and see no reason to change my mind.
      Its base assumption is that the economic system is perfect but that some individuals are defective. A very nasty creed that has Bill’s pathological little hands all over it..

  20. Cinny 20
    8 November 2017 at 5:11 pm

    Really pleased to hear that there could be an investigation into NZDF re the Hit and Run allegations. May that happen, it needs to.

    • Exkiwiforces 20.1
      8 November 2017 at 9:01 pm

      Was that mentioned in the G’G’s address to parliament today? If it was I must have miss it when I was skipping through her speech over at the scoop website.

      It sounds like the Australian SAS are in spot of trouble with ADF Inspector General’s investigation and ADF JAG after a well known Aussie journalist release his book a about the SASR the Gan and from the sounds a few a sour grapes at one of the VC medal holders at what he may have done or may have not done along with a few knives being thrown around like a circus sideshow with someone hoping it may stick to somebody etc.

      McMasters, hasn’t received the attention that old Nicky Hager got in NZ for his troubles as there was few articles about McMasters book in Oz newspaper and then went quite all of sudden.

  21. Morrissey 21
    8 November 2017 at 5:16 pm

    What’s the German for “I know NOTHING”?

    Fans of the classic comedy Hogan’s Heroes will remember the bumbling, easily gulled, and unfeasibly stupid Sergeant Schultz. It appears he married Col. Klink’s secretary Helga and they had a child, whom they called Edward. Sadly, Edward seems to be even stupider than his poor old dad….