Open mike 09/03/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:47 am, March 9th, 2014 - 194 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

194 comments on “Open mike 09/03/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. phillip ure 1
    9 March 2014 at 7:11 am

    this one is a total ‘howler’..

    http://whoar.co.nz/2014/comment-whoar-a-shocking-piece-of-junk-journalism-cunnliffe-accused-of-corruptionlying-jonathon-milne-short-listed-for-crappiest-piece-of-journalism-awards-2014/

    (excerpt..)

    “..it milne isn’t severely censured by the broadcast standards authority for this exercise in putrescent/’trash’-journalism..

    ..what good are they..?..what are they for..?..”

    phillip ure..

    • Jenny Kirk 1.1
      9 March 2014 at 8:05 am

      I totally agree with you, Phillip Ure. I’ve just laid a formal complaint with the Herald Editor, and if they don’t retract and apologise, I’m going onto the Press Council.

      This is a scurrilous piece of non-journalism, and the text of the story tells you there is nothing in it except what a friend does for another friend if the occasion calls for it.

      • karol 1.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 8:19 am

        Is that about this morning’s Herald on Sunday piece, that says Cunliffe is rich and has rich buddies, and one of Cunliffe’s secret donors isn’t KDC or the Unite Union?

        • Jenny Kirk 1.1.1.1
          9 March 2014 at 8:37 am

          Yes. Karol. The actual story itself is totally different from the headline and the picture caption.
          Its an incredible piece of sloppy, inaccurate journalism. The Herald should be ashamed of itself.

          • phillip ure 1.1.1.1.1
            9 March 2014 at 9:02 am

            my heart kinda sank when i saw the headline..

            ..and i asked myself in somewhat nervous tones:

            ..’what is this?’…

            ..by the time i had read/re-read..

            ..my tone had turned to one of anger..

            ..and the question-mark was replaced by an exclamation-mark..

            ..phillip ure..

          • mickysavage 1.1.1.1.2
            9 March 2014 at 9:13 am

            This is the non story of all non stories. Cunliffe helped a mate. Farrar and Hooton are playing tag team and tweeting it up for all it is worth and Slater has already run a post. Obviously they see this as a war of attrition.

            • Disraeli Gladstone 1.1.1.1.2.1
              9 March 2014 at 10:09 am

              Farrar’s blogpost was like reading Proust.

              It took hundreds of words and didn’t make a single worthwhile point.

            • Seti 1.1.1.1.2.2
              9 March 2014 at 1:52 pm

              Who said back in August 2012 “this National Government is selling New Zealand pound by pound, hectare by hectare, and there will be nothing left.”

              That’s right, and here he is helping his rich, foreign mate buy 19 hectares of prime coastal property. And he may not have a direct financial interest but his wife did legal work on the deal. Was that at no charge?

              “Cunliffe acknowledged making two visits, though he could not initially recall how many, when they were, or whether Keenan was there.”

              Rather lame memory lapse isn’t it? Shades of Banks not recalling whether he had been to the Dotcom mansion.

              • JK …
                9 March 2014 at 2:00 pm

                How pathetic, Seti. 19 ha of rocky coastal land which is mostly inaccessible being sold to an individual does NOT compare with thousands of ha of good farming land which the Nats have let go to foreign corporates.

              • Puddleglum …
                9 March 2014 at 8:56 pm

                Hi Seti,

                Perry Keenan is a New Zealand businessman who lives in Chicago. From the article:

                “This week, the Herald on Sunday learned the new owner of the 19ha property is Perry Keenan, a Chicago-basedNew Zealand businessman”

                Clear and precise acquaintance with the facts helps with thinking accurately about political issues – just a handy hint.

          • weka 1.1.1.1.3
            9 March 2014 at 9:30 am

            Yes the Herals should be ashamed and thanks for making the complaint.

            However, what the fuck is Cunliffe doing? When he was asked 2 weeks ago about his involvement with the property why didn’t he just say he had no legal/financial interest, but he had visited it to check it out for a friend who wanted to buy it? Did he think that the Herald wasn’t going to keep digging and use anything it could against him?

            • phillip ure 1.1.1.1.3.1
              9 March 2014 at 9:42 am

              are you demanding cunnliffe should have disclosed he went and looked at the house..as a favour .. for a close friend .. who was overseas at the time..

              ..and gave him a report/maybe took some pics..?

              ..how in any/the slightest way is this/that in the public interest..?

              ..stop buying into this ‘cunnliffe’s-rich! bullshit rightwing-meme..

              ..cunnliffe disclosed all he had to..

              ..no reason for you to have a (green) whinge at him..

              ..phillip ure

              • weka …
                9 March 2014 at 10:17 am

                It’s not playing into the rich mates meme. It’s playing smart with a bunch of venal fucks who want to skew the election.

                It’s not in the public interest in the way you mean. It’s in the public interest by way of getting a left-wing govt come November.

                Cunliffe didn’t do anything wrong other than let himself get set up, again. He was asked specifically if he had a legal/financial interest in the property, which he answered truthfully, but why not just say that he helped a mate out too? That’s not a rhetorical question. You’re argument seems to be that he shouldn’t have to. Political naivity.

                • phillip ure …
                  9 March 2014 at 10:27 am

                  no..you are wrong..

                  ..he did a small favour for an old friend..

                  ..that’s it..end of story..

                  .no political/financial ‘gain’..

                  ..there is absolutely nothing he should have disclosed..

                  ..this is total bullshit..

                  ..and you are buying into it..

                  ..just by yr moan about it..

                  ..philip ure..

                  • weka …
                    9 March 2014 at 10:30 am

                    Ok, so the article in the Herald will have absolutely no effect on people’s perceptions of Cunliffe 🙄 We don’t have to be concerned about the hatchet job being done on Labour. Everything is sweet in the rose garden because phil thinks that the only thing a politician has to do is play the game the way he thinks.

                    • phillip ure …
                      9 March 2014 at 10:43 am

                      now you are just talking absolute drivel..

                      ..i was the one who first gave the heads’-up on that..

                      ..could you stuff more words into my mouth..?

                      ..and it is nothing to do with ‘thinks that the only thing a politician has to do is play the game the way he thinks.’..

                      ..it is to do with yr stoopid/knee-jerk-reaction..

                      ..based on nothing..

                      ..how about you tell us just ‘why’ cunnliffe should have told of doing that small-favour for his freiend..?

                      ..go on..!

                      ..tell us exactly how/why he ‘blew’ it..as you allege..

                      ..phillip ure.

                    • phillip ure …
                      9 March 2014 at 10:51 am

                      and as a ‘green’..

                      ..why aren’t you asking/moaning about the bone-headed-decision not to debate ‘chem-trails-col’..on the nation..?

                      ..to just hand him a platform/free-run..

                      ..care to give yr ‘slant’ on that..?

                      ..care to tell us how that was ‘clever’..?

                      ..phillip ure..

                    • weka …
                      9 March 2014 at 11:06 am

                      “..why aren’t you asking/moaning about the bone-headed-decision not to debate ‘chem-trails-col’..on the nation..?”

                      Because I don’t watch the Nation (no tv) so I have no idea what the fuck you are on about.

                      Still can’t debate the issues raised, eh?

                    • weka …
                      9 March 2014 at 11:11 am

                      “..how about you tell us just ‘why’ cunnliffe should have told of doing that small-favour for his freiend..?”

                      I’ve already explaing this, but one more time…

                      IMO, it’s Cunliffe’s job to anticipate the hatchet jobs being done. If he was being asked about his financial/legal involvement in a high priced property sale, it’s his job to understand that this is a jonolist seeking to find some shit on him. So, there is no harm in telling the jonolist what the jonolist is going to find out easily anyway and use against him if he isn’t up front about it. There is no real reason for him to talk about helping a mate out, other than the fact that he is talking to a jonolist in an election year.

                      Your argument that it’s a non issue (his helping his mate out) is just denial of the political issues involved with the MSM and the NACT shills. A better argument would be that it doesn’t matter what he does, the skewing will still happen, so better to just get on with the other stuff that gives Labour a chance. I have no idea if that would be reasonable in this situation, and neither do you.

                    • phillip ure …
                      9 March 2014 at 11:15 am

                      there is no ‘issue”..

                      ..which was my point in the first place..

                      ..and..f.y.i..the green party refused to appear on the nation to debate ‘chem-trails-col’..

                      ..and the greens said they would only appear if craig withdrew his defamation-suit against norman..

                      ..and we all know that was never going to happen..

                      ..so why did they do/say that..?

                      ..and at the same time turn down a media-platform..(in a time of falling-polls..(!)..

                      ..and turned down a chance to monster ‘chem-trails’..

                      ..i’ve shortlisted that one for bone-headed-political-decision-of-the-year..2014..

                      ..phillip ure..

                    • weka …
                      9 March 2014 at 12:17 pm

                      “there is no ‘issue”..”

                      So you say. Still can’t debate the issues, eh?

                      I don’t know the story of the GP refusing to debate with Craig, but I can’t see any reason why they should. FFS, the guy has some pretty abhorrent and bizarre beliefs, and he is being used by NACT to keep control of NZ. If he has enough support in NZ to get into parliament, that’s one thing. But the GP is under no obligation whatsoever to give him any attention.

                  • cricklewood …
                    9 March 2014 at 11:34 am

                    Im betting if he had said he had a look through for his friend initially it would have killed any storey dead as It is a perfectly reasonable thing to do…
                    Instead he tells half the story and lets the media create a story from nothing and frame him as sneaky again.
                    Needs to box cleverer…

                    • phillip ure …
                      9 March 2014 at 11:55 am

                      there is no ‘story’..

                      ..and that the meda are so blind to national/the elites being so far up each others’ arses..

                      ..they have the need to tie their shoelaces together..

                      ..and put a broom-stick between their ankles..

                      ..to stop from completely disappearing..

                      ..this is a double-standard too far..

                      ..we have a media that goes nowhere near the needs of the average nz’er..

                      ..they are owned..lock stock and barrel..

                      ..by the corporates/elites they serve..

                      ..there is yr ‘story’..there is yr ‘issue’..

                      ..phillip ure

                    • weka …
                      9 March 2014 at 11:57 am

                      Exactly cricklewood. Much more precise explanation of what I was getting at, thanks.

                    • Naki Man …
                      9 March 2014 at 1:17 pm

                      Cunny seems to be a very slow learner, he should know this. He does not appear to be very clever.

                    • Puddleglum …
                      9 March 2014 at 9:21 pm

                      I’m not so sure that’s likely, Cricklewood.

                      If I were a journalist looking to paint Cunliffe in devious colours I know how I would have treated any volunteering of such information. I’d imply that (a) Cunliffe was forced to admit acting on behalf of a rich friend to buy an expensive property, and (b) he downplayed his role but (c) while he claims he did nothing to materially help, his wife was involved in the sale process (wink, wink).

                      Pretty easy, really, when you put yourself into that mindset. I’m not sure why you think the story would have ‘gone away’, given that it would have played into the ‘tricky’ meme just as well as this follow-up story.

                      If you accept that the journalistic angle on Cunliffe is to run with the ‘tricky’ narrative, I think you’d lose your bet.

                      Personally, I think the one positive for Cunliffe in all of this is that the series of revelations is really starting to look a bit silly, and very much like a concerted witch-hunt. There’s quite a potential for this to backfire, especially given that it has started so early in election year. I presume the right-wing strategists have thought this through so perhaps they know the New Zealand electorate better than I do.

                    • RedLogix …
                      9 March 2014 at 10:14 pm

                      Puddlegum,

                      Once again I appreciate how you have taken the time to articulate this.

                      The one thing I have been trying to convey is that Cunliffe’s enemies (and I used that word deliberately) will use any piece of information or action to smear him.

                      There is nothing Cunliffe can do to ‘behave’ better, or ‘box smarter’ with these people. Everything will be turned against him one way or another.

                      Which to a devious mind suggests a strategy …

            • Skinny 1.1.1.1.3.2
              9 March 2014 at 12:29 pm

              Phil is quite correct. Calm down you strange bird. DC would have put them straight, however the shrill MSM media are gang banging the opposition party’s to keep the elite owners happy. I know a few good print journalists who cover stories which never get to the printer. The right-wing editors simply refuse to publish unflattering coverage of National. Or praise worthy content of the Left.

            • Olwyn 1.1.1.1.3.3
              9 March 2014 at 12:38 pm

              I think it is time now to resist the bait. It may be true that Cunliffe could have or should have said or done something different regarding trusts, houses or rich friends, but we should not allow ourselves to be sucked into a petty conversation with which the right is far too comfortable. We should be working now toward changing the conversation, so that Cunliffe’s actual ideas get some oxygen, and people are motivated to vote for him on that basis. And if that can’t happen through the media, we must get it happening on the ground. Changing the leader is not enough by itself to seriously challenge the status quo. Our involvement and commitment is also needed, and we should not allow it to be weakened by set-piece distractions.

              • weka …
                9 March 2014 at 3:36 pm

                I agree with much of that Olwyn. I don’t see much of that other happening, but I hope it is, or will increase.

      • bad12 1.1.2
        9 March 2014 at 8:28 am

        Good on you Jenny Kirk, that is simply a ridiculous piece of Jonolism, the author outing Himself as the Alfred E. Nuemann of the print media…

        • phillip ure 1.1.2.1
          9 March 2014 at 10:34 am

          what have you got against alfred e nuemann..?

          ..that he has become a figure of scorn/contempt-comparison for you..?

          ..mad mag was one of the few sources of satire in a time of whitebread/unquestioning-journalism..

          ..stop sullying his good name..!

          ..phillip ure..

      • redbaron77 1.1.3
        9 March 2014 at 10:54 am

        They are really trying put the dirt on DC with this one. Good on you for taking it up with HOS and Press Council

    • ianmac 1.2
      9 March 2014 at 1:42 pm

      I went back to the Herald online just now and the rubbish that Milne wrote is no longer on the front page.

    • Murray Olsen 1.3
      9 March 2014 at 8:50 pm

      The real estate agent who chatted to the Herald (or maybe Farrar) about a rich client might be lucky to keep working in the area. Rich pricks, whether they’re mates with Cunliffe or not, don’t like their business spread around the gossip rags. If she sold the place, there may even be a basis for a complaint.

      Anyway, I’m left with the overwhelming impression that the real crime here is that the place overlooks Key’s disgusting and environmentally damaging mansion out on the sandspit. As a Northlander, watching Jafas and others build all over sandspits and clear mangroves has been making me feel sick for years. Who knows what they’ll do if those environmental warriors in National are forced to gut the RMA against their will, by the centre-right ACT party? We need to shovel these creeps into the toxic waste bin of history while we still have something left. Grrrrr.

  2. David Craig 2
    9 March 2014 at 7:49 am

    Is David Cunliffe really that much of an enigma? I guess one of the problems for the right/ media about banging on with questions about ‘who is David Cunliffe’ and the ‘enigma’ of Cunliffe is that you might actually get an answer to your question. And when people see and understand that answer, as they will, they’ll wonder what you were up to (and how smart you were) going round and round on the question.

    Having known the man fairly well for a decade, my answer would be, 160 IQ, brought up fairly poor, hugely successful business consultant before politics (with hugely successful/ busy partner/ mother of children, and hence the house where it is); But most importantly the politician with the best vision for a less neoliberal, post GFC NZ economy that can deliver the social and labour market goods he also absolutely genuinely wants to deliver.

    I dont think it’s that hard: that’s essentially him. The rest is manner, being ‘moved’ by things at the same time his brain is whirring at warp speeds, unbridled enthusiasm and revving high to get on with it: nothing sinister there. The more people see of him, as long as they are not competing with him for the job, the more in my experience they will recognise this. Attempts to frame him as tricky or something else he isnt will look a bit silly at that point.

    He’s unusual/ rare but not incomprehensible, unless you actually dont want an answer to your question about ‘who he is’. But let’s face it, all Labour leaders are a little rare and different, or they wouldnt find themselves in a position to get the job. Once the public get a feel for the rareness, they can be very forgiving, especially as the strengths start to deliver.

    • Saarbo 2.1
      9 March 2014 at 2:17 pm

      Yes, I think people keep asking the “who is David Cunliffe” question because they keep comparing him to the way they they know John Key who has a public profile built up over half a dozen years, helped along with an expensive team of PR people and suck ups.

      I get annoyed with the tribal National/right wing shit heads that can’t seem to understand why wealthy people support Labour, Im guessing that these are the people who have an insatiable need for more and more wealth, they have never asked the question; why? These are the RWNJ’s that don’t seem to get through their fat heads that Labour has a GDP growth on average 1% higher per annum than National, this is what DC refers to when he says the “Labour can walk and chew gum at the same time”. Labour will put the minimum wage up but will also create an environment that is better for the top line, businesses will ultimately do better!

      The irony in all of this “who is David Cunliffe” questioning is interesting, because I would bet that if people actually got to know John Key he would turn out to be a bit of a fuckwit, they type of person who wouldn’t have time for people of little wealth or status (whatever the fuck that is). I did work with DC in the 90’s, we were never friends but I remember him to be a bloody good bugger, he had no problem getting on with people across the spectrum of workers…I wouldn’t bet that you could say the same thing about John Key.

    • Murray Olsen 2.2
      9 March 2014 at 10:01 pm

      An IQ of 160 is pretty unusual, even putting aside the issues about what it measures. This may actually be a problem for Cunliffe at the moment, because he won’t he used to knocking off 50 or 60 IQ points to get to the level where NAct puppets like Farrar and Slater can understand what he’s on about. He may also feel that the rubbish they spout is so stupid and ignorant that its irrelevance should be self evident. The sort of intelligence he has can bring a little naivete with it, and he might not yet have realised just how far below him the opposition is. However, it also means that he’ll learn quickly how to deal with them.

  3. Descendant Of Sssmith 3
    9 March 2014 at 7:52 am

    Here’s an interesting commentary on the use of interns in film and advertising.

    http://www.idealog.co.nz/magazine/12/creative-serfs

    She did the rounds of Auckland design agencies, but found them “already full of free workers”.
    “Most of them said I’d have to show I was keen by working for free,” she says. “I wouldn’t, but it’s become accepted now because many people are desperate.”

    I just detest employers who want people to work for nothing. Doesn’t matter how easy the government makes it for ’em (e.g. 90 day trial) it’s never enough.

    • felix 3.1
      9 March 2014 at 8:01 am

      Disgraceful. They justify it by saying it’s temporary while the worker proves themselves, but that only applies to the individual.

      In reality they’ve created a permanent situation of a pool of free workers to be drawn on at any time.

    • Aww 3.2
      9 March 2014 at 8:32 am

      While this article outlines a highly exploitative use of interns, I am aware of a charity which was approached by Intern NZ. The charity got a qualified and passionate intern for 3 months so was understandably pleased, particularly because it was an out of the blue offer.

      This is different in my view because it is a charity, and because there was a limit on free labour.

      The chap exploited for six years(?!) that’s just abuse.

    • Aww 3.3
      9 March 2014 at 8:57 am

      Corporate welfare:

      “We were encouraged by the agency we were working at to go on the dole,” says fellow ad intern Price. “It was hard because WINZ was constantly ringing, trying to get me other work. I tried being honest with them at first, told them what I was doing, but that just meant I wasn’t going to be able to carry on with the internship.”

      Sounds to me like a breach of the Social Securities Act, namely the section about making your situation worse off (by working without pay). Wonder if the SSA can be used to stamp out the practice, or at least give it a fixed time limit of say one month to make it uneconomic for companies to keep recruiting interns and retraining them.

      • Descendant Of Sssmith 3.3.1
        9 March 2014 at 9:14 am

        Yeah an “employer” tried to put my son in this situation with a “four week trial” on no pay.

        Never mind he had rent to pay etc and he’d already turned up at 7:00 and done 2 hours work before the boss arrived – manufacturing firm.

        You can only get a unemployment benefit if you are unemployed. If you are working but your employer is not paying you you are not unemployed.

        WINZ can approve a work experience trial in conjunction with an employer and still pay a benefit but with only for a maximum period of four weeks.

        http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/manuals-and-procedures/employment_and_training/programmes_and_services/work_experience/work_experience-04.htm

        • Stephanie Rodgers 3.3.1.1
          9 March 2014 at 9:23 am

          This is why internships are anti-worker/anti-working class: it’s fine for people from well-off families who can live at home or get the rent paid from their trust fund, who then get their foot on the career ladder. The people who don’t have those resources just get shut out of the whole industry.

    • Skinny 3.4
      9 March 2014 at 8:58 am

      Peter Jackarse didn’t help with his successful lobbying of National to change employment laws, which loaded the gun in the bosses favour.

      Key-National will have credited the ‘free labour’ as being in full time employment, fudging the true unemployment figures.

      Trickery is as trickery does.

    • just saying 3.5
      9 March 2014 at 9:23 am

      There is a whole post in private businesses profting form free labour, and the ever more creative ways they are finding to do it. I was gobsmacked at the audacity of a new business round my way that started up recently using one such formula:
      Create a charity that does something. Get volunteers to raise all the money to do it. Be the provider of whatever it is. Charge whatever for providing that service. There are even public agencies that will find the volunteers for you, and WINZ (and other employment agencies) refer clients to them.
      Ka-ching.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.6
      9 March 2014 at 2:18 pm

      STAY if you’re doing work for big clients—when you’re making money for your company, you’re buying yourself a job.

      Hey, maybe if I work really, really hard maybe I can buy myself a job /sarc

      Yeah, no.
      And I suspect it’s gotten a lot worse since that article was published back in 2007.

      Employment is not a charity provided by bosses

  4. Sosoo 4
    9 March 2014 at 8:07 am

    Any guesses? Presumably, it’s not against the law to work out who it is based on publicly available information.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11216464

    I have a horrible feeling I know who this is. Wife beaters should be hounded out of parliament.

    • bad12 4.1
      9 March 2014 at 8:21 am

      An order against publishing the name tho is just that, so doing so here may be thin ice, if the person in question has been convicted of an assault on His wife in court where no suppression order was given you could publish that as a fact, but, couldn’t publish anything linking to the divorce…

    • karol 4.2
      9 March 2014 at 8:21 am

      From that story it sounds like the “politician” isn’t actually an MP, but is a “high profile political figure” who supports some MPs – said MPs are reported as supporting “family values”.

      • RedBaronCV 4.2.1
        9 March 2014 at 11:28 am

        Compare this with the pasting Len Brown took in the public arena for nothing actually illegal.

      • chris73 4.2.2
        9 March 2014 at 12:21 pm

        His name should be known

        • Ron 4.2.2.1
          9 March 2014 at 1:26 pm

          His name is well known and was previously published in newspapers when the case first came up if I remember correctly.

          • Sosoo 4.2.2.1.1
            9 March 2014 at 2:09 pm

            Now that I know who it is, my guess is that it’s just a case of a well known rich douchebag getting his mates to do him a favour.

    • cricklewood 4.3
      9 March 2014 at 8:47 am

      More complicated than meets the eye I think right down the bottom of the article…

      “My finding that the wife is likely to distort the truth and what she says to media outlets is likely to be inaccurate or exaggerated and as a result she is going to be reported even though it has no relationship with the truth.

      And…

      The husband had “acted appropriately and endeavoured to support his wife, who was clearly unwell for a long period of time before separation”, Judge Burns said.

      He added: “I do not consider he can be validly criticised, and I am concerned that sensitive material sought by the wife could be without the benefit of it being fully tested.

      Taking the judges comments at face value supression is prob justified

      • RedBaronCV 4.3.1
        9 March 2014 at 10:57 am

        And further up the article there are these comments:

        “a disputed allegation the man grabbed or touched his wife’s neck, tried to kick in the door of their home and shouted abuse at her.”
        .
        How does this square with this comment:

        “acted appropriately and endeavoured to support his wife, ”

        Even if the allegations are disputed it does not mean that those events did not happen and are complete fiction.

        The Judge is just saying something random here. Even if he doesn’t want to lift supression he looks like he is showing bias making remarks like this because he does not appear to be quoting the actual protection order hearings.

        If I’m thinking of the correct one then before all these orders kicked in some of the man’s family had given evidence that was not favourable to him and the protection hearing didn’t dismiss matters on the “acted appropriately” basis.
        And saying she will make things up, do we have any proof that he doesn’t make things up?

        But hey this is DV. The court as co abuser??

        • Pascal's bookie 4.3.1.1
          9 March 2014 at 11:30 am

          Yep.

          The problem here is not just for this case, (and it is problematic that the wife here cannot discuss these things without risking a jailterm), there is also the pecedent.

          File for a restraining order, and even if it is not granted, and you get classified as ‘vulnerable’ and have a good shot at suppression. No fuckwits will use this, obviously, we trust them not to at least, on their honour as fuckwits..

    • Anne 4.4
      9 March 2014 at 10:52 am

      Wife beaters should be hounded out of parliament.

      He’s not in parliament.

      • Sosoo 4.4.1
        9 March 2014 at 1:34 pm

        I wasn’t aware at the time I wrote that, that the person in question was not in parliament. The headline is misleading: “politician”.

  5. Debbie Brown 5
    9 March 2014 at 8:22 am

    Pretty certain who it is Sosoo. After all the dognapping charges and allegations of spying are already in the public domain.

    Somehow don’t think Whaleblubber will be making a “principled” stand on this one though. Shame, it would be a perfect opportunity for him to back his claims that he is equally nasty to both the left and the right.

  6. karol 6
    9 March 2014 at 8:32 am

    Paul Little in the Herald On Sunday, tells it like it is:

    Every time a Green uses a method of transport other than a sandal the Right calls them hypocrites.

    It’s the standard of logic that we can look forward to seeing more of between now and the general election.

    It is in the Government’s interest to avoid dealing with issues of importance and distract the public as they coast to … hey, did you see those pictures of the Prime Minister derping at Orientation Week? Gosh, he’s a character.

    Other recent events confirmed this.

  7. big bruv 7
    9 March 2014 at 8:35 am

    I want to purchase a home at Ti Point. Can anybody tell me which MP I should approach for some assistance in this matter?

    • Jenny Kirk 7.1
      9 March 2014 at 8:40 am

      How about you go and ask your mate, Shon Key.

    • idlegus 7.2
      9 March 2014 at 8:41 am

      even you must see how pathetic that is. im not quite sure what the big deal is, cunliffe has friends that buy property in nz? bfd. i cant wait to see key go grey on tv3 10:10 this am!

    • bad12 7.3
      9 March 2014 at 9:14 am

      You just keep outing yourself as ‘something’ of lower intelligence that didn’t quite get your fair share from the gene pool, fair share of brains that is Bruv,

      You do understand that MP’s, and just an MP David Cunliffe was when He helped His friend check out a property He was interested in buying,

      The Why of this happening is pretty simple, the bloke David was helping, a long time friend, has a job and a business in the US and its pretty obvious that He didn’t have the time to hang around long term to view the property,

      What exactly is sinister about this???, Nothing unless you are either a ‘wing-nut’ or a Liar, Cunliffe as a opposition MP has no means of interfering in any legal impediment to the sale of this property even if there were one…

      • PapaMike 7.3.1
        9 March 2014 at 1:47 pm

        Well why did he simply not say so rather than flannel and get himself in a corner.
        He has done nothing wrong, except be honest when asked by the Herald.

      • David H 7.3.2
        9 March 2014 at 1:47 pm

        When the imagnary person gave out Brains Bruv thought he said Trains, and asked for a small slow one.

  8. big bruv 8
    9 March 2014 at 8:52 am

    Will it help me if I donate to that MP’s party, or perhaps to his leadership election campaign?

    [karol: this is pointless trolling. Keep it up and you’ll find your comments in moderation.]

  9. Ad 9
    9 March 2014 at 8:54 am

    Anyone see how the Labour people are doing at Pasifika?

  10. bad12 10
    9 March 2014 at 8:57 am

    From the Herald online business section, ”Our yields are up and our inputs,(of water and fertilizer), are down so its a good enviroment story”,

    ”Generally what is good for the enviroment is good for the bottom line”, ”We are sitting on the same bus alongside the Green Party because we have got the same philosophy”, unquote.

    So says Craige Mackenzie, Chairman of the Precision Agriculture Association and advocate of precision mapping of dairy farms soils sometimes paddock by paddock so as to understand what the optimum level of water and fertilizer application is that give the highest yield while ensuring leaching into the water table or from the on farm to the off farm enviroment doesn’t occur,

    Smart man, probably will find Himself with no friends down at the local pub on His next night out having happily linked Himself to Green Party philosophy,

    Pouring money down the river is a good means of describing the current situation of envormenatal destruction where without any scientific basis water and fertilizer are pumped onto paddocks a lot of the time on the basis of ‘thats how the farm down the road does it,

    Soil mapping allows for the exact amount of water/fertilizer to be added paddock by paddock at the precise time and in the precise amounts so as to give the optimum output from each paddock without leaching either to the water table or to the off farm enviroment,

    ‘Smart Green’ farming techniques are available which ends up being a cost saving to the farmer through applying less fertilizer/water to each paddock while gaining the same or an increased level of production from having used such techniques…

    • weka 10.1
      9 March 2014 at 10:11 am

      This? http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11216057

      Yeah, nah. Nothing green or sustainable about that. Different packaging, same old shit underneath. It’s all about maximising profit via extraction of resources. There is fuck all difference between this and mining. Keeping effluent and nitrates out of waterways is the minimum we should be doing. Beyond that, there are still major issues with land management. Putting dairy cows in sheds, or micro-managing inputs is just shifting the problem sideways.

      That whole article is about how to make excess money. They can wax lyrical all they like about how being green is good for the finances/farm, but there is nothing in that article that speaks to sustainable land management. Nothing.

      • bad12 10.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 10:44 am

        weka, that sounds like the usual, ”i hate cow-cockies rave”, if you want to live down on the farm with 10 chickens, 4 goats, 2 geese, and, a house cow feel free,

        Everything in that article speaks to sustainable land management, unless your a Luddite of course, IF the application of water/fertilizer is managed in such a way so as to prevent any leaching into the water table,

        And,

        If the application of water/fertilizer is managed in such a way so as to prevent any of this from leaching from the on farm enviroment into the off farm enviroment then what is unsustainable about that…

        • weka 10.1.1.1
          9 March 2014 at 11:02 am

          It’s tinkering with a system that is fundamentally unsustainable. I think you have bought into the idea that sustainability is about polluting less. It’s not. It’s about creating systems that will sustain themselves over time. Extractive farming, but its very definition, is not sustainable (do you think that mining can be sustainable?). Likewise, farming that requires increasing amounts of external inputs (esp ones based on fossil fuels), are not sustainable.

          Reducing run off is obviously good for waterways, but that doesn’t make the thing sustainable. The use of artificial fertilisers degrades soil fertility (which means you need more artificial fertilisers ie the land management requires increasing external inputs, thus failing any measure of sustainability). Sustainable land management builds soil fertility without the need for excessive external inputs (or that’s one of the things it does) ie it sustains itself. Part of that is not creating excess pollution, but it’s not the whole of it (btw in a sustainable system, the ‘pollutants’ become inputs that build fertility and/or create stability in the system).

          There are many other examples of how industrial farming fails environmentally, even when they try and reduce pollution.

          I’m getting a bit sick of your pejorative ad hominems. There are plenty of examples of farms that use sustainable land management practices, so fuck off with your lifestyle block put downs. If you are genuinely interested in what sustainable land management is, let me know and I will put up some links. Or, you know, just ask questions if you don’t understand what I mean instead of trying to marginalise my argument with personal put downs. Am pretty sure I know a hell of a lot more about sustainability than you, so why not use the opportunity to learn something?

          • bad12 10.1.1.1.1
            9 March 2014 at 11:21 am

            Your waffling weka, now for how many years, decades, centuries even, have farmers been applying masses of fertilizer to the very same soils that you claim are being unsustainably farmed,

            If an iota of what you say were to be correct weka, none of them, the farms that is, would be able to produce anything, where’s the evidence of ‘dust-bowl NZ’,

            Craige Mackenzie of the Precision Agriculture Association says that using soil mapping of indivdual farm soils right down to doing so on a paddock by paddock basis allows for the same or better production,(He is talking grass growth), and without the provision of evidence you dismiss this as Lies???,

            If He is correct, that such intensive investigation and management allows for current and greater production without any leaching of water/fertilizer into the water table and stops any leachate of the same into waterways via using less water/fertilizer i would suggest you need provide proof of why anyone would believe your ‘i thunk it therefor it is’ denigration of what He says…

            • weka 10.1.1.1.1.1
              9 March 2014 at 11:42 am

              You really are out of your depth here dude. Read up on the differences between artificial fertilisers (in use for less than a century) and organic fertilisers (in use for all of the time we’ve had organic matter on the planet). One uses imported chemicals to force plants to grow, but at the expense of the microbial life in the soil. The other uses organic matter (plants and shit) to build the soil microbes and structure, so that the soil provides all the needs for the growing plants. These are not new concepts, they exist within biological sciences and sustainable land management practices.

              Chemical fertiliser farming depletes soil in a number of ways, and because of this is unsustainable ie, the only way you can keep farming that way is to bring in external inputs. In this case that is fossil fuel based ones, which create futher problems on multiple levels.

              The reason that this is becoming more of a problem than in recent decades, is because of the intensification (both in terms of ‘stock units’, and how many such farms there are). But the old style of farming (post WW2 – now) wasn’t particularly sustainable either, it was just going to last longer than industrial dairying before fucking the land.

              As for ‘dust bowls’ NZ has more than its fair share of land that was once fertile and is now marginal. You need to get out into the country more.

              “Craige Mackenzie of the Precision Agriculture Association says that using soil mapping of indivdual farm soils right down to doing so on a paddock by paddock basis allows for the same or better production,(He is talking grass growth), and without the provision of evidence you dismiss this as Lies???,”

              No, I didn’t say he is lying (try reading what I actually say). He is probably quite correct that he can get better production from the model he is using. I’m just objecting to that being called sustainable in an environmental context. What on earth makes you think that increased grass growth on its own is a measure of sustainability?

              “If He is correct, that such intensive investigation and management allows for current and greater production without any leaching of water/fertilizer into the water table and stops any leachate of the same into waterways via using less water/fertilizer i would suggest you need provide proof of why anyone would believe your ‘i thunk it therefor it is’ denigration of what He says…”

              You are talking about pollution mitigation. That’s not sustainability. Try comparing that to AGW mitigation vs prevention. Which would you prefer?

              “i would suggest you need provide proof of why anyone would believe your ‘i thunk it therefor it is’ denigration of what He says…””

              I’m putting up the arguments, which you seem to be missing. I’ve offered to link, but am not going to do that work until you grasp some of the basics, or at least hint you are open to understanding the basics.

              • bad12 …
                9 March 2014 at 2:04 pm

                Yawn weka, diatribe is proof of nothing, come back when all the dairy industry collapses through lack of grass growth brought about by the use of fertilizer,

                What century do you propose that this will occur in again???…

                • vto …
                  9 March 2014 at 3:44 pm

                  what on earth are you saying?

                • weka …
                  9 March 2014 at 4:00 pm

                  Fortunately, I’ve got stuff to go and do. But if I am getting this right, you are asking for several things.

                  One is evidence that intensive, artificial fertiliser based farming significantly damages land. That this is happening in NZ. And that industrial dairying is part of that (ie that dairying does more damage than just polluting water). I’m happy to chase up some links for you when I get back, but I do have to wonder how genuine your query is.

                  In the meantime I suggest you google ‘peak soil’ if you want to understand the underlying concepts. This is not some wacky theory I am talking about, it’s fairly mainstream understanding globally. Why NZ thinks its immune is another question.

                  “diatribe is proof of nothing”

                  Well you would know, given that you seem unable to respond to the points* that I raise and instead resort to ad hominems and abuse. I suspect you aren’t even reading my comments properly 🙁

                  *ie what sustainable land management actually is, why industrial dairying doesn’t fit that, how the article you linked to is instead greenwash etc.

            • vto 10.1.1.1.1.2
              9 March 2014 at 11:46 am

              bad12 ” for how many years, decades, centuries even, have farmers been applying masses of fertilizer to the very same soils that you claim are being unsustainably farmed,”

              You showing a bit of ignorance here aren’t you? The scale of intensification and fertilisation and irrigation going on right now is vastly different to anything done in previous “years, decades, centuries even”. Do you not know that?

              That is why, for example, waterways and drinking supplies in Canterbury have only started failing in the last 5 years. The scale ramped up starting mid-1990s.

              bad12, you also said this “If an iota of what you say were to be correct weka, none of them, the farms that is, would be able to produce anything, where’s the evidence of ‘dust-bowl NZ’,”

              Again, take a look at history, silly. Lets take a couple of examples of NZ’s primary industries practices and results. Kauri milling, dust bowls in Canterbury a few decades ago, fishing stocks, or maybe take a look at the land in East Cape all slipped into the rivers and fucked, and same with South Island high country.

              Sure bad12 you can wait for the dust bowl to arrive and suffer the same results as above, or you can think and recognise the same practises that caused the earlier “dust-bowl’ disasters listed, and do something about it.

              Think man, think.

              • bad12 …
                9 March 2014 at 2:08 pm

                So the current use of fertilizer on today’s farms doesn’t create dust bowls is the sum total of your comment,

                Same question as to weka, in what century do you suppose these dust bowls are going to destroy the majority of modern farms in this country…

                • vto …
                  9 March 2014 at 3:41 pm

                  already answered that question

                  and no, that is not the sum

                • weka …
                  9 March 2014 at 4:07 pm

                  “So the current use of fertilizer on today’s farms doesn’t create dust bowls is the sum total of your comment,”

                  That is a specious question. YOU are the one who raised the issue of dust bowls (as if that’s the only way to fuck the land). What’s being discussed here is whether modern farming practice in NZ is sustainable. It’s not. It’s pretty easy to prove it’s not – any basic understanding of sustainability makes this obvious. You attempting to reframe this ‘we don’t have dust bowls therefore everything is ok’ is pretty ridiculous, and just you squirming because you can’t address the actual points being made.

                  • bad12 …
                    9 March 2014 at 6:27 pm

                    weka the actual points being made are in total ”you thunk it therefor it is” rubbish, why then would i legitimize such rubbish by answering it,

                    When a clown, (you), enters a subject with the claim that ”i know more than you” it is in my opinion that they should be treated like any other blowhard, laughed at,

                    You claim that the use of fertilizer leaves farms unable to produce grass unless higher and higher amounts of fertilizer is added, such bullshit is just that,unless it is linked to scientific fact,

                    My point of posting the original Herald story lies in the fact that intensive soil mapping allows for less fertilizer and water to be used to produce the same or more production, i would suggest that the farmer quoted knows what He is saying is true from actually having hands on experience from having used such soil mapping science to produce the results He talks of,

                    Now your vast knowledge that gives you self declared ‘expert’ status to dispute this man’s work without the provision of a shred of evidence is what???,

                    As far as i can see everything you have so far written on the issue discussed is a simple blow of your own trumpet without a fact in sight…

      • marty mars 10.1.2
        9 March 2014 at 11:43 am

        Yep I agree with you weka

        “sustainable intensification” in land use

        that is the gold quote from the article and it shows exactly where their heads are at. As the topsoil continues to be blown out to sea and the naked hillsides continue to slip and the rivers clog to a standstill – nah all good here in headinthesandparadise. But at least some farmers can buy the latest car this year.

  11. David 11
    9 March 2014 at 9:02 am

    Is David Cunliffe really that much of an enigma? I guess one of the problems for the right/ media about banging on with questions about ‘who is David Cunliffe’ and the ‘enigma’ of Cunliffe is that you might actually get an answer to your question. And when people see and understand that answer, as they will, they’ll wonder what you were up to (and how smart you were) going round and round on the question.

    Having known the man fairly well for a decade, my answer would be, 160 IQ, brought up fairly poor (but in a caring, values- intense family), hugely successful business consultant before politics (with hugely successful/ busy partner/ mother of children, and hence the house where it is); But most importantly the politician with the best vision for a less neoliberal, post GFC NZ economy that can deliver the social and labour market goods he also absolutely genuinely wants to deliver.

    In terms of character, he listens. He learns and has leant to attend, even when he thinks he knows the answer, or what you are going to say. He weighs the larger justice, the bigger picture of the thing. He doesnt hold grudges and doesnt and wont throw people under buses. He believes he can lead, and that that leading will make a positive difference.

    I dont think it’s that hard: that’s essentially him. The rest is manner, being ‘moved’ by things at the same time his brain is whirring at warp speeds, semi-bridled enthusiasm and revving high to get on with it: nothing sinister there. The more people see of him, as long as they are not competing with him for the job, the more in my experience they will recognise this. Attempts to frame him as tricky or something else he isnt will look a bit silly at that point.

    He’s unusual/ rare but not incomprehensible, unless you actually dont want a clear and plausible and popular answer to your question about ‘who he is’. But let’s face it, all Labour leaders are a little rare and different, or they wouldnt find themselves in a position to get the job. Once the public get a feel for the rareness, they can be very forgiving, especially as the strengths start to deliver.

    • phillip ure 11.1
      9 March 2014 at 9:18 am

      is that you david..?

      phillip ure..

      [It is another David. The Labour Party is full of them … – MS]

      • phillip ure 11.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 9:58 am

        it was my (albeit weak) attempt at wit/levity…

        (..not my best work..i know..)

        ..and..

        ..explaining is losing..(sigh..!..)

        ..(and yes..!..far far too many ‘david’s in the labour party.

        ..in anyones’ eyes..

        ..what to do about that..?..

        ..name changes..?..

        ..no more ‘david’s allowed to join..?

        ..enforce a quota-system..?..)

        ..phillip ure..

        • bad12 11.1.1.1
          9 March 2014 at 11:24 am

          Never mind Phillip, not your best work is pretty much the opinion of everything you have so far contributed in writing anywhere on the planet,(par for the course in other words)…

    • idlegus 11.2
      9 March 2014 at 9:21 am

      hes def doing something right, going by the enemies hes made & the fear hes instilled in the right. & the bs stories the herald/tv3 keep bringing up, i mean, is that it? really?

    • bad12 11.3
      9 March 2014 at 9:25 am

      David, Cunliffe that is will be on TV1’s Q+A in about 5 minutes…

    • Jenny Kirk 11.4
      9 March 2014 at 9:46 am

      Ta for this David whoever you are ! Helpful to have a decent testimonial ….. and I’ve sent it on to everyone I know is remotely Labour-inclined.

    • RedLogix 11.5
      9 March 2014 at 1:39 pm

      Thank for this David.

      I’ve never personally met DC but everything I’ve seen and read from him for a very long time resonates with me at a very personal level. You’ve very eloquently expressed my own reaction for me.

      I think that the reason why his opponents are trying to stick the ‘tricky’ label on him is because DC is capable of hold two or more disparate thoughts in his head at the same time – and this is a capability they indeed find very tricky to do.

  12. Morrissey 12
    9 March 2014 at 9:28 am

    Vote in OAS vote favours Venezuela by 29 to 3;
    These rogue states just won’t do as they’re told
    8 March 2014

    The Friday meeting of the Organisation of American States (OAS), typically dominated by the US throughout its history, has not come out with a resolution against the Venezuelan government. The meeting was ostensibly convened by Panama, which along with the US and Canada, made up the 3 votes against the final OAS statement. Venezuela had already broken off diplomatic relations with Panama on Wednesday, with Maduro calling the Panamanian government a lackey of the US. The meeting didn’t condemn the Venezuelan government and called for continuing dialogue between the parties.

    Next Wednesday, there will be a meeting of UNASUR (Union of South American States) in Chile, which will make a strong statement of support for the Venezuelan government. When the US was trying to delegitimate the election of Maduro as president in April last year, the statement by UNASUR supporting the election result was key in putting a stop to that.

    http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1394283446.html

  13. Morrissey 13
    9 March 2014 at 9:37 am

    Drippy ignorant Hollywood “liberals”
    No. 2: KEVIN SPACEY

    I don’t know what’s more upsetting: the sheer purblind ignorance of Kevin Spacey and his Hollywood buddies or the cynical lies being peddled by this scurrilous Murdoch rag….

    Venezuelan Conflict Moves From Street to Hollywood Boulevard
    Actors, Artists, Athletes and Fashion Designers Dive Into the Country’s Bitter Political Divide
    by JOSÉ DE CÓRDOBA, The Wall Street Journal, March 4, 2014
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304585004579419403860710412

    When Jared Leto expressed his support for the “dreamers” who are resisting Venezuela’s government during the Academy Award ceremony this week, he became the latest actor to dive into the country’s bitter political divide. Mr. Leto’s declaration to millions of viewers set off a skirmish, with Venezuela’s communications minister retweeting, “Whoever had doubts that the U.S. had its nose inside Venezuela, there is no doubt now.”

    From pop culture to high culture, Venezuela’s conflict is leading actors, artists, athletes and fashion designers to voice their support for the antigovernment protesters, with a minority backing President Nicolás Maduro. This battle over Venezuelans’ hearts and minds is playing out as hundreds of thousands across the country air their grievances over issues including crime, food shortages, a crumbling economy and the arrest of an opposition leader.

    At least 18 people have died so far in the demonstrations, many of them shot by security forces or paramilitary groups tied to the government, rights groups say. Hundreds have been wounded.

    “For the first time, there is an international climate of opinion that there is only one guilty party in the Venezuelan turmoil—the government,” said Javier Corrales, a political science professor at Amherst College.

    The Venezuelan government has some Hollywood celebrity supporters, but most of them—including Sean Penn, Danny Glover and Michael Moore —have been publicly quiet since the protests began about a month ago.

    Oliver Stone, a bête noire of Venezuela’s opposition, has complained on his Twitter TWTR -2.37% account that Mr. Maduro’s opponents have attacked him on social media. “To those who tweet me vile and ugly comments about Venezuela—I’ve never experienced such verbal violence on social media,” Mr. Stone posted.

    Mr. Stone plans to screen a documentary on the late President Hugo Chávez, Mr. Maduro’s predecessor, on Wednesday, the anniversary of Mr. Chávez’ death, on the Venezuelan government-funded Telesur, a channel seen throughout Latin America. The movie is entitled “My Friend Hugo.”

    Such support seems to be in the minority. On Oscar night, actors Kevin Spacey and Forest Whitaker also tweeted their criticism over government repression of protesters. Mr. Spacey wrote, “Venezuela don’t give up, everybody has the right to express themselves.”

    At a post-Oscar party in Hollywood, Venezuelan fashion designer Carolina Herrera told a television reporter, “The world should know that Venezuela is in the hands of a communist dictatorship, and there is no democracy.”

    But when Mr. Leto, clutching his golden statue in hand, told audiences on Sunday—”To all of the dreamers out there around the world watching this tonight, in places like the Ukraine and Venezuela, I want to say, ‘we are here'”—most Venezuelans weren’t watching. ….

    Read more…
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304585004579419403860710412

    People like Hollywood faux-liberals and Murdoch “reporters” will of course continue to believe whatever they are told by other Hollywood faux-liberals and Murdoch “reporters”. People who are serious about understanding Venezuela will go to serious sites like the following….
    http://venezuelanalysis.com/
    http://zcomm.org/znet/
    http://normanfinkelstein.com/2009/viva-venezuela/

    Check out another drippy Hollwood “liberal”….
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-03032014/#comment-780886

    • Murray Olsen 13.1
      10 March 2014 at 12:27 am

      Thankfully the people of Venezuela do not rely on Hollywood liberals to fight off the restoration of empire attempted by those in the gated suburbs of Caracas.

  14. freedom 14
    9 March 2014 at 9:43 am

    It appears there have been quite a few fund raising dinners with the PM. Given recent and not so recent comments from the PM, I have what I think is a reasonable question.

    Have any of the fund raising dinners been the reason the PM was absent from Parliament?

  15. Morrissey 15
    9 March 2014 at 9:46 am

    Manufacturing Contempt for Venezuela
    by CYRIL MYCHALEJKO, March 7, 2014

    ….Then there is Francisco Toro, a Venezuelan blogger whose “musings” at Caracas Chronicles (a website he founded) are “a must-read for foreign journalists,” according to the Associated Press. In an article that went viral on both Twitter and Facebook entitled “The Game Changed in Venezuela Last Night – and the International Media are Asleep at the Switch”, Toro wrote about a “tropical pogrom” that allegedly took place one night in Venezuela – except it didn’t. There was no massacre by “paramilitaries.” One person did die from injuries sustained that night, however that was four days later. This death is a tragedy, but it is a far cry from a “pogrom” or massacre.

    After this misinformation and gross exaggeration was exposed and criticized Toro took to Twitter and admitted to “overstatement in the heat of the moment.” He also addressed it in a blog post which garnered a whopping 14 likes on Facebook and 12 Tweets – in contrast with the hundreds of thousands of Facebook likes and over 10,000 Tweets his original, factually challenged blog post amassed. This supports Silverman’s aforementioned thesis about how error corrections are not retweeted and viewed as much as the initial errors.

    …Another egregious example highlighted by CNN’s report was a photo tweeted by Venezuelan actress Amanda Gutierrez which was allegedly lifted from a US-based porn site. The photo was used by her to “prove” sexual abuse by police against anti-government protesters….

    http://zcomm.org/znetarticle/manufacturing-contempt-for-venezuela/

  16. Sosoo 16
    9 March 2014 at 10:01 am

    Watching Q&A makes me no longer believe in freedom of the press. What a complete waste of time.

  17. bad12 17
    9 March 2014 at 10:21 am

    Are those that continue to perpetrate a Lie to be seen as Liars, that question must be asked directly of Fran O’Sullivan after Her abysmal performance on today’s Q+A,

    The claim is that David Cunliffe says one thing to us normal lot out here in the real world and once behind closed doors tells a completely different story to the business community,

    True or false???,

    Blatantly false, a construct of the ‘wing-nuts’, O’Sullivan even had the gall to link this claim of deviousness to the Labour/Green stated intention to establish a single desk seller of generated electricity to the retailers of such,

    This despite David Cunliffe five minutes earlier on the same Q+A bluntly saying that everyone including these same electricity generators have been told that they will have input to the actual establishment of the proposed single desk seller,

    Tell different things to different audiences, well sure, it would be pointless for instance for Cunliffe to make a business speech to a group of kindergarten mums just as it would be as pointless to make a kindergarten/Best Start speech to a business audience,

    Making mountains out of molehills might be a polite means of describing Lies, you tell us Fran exactly which speeches on what dates has David Cunliffe said one thing about a specific subject to one audience and another about that specific subject to another which are obviously diametrically opposed in content and intent,

    If Fran you aint got the goods you really should shut the fucking thing, your mouth that is, or do we just assume you to be a Liar…

    • freedom 17.1
      9 March 2014 at 11:36 am

      “Tell different things to different audiences, well sure, it would be pointless for instance for Cunliffe to make a business speech to a group of kindergarten mums just as it would be as pointless to make a kindergarten/Best Start speech to a business audience,”

      thing is bad12, maybe, if this did occur, there would be less need for the different speeches in the first place ? 😉

      I can only imagine what a JK speech at a 5k a head dinner must be full of and how that same speech would be received by those to whom 5K is a serious chunk of annual income.

    • geoff 17.2
      9 March 2014 at 7:56 pm

      And what about the ridiculous, ‘Nobody knows who David Cunliffe is’ line. Grr it is very irritating to see how much the journos are parroting lines that have been fed to them by National.

  18. greywarbler 18
    9 March 2014 at 10:24 am

    This ‘business’ of ‘business’ that gets young people to work for free. Needs to go onto a separate post. It needs sunlight exposure.

    And looking at the hours they are expected to work whether they are free or getting subsistence wages. Law offices and ….I have heard of law offices doing this, wealthy ones so that they can say they are looking for the brightest and the best, and then there is a good salary held out as a carrot. What other types of businesses are doing this? Let’s have a look?

    • cricklewood 18.1
      9 March 2014 at 10:42 am

      Heaps, even the local swimming pool, I know of one that required 4 weeks voluntary work while they trained you… to work for minimum wage on the front desk… I went into bat for a the successful candidate who was gobsmacked on receiving the offer response being that its legal and we’ve done it this way for 10+years. Why should we pay while someone’s learning the job?
      Advised the candidate to tell them to shove it… Who want to works for a bunch of pricks like that…
      Problem been many are desperate so they always get someone…

      • freedom 18.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 12:50 pm

        Let’s not forget that choosing to turn down such an offer may well see those on a benefit facing very real penalties, such as loss of all government assistance for up to twenty six weeks. The employer who offers such a position to a beneficiary gets a government paid lackey for a month and can do it all over again in only 62* days with neither rhyme nor reason being asked of them.
        That’s nearly three months of employment costs taken off your own books. Or to put it more bluntly, hire three get the fourth worker free.

        *I included the four week trial period as being part of the employment contract because we know damn well any employer running this type of operation will certainly be including it!

      • Skinny 18.1.2
        9 March 2014 at 12:52 pm

        Well contact the regions Union co-ordinator e.g Unions Auckland, Unions Waikato, Unions Northland…etc. I am sure if the facts stack up and it’s clearly exploitation by a scumbag employer (hmm wondering if it’s Tiger) then a exposure picket, protesting outside the premise can be arranged.

        Personally I find a protest outside the owners house will get a result for them to cough up compensation to the vulnerable workers.

    • Draco T Bastard 18.2
      9 March 2014 at 3:04 pm

      I’ve heard of it being used in the construction industry for, get this, qualified and experienced builders.

  19. greywarbler 19
    9 March 2014 at 10:48 am

    NZ is great! NZ Geographic is produced by a small NZ concern, hard working, along with small staff and many equally dedicated photographers and turning out fine stuff. Good to give a subscription for a prezzie for anyone, or to oneself. Support fine NZ creation.

  20. bad12 20
    9 March 2014 at 10:59 am

    Lolz, Slippery the Prime Minister in the re-run of the Nation interview on TV3 was giving Alfred E. Nuemann,(Paddy Gower), a look that says ”if i had an axe right now you would be wearing it”,

    Credit where credit is due, that was probably the most incisive interview of Slippery the PM that i have had the pleasure of laughing at,

    Gower, probably because the PM wasn’t expecting to to get such a slicing and dicing, elicited from the PM the perfect ”these are my principles but i have another set if you don’t like these ones” set of answers,

    Gower has raised himself in my opinion from wallowing in the gutter to sitting on the kerb with this interview,

    While Gower will never escape from the likening of Himself to Alfred E. Nuemann of mad comics infamy,(unless he indulges in a bout of extended cosmetic surgery), IF He continues to apply such a precise form of interviewing of His political subjects He might just become one of the few ‘greats’ among the few of political interviewers/commentators…

    • idlegus 20.1
      9 March 2014 at 1:03 pm

      wow, gower showed some great skills there, watching it in hindsight you can see the set up coming a mile wide, marvelous!

  21. risildowgtn 21
    9 March 2014 at 11:01 am

    Re The Nation watching the Borg spin right out crap shows they’re in a panic alright..

    Thing is the Borg dont realise how tragic she is…..

    • Skinny 21.1
      9 March 2014 at 1:42 pm

      Q&A turned to custard when Susan Wood took over. The panel was woeful, Bryce Edwards couldn’t even hold his own against toxic Botox Borg, going as far as agreeing with her.

      McCarten use to discredit her and openly front foot her by attacking her. I once lined her up on Willie & JT’s political show. She was condemning Auckland port workers high wages for long hours & dangerous work. I called in under my alter ego ‘George’ and said “What would you know about dangerous work, the only danger in your workplace would be while having a long boozie lunch in a swanky Ponsonby road cafe/bar, you might choke eating tapas.” Then boys all roared with laughter and Borg mumbled “thanks that’s very kind of you.” my reply “your welcome.” For the remainder of the show she was somewhat more reserved.

      Anyway, my point is any commentator purporting to represent the Left, must when on these political shows, quickly counter the spin being peddled by Hooton, Borg, Wilde or any other other NACT sponsored mouthpiece. If not stand down and I’m sorry Josie & Bryce are poor subs for McCarten. Bradbury maybe the next best?

      • risildowgtn 21.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 3:28 pm

        Yeah i ‘d like to see Bomber on the show…… today was first time I have bothered with the nation or Q & a for over a year and tbh it has got worse.. its all key this n that and we love key- fucking asslickers

      • karol 21.1.2
        9 March 2014 at 6:50 pm

        Weren’t Boag & Bryce Edwards on TV3’s The Nation this weekend, while Fran O’Sullivan and a couple of other guys were the panel on QU & A today?

      • Murray Olsen 21.1.3
        10 March 2014 at 12:45 am

        Nah, Bomber’s a one line pony. Unless the question is about the evil of baby boomers, his answers won’t be relevant. Marama Davison could be worth a try. Unlike Josie and Edwards the Lesser, she is from the broad left.

  22. blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 22
    9 March 2014 at 11:13 am

    The coverage of The Nation’s interview with Key on TV3 last night was a lot better than I imagined it would be – this was good to see Gower giving Key a hard time – it would be great if this type of approach continued from him.

    That is: to direct factually based challenges toward all political parties -( not solely challenges toward leftwing parties on made up shit)

    New Zealanders have a right to know what is going on in their government .

    The NZ mainstream media are failing us on this one.

    One could assert we have a duty to be informed prior to voting.

    The mainstream media are failing us.

    Great to see a shift from Gower – hope his new found approach is here to stay.

    I would like to see The Herald & co follow suit – it is a very poor show if they continue with the opinionated biased misinformation that they have been pursuing – it is bad form.

    • Arfamo 22.1
      9 March 2014 at 12:53 pm

      That Key The Nation interview hasn’t been made available on TV3 On demand though. Why might that be?

      • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 22.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 2:22 pm

        Un-believable
        What is wrong with these munters?
        Most of them wouldn’t even be advantaged by having King of the Munters get back into government.
        I guess they like having someone really particularly hollow to model themselves – on aspirationless twerps.

      • karol 22.1.2
        9 March 2014 at 6:59 pm

        The Cunliffe interview is here – it’s just not that easy to find.

    • ianmac 22.2
      9 March 2014 at 1:55 pm

      An excellent interview by the same Paddy we railed against last week. Beautifully done. Though I’m not sure that Mr Key was given a “hard time” blue. It was more that the questions being asked were good questions and were of the standard that all political interviewers should be using. Just seemed good because the previous were so bad. How often has Mr Key been really held to account? (Like a starving man saying that the crust he found tasted so good.)

      • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 22.2.1
        9 March 2014 at 2:14 pm

        Yes I thoroughly agree Ianmac.

        And wouldn’t it be so much more helpful to our entire country if we had a decent standard of political journalists doing decent interviews.

        It is a complete farce not to have this present in a democracy – we really are being severely ripped off – Big money interests are really taking the Mickey and are destroying our system.

  23. blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 23
    9 March 2014 at 11:18 am

    Dear Mainstream Media sources,

    “Show us the information” mainstream media sources – we are not interested in your small-minded, petty, biased opinionated fantasies – leave them out from hereon in.

    Thanks

  24. drongo 24
    9 March 2014 at 11:26 am

    Like it or not, each one of these articles continue to erode David Cunliffe’s reputation.
    He needs to regain the offensive or resign himself to become dog tucker at the next election.

    • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 24.1
      9 March 2014 at 11:35 am

      @ Drongo

      If you are referring to the mainstream media’s opinionated made up misinformation – the only reputation such is eroding is the media source from which it emanates.

      Perhaps they don’t need the money that comes with a high readership/amount of viewers, and they are happy to keep printing and screening their crap with no one receiving it – doubt their advertisers view it that way.

      • chris73 24.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 12:31 pm

        As kiwiblog puts it:

        His misleading speech and false advertisement about the baby bonus – own goal

        The next day not knowing the details of part of his own policy – own goal

        Deciding to go after John Key for living in a leafy subject – own goal

        Describing his own household as a middle rang existence while on prob $600,000 or more a year – own goal

        Setting up a secret trust for his leadership donations – own goal, and exposed by NZ Herald – nothing to do with National

        Failing to disclose an investment trust to the Registrar of Pecuniary Interest on time – own goal, and exposed by TV3 after they heard him mention it

        Having his own office send Amy Adams their ICT policy ideas – own goal

        Letting Clare Curran take the blame and fall for a stuff up by his own office – own goal

        Theres a common denominator and it involves Labour incompetency and/or someone inside Labour spilling the beans

        • bad12 24.1.1.1
          9 March 2014 at 1:55 pm

          Chris73, stupidly believing that in the great scheme of things any of what’s trotted out there is of the slightest relevance, own goal!!!…

        • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 24.1.1.2
          9 March 2014 at 2:02 pm

          @ Chris73

          You are apparently unaware what a waste of time and how boring it is to read the fictional workings of rightwing spin doctors – I have therefore looked at your comment for enough time to work out that is what it consists of and to note that these utterances aren’t relevant to any point I raised and therefore didn’t bother reading any further.

          I suggest you respond to my points and in a credible way if you want to converse – otherwise you are just being a waste of time.

          Thanks

          [+1 Bad12 you summed it up well]

        • Steve Walu 24.1.1.3
          9 March 2014 at 3:23 pm

          A year ago you were all banging on about David Shearer and couldn’t wait to see the back of him as leader. Apart from a few examples here, none of you seem able to see the awful decision you’ve made in electing Cunliffe and his multiple faces which speak only one thing…inconsistency. Since Nov 2008 the Opposition leader who secured the highest poll result for the Party was David Shearer. And he was forced out. There was some hope of getting rid of Key then but not now with the multi bungler in charge. And he leads his swaggering coterie of egomaniacs into a battle they won’t win until the ego gets pulled into line. Hardly likely to happen with this bunch. You all lack the courage to demand he changes his ways or resigns as leader. But he wouldn’t listen anyway. So, when Labour is not elected this year will you all be baying for Cunliffe’s blood?

  25. joe90 25
    9 March 2014 at 11:40 am

    Who woulda thunk it.
    /

    – About two dozen Iraqi women demonstrated on Saturday in Baghdad against a draft law approved by the Iraqi cabinet that would permit the marriage of nine-year-old girls and automatically give child custody to fathers.

    The group’s protest was on International Women’s Day and a week after the cabinet voted for the legislation, based on Shi’ite Islamic jurisprudence, allowing clergy to preside over marriages, divorces and inheritances. The draft now goes to parliament.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/08/us-iraq-women-islam-idUSBREA270NR20140308

  26. greywarbler 26
    9 March 2014 at 12:19 pm

    Good explanation of the Crimean situation by Wayne Brittenden and an expert in a thoutht-provoking interview about 11.45 a.m.

    11:40 Wayne Brittenden’s Counterpoint
    Coverage of the crisis in Ukraine has generally lacked historic context, yet some little-known facts are essential for a proper understanding.
    Wayne fills some of those gaps and Finlay follows up with New York-based geopolitical analyst Eric Draitser.

    Audio –
    Wayne Brittenden’s Counterpoint ( 18′ 11″ )
    11:40 Coverage of the crisis in Ukraine has generally lacked historic context, and yet
    some little-known facts are essential for a proper understanding of the complex and rapidly changing situation there.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday

    Also for IT information see Pete Seel University of Colarado 9.40 – what happens to your info online when you’re dead? Can your family access it for things they need to know / don’t want to know?

  27. papa tuanuku 27
    9 March 2014 at 12:34 pm

    Michelle Boag on The Nation:

    ‘I go to $1000 dinners all the time.’

    On Moerewa School being taken over by a Commissioner for two years: ‘Oh it must be over financial issues’

    • greywarbler 27.1
      9 March 2014 at 1:18 pm

      Pretty good snapshot example Papa Tuanuku, of where NZ is at with the upper crust wealthy and the ones on the lower deck struggling for a crust.

  29. chris73 29
    9 March 2014 at 12:48 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11216495

    May not be illegal but shows an astounding lack of judgement, poor Matt must be tearing his hair out

    • freedom 29.1
      9 March 2014 at 12:57 pm

      YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWN

      to quote from my tdb comment

      What is more embarrassing than the Editor’s decision to run the story is RWNJs like you getting all excited by it. Are you that much of a pavlov’s dog that granny only has to hold up a can of sawdust and you think its filet mignon?

      • chris73 29.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 1:02 pm

        Lesse first Cunliffe said he had nothing to do with it, then it turns out he did and his wife did some work for the guy and it now turns out the guy donated to Cunliffes secret trust

        Yeah nothing to see here at all

        • freedom 29.1.1.1
          9 March 2014 at 1:28 pm

          Would really help if you read all the way to the end of the article, and with granny of late, it is the only place the relevant facts ever seem to be situated. If a question is not asked it cannot be answered. Have you heard the interview in question? I ask because The Herald have not supplied any links to it!

          The Herald has written a piece so openly suggestive that it is meaningless and your creative math with the facts surely fails even your meagre standards of reporting reality.

          Cunliffe did not disclose his visits when the Herald on Sunday inquired about it on February 22. This weekend, he said he had checked his recording of the interview and he had truthfully answered questions about any beneficial ownership of the property. “If you had asked me whether I had visited the property, then my answer would have been yes,” Cunliffe said.

    • joe90 29.2
      9 March 2014 at 1:00 pm

      Posted up thread moran, but you’re like a three year old rushing in to show off the snot you picked aren’t you.

  30. greywarbler 30
    9 March 2014 at 1:09 pm

    Nicky somebody on libraries and swimming pools – they are nice to haves and developers are doing such a self-denying job of providing housing that they should not be burdened with levies that support such ‘nice to haves’. In good old Britain miners in some areas where the tunnels went under houses, would return home and find the doors of their cottages had jammed because of ground movement during the day. They had to break their doors open. Don’t know what it was like for the family inside. So we have got a lovely long slide to go yet as we lose the amenities that we hoped would be permanent in a modern, enlightened, progressive society.

    Vote for National and ACT, and get more and better lifestyles. We at National do not encourage the poor to vote for us, or join us, and we seek to assist our supporters (or lead them to believe we will, which we usually do). We spit on you other losers. You are lucky we give you the opportunity to live on some small piece of land, and perhaps we will assist you with a small plot for vegetables in some common area.

    The future as NACTs see it.

    Meanwhile some Mayors are having a private chinwag and are discussing the trend to amalgamation to supercities. And this is a pre Local Bodies Association meeting for them to get some overview so they haven’t invited LG Head Lawrence Yule. But they did invite Paula Bennett the Local Government Minister (did you know that) but she declined. (Chris Tremain was Local Government Minister when he made a release on 12 December 2013 then on a
    3 March 2014 release Paula Bennett is Local Government Minister. So she is to be the new punchy, aggressive minister to kick-box these pesky local bodies into cookie-cutter shapes of central govt choice.)

    Local government already is fading like the Cheshire cat’s smile. I was trying to find out details of the present membership of board on line and there were lots about policy and statements about practices, but finding the names of members of Local Government NZ and details about them are not immediately accessible, even on Wikipedia.) But there is up to date information about the sector to be seen on-line at http://www.localgovt.co.nz/.

    • Jenny Kirk 30.1
      9 March 2014 at 2:20 pm

      Three commissioners, GreyWarbler – Basil Morrison, Anne Carter, Grant Kirby – all intent on following thru on the NAct Govt agenda of first of all, demolishing all our LOCAL government and replacing it with -out-of-touch and distant “provincial” type government. And when that has occurred, the next thing to happen will be multinational corporates bearing down to takeover our current local government infrastructure !

      We’re fighting a proposal to have a Unitary Authority for the whole of Northland right now. We managed to get about 1700 submissions into the Local Govt Comm Opposing this proposal, and now quite a number of us are waiting to have our submissions heard because the LGC didn’t allow enough days/time/venues for this number of submitters. Maybe ……. just maybe….. for once, we might make a difference with our opposition to the neo-libs in power.

      • RedLogix 30.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 2:35 pm

        And when that has occurred, the next thing to happen will be multinational corporates bearing down to takeover our current local government infrastructure !

        There is actually a lot to be said for amalgamating the infrastructure capabilities of local govt. The Wellington region for instance has no fewer than 14 different entities dealing with water supply or waste water in one form or another. Insane.

        Having worked in the sector I’m absolutely convinced that there is much to be gained from amalgamation at this level.

        The real problem is political accountability. Far too often we have seen the formation of large CCO’s as a precursor to privatisation. Or the contracting out of services. It’s unfortunate that the two issues are conflated like this because it means there are far too many, tiny, unviable TLA’s struggling to meet modern and efficient service standards – yet while the risk of privatisation hangs over our heads we are relunctant to do the obvious.

      • greywarbler 30.1.2
        9 March 2014 at 3:56 pm

        This shows we can’t look naively at anything as being what it appears on the surface. What is behind this? How can this be privatised and profitised?

        Red Logix paints a clear picture of today’s dilemma with Councils. One they need to be accessable, and to listen. I notice in Marlborough they have Wards. Reasonably well represented then.
        And there needs to be a balance of how big. How can you stop takeovers by people with similar interests who just want to bend the tree till the fruit falls in their territory. The dam in Hawkes Bay is so big that it’s another Forsyth Barr. Perhaps taking away the ability to borrow skyhigh might be the answer and any privatisation has to go to referendum.

        Good luck Jenny – at first sight it seems reasonably practical, and gives weight to bulk up against the Auckland octopus. But one great outfit far distant from outlying poorer more precarious areas can be difficult for getting understanding of people’s requirements. I don’t know how often Kaeo in the Far North is going to flood and the Council doesn’t either, but it’s time they got together with the people and worked out something to help that little settlement. The further away the council offices are, the less they can motivate themselves to do something for the people who need a hand.

        The thinking that is happening is – how do we package it to appeal to the punteres prejudices? Can we go with the bad government thing like so many USA states?
        You get your own people into government, screw it up and then have the efficient private company offer to take over and straighten it all out nicely for them – and more cheaply too for the first few years.

        It’s really what Brierley and other asset strippers did to companies in the past, stripped off the easily saleable bits and then cut out services and staff, to the other bits.
        Meanwhile withdrawing anything of value and replacing it with short-term solutions and machinery.

  31. hoom 31
    9 March 2014 at 1:29 pm

    Interesting coverage of the Ukraine situation on RNZ this morning
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/2588325/wayne-brittenden's-counterpoint

    The importance of far right element in the protest movement has been heavily under reported.
    Also the fact the new PM is already proposing a rapid neoliberal reform program…

  32. millsy 32
    9 March 2014 at 1:56 pm

    “Also the fact the new PM is already proposing a rapid neoliberal reform program…”

    I always thought that the Ukranians were screwed either way. One one side you have Russian oligarchs, mafia dons and corrupt Orthodox priests, and on the other side you have EU technocrats, ready, willing and able to impose austerity (did someone tell them there is next to nothing left to cut….??)

  33. greywarbler 33
    9 March 2014 at 3:41 pm

    Someone I heard on radio today commented that NZs are self-effacing? Is that true? Or what? Sounds a bit on the weak side. Are we? Scared of our own shadows? But probably he’s right, I think he was from overseas.

  34. rhinocrates 34
    9 March 2014 at 4:08 pm

    Test.

    I’m losing messages on another thread – eleven attempts with one – so please ignore this. It’s probably a technical fault. I just want to see if it works here.

  35. hoom 35
    9 March 2014 at 4:16 pm

    “I always thought that the Ukranians were screwed either way. One one side you have Russian oligarchs, mafia dons and corrupt Orthodox priests, and on the other side you have EU technocrats, ready, willing and able to impose austerity”
    Indeed.

    “Kos calls bullshit on the notion that US neocons made the events in Ukraine happen the way they happened.”
    Its true that the background is complex & not directly to do with US.
    But there are most certainly a bunch of indications of strong US involvement.

  36. Draco T Bastard 36
    9 March 2014 at 5:06 pm

    This is what 3D printed wood looks like

    An interesting adaption of the 3D printer. I suppose the question is: Does it use more resources or less than tradition manufacture?

    • McFlock 36.1
      9 March 2014 at 6:04 pm

      also: how do they bond it?
      If it doesn’t have the feel of wood, might not be much difference from the faux-wood plastics that are popular and shit.

  37. greywarbler 37
    9 March 2014 at 6:14 pm

    All people that are rescued should be expected to make a koha of at least $100 to the rescuing body and neighbouring people who have used their resources to help, ie farmers lending their equipment and time. The cave system in Nelson has only recently been entirely explored. For a betting man it would have been a good one to take – how long now till somebody gets stuck trying to get through.

    In this case one could make a play on Shakespeares quote about demanding money and perhaps to the extent of offering a pound of flesh. That caveman should have slimmed down before trying to Squeeze through. Now I hope that seeing he is an older man, and supposedly experienced, then he should pay out $1000 to the rescue group to assist with their expenses and equipment provision. The young might be forgiven their ignorance, and lack of planning, the over 40 years not. I think this man was considerably older.

    • Murray Olsen 37.1
      10 March 2014 at 1:04 am

      I’ve thought about this issue at various times, mainly when the Kiwi Navy has had to rescue some millionaire playboy yachtsman from the Southern Ocean at great cost. However, I don’t think we can make people pay individually for being rescued. The unwanted effect of this would be to cut off many interesting activities from participation by all but the filthy rich. I think paying for rescues from taxation is the best way to go. Of course, this would not apply to any activity which involved jetskis. Riding a jetski should bring about an automatic custodial sentence, with no right of appeal.

  38. Skinny 38
    9 March 2014 at 6:38 pm

    So the rort of taxpayers money by Key-National continue glaringly obvious right under our noses.

    Their latest 2.4 million dollar electioneering campaign is what I am referring to.
    An education policy release outlining 4 hubs to be setup in ‘key electorates’ New Plymouth, Christchurch, Hawkes Bay and South Auckland. How slimy they National pricks are.

    This is on top of arranged visits by the Royals to Hamilton (West) no doubt lining up the marginal seats to sure up votes.

    Tricky as tricky does!

  39. geoff 39
    9 March 2014 at 8:09 pm

    Dunno if anyone else has posted this yet but here is the link to the classic Gower interview with Key from Saturday:

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Key-not-talking-about-fundraising-dinner/tabid/370/articleID/335058/Default.aspx

    The whole thing is very watchable but Key’s child-like, repeated ‘nu it’s not right’ @ 10:00 mins is Key’s most feeble moment in my opinion.

    And…I hate to say it but Gower was impressive

  40. JanM 40
    9 March 2014 at 8:32 pm

    Just to change the subject, has anyone read the opinion piece by Keith Woodford in Stuff, pointing out that Fonterra is essentially broke?

    • geoff 40.1
      9 March 2014 at 8:49 pm

      Here’s the link:
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/opinion/9803431/Fonterra-needs-more-capital-as-many-miss-out

      Interesting article. It’s yet another example of the systemic risk that occurs from having a too-big-to-fail entity like Fonterra.

      • JanM 40.1.1
        9 March 2014 at 8:52 pm

        It’s especially interesting to read who’s going to lose out as a result, isn’t it – not the big boys!

      • greywarbler 40.1.2
        9 March 2014 at 9:37 pm

        After reading some of this article which is all I can take at the moment of bad news I recommend it to everyone – it’s important to understand how NZ manages to screw up everything that we have going for us.
        The author knows what he is talking about – Keith Woodford is Professor of Farm Management and Agribusiness at Lincoln University.

      • Ad 40.1.3
        9 March 2014 at 9:58 pm

        Looking forward to her next instalment.

    • RedLogix 40.2
      9 March 2014 at 8:50 pm

      So the sharemilkers get screwed? No harm done then.

    • RedLogix 40.3
      9 March 2014 at 8:55 pm

      Fonterra has got itself into this situation because of the new TAF capital structure. What we have seen so far is just the tip of the iceberg. Behind the scenes they will now be working to create new rules. However, papered-over cracks always reappear.

      The Government bureaucrats responsible for giving a tick to TAF must also be squirming in their seats, given that Government’s position has always been that there must be clear rules for setting the milk price.

      So how does Fonterra get out of the TAF straitjacket? Where can it get the funds if it is to take New Zealand’s economy to new places? That is the issue for next week.

      How long did that take after the ‘float’ for a ‘crisis’ to appear?

      I’m assuming that the fix for the problem will be to sell more of it off out of New Zealander’s hands. Chinese would be first in the queue.

  41. JanM 41
    9 March 2014 at 9:02 pm

    I was under the impression that Fonterra was the Nat’s Great White Hope, so to speak!