Open mike 10/08/2014

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, August 10th, 2014 - 205 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen 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 …

205 comments on “Open mike 10/08/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    10 August 2014 at 7:27 am

    Bernard Hickey in the Herald.
    ‘There’ll be only yuan winner’

    Key parts of the article…..

    “We ain’t seen nothin’ yet. The revelation that Shanghai Pengxin is buying Lochinver Station should not be a surprise to anyone watching the capital flows out of China in the past few years.

    It is only the beginning, and the scale of the flows will dwarf the $300 million-plus that Shanghai Pengxin’s property development billionaire owner Jiang Zhaobai has spent over the past three years building a portfolio of dairy and dairy-support farms in New Zealand.

    New Zealanders debating their foreign ownership laws should understand the scale of the capital flows that are coming, and where they come from.

    The first thing to know is that there is a wall of cash about to break out from inside China.

    This is the key point. China’s new leadership under President Xi Jingping wants to relax those capital controls to remove some of the distortions in China’s economy and impose market disciplines. This will make it easier for some of that US$14t to get out and buy assets beyond China’s borders.

    China’s state-owned banks are in the vanguard of facilitating these flows. State-owned China Construction Bank, chaired in New Zealand by Jenny Shipley, was registered as a New Zealand bank this year and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, chaired here by Don Brash, was registered as a New Zealand bank last year.

    Bank of China has taken out a lease in Queen St, and is expected to also gain a licence here.”

    Sobering stuff.
    And note how ex members of the National and ACT parties are facilitating this.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11306580

    • silverbullet 1.1
      10 August 2014 at 8:10 am

      Add to that the Herald story on most common last names of new borns in Auckland – nearly all Asian with a school photo of 10 kids with only 1 white face. Apparently that = ‘diversity’, it is more like ethnic cleansing.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 8:53 am

        Remind me, which country is “Asia”? What do they speak there? “Asian”?

        The New Zealand Herald encourages bigotry. Why join in?

        • Paul 1.1.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 9:08 am

          It is not bigotry to be opposed to wealthy corporates buying up land in countries across the world.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1.1.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 9:09 am

            Then what has their ethnicity got to do with it?

            • Paul 1.1.1.1.1.1
              10 August 2014 at 9:41 am

              Nothing. There is no connection to ethnicity and I have not made one.
              I would have highlighted an article about US or UK corporates as well.
              It’s the global elite that is the problem and our economic system, not any particular race, obviously.

              Worth a read…
              The Landgrabbers
              http://www.randomhouse.com/book/216574/the-land-grabbers-by-fred-pearce

              And this worth watching

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                10 August 2014 at 9:55 am

                My initial response was to Silverbullet. I agree that land is a daft thing to sell to overseas residents.

            • Tom Jackson 1.1.1.1.1.2
              10 August 2014 at 9:45 am

              Ask a Maori.

              It’s one thing to think that there’s nothing wrong with foreign immigration per se. That’s compatible with allowing a mix immigrants from diverse backgrounds. Allowing mass immigration from one source has different results.

              The Maori woke up one morning and discovered that they now lived in a European country with European culture, laws and social mores. Would you like to wake up in a country that has moved towards the culture, laws and social mores of the PRC?

              • Molly …
                10 August 2014 at 10:00 am

                Agree, Tom.

                It is not about being “for” or “against” immigration. It is the un-had discussion regarding the amount and rate of immigration that is beneficial and that does not result in adverse effects on our physical infrastructure, environment, delivery of public services and social networks.

                We simplify the discussion – to a “for” or “against” – for all the wrong reasons. Supposed economic benefit, fear of discussions becoming xenophobic or racist, refusal to consider that growth is no longer a prime motivator for policy.

                If it could ever be discussed fully and impartially by all NZers – including recent immigrants who will have quality information about the difficulties they have faced and barriers to NZ lifestyle benefits – our immigration laws and quotas could be drafted to benefit all – both existing NZers and newcomers.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  10 August 2014 at 11:24 am

                  +111111

                • aerobubble …
                  10 August 2014 at 12:57 pm

                  Wealth solves our social ills said Whyte. Then quickly added to his bait, the switch. So all economic growth was good for social ills.

                  The ignorance of the man!

                  The widening wealth gap is bad for the economy, bad for social problems, and we all ignore this at our peril, whether the poor, and more important the rich who have further to fall.

                  Growth can rise in N.Korea but it has no effect on its social backwardness.
                  Growth can rise in China and has everything to do with its widening of wealth to more people, and not because a few are staggeringly rich.
                  Growth can fall in the UK and social ills magnified.
                  Where on Earth does there exist a society where growth created greater social wealth, better environments, well where government is mindful to spread wealth like in the Scandinavian countries, or Singapore.

                  But Whyte thinks less government and more growth will heal social malaise magically. The guy is a complete fool.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                10 August 2014 at 10:03 am

                Is that what demographic trends are suggesting or the xenophobia the right is looking for? That’s a rhetorical question.

                • Tom Jackson …
                  10 August 2014 at 10:44 am

                  Well, it’s noticeable in Auckland.

                  It’s not like it’s confined to Western countries either. I know that concern about Chinese immigration also exists in other Asian countries.

                  But from my point of view, we should kick out all the saffers and poms. Rugby traitors the lot of them! Send ’em back! Noo Zillund for the Noo Zillunders!

                • aerobubble …
                  10 August 2014 at 1:06 pm

                  Norman is a Australian. Norman is against, I believe, land sales to non-resident foreigners. So I’m guessing there are other foreign residents from China, UK, US, etc all who agree that selling land to non-resident foreigners is a bad idea. Worse, now we know in other countries they are not called xenophobic for introducing patriotic limits on land sales. Even National admitted to have tightened the rules.

                  So why did Dunne have just one thing to say about land sales, that we’re all racists xenophobics? Is he moronic? Is he stupid? Does he just like calling most of NZ racists? Yes, all of the above?

                  • Pasupial …
                    10 August 2014 at 2:47 pm

                    Norman Russel is a NZ Citizen (though he was born in Australia), as is his wife and child. But otherwise, I do agree with your point that; having a policy not selling land to non-resident foreigners is not necessarily xenophobic.

                  • anker …
                    10 August 2014 at 8:56 pm

                    aerobubblie, I think Dunne is just trying to justify the unjustifiable………….like Joyce………but its not a credible argument at all.

              • ropata …
                10 August 2014 at 10:40 am

                +1 Tom Jackson

                The weird thing is they don’t exactly vote left wing, the Asian people I hang out with tend to like National, love property investment, and think the country should be run like a business.

                (Also I have observed people aren’t voting for policy, they are voting for JK, and against beneficiaries)

                • weka …
                  10 August 2014 at 7:01 pm

                  “The weird thing is they don’t exactly vote left wing, the Asian people I hang out with tend to like National, love property investment, and think the country should be run like a business.”

                  Anything to do with the fact that our immigration policy promotes business people/rich people over others? It’s not like they’re letting the Asian hippies in is it.

                  • ropata …
                    10 August 2014 at 8:13 pm

                    It is ironic that a purportedly communist country exports so many randian capitalists and has worse inequality than neoliberal NZ

              • Pasupial …
                10 August 2014 at 11:11 am

                Tom J

                “The Maori woke up one morning and discovered that they now lived in a European country.”

                That does rather discount the decades of both; peaceful & armed resistance, from; individual iwi, iwi alliances, and the Kingitangi movement which led to the development of Māori identity as a people. Similarly, it was what changed the “Ingarani” of Te Tiriti into the Pākehā of today: A sometimes contentious term; the best definition I’ve heard is that Pākehā are the descendants of settlers who have shed blood for the country (not necessarily their own), whereas Tauiwi are more recent arrivals. Though, I would include having an ancestor; who’d made a significant contribution, or even just being buried, in Aotearoa as enough to identify as Pākehā (regarding commitment to the country as metaphorical “blood”). Drifting a fair way off topic here…

                Māori didn’t just wake “up one morning” to discover their Rangatiratanga usurped by settler Kāwanatanga, it was a gradual and sporadic process. The central nexus in my view was; the guesstimate census presented to the settler government in 1860, which indicated that settlers then outnumbered (the Tangata Whenua who were becoming) Māori. The next year, the Taranaki land wars started; heralding the influx of thousands of British Empire soldiers to enforce Settler authority.

                • Tom Jackson …
                  10 August 2014 at 12:10 pm

                  Sigh… that’s sort of irrelevant to the point I was making.

                  • Pasupial …
                    10 August 2014 at 2:29 pm

                    TJ

                    Your point (or at least, concluding line) seemed to be:

                    Allowing mass immigration from one source has different results… Would you like to wake up in a country that has moved towards the culture, laws and social mores of the PRC?

                    My counterpoint was that such a cultural shift is not something that just happens overnight, and that one can struggle against it (though not necessarily prevail). However, change is the only constant, and our culture will change over time regardless.

                    Also, if you going to cite the colonial experience of Māori; then you should have some inkling of what you refer to.

                    • ropata …
                      10 August 2014 at 3:49 pm

                      The point was, we are being re-colonised right now, so your history lesson isn’t much use.

                      As to your mad implication that we should surrender ourselves to some inevitable “cultural shift” … what a load of useless bollocks

                    • Pasupial …
                      10 August 2014 at 5:37 pm

                      ropata

                      In response to OAB’s; “Then what has their ethnicity got to do with it?”; TJ replied “Ask a Maori… [who] woke up one morning and discovered that they now lived in a European country “.
                      My argument against that is the historical record; where the tangata whenua did not have a pan-Māori identity until it was forged in the fires of resistance. I felt that TJs depiction of; Māori as uniform ignorami who didn’t realise their disposession until it was an accomplished fact, was disingenuous. Or:

                      “a cultural shift is not something that just happens overnight, and that one can struggle against it”

                      Which wasn’t mean to be read as advice to surrender to inevitable landsales to nonresident foreigners. However, we are always being re-colonised and it is the struggle against (and accommodations with) that process that determines our national character.

                      If you don’t find that useful, then my apologies; I tend to be more interested in truth than utility. Perhaps you should read another’s comments.

                    • ropata …
                      10 August 2014 at 5:47 pm

                      And you’re still off in the land of abstraction, but apology accepted 🙂

            • Local Kiwi 1.1.1.1.1.3
              10 August 2014 at 2:33 pm

              OAB you are very akin to nats’ who have no long term visions.

              Try extending your self to a long term plan for this land for heaven sakes.

              God help us with your short bursts of live snapshots of the money changing dynamics of this land.

              With the most liberal open border Neo Liberal policies in the world don’t you know.

              Wake up before the whole country is sold from under our feet..

      • Colonial Viper 1.1.2
        10 August 2014 at 9:14 am

        Apparently that = ‘diversity’, it is more like ethnic cleansing.

        You’re sorta stupid, aren’t you. If you want coloured people to have a lower fertility rate, you have to give them more chances at higher education and higher incomes. Are you willing to do that.

        • tinfoilhat 1.1.2.1
          10 August 2014 at 9:26 am

          “You’re sorta stupid, aren’t you. If you want coloured people to have a lower fertility rate, you have to give them more chances at higher education and higher incomes. Are you willing to do that.”

          If you want people to have a lower fertility rate, you have to give them more chances at higher education and higher incomes. Are you willing to do that. FIFY

      • tinfoilhat 1.1.3
        10 August 2014 at 9:27 am

        Vile bigoted rubbish.

    • RedBaronCV 1.2
      10 August 2014 at 9:16 am

      Good article from Bernanrd. Lets hope some of the more Nact inclined members of the nation understand the economic wake up call from this. China is artificially keeping it’s exchange rate down and attempting to buy real assets the world over. Colonisation in other words. Gives a good idea of how maori felt doesn’t it.

      • Colonial Viper 1.2.1
        10 August 2014 at 9:28 am

        Economic colonisation of our nation, yes. And our ‘tribal leaders’ in Government seem to be all for selling their iwi (us) out.

        • RedBaronCV 1.2.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 9:46 am

          Yes unfortunately our Nact tribal leaders do want to sell the “iwi”out. Still we should think positive and look at how we can stop overseas land ownership and then make life uncomfortable with a lotta taxes (overseas domiciled get to pay a CGT each year -no clawbacks- but domestic CGT based on realisation only) until sale takes place.
          Let’s turn this into an “iwi” gold mine.

        • Paul 1.2.1.2
          10 August 2014 at 9:50 am

          Brash and Shipley don’t believe in society or community.
          There are devoted followers of the Ayn Rand cult….listen to Jamie Whyte and you hear this vile doctrine.

      • Gosman 1.2.2
        10 August 2014 at 10:28 am

        If the Chinese really wanted to purchase assets offshore in the way you are suggesting they would be much better to inflate the value of their currency rather than keep it low.

        • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1
          10 August 2014 at 10:48 am

          For these purposes, its own exchange rate is less relevant as China is divesting itself of its massive holdings of USD.

        • tricledrown 1.2.2.2
          11 August 2014 at 7:28 am

          What Rubbish goose you haven’t managed to get one economic fact right yet goose .
          If China the great democratic country sorry dictatorship increased the value of its currency its surpluses would disappear and exports dry up!
          China’s dictators have a longterm plan for their economy !
          New Zealanders like your dumb arse selfish short term thinker only can see a 3 month reporting period!
          Rod Oram points out that these companies take the commodities out of our country with out adding value even Fonterra hand over most of their milk powder for the likes of Nestle’ to add all the value!
          Gooseman racial fermenter!

    • Gosman 1.3
      10 August 2014 at 10:23 am

      Oh no the dreaded Chinese are coming!

      Now where have seen that before?

      • felix 1.3.1
        10 August 2014 at 10:46 am

        Shanghai Pengxin are here.

        Jiang Zhaobai is here.

        China Construction Bank is here.

        Industrial and Commercial Bank of China is here.

        Who are these “the Chinese” you keep going on about and when are they coming?

      • Local Kiwi 1.3.2
        10 August 2014 at 2:43 pm

        Gosman, the chameleon .

        You need to take a good look at yourself and your silly snipes.

        Travel like we have the globe and then tell the truth, unfortunately Bernard is correct Chinese money is now drowning the world in debt from your speculator mates who use cheap Chinese money.

        This global economic crash is all down to you and your mates fast and easy flash in the pan speculations and you now are planning this continued policy will destroy our NZ economy?

        best you look up the business registry of the top icon companies we had that now have been taken mostly over by Chinese, just for one is Fisher & paykel.

        Policies you promote are dangerous. They call that a crime against the state, and the people you loathe as Kiwis..

      • tricledrown 1.3.3
        11 August 2014 at 7:36 am

        Goose we are 58th on the list of countries adding value to our primary industry !
        Until that changes we will continue to become closer to the bottom of the developed world!
        build some more motorways so our commodity based economy can help all the overseas commodity value adders keep us poor!
        3rd world thinking from a goose.

  2. Paul 2
    10 August 2014 at 7:34 am

    New Zealand.. the country of the the haves and have nots.
    The NZ Herald’s editor seems to celebrate that fact by detailing the obscene amounts of wealth NZ’s wealthy have.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=11306605

  3. phillip ure 3
    10 August 2014 at 8:12 am

    “..I Tried Cannabis Lube – and This is What My Vagina Felt Like..

    ..Oh what a feeling!

    My journalistic investigation would be to see if my vagina could actually get high..”

    (cont..)

    (reason number 53 to legalise/regulate/tax the magic herb..eh..?

    ..new zealand women should be free to get their vaginas high..

    ..don’tchareckon..?..)

    http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/i-tried-cannabis-lube-and-what-my-vagina-felt

    • Stephanie Rodgers 3.1
      10 August 2014 at 10:04 am

      It’s kind of grotty for a man to exploit women’s sexual pleasure to push a political issue.

      (And not everyone who has a vagina is a woman, and not every woman has a vagina.)

    • phillip ure 3.2
      10 August 2014 at 12:59 pm

      and the good news is that it works..!

      “..As soon as the licking started – it hit me. There are the drugs.

      It was an all-over buzzy tingly feeling that spreads the pleasure much further than wherever you’re being directly stimulated.

      It pulsated like there was a delicate vibrator inside of me – but better.

      Cloudier.

      I hadn’t felt anything like it before – and I’ve had my share of sex after some hits from a J..”

      whoar..!..eh..?

      ..’holy high vagina..!..batman..!’..

      • The Al1en 3.2.1
        10 August 2014 at 1:11 pm

        Slightly better than using sick kids as an excuse for personal gain… But not by much.

      • phillip ure 3.2.2
        10 August 2014 at 1:58 pm

        i..i can’t help myself..i’m having to script the infomercial:

        “..are you lying in bed..looking at each other and going..’yeah..!..nah..!..eh..?..’

        ..have you done it every which way more times than you can count..?

        ..are the costumes/accessories mouldering away in a forgotten drawer..?

        ..even watching porn together doesn’t ‘do it’ for you both anymore..?

        ..introducing vag-hi..!..the new miracle marital aid for women..!

        ..(here’s a happy customer.:..

        ‘It pulsated like there was a delicate vibrator inside of me – but better..!’..)

        ..and of course..with vag-high..

        ..you just have to spray and walk away..!..’

        ..and vag-high is guaranteed to kick start yr love-life..

        ..but wait..!..there’s more..!..

        ..vag-hi will make your orgasms..’cloudier’…

        ..call 08001wantsome!..

        ..and today i’ll give you not one vag-hi..but two..!

        ..that’s 400 orgasms for only $39.99..!

        ….call 0800iwantsome!..now..!

        ..remember..!..pleasure is only a spritzer away..!

      • Local Kiwi 3.2.3
        10 August 2014 at 2:51 pm

        Phillp ure.
        if you cant contribute with constructive comments to help the country out of this spiralling drowning in debt and takeovers shut the fuck up you corrosive NatZ.

        • adam 3.2.3.1
          10 August 2014 at 3:23 pm

          Err LK, phillip is very very far from being a nat. Please read many of his comments on many wide range of pages here at the standard. Also the left is about robust diverse voices, well maybe not the authoritarian left, but the rest of us. So please, if you don’t like Philips humour, don’t read his posts, self censorship is fine.

          • Rodel 3.2.3.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 8:17 pm

            Did you mean nut or nat? This fool is embarrassing. Where are the men in white coats when we need them?

  4. bad12 4
    10 August 2014 at 8:55 am

    From yesterdays Herald, Franny O’Sullivan gives an elongated Tsk Tsk Tsk to all those young people for indulging in the recent InternetMana Party Party rave,

    Little of it is worth repeating, pretty much akin to reading something printed off on an old Gestetner circa 1960’s and then comparing it with today’s zooo–ooom of internet communications,

    Risible from O’Sullivan as She put forward Her ‘thoughts’ of what the Youf of today should be occupying their minds with in ‘election season’, Freedom didn’t get a look in from Fran, Party Party’s apparently are definitely a No No according to the gospel of O’Sullivan,

    i think i can safely say to O’Sullivan that the young people attending InternetMana Party Party’s up and down our little islands would only have Two words, very descriptive, involving both sex and travel, in reply to Grannies Granny telling them to get a mortgage,

    You can guess the rest…

    • Bearded Git 4.1
      10 August 2014 at 10:53 am

      FJK…FJK…FJK!

    • Stephanie Rodgers 4.2
      10 August 2014 at 11:15 am

      bad, I would like you to back up a quote you attributed to me on yesterday’s Open Mike.
      http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-09082014/#comment-863487

      Specifically where you said:

      This attitude, epitomized in a recent debate on ‘decriminalizing abortion’ where you proposed that ”abortion might be a solution to child poverty” to me reeks of an attitude where eugenics would be the next step toward the slippery slope,

      I have had a look at recent discussions of abortion at The Standard and surprisingly enough cannot find any comment I made which even vaguely correlates to your claim.

      It’s a bit puzzling that you’d even raise the topic in the middle of a discussion about Ohariu, but since you’ve basically accused me of supporting eugenics, I insist you back it up or retract it.

      • bad12 4.2.1
        10 August 2014 at 11:25 am

        Stephanie, how easily you forget, you made the comment in ‘Open Mike’ i do believe, about the same day, give or take a day or two either side, that the last actual Post discussing abortion appeared here a the Standard,(the discussion about the actual Green’s policy),

        i have other things to do this morning, and, will hunt it out later, i will also comment later on why i raised such a comment vis a vis your obviously placed in some position within Labour’s Ohariu electorate campaign later…

        • bad12 4.2.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 11:50 am

          i will amend the above, the original discussion occurred in ‘Open Mike’ on 09/06/2014, this was followed in the next couple of days by an actual ‘Post’ on the Green’s ‘new policy’,(the ‘Post’ may have even been the same day),

          i have to be somewhere starting in 15 minutes, the comment you made Stephanie, was i now believe made within that specific ‘Post’ discussing the actual policy, i will hunt it out later…

        • Stephanie Rodgers 4.2.1.2
          10 August 2014 at 11:53 am

          It’s very easy to forget saying things which I have never said.

          And I’m breathless with anticipation to know just how my (alleged and unproven) feelings about abortion decriminalisation are applicable to my statements about the strategic voting situation in Ohariu (none of which you’ve actually managed to rebut.)

          Edited to add: it’s also interesting how in the 25 minutes between your two comments above you managed to remember the exact date of the post but not actually find the quote you have attributed to me.

          • bad12 4.2.1.2.1
            10 August 2014 at 10:52 pm

            Ah so smug Stephanie, you shouldn’t be, but, yes i will withdraw unreservedly my allegation that you used the word ‘Poverty’ in ‘Open Mike’ on 6 June 2014,

            You will tho be getting no apology as the words you did use, and i quote:

            ”it seems fairly obvious that an early abortion of an unaware clump of cells is a heck of a lot better fate than being born into abuse and neglect” unquote,

            Is in fact a direct reference to poverty, any fool, well perhaps in your case i may have to create a special category, would know that in the vast majority of cases where abuse and/or neglect is reported it is also evident in the family concerned an ongoing situation of Poverty,

            So while your glib excuse making and outright smugness may come from not actually having used the word Poverty in your above quote it is obvious to anyone who has worked for any amount of time, large or small, in the area of the care of children, as i have, that Poverty, Neglect and/or Abuse in the family situation are inseparably intertwined,

            IF Stephanie, you had a shred of concern for such children, born into Poverty and thus ‘at risk’ of suffering the myriad negative effects that are part and parcel of such Poverty, including Abuse and Neglect, you would be advocating the raising of the income of ALL such families instead of claiming as you do that their unborn children be ripped from their mothers wombs and effectively flushed down the sink as some form of ‘solution’ which smacks at the least of a gross lack of humanity on your part,

            Your comment above is a massive step in the direction of Eugenics and thus abhorrent…

            [lprent: Stephanie is always very precise in her choice of words. However she is also an author, so it is inadvisable to continue to attack her on the basis of what she did not say, or what you choose to place as the meaning on those words.

            After all, I could start trolling through you comments and taking meanings from what you have said in the past. ]

            • ropata 4.2.1.2.1.1
              10 August 2014 at 11:13 pm

              I don’t particularly like or approve of it, but legalised abortion != eugenics. Nor does your slippery slope argument hold water.

              Aside from the women’s rights argument, abortion may actually reduce crime
              http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/

              • bad12 …
                11 August 2014 at 12:42 am

                Ropata, i did not say that, you have as i have just been ‘spanked’ for, read into my comment something that simply is not there,

                As i point out, Neglect and/or Abuse is accompanied in the overwhelming majority of such cases by Poverty,

                Therefor, and as the Moderator has pointed out, the commenter may have not intended to convey this, the opinion those words have formed in my psyche at least is that abortion has been proposed as a means to lower the obviously high amounts of abuse and neglect that occur within families,

                Much the same as your link makes an assertion that abortion may reduce crime, i could, perhaps mistakenly, construe that by linking to such an assertion you support the point the link makes,

                Do you…

                • ropata …
                  11 August 2014 at 1:09 am

                  It’s a tough question. I abhor the picture you have described (late term abortion), but on balance I think the sum of human happiness is improved by reproductive choice. Just look at the impact of contraception on third world countries.

                  • bad12 …
                    11 August 2014 at 1:34 am

                    Ropata, i fail to understand your reference to ”late term abortion” has the inclusion of such a term in the discussion any relevance and if so can you elucidate that relevance,

                    Crime, by conviction, not necessarily by value, also has attached to it another demographic, exactly the same as the demographic attached to families where reported abuse and neglect is rife,

                    Poverty is that linkage, and, while there my be some small truth in claims that abortion would alleviate/lower rates of both crime and abuse/neglect this could not be achieved by ‘choice’,

                    In other words to achieve such aims through the use of abortion of the tool someone else would be doing the choosing,

                    Families where crime, and/or abuse/neglect occur still choose to have babies so while those proposing such ‘solutions’ are not at the same time proposing that someone other than ‘the mother’ exercise ‘choice’ to achieve a lowering of the statistics alluded to in this discussion would involve ‘choice’ at some stage being replaced by ‘force’,

                    Think tho wont you, why do we have poor people, poor workers especially are seen as a necessity of our economy,

                    If the unborn babies of such poor people where to be ‘knocked off’ in a generational manner so as to make a difference in the statistical areas we are discussing who will then be left to do the labour of the poor,

                    Now perhaps do you see the linkage i postulate between such ‘ideas’ and Eugenics, while no-one is overtly proposing Eugenics for such proposals as using abortion as a tool to say lower crime rates such proposals are one very large step in that direction…

            • bad12 4.2.1.2.1.2
              11 August 2014 at 12:01 am

              LPrent, while i take on board your point that Stephanie is an author, this conversation as you can see is the result not of a ‘Post’ that Stephanie wrote but as a result of comments between the two of us in a previous ‘Open Mike’,

              Everybody commenting here at the Standard continually ”reads into” comments from anywhere and everywhere, on-site and off-site ”meanings” into what is said by those commenting, those in the media, and, those involved in politics,

              So really, i have to ask here what is the point of your moderation except to stifle my ability to debate,

              i see no overt abuse in my comment to Stephanie and simply point out the facts vis a vis Poverty and such poverty’s connections to child Abuse and Neglect,

              i do not usually bother to respond to ‘moderation’s comments’ as there is obviously little point to doing so as it appears to have only one inescapable conclusion in doing so…

            • Stephanie Rodgers 4.2.1.2.1.3
              11 August 2014 at 12:04 pm

              That’s utterly pathetic, bad. Now you’re pretending that this is just about whether I used the word ‘poverty’ or not – when anyone can see by clicking on the links I have provided that you accused me very specifically of saying “abortion might be a solution to child poverty” – and then got really smarmy about “how easily I forget” saying such things.

              Now you’ve accused me of not supporting moves to raise people’s incomes and get them out of situations where they feel abortion is the best option for them, which is a complete lie, and you’ve once again linked my opinions about abortion to eugenics.

              And you still haven’t explained exactly what the hell this has to do with strategic voting!

              I’m going to have to insist once again that you retract your accusations about what I said – not some sneaky, weaselly “did I use the word ‘poverty'” spin – apologise for saying I support eugenics, and explain your choice to introduce these lies in a completely different conversation.

              Because right now the “opinion your words have formed in my psyche” is that you’re a sad little liar who can’t handle women disagreeing with him or making choices he doesn’t like.

  5. Tiger Mountain 5
    10 August 2014 at 8:55 am

    Don’t forget “you know who’s” Kumeu Baptist Church Candidates Meeting 6pm tomorrow night (Mon Aug 11)–21 Access Rd. just off H16 before Huapai, lots of parking.
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kumeu-Baptist-Church/747234255305216
    https://www.google.com/maps/search/Kumeu+Baptist+Church+NZ/@-36.8057749,174.5491671,13z

    Well worth going imo to keep the heat on Slippery the PM. Laila Harre´and Hone Harawira will be missing IMPs Invercargill Roadtrip mtg. to attend.

    • ianmac 5.1
      10 August 2014 at 10:17 am

      They reported that there was only room for about240 people at Kumeu I think. About 239 National supporters and one tame other?

      • Tiger Mountain 5.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 10:26 am

        My thinking was just to mill about outside with left party signage before candidates mtg and then have a rally depending on numbers afteward (and welcome anyone evicted from the hall by security).

    • alwyn 5.2
      10 August 2014 at 3:18 pm

      Are you serious?
      “Laila Harre and Hone Harawira will be missing”.
      I understand why Hone won’t be there, as he isn’t a candidate in the electorate, but I didn’t think that Laila would run away. It certainly shows how Dotcom rules the roost doesn’t it.
      I suppose she is scared that she is going to look like a complete prat and is looking for an excuse not to have to be there and be shown up by Key of course.

      • Te Reo Putake 5.2.1
        10 August 2014 at 3:24 pm

        Fuck John Key.

        And try reading this sentence slowly and in full:

        “Laila Harre´and Hone Harawira will be missing IMPs Invercargill Roadtrip mtg. to attend”.

        Better trools needed.

        • alwyn 5.2.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 3:35 pm

          I did read the sentence in full.
          Is being one of a group forming Kim Dotcom’s court in Invercargill really more important than attending the only candidate meeting in the electorate in which she is standing?
          She is the one after all who claimed that she would be chasing John Key to hold him to account.
          Instead when KDC tells her to follow him, as if he was the Pied Piper and she was one of the original followers in the story, she follows his orders.
          I stand by my words. KDC is totally in charge isn’t he?

          • ropata 5.2.1.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 3:40 pm

            o dear 🙄

            the stupid is strong in this one

            • alwyn 5.2.1.1.1.1
              10 August 2014 at 3:52 pm

              Whoops. Sorry. I mentally put a colon in the sentence as I read it.
              I read it as being a statement that they would be missing and an explanation why.
              I take it Laila will be present after all.

              • ropata …
                10 August 2014 at 3:58 pm

                lol .. you got it this time 🙂

                • alwyn …
                  10 August 2014 at 4:09 pm

                  Yes. It was the fact that the word “missing” was at the end of the line in T.M’s original post and the next line started with the capital letter in “IMPs” that fooled me into thinking it was two statements. Can I blame TM for carefully arranging the length and construction of his sentences deliberately to trick me? No?

              • Weepus beard …
                10 August 2014 at 4:19 pm

                Hi alwyn. An apology for being stupid is welcome but are you going to withdraw the rest of your self assured diatribe at 5.2?

                • alwyn …
                  11 August 2014 at 11:21 am

                  I thought that it could be taken as read. It was based on a false premise from misreading one sentence as two. On that basis any conclusions based on a misinterpretation of the facts are clearly not justified.
                  I still think Laila has been bought by someone who would appear to hold values that are completely different from anything that she has supported in the past of course.

      • Murray Olsen 5.2.2
        10 August 2014 at 11:34 pm

        Thanks for that great look into the mirror mind of a denizen of Planet Key. Are you really that thick to completely misunderstand what was written?

  6. RedBaronCV 6
    10 August 2014 at 9:01 am

    Is the Herald once again leaving behind the impression that Liu gave lotsa money to labour. Why doesn’t he mention any donations the Nacts got? I seem to remmeber a court case some time back where a judge had some scathing remarks to make about a magazine that printed rumours about a public figure so it could also print a denial.

    “A Herald investigation revealed that Maurice Williamson contacted police about the domestic violence inquiry on Liu’s behalf. He resigned his ministerial portfolios in May.

    There was further political controversy in June over donations Liu said he had made to the Labour Party.”

  7. phillip ure 7
    10 August 2014 at 9:16 am

    what is it with far-right politicians and their weird staring politron 3 eyes..?

    ..both ‘moon-landing-denier’ craig..and ‘dweeb’ seymour..(he’s from act..)

    ..they both have that going on..

  8. David H 8
    10 August 2014 at 9:25 am

    Watching the Comedy that is the Epsom. On Q+A TV1. There’s Goldsmith denying that he wants to be a sitting MP only a List MP. And the Clown for ACT? What a train wreck. And now Goldsmith is sounding like the one to elect. And the Labour Guy Michael Wood well he is sounding really good too. Julie Anne Genter accepts that most speak to her over Transport. And Rankin? Well nice Earings

    • Macro 8.1
      10 August 2014 at 1:05 pm

      I think we need a Reform Act – get rid of these Rotten Boroughs.
      Not quite the same as those in Britian but they behave in almost the same way.

  9. phillip ure 9
    10 August 2014 at 9:31 am

    epsom candidates’ debate on q & a..

    genter took it out..by a country-mile..

    ..wood from labour was (surprisingly) good..

    ..’dweeb’ seymour from act was a rude/arrogant prick..

    ..goldsmith was ever-unctuous..

    ..and rankin was reduced to babbling inanities from the sideline..

    ..all in all a good showing for the progressive-camp..

  10. phillip ure 10
    10 August 2014 at 9:38 am

    tim barnett..fucken braindead..’no..no..we won’t tell our supporters to vote tactically in epsom’..(!)

    ..w.t.f..!

    ..as boag pointed out..if banks had not won epsom by 2,500 last time..key wd not have even got a second term..

    ..w.t.f. is wrong with labour..?

    ..hell-bent on this antipodean/modern charge of the fucken light brigade..

    ..’we were defeated..but we flew our flag high..we died honourable men..!’

    ..fucken idiots..!

    • Visubversaviper 10.1
      10 August 2014 at 9:46 am

      Labour, and hopefully Green voters in Epsom are bright enough to work it out for themselves. It is the Nats who have to be unsubtly reminded where their class interests lie.

      • phillip ure 10.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 10:19 am

        the voting numbers from last time show that labour/green voters in epsom were not..

        ..’bright enough to work it out for themselves’..

        ..were they ‘bright enough’..act would not exist..

        ..key wd have been a one-term prime minister..

        ..and all those assets would not have been sold..

        ..what..the..fuck…is..so..hard..to..understand..about..that..?

        ..(should i say it again..?..slowly..?..

        ..and this is all why barnetts’ ignoring of this political-reality/history..

        ..has me grinding my forehead into the keyboard..)

    • bad12 10.2
      10 August 2014 at 11:08 am

      Have another look at the Q+A program without the blinkers on Philip, the Green’s Julie Ann Genter, as much as i like Her, was saying much the same thing,

      Blah Blah, Democracy, Democracy, seeking Party vote only, but, the people of Epsom must be left to choose their own electorate MP,

      If Julie Ann wakes up the morning after with a healthy vote in both categories, party and electorate, with the ACT candidate still firmly ensconced in the Seat of Epsom allowing a 1 seat majority for the right to govern shall we all thank Her for the effort,

      i know i wont be…

  11. North 11
    10 August 2014 at 9:52 am

    Ain’t old Michelle shrill on Q + A ?

    Reckon you’d have smelt it and seen it seeping across the floor if you’d been in that studio. Isn’t their some incontinence pad they advertise on the tele’ ? Send the poor thing a comp’ carton of same.

    Ha ! Apparently the 2011 result was down to one ACT seat in parliament. What happened to the most magnificent electoral endorsement ever seeen in the history of New Zealand politics ?

    • Paul 11.1
      10 August 2014 at 9:54 am

      Did Susan Wood host the show?
      If so, was she her usual biased self?

      • phillip ure 11.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 10:22 am

        smalley hosted the debate..

        ..and confirmed her previously-over-rated status..

        ..without an auto-cue..the glitter fades..

        • Local kiwi 11.1.1.1
          11 August 2014 at 8:37 am

          Phillip ure,.

          Like you we are unimpressed by TV1 adaptation of Rachael Smalley.

          She used to be a giant investigative journo, so objective by asking the Hard questions.

          But now she sadly looks like another of the many natz clones at TV1, wasn’t TV1 a public TV channel not a Government election tool?
          Almost all are Natz moles, and Mike Hosking’s????.

          What have they done to Rachael?

          Has she gotten to close to the spin doctor Joyce?

          Something has taken her over at the Joyce/Goebells propaganda channel TV1? taken out her brain or brainwashed her?

          Please wake up Rachael, we need you to be your real former balanced investigative journo type, smart, witty, and just what we need to dig under the pile of crap called “National”.

          • phillip ure 11.1.1.1.1
            11 August 2014 at 8:52 am

            “..What have they done to Rachael?..”

            i think she was upgraded from the mediatron3 to the mediatron4..

            ..the latter is a much more compliant tron..

            ..the awkward-question ‘faults’ ironed out of it..

            ..(it says as much in the manufacturers’-upgrade-guarantee..)

    • Treetop 11.2
      10 August 2014 at 3:15 pm

      I hope Act is gone on 20 September. I do not like manipulative bossy candidates/parties.

    • Once Was Tim 11.3
      10 August 2014 at 5:58 pm

      In case you hadn’t noticed @ North – Michelle is ALWAYS shrill. She just drips with shrill

      • Anne 11.3.1
        10 August 2014 at 7:25 pm

        Michelle is ALWAYS shrill. She just drips with shrill.

        Nah… she was worse than ever on Q&A this morning. She’s panicking big time. It was funny to watch.

        • Anne 11.3.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 7:45 pm

          Talking of panicking…

          RNZ’s Monday morning political spot starting around 1110am will be well worth a listen. A word of warning: batten down your cerebral hatches because Matthew Hooton will be spinning like a Force 10 hurricane.

    • RedbaronCV 11.4
      10 August 2014 at 9:42 pm

      And wearing the royal purple again. On the very odd occasions I have seen her on the TV she always seems to have a lot of purple clothes on. Channeling a desire to be royalty perhaps?? -Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown…

      • Anne 11.4.1
        10 August 2014 at 10:00 pm

        She likes bright colours. Pinks, purples and blues. Maybe she thinks of herself as the Queen Mum’s NZ successor. She also went in for pinks, purples and blues.

  12. just saying 12
    10 August 2014 at 10:13 am

    Calling the Queen of Thorns…

    Are you coming back to the interwebs for the election campaign?
    Kinda miss your input.
    Quite understand if you have better ways of spending your time.

  13. Morrissey 13
    10 August 2014 at 10:54 am

    How much marijuana did Arthur Baysting smoke before the Kim Hill interview?
    Saturday Morning, Radio New Zealand National, 9 August 2014

    Anybody else listen to Kim Hill interviewing Arthur Baysting (AKA Neville Purvis) about the need for marijuana legalization? Much of what he said was perfectly sensible and reasonable, until right near the end, when he saw fit to praise President Barack “Bomber” Obama for his liberal attitude towards cannabis law reform.

    So far, so good.

    But then Baysting, in his blissed out zeal, went a little bit further than was sensible. Because it is now legal in several states, the jail population is going down dramatically, he claimed, and would mean Obama’s legacy would be “up there with Nelson Mandela’s”. That’s a stupid and ignorant and inflammatory thing to say, and is unforgivable, even for an old hippy musician who has obviously been toking daily for the last half-century.

    If Arthur Baysting wants to be taken seriously, he needs to learn to speak with a degree of moderation and proportion. Comparing a smooth-talking, cynical product of the rotten, vicious Chicago Democrat Party machine to a revolutionary, principled peace activist that he would have defamed mercilessly if he had been president while the apartheid state was—like Pinochet’s Chile, Duvalier’s Haiti, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq—an American protégé, is utterly preposterous. It’s the kind of thing a stoned old stupid old muso would say during a session. A dope-smoking session, that is. Like the thirteenth gong of a cuckoo clock, it casts doubt on all that went before.

    Meanwhile, now that the Nobel Peace Prize-winning peacemaker Barack Mandela has committed to another attack on Iraq, in contravention of his election promises, we can only speculate on how the U.S. soldiers will behave. Sadly, judging by their behaviour in Afghanistan, it’s not entirely promising….

    US soldier pleads guilty to urinating on Afghan bodies
    AFP DECEMBER 22, 2012 2:48AM

    A US Marine was jailed for 30 days, fined and demoted after pleading guilty to participating in a video that showed soldiers urinating on the dead bodies of three Afghans.

    Staff Sergeant Joseph Chamblin was charged with “alleged involvement in desecration and posing for unofficial photographs with human casualties,” a statement said.

    He pleaded guilty to the charges, which included “wrongfully urinating on the body of a deceased enemy combatant,” as well as failing to supervise the young soldiers in his unit who also took part in the incident.

    Chamblin’s rank will be bumped down to lance corporal, he will serve 30 days confinement, his pay will be docked $US500 ($477) a month for the next six months, and he was ordered to pay a $US2000 fine, the judge in the special court martial ruled.

    Another soldier, Edward Deptola, is also facing military prosecution, while three others involved in the case have faced administrative sanctions. All five belong to an elite unit of snipers.

    The incident came to public attention in January, when a video surfaced online that showed four US soldiers urinating on three bloodied corpses. One of the men, apparently aware he was being filmed, says: “Have a great day, buddy,” referring to one of the dead.

    The incident had apparently occurred six months….

    Read more….
    http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/breaking-news/us-soldier-pleads-guilty-to-urinating-on-afghan-bodies/story-e6freoo6-1226542198975?nk=a8ce7cecc5ade34f5bdba1b9378543f4

    • phillip ure 13.1
      10 August 2014 at 11:07 am

      “..the jail population is going down dramatically, he claimed..”

      the facts of the matter morrissey..are that in colorado..

      ..legalisation/regulation/taxation has led to both a drop in the consumption of the killer drug alcohol..

      ..and a marked drop in crime..

      ..coincidence..?..or cause/effect..?

      • Morrissey 13.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 11:13 am

        I agree with you, Phillip, and I share your—and Arthur Baysting’s—desire to see the absurd and cruel drug laws abolished. However, judging from what I’ve seen of your posts over the years, I don’t think you would ever be so foolish as to compare Barack Obama to Nelson Mandela.

        My problem with Baysting is not his pro-marijuana views, it’s his addled comparison of a war criminal to a heroic peace activist.

        • Te Reo Putake 13.1.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 12:05 pm

          You do know that Mandela was a convicted criminal, Moz? He co-founded Umkhonto we Sizwe, the armed wing of the ANC. Presumably he was a supporter of MK’s activities right through to democracy. I sincerely doubt he ever considered himself a peace activist, rather, he was a soldier in an armed struggle.

        • phillip ure 13.1.1.2
          10 August 2014 at 12:43 pm

          i agree it was a trainwreck of an interview..(and said so yesterday..)

          ..and an obama/mandela comparison/equivalence..?

          ..yeah..nah..eh..?

          ..but..he has ordered his attorney-general to order the national sentencing commission (?)

          ..to allow prisoners serving non-violent long sentences for cannabis..

          ..to be allowed to apply to the courts for a reduced sentence..

          ..(which is a major breakthrough..)

          ..i presume it is this that baysting is speaking of..

      • The Al1en 13.1.2
        10 August 2014 at 11:22 am

        “..legalisation/regulation/taxation has led to – a marked drop in crime.”

        Using your logic, puff heads are responsible for said quoted criminal activity?
        And you want to reward them?

        Armed bank robbers should just be given bundles of cash when they need it. Problem solved then lol.

    • Poission 13.2
      10 August 2014 at 12:30 pm

      Meanwhile, now that the Nobel Peace Prize-winning peacemaker Barack Mandela has committed to another attack on Iraq, in contravention of his election promises

      Its a response to the UN call,of which the Unanimous statement of the security council is that a response to ethnic cleansing in northern iraq and syria by isis is required.

      http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=48439#.U-a6S6MymXU

      Pissing on a corpse of an enemy combatant,is insignificant in comparison of beheading,crucifixion and stoning to death.

    • Once Was Tim 13.3
      10 August 2014 at 7:03 pm

      Quite a few of us are left wondering @Morissey – what ya sed with the opening lines.
      ooops – sincere apologies! Can I shove an additional ‘r’ up ya?

      Kim needed coaching on how it was he was attempting to connect dots too.
      She should have had Rik B and some other strugglers waiting in the wings – not that its all about Kim.
      Get back to you’re gardening woman will ya!

      But then what’s a dot or two between friends eh?

  14. Clemgeopin 14
    10 August 2014 at 10:59 am

    Colmar Brunton Epsom poll results: [On Q and A this morning]

    Who would you vote for with your electorate vote?

    National Paul Goldsmith 44%
    Act David Seymour 32%
    Labour Michael Woold 10%
    Green Julie Anne Genter 9%
    Conservative Christine Rankin 4%
    Internet Mana Pat O’Dea .08%
    Independent Grace Haden 0.3%
    Don’t know 8%

    Were you aware John key is encouraging National Party supporters to give their electorate vote to the Act Party candidate?

    Yes 70%
    No 28%
    Don’t know 2%

    With this in mind, who would you now vote for with your electorate vote?

    National Paul Goldsmith 31%
    Act David Seymour 45%
    Labour Michael Woold 9%
    Green Julie Anne Genter 10%
    Conservative Christine Rankin 4%
    Internet Mana Pat O’Dea .08%
    Independent Grace Haden 0.1%
    Don’t know 13%

    Do you support or oppose arrangements like the one John Key has made with the Act Party in Epsom?

    Support 47%
    Oppose 37%
    Don’t know 16%

    Which political party would you vote for?

    National 60%
    Green 16%
    Labour 14%
    NZ First 3.3%
    Act 2.7%
    Conservative 2.1%
    Internet Mana 1.5%
    Maori 0.6%
    Don’t know 6%

    • bad12 14.1
      10 August 2014 at 11:17 am

      Stunning numbers for the Green Party in what is obviously a right wing stronghold, InternetMana cannot be too disappointed with having 1.5% Party Vote support there,

      Poor old Labour take yet another hit in a ‘poll’, perhaps the peeps in Epsom, or those ‘counting’ the numbers are taking the piss, trying to rain on Labour’s parade…

      • Colonial Viper 14.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 11:25 am

        The Greens are standing Genter there? Too much electoral candidate firepower IMO; at 9% her Green supporters need to turn more to Goldsmith.

      • Clemgeopin 14.1.2
        10 August 2014 at 11:32 am

        May be so. But on the other hand, it could also be that the traditional Nat supporters torn about the Key’s directive but reluctant to vote for ACT or Labour, are taking the mischievous option of giving their vote to the Greens knowing or hoping that the Greens will be or could be a pain in the arse for a Labour led coalition government with their exaggerated demands and sense of over entitlement for cabinet positions, uneconomic unemployment inducing policies and stuff or hoping that the Greens may go into a defacto relationship with the Nats after the election if the supposed ‘murmurs’ alluded to by Mike Sabin and as yet undenied by the Greens are correct! Who knows! Your guess is as good as mine!

        • Disraeli Gladstone 14.1.2.1
          10 August 2014 at 12:10 pm

          And here we have the Labour Tribalist in its natural habitat. If you observe closely, you can see when threatened by a younger, more confident contender, the Tribalist will rear back and sprout out complete bullshit in the hope of defending itself.

          • Clemgeopin 14.1.2.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 12:39 pm

            “Labour Tribalist” “sprout out complete bullshit’

            Wrong on both counts. Doubly wrong.

            Materia’s statement as quoted by Bad12 ‘with an underlying vein of sharpened and hardened steel in Her voice’ that
            “IF Labour were forming the next Government the Green Party would be at the Cabinet Table In Numbers AND there would be a Comprehensive Coalition Agreement which covered ALL of the Green Parties policies”

            Panelist Sabin on The Nation debate stated that ‘there have been murmurs’ within the Greens of going into coalition arrangement with National after the election if Labour is unable to support some of the Green policies such as the free transport for tertiary students etc! He also said that the Greens would deny this in public if asked.

            I doubt he would make such claims unless there was some truth to that.

            Neither Materia nor Norman have pulled up Sabin on this not categorically denied such talks took place within the Greens.

            So, what are you on about about ‘tribalist’ and ‘bullshit’?

            So, spit it out. What ‘tribal’ bullshit and spin are you now going to spout about those statements from/about the greens and the completely valid points I have made?

            • karol 14.1.2.1.1.1
              10 August 2014 at 6:16 pm

              If you are this wide of the mark, Clem, then “bullshit” is a very good call.

              You refer to Sabin’s very skewed version of something he heard from someone in The Greens, then spin it through your own misinterpretation.

              You are supporting right wing wedge politics, aimed at fragmenting the left. We need more cross party support than all the smears you are dishing out.

              You keep on repeating the same misinformation even after people keep pointing out how wrong you are – hands over your ears.

              Firstly, if you are going to quote someone as a source, try to get their name right – it’s BROOK Sabin. Looks like you are not paying very much attention to the source.

              The statements of Sabin’s that you keep referring to, are actually focused on how weak Labour is looking in terms of leading a government – and that the Greens must be disappointed because they need a stronger Labour if they want a Lab-green coalition.

              At about 4.35 mins into the video.

              LISA OWEN: We asked Metiria about whether she goes home and has a wee cry about how Labour is doing, she was dodging that one.

              BROOK SABIN: Yeh, and I’ve got a fascinating insight actually, the Greens – there’s murmurs- policy concessions with National. In the Greens now about, if Labour don’t get through. Looking forward to the next term and what they may be able to get through. Things like that Green Card: free public transport – off-peak public transport for tertiary students. Solar – doing some deals – get the policy concessions with National. We’re starting to see that kind of thinking in the Greens. They’ll never admit it. But that’s what they’re thinking.

              This would be in the realms of Memorandum of Understanding, and has nothing to do with contemplating forming a coalition with National.

              You seem totally unaware that the Greens (under the Leadership of Jeanette Fitzsimons and Russel Norman) signed a MoU with the Nat government in 2009. They tried to extend this after the 2011 election, but there wasn’t enough common ground between the parties.

              It’s part of the Greens approach that they will aim to work with any party on policies that they agree on.

              The 2009 MoU- insulation for homes; energy efficiency; health products.

              Green Party Press Release on it said,

              “This has been our position since before the election. Our differences ruled out a confidence and supply arrangement, but we are committed to work co-operatively with National where possible. Pragmatism and principle are both important to our voters.”

              The news reports on the failure to expand the MoU in 2012, said this:

              “It is disappointing but it is probably a reflection of what happened after the election where National has taken more of a right-wing turn.

              “I think that has made it harder to find common ground.”

              The Greens had provided National with a list of projects it believed the two parties could work together on, he said.
              […]
              “Our position was if you can find common ground and work together, you should.”

              So, Brook Sabin’s comments are just about the Greens fall back position. They have strongly stated they want to play a significant role in a Lab-Green government. Sabin’s comments are spinning about Labour being too weak to govern, and the Greens starting to look at policies they could put to the Nats as an MoU. It’s not about a coalition or confidence and supply, but about selected policies. And, for all we know, it was just some idle chatter amongst a couple of Greens.

              That is something the Greens have always been up front about doing – so nothing for Turei and Norman to deny.

              Clem, do you really want to continue supporting Sabin’s comments about a Labour Party too weak to govern?

              • Clemgeopin …
                10 August 2014 at 7:26 pm

                “Clem, do you really want to continue supporting Sabin’s comments about a Labour Party too weak to govern?”

                Labour will be a strong party with a strong leader and a strong caucus. It will be a party with very strong well thought out economic, social and environmental policies for the good of all the people for the long term good of the country. While the smaller progressive parties like the Greens are welcome, I do not want to see these smaller parties to be too arrogant or cocky or too greedy and put their boot into the coalition’s political interest by exaggerated claims and demands far and above their limited party support from the voters. If that happens, I have no doubt that the voters will punish Labour and the coalition parties in 2017. I am sure no thinking progressive voter will want such an outcome. Slow and steady is the smart way to go for everyone’s long term success.

                • karol …
                  10 August 2014 at 7:31 pm

                  ie – small parties should know their place.

                  Nevertheless, a more reasoned comment from you, Clem, and more positive sounding.

                  It’s up to the voters to decide which parties they prefer. That’s what the election is for.

                  I’m happy if there’s a strong left coalition in government, and parties that will work for a return to truly left wing policies. It’s good we have a choice.

                  • Clemgeopin …
                    10 August 2014 at 10:24 pm

                    “ie – small parties should know their place.”

                    Not at all. Sure, they can get a little more than what their party support proportion says, just a little more, but not too much over and above that. Because, that will be unfair, resented and harmful to the main party, Labour in this case, its own policies, its own standing, the aspirations of its own voters and IT’S own caucus members many of whom are senior MPs with vast experience in administration of the country for much longer than the entire lot of green list members that the Greens will bring in.

                    I was and I am still very annoyed at Materia Turei’s over the top cocky statement quoted by bad 12.

                    Labour leadership and MPs have been very tolerant, decent, courteous, controlled and silent about the anti Labour rhetoric, snide remarks, cunning tactics, telling off, put downs, damaging criticisms from the left, right and centre. I don’t have to. I am just an ordinary Labour supporter. I like to express my opinion as I see it and as best as I can, hoping that REAL sanity and FAIR dealing prevails all around.

                    The choice is everyone’s.

                    • bad12 …
                      11 August 2014 at 12:18 am

                      There is nothing over the top or cocky about Metiria’s statement aired on ‘the Nation’ Clem,

                      Metiria said that the Greens will be at the Cabinet table in numbers, you yourself postulated yesterday that you would see only 3 green Cabinet Ministers and maybe a number of Associate Ministers,(my later comment pointed at 4 Green Ministers and a number of Associate Ministers),

                      That Is Numbers Clem, there is nothing arrogant about it,

                      The Green party policy Platform, again i pointed out yesterday that the Greens in a coalition negotiation will want to go through their whole policy program with Labour, some of which both Parties will immediately agree on, some of which both Parties will somewhat agree on which can be safely left for later discussion and a few policies which might or might not be deal breakers,

                      i see nothing ‘over the top’ or ‘cocky’ about Metiria publicly pointing out how coalitions are hammered together and fail to see your point at continuing to rail against the Green Party in such a fashion…

                    • Clemgeopin …
                      11 August 2014 at 12:54 am

                      Where did you acquire the skill of polishing a turd?

                    • bad12 …
                      11 August 2014 at 1:46 am

                      Clem, not long after you started regurgitating said turds into the comments here at ‘Open Mike’…

                    • karol …
                      11 August 2014 at 7:55 am

                      Labour Green leadership and MPs have been very tolerant, decent, courteous, controlled and silent about the anti Labour Green rhetoric, snide remarks, cunning tactics, telling off, put downs, damaging criticisms from the left, right and centre.

                      FIFY.

      • Clemgeopin 14.1.3
        10 August 2014 at 11:45 am

        It is a reasonably well known fact that many soft RW Nats do support the Greens.
        Did you think that the Greens get their support only from the traditional Labour voters?
        You would be wrong there I think.

        • Once Was Tim 14.1.3.1
          10 August 2014 at 7:39 pm

          They’d be the ones who are a bit like my neighborus. Into reccycling and cleaning up rivers right up until the time it becomes the slightest inconvenience – such as having to clean up their own shit after themselves.
          Every little bit counts though eh? (as the old lady said as she spat into the Ocean)

        • karol 14.1.3.2
          11 August 2014 at 7:56 am

          QED.

    • ropata 14.2
      10 August 2014 at 11:29 am

      trust the good villagers of epsom to vote for entrenching their wealth and privilege at the expense of true democracy

    • Pasupial 14.3
      10 August 2014 at 11:31 am

      Clemgeopin

      Interesting numbers, fortunately Epsom voters won’t be getting that hint immediately before they cast their actual ballot. WTF is up with Epsom GP & LP voters though – your candidates have no hope of winning; persisting in voting for them would only ensure an ACT victory!

      • Clemgeopin 14.3.1
        10 August 2014 at 11:36 am

        Yes, I agree, but early days yet. Key can let the cat among the pigeons by withdrawing Goldsmith out of the race altogether. He has till the 26th (or so) to do that! Will he or won’t he is the question!

        • ScottGN 14.3.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 8:24 pm

          Michelle Boag was certainly of the opinion that National should withdraw Goldsmith and I think that and her rather agitated performance on Q & A today is a further sign that National thinks this election is on a knife edge.

          • Clemgeopin 14.3.1.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 9:15 pm

            Yes, if Goldsmith does a premature withdrawal, lots of NATS vote may shift to Rankin rather than ACT, in which case the Nats vote may be divided between ACT and Rankin and some scattered to Labour and the Greens candidates. The strategic voting for Labour and Green voters will then become tricky and will depend upon what the local polls are saying around the first and second week of Sept, I think.

      • Tangled_up 14.3.2
        10 August 2014 at 2:12 pm

        Add the Labour (Woold) + Green (Genter) 19% to the National (Goldsmith) 31% and ACT loses.

        There will be some other close electorate contests which National beat Labour but wouldn’t if Green voters tactically voted for the Labour candidate.

      • Blue 14.3.3
        10 August 2014 at 2:28 pm

        WTF is up with Epsom GP & LP voters

        Quite. According to this, only 28% of Labour voters in Epsom are voting tactically, while 56% of Green supporters are.

        Labour voters in Epsom seem to be asleep at the wheel. When told that National wants people to vote David Seymour, the National voters switch their votes, with Goldsmith losing 13% and Seymour gaining them.

        But the Labour voters? They either don’t change their vote or give it to the Green candidate Julie Ann Genter, who rises by 1%. WTF difference do they think this is going to make?

        • Clemgeopin 14.3.3.1
          10 August 2014 at 7:39 pm

          Not sure how you came to that mathematical conclusion? Can you explain how you did that calculation?

          • Blue 14.3.3.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 9:36 pm

            My analysis is oversimplified and it’s impossible to tell what’s really happening without all the data. But that’s generally what it looks like.

            When told that National want people to vote for Seymour, Goldsmith’s vote drops 13, Seymour’s rises 13. That looks like a straight transfer – National voters switching their votes from Goldsmith to Seymour in accordance with Key’s instructions.

            Meanwhile, Labour’s Wood drops 1% and Julie Ann Genter from the Greens picks up 1%. But the don’t knows go from 8% to 13%, so it’s hard to tell what is actually going on.

        • blue leopard 14.3.3.2
          10 August 2014 at 7:48 pm

          lol I noticed that too – the Green vote is higher the second time the question is asked. Just realised what it probably is: Nat voters who can’t bare the thought of voting for Act have chosen Green instead – such behaviour provides the same outcome, because it takes a vote away from the most likely contender to win after Act, with out having to vote for Act.

          • Clemgeopin 14.3.3.2.1
            10 August 2014 at 9:21 pm

            Where did the numbers, 28% and 56% come from in the calculation?

            The vote only had 1% shift between 1st and 2nd poll between Labour and greens.

            That can’t translate to 28% and 56% strategic voting as claimed, as far as I can see.

            • blue leopard 14.3.3.2.1.1
              10 August 2014 at 9:43 pm

              I don’t know either – I assume Blue was making a comparison between the shift in voting and the party vote – but can’t be arsed working out if that is where they are derived from – it was the shift in the Green vote that I had noticed.

            • Blue 14.3.3.2.1.2
              10 August 2014 at 9:45 pm

              The party vote numbers show 14% support for Labour and 16% for the Greens.

              The first round of candidate votes (before being told Key wants Seymour to win) show Labour’s Wood on 10% and Julie Ann Genter on 9%. I’m assuming that people usually give their candidate vote to the candidate from their party.

              If the poll had 100 voters, that means 14 Labour people and 4 would vote for a candidate other than Wood. That’s a percentage of 28.57.

              Similarly, there are 16 Green people, and 7 of them would vote for a candidate other than Genter. I have made an error here – the percentage for that is 43.75.

              So more Green voters acting tactically and (hopefully) voting for Goldsmith.

              • Clemgeopin …
                10 August 2014 at 10:49 pm

                Ok, Thanks. I get your maths. Makes sense. Very good! Your conclusion may be correct. (though it just shows that the diminished votes (between party vote Vs candidate vote) went elsewhere, not necessarily to Goldsmith. Any other assumption is just that)

                However, these are early days and the voters haven’t yet made their firm decisions. I think a similar poll done about a week or so before the election will be more revealing.

      • ScottGN 14.3.4
        10 August 2014 at 8:38 pm

        Pasupial, I understand that it’s frustrating that Labour and Green voters won’t do what’s tactically and strategically the best option, I wish they would too. But you know what, I like even more that it seems there are around 30% of voters in Epsom who believe enough in Labour and the Greens to get out and vote for them on Election Day and in all honesty who can deny them the pleasure of ticking that box.

        • Blue 14.3.4.1
          10 August 2014 at 9:21 pm

          I can. This is too important to let go. If Act lose Epsom they are out of Parliament and they will likely implode, destroying the party completely. National will be without an important support partner and they can no longer blame Act for their choice to sneak in uncampaigned-for policy (e.g. charter schools).

          If Labour and the Greens win the election (which is balanced on a knife edge and the seat of Epsom could be the difference between winning and losing) then we can get rid of coat-tailing altogether. That means Epsom can go back to being a normal electorate.

          There’s too much at stake to have Labour and Green supporters blow this by voting for their own candidate. They need to vote for Goldsmith.

        • Clemgeopin 14.3.4.2
          10 August 2014 at 10:55 pm

          I found the NAT and CONS candidates quite irritating. Am I prejudiced?

      • weka 14.3.5
        10 August 2014 at 9:46 pm

        “WTF is up with Epsom GP & LP voters though – your candidates have no hope of winning; persisting in voting for them would only ensure an ACT victory!”

        Some people don’t understand how MMP works. Others do but are unaware of the current issue. Others still will not vote on the right no matter what. Some people don’t believe in tactical voting. If the GP and/or Labour wanted their voters to vote National, they would have not stood a candidate in the electorate. Lots of people are probably confused too.

        • karol 14.3.5.1
          10 August 2014 at 10:08 pm

          Parties stand candidates in the election because it helps get party votes. Every party vote counts, and they are too important.

          The Greens always say they are campaigning for the party vote.

          • Clemgeopin 14.3.5.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 11:05 pm

            “The Greens always say they are campaigning for the party vote”

            The party vote is CRUCIAL for EVERY party. Not just for the Greens.

            It is even MORE crucial for LABOUR because they have strong National candidates fighting for their electorate seats against Labour candidates. The potential Labour PARTY votes get scattered among so many of the smaller parties on the left.

            • Clemgeopin 14.3.5.1.1.1
              11 August 2014 at 12:30 am

              So, Labour voters should really give BOTH their votes to Labour.

            • karol 14.3.5.1.1.2
              11 August 2014 at 8:07 am

              But in all but one or two electorates, the electorate vote doesn’t decide the number of MPs a party gets.

              For a small or medium sized party, it’s a better use of their resources to focus on the party vote.

              Clem, you really are showing a sense of entitlement by Labour to left wing votes. And you are the one that’s been using the “arrogant” word against others.

              It’s up to voters to decide who and what party to vote for. A left party needs to earn the left wing votes.

              No party can rest on its laurels. I was once a Labour voter. I will be more likely to vote Labour again if the return to strong left wing values. Right now, I see a couple of other parties having stronger left values, policies and processes. Cunliffe has made some very promising noises, but he has yet to show he will be able to follow through if in government. It will require strong left wing coalition parties to hold them to account.

              Labour wasn’t always the main left wing party in NZ. They achieved that position by taking a strong left wing position. They lost ground when they moved away from that.

              I don’t really care which party leads left wing politics. I will vote for which ever one does.

              You seem stuck in a FPtP mode.

    • mikesh 14.4
      10 August 2014 at 12:29 pm

      Despite JK’s efforts it seems 2/3 of National’s supporters would still vote for Goldsmith.

    • alwyn 14.5
      10 August 2014 at 3:45 pm

      I am amazed that the Labour Party candidate does as well as this poll says.
      After all even interested left-leaning commenters on this blog don’t seem to know who he is.
      As a question for Clemgeopin and Tangled_up at 14.3.2 can you pleas tell me who this person Michael Woold you are talking about is? I thought the Labour candidate was named Michael Wood.

      • lprent 14.5.1
        10 August 2014 at 4:46 pm

        I am amazed that the Labour Party candidate does as well as this poll says.

        What do you mean? I know Michael Wood well.

        I believe that your problem is that you probably aren’t particularly close to the Epsom electorate. Michael is. He has been campaigning across the border from Epsom in Mt Roskill. Just as I have been while campaigning across the border in Mt Albert. It may be hard to understand, but neighbours who know the electorate especially the poorer parts will do well.

        Given that the other parties have put complete nutty fuckwits up as candidates – Seymour, Rankin, and even Goldsmith (let me bend over to help..), I’m not surprised Michael is doing pretty well. Given that he knows the area from the local politics side, he will make sense.

        • Herodotus 14.5.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 7:34 pm

          This is the same Michael Wood who was presented as Labours candidate in the botany election?
          If so he did well in leading a crap performance from labour in their display of contempt towards an electorate. He almost was a sole effort. I hope after botany now epsom Michael will be better treated by the labour hierarchy in future… But no, at 39 after standing for pakuranga,botany and now epson, talk about be dealt a bad hand and being under appreciated!!! Sometimes people deserve better and this is how labour looks after their own mmmmm

        • alwyn 14.5.1.2
          11 August 2014 at 11:11 am

          You may know Michael Wood very well, and he may in fact be a reasonable candidate.
          The other people who are commenting obviously don’t though as they don’t even know what his name is. As I have said in the last two sentences, they seem to think his name is WOOLD, not WOOD. Did you get that far in what I wrote?

    • weka 14.6
      10 August 2014 at 7:13 pm

      “Colmar Brunton Epsom poll results: [On Q and A this morning]”

      “Who would you vote for with your electorate vote?…

      Were you aware John key is encouraging National Party supporters to give their electorate vote to the Act Party candidate?…

      With this in mind, who would you now vote for with your electorate vote?”

      How lovely of TVNZ to run a National Party voting tutorial for people who live in Epsom.

  15. Papa Tuanuku 15
    10 August 2014 at 11:40 am

    All you need to know about the Maori seats: Tai Hauauru.

    So you’re on the Maori Roll? We’ll presume u R voting 4 a party that supports the Maori seats (this cuts out Act, National, NZ First).

    Party vote

    Your most powerful vote is your party vote. If you love the current govt, give your party vote to the Maori Party (John Key supports this 2).

    To change the govt, give your Party vote to Labour, Green, or Internet Mana. You decide who has the korero that support your goals, and who’s more principled/organised.

    Electorate vote

    The electorate vote is important too. Tai Hauauru has some hard case things going on there:

    Mana – do they have anyone’s name up yet? By now they should have a name up, out of respect for voters, and to show that they are organized.

    Maori Party – like most Maori people in most parties, Chris is probably a nice guy. But his position says a lot about where te ao Maori is right now. Maori are getting poorer under the govt, under the system, but hey its fine, as ‘Maori are at the table’. There’s a disconnect here – people with skills r standing 4 a party that’s in cahoots with people doing [insert word to describe what National is doing here] things. There must b a psychological term for this level of disconnect.

    Who on the hikoi in 2004 could imagine than four years later Tariana would be standing beside a bunch of greedy, dishonest mongrels?

    Labour – crack up, this guy used to be the chairman for Tariana. This is the story of the Maori Party though. 90% of their door knockers from 2004 are now door knocking for someone else. Adrian is also a nice fulla with nice skills. His main point made so far: ‘we’re not the same Labour Party that stole the foreshores’ doesn’t really inspire.

    Green – nice young rangatahi, again, the Green problem is they don’t have the relationship in the Maori seats that others have. Noone thinks ‘oh the greens have a chance of winning Maori seats.’ This doesn’t mean that Jack isn’t on to it though.

    Where should the vote go?

    If you want the current govt to continue, vote 4 Chris. If you want to change the govt, vote for Jack or Adrian, but like the other seats, you probably won’t feel inspired.

    BUT you can inspire yourself in the knowledge that your party vote will swing this election. When the election will be won by a 1 or 2 percent of the vote, then guess what? The Maori seats hold the balance of power! Get excited about that please.

    Post script: we’re annoyed with commentators that fail to make the connection between a Maori Party vote and the way that Maori communities have been hurt over the last 6 years. Our hunch is the commentators are doing OK thanks, winning the Whanau Ora contracts and setting up charter schools. The politics of the 1%.

    • ropata 15.1
      10 August 2014 at 9:06 pm

      +100
      “Who on the hikoi in 2004 could imagine than four years later Tariana would be standing beside a bunch of greedy, dishonest mongrels?”

      Yeah, that’s freakin unbelievable bro.

      • Clemgeopin 15.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 11:20 pm

        Shame on the Maori party for having propped up a right wing Government dominated by NATIONAL, ACT and DUNNE of all people! What a complete disgrace to score some baubles and bull shit.

        Kia Mattara!

        Kia mataara me te inoi, kei uru ki te whakamatautauranga. He hihiko te wairua, ko te kikokiko ia he ngoikore.

        • ropata 15.1.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 11:52 pm

          Asset sales should have been the deal breaker… but I guess the $$$ were too good to pass up

          • Clemgeopin 15.1.1.1.1
            11 August 2014 at 12:34 am

            you ARE correct. The Maori party and that cheap fool Dunne should have walked out against the asset sales issue, against the Charter school rort and the GCSB issue.

  16. Draco T Bastard 16
    10 August 2014 at 2:26 pm

    Fishing for votes with David Cunliffe

    We paddle back ashore and as I leave, the one that got away is mentioned again. The former fisheries-spokesman-in-punishment asks how a 25cm snapper fished from a commercial boat is fine to sell, but a 28cm snapper off a recreational boat can’t be eaten. He mentions National heavyweight Peter Goodfellow’s links to the fishing industry. Cunliffe the Outdoorsman weighs his verdict: “It’s not fair”.

    How can someone who was fisheries spokesperson not know that net fishing is going to get some smaller catch and that there’s nothing that you can do about it? Yes, you can make nets that allow smaller fish through but some will always get caught up with the rest of the fish. Once it’s caught and dead there’s only two choices – sell it or throw it away.

    Thankfully, there’s been some government funded research going on that will help prevent smaller by catch while also making the fishing better.

    Oh, and my families boats already require the fish caught to be 30cm. Some people remember that 50 years ago fishing brought in more and bigger catches than today and think that the government should be doing more to protect our fisheries both for the ‘recreational’ fishers and for commercial.

  17. Local Kiwi 17
    10 August 2014 at 3:21 pm

    Epson poll??

    Coleman Brunton is always a rigged right wing phoney rigged poll.

    Especially now the NATZis have storm trooper Joyce/Geobbels who is running the Propaganda show there.

    He is a liability on screen so he has the job of rigging polls now beginning with Epsom,

    Then next Colman Bruton Political poll wait and see.

    Since he looked so stupid on camera against David Parker he’s now behind the scenes pulling phoney polls to prop up the Fuehrer.

  18. Penny Bright 18
    10 August 2014 at 6:21 pm

    FYI – apologies for the length of this post, but think there will be quite some public interest ….

    Penny Bright – Independent candidate for the Helensville electorate will now be attending the Helensville candidates meeting to be held at the Kumeu Baptist Church Monday 11 August 2014

    REPLY RECEIVED 3.35pm SUNDAY 10 AUGUST 2014

    Holly Ryan via yahoo.com 3:35 PM (2 hours ago)

    to me

    Penny,

    As Kumeu Baptist Church prefers to avoid being embroiled in media or Court disputes, you may attend as a candidate tomorrow evening.

    As sole organizer, I personally would stand against your bullying tactics and stick to my original and, until now, unaltered plan for the event.

    You will need to seek me out when you arrive tomorrow evening. As all publicity material has been completed, nothing other than your attendance can be changed.

    Holly Ryan

    FYI – I sent this email first to Holly Ryan and to Samuel Schuurman, and rang both to try and ensure that they had received this email before sending it out widely to media and politicians at local and central government.

    From the beginning – I have tried to deal with my (unlawful) exclusion from this one and only Helensville candidates meeting in a proper way, and have the ‘paper trail’ to prove this – in the hopefully unlikely event that it ends up in the Auckland High Court tomorrow, in the form of an application for an injunction ……

    I look forward to my rights as an Independent candidate for Helensville being respected, and being able to address members of the voting public, on the same basis as candidates representing political parties, which thus respects the right of the voting public public to ‘cast an informed vote’.

    Please remember that I have stood as an Independent candidate at both local and national government levels on a number of occasions, and know how to conduct myself at public electoral meetings.

    Cheers!

    Penny Bright

    10 August 2014

    ‘Open Letter’ to the Organiser of the Helensville candidates meeting Holly Ryan and Senior Pastor of the Kumeu Baptist Church, Samuel Schuurman:

    Dear Holly Ryan and Senior Pastor Samuel Schuurman of the Kumeu Baptist Church

    Please be advised that I am now in possession of a recorded telephone conversation taken Wednesday 6 August 2014 at 12.15pm between Holly Ryan and an unidentified woman, regarding candidates who had been invited to speak at the upcoming Helensville meeting, and the reasons given for excluding myself, Penny Bright, as an Independent candidate.

    (I was advised of this recording on Friday 8 August 2014, and received a copy on Saturday 9 August 2014. I had no prior knowledge of this recording beforehand.)

    In this recording Holly Ryan states that I, Penny Bright am ‘a major activist’ and ‘will cause trouble one way or the other’, and it is clear that political bias against me, because of my political activist background that is the real reason for my exclusion from this meeting.

    However, this was NOT the reason given by Holly Ryan, one day later, in response to my complaint to the Human Rights Commission about my exclusion from the Helensville candidates meeting being unlawful discrimination on the grounds of political opinion:

    From: Lesley Ashworth-Lawson
    Date: 7 August 2014 4:43:03 pm NZST
    To: “‘waterpressure@gmail.com'”

    Hello Penny

    As per your request I confirm that you approached the Human Rights Commission complaining that you felt you had been discriminated against by Holly Ryan, organisor of a meeting of political party candidates.

    You felt that in not being included in that meeting, you were being discriminated against on the basis of your political opinion.

    Within the context of the Commission’s confidential dispute resolution process, I rang Holly to notify her of your complaint and to obtain a response to your complaint, in particular to request the basis on which you had not been included in the meeting.

    Holly told me that she had wanted to arrange a meeting so that people could hear from candidates affiliated to parties who she considered had a possibility of gaining a seat in Parliament, from whom she considered the public may wish to hear.

    She has organised the meeting on her own initiative.

    Holly agreed for me to relay this information to you, as part of our process of assisting to resolve complaints.

    She did wish to enter into mediation.

    Kind regards,

    Lesley Ashworth-Lawson
    Mediator/Kaihohourongo
    Human Rights Commission| Te Kahui Tika Tangata
    T: +473 9981 Ext 720 | F: +64 4 471 6759
    Toll free 0800 496 877
    PO Box 12411, Thorndon, Wellington 6144
    Level 1 – 44 The Terrace, Wellington 6011
    New Zealand | http://www.hrc.co.nz

    Please be reminded of s.11 of the Constitution of the Kumeu Baptist Church:

    http://www.kumeubaptist.org.nz/assets/downloads/Baptist-Constitution.doc

    1. Baptist Churches of New Zealand

    It should be noted that churches are subject to Acts of Parliament such as the Race Relations Act, Employment Relations Act, Privacy Act and Human Rights Act.

    THE BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990:

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM225516.html

    Non-discrimination and minority rights

    19Freedom from discrimination

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM225519.html

    HUMAN RIGHTS AMENDMENT ACT 2001:
    Prohibited grounds of discrimination

    Heading: inserted, on 1 January 2002, by section 7 of the Human Rights Amendment Act 2001 (2001 No 96).

    21Prohibited grounds of discrimination

    (1)For the purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are—

    (j)political opinion, which includes the lack of a particular political opinion or any political opinion:

    Please be advised that I have had discussions this morning with Graham McCready from the NZ Private Prosecution Service about this matter.

    Graham McCready will assist me with the preparation of a High Court injunction to prevent the use of the Kumeu Baptist Church being used for this Helensville candidates meeting, if I Penny Bright, as an Independent candidate, am not given an equal opportunity to speak, as are other candidates standing for the above-mentioned political parties.

    A full transcript of this above-mentioned telephone conversation will be made available, if required, for both the High Court and the media.

    (FYI – I worked very closely with Graham McCready in the successful prosecution of former ACT Leader and MP for Epsom John Banks, for electoral fraud.

    In fact – I was the ‘process server’ who hand-delivered the witness summonses that resulted in Kim Dotcom, his lawyer (Greg Towers), former bodyguard (Wayne Tempero) and the CEO of Sky City Casino (Nigel Morrison) appearing in the Auckland District Court to give pre-trial oral evidence.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/adam-bennett/news/article.cfm?a_id=263&objectid=11268946

    Watchdogs claim biggest scalp as Banks found guilty

    11:45 AM Friday Jun 6, 2014

    Self-styled public watchdogs Penny Bright and Graham McCready claimed their biggest scalp yesterday as Act MP John Banks was found guilty of filing a false electoral return.

    But police reluctance to pursue the affair has fuelled calls by Ms Bright and David Bain’s champion Joe Karam for an independent commission against corruption.

    I sincerely hope that this will NOT be necessary, and the basic principles of natural justice, democracy, the ‘rule of law’ and commonsense will prevail, particularly given that this meeting, as I understand it, will the only one which Prime Minister John Key will be attending, and will continue to be the focus of significant election publicity.

    Please be reminded that this was the original notice advertising this Helensville candidates meeting:

    eventsworkshopsforums/10351-helensville-electorate–te-tai-tokerau-cross-party-candidates-meeting

    HELENSVILLE ELECTORATE / TE TAI TOKERAU CROSS PARTY CANDIDATES MEETING
    MONDAY 11TH AUGUST at KUMEU BAPTIST CHURCH, Access Rd, Kumeu

    8 political parties – National, Labour, Greens, Maori, Act, NZ First, Conservative, Internet Mana are invited to be represented by their candidates and up to 2 other party policy speakers.

    Parties will have opportunity to set up stands in the church hall, with public welcome to attend from 6pm to chat casually.

    The main meeting will commence in the church at 7pm. Seating for 230, with sound system. Each candidate will have 5 minutes to present themselves, followed by written questions from the public, drawn for order. At 9pm the meeting will end, with opportunity for everyone to return to the hall for informal discussion and refreshments.

    The meeting will be tightly managed, with any interjectors removed after one warning.
    Questions may be answered by the party policy supporters, seated behind the candidates.

    RSVP to Holly Ryan, Convenor
    …………………….

    Please be further advised that there is significant and growing media and public interest in this matter.

    I look forward to your confirmation by email, by 5pm today, Sunday 10 August 2014, that I have the same opportunity to address the public at this Helensville candidates meeting, as the other above-mentioned candidates.

    Yours sincerely,

    Penny Bright
    ‘Anti-corruption /anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’

    2014 Independent Candidate for Helensville

    2013 Independent Auckland Mayoral Candidate (polled 4th 11,723 votes)

    2009 Attendee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference

    2010 Attendee: Transparency International Anti-Corruption Conference

    2013 Attendee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference

    2014 Attendee: G20 Anti-Corruption Conference

    • ropata 18.1
      11 August 2014 at 12:12 am

      I sympathise with Holly Ryan, you have engaged in bullying tactics. Just like a blog, freedom of speech doesn’t give you the right to gatecrash someone’s party and hector their guests.

    • Clemgeopin 18.2
      11 August 2014 at 1:05 am

      I am glad that you have been invited, being a candidate in that electorate. It is a shame that democracy is not served fairly or well in our country!

  19. ropata 19
    10 August 2014 at 7:44 pm

    i am just relieved that phil isnt detailing his personal habits. now that would truly be gross

    • ropata 19.1
      10 August 2014 at 8:20 pm

      aarrgh stupid nokia phone, can’t reply properly to the thread …

      • weka 19.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 9:50 pm

        Actually it the the standard’s mobile version that prevents replying to specific comments in-thread. You can switch the the desktop version on your phone and the reply buttons are there. Bit tedious though.

        • lprent 19.1.1.1
          10 August 2014 at 11:43 pm

          It is a pain. I have tried to get that problem fixed several times. Each time not quite succeeded before running out of time. The upgrades on that particular theme are pretty fast and quite extensive. So I usually have to restart each time.

          • ropata 19.1.1.1.1
            10 August 2014 at 11:56 pm

            Thanks. Minor bug, low impact, won’t chuck my phone out the window this time 🙂

          • weka 19.1.1.1.2
            11 August 2014 at 12:02 am

            the loss of name and email in the text boxes is probably more of a pain 😉

            • lprent 19.1.1.1.2.1
              11 August 2014 at 12:07 am

              Yeah I know. I got caught with some SQL that I had to get done (and still have bugs in). Lyn has a bug as well which has been minimising my work time with hacking coughs and obsessive TV watching.

              • weka …
                11 August 2014 at 12:10 am

                You always sound like you are working too hard anyway, so there’s no hurry. It’s interesting that it’s taking me so long to remember to check the boxes each time. What tv are you obsessively watching?

  20. Leroy 20
    10 August 2014 at 8:14 pm

    As a political scientist, what a terrible bit of research by Colmar Brunton and then for TVNZ to publish it. So, they do one poll on electoral vote (which shows National candidate leading) and then remind/discuss voters John Key’s request for National supporters to vote for Act candidate and guess what? The poll results are very different (Act is now leading) – well of course! That’s not a poll…that’s a way to influence the outcome. Dumb, dumb, dumb!!!!!

    • blue leopard 20.1
      10 August 2014 at 8:19 pm

      I would have called it ‘corrupt’ or ‘bought’ rather than dumb – unless you mean it was dumb of them to come out and admit that is what they have been up to….

      • weka 20.1.1
        10 August 2014 at 8:58 pm

        It’s the Key effect. Do what you want and with a smile and pretend that it’s normal and no-one will bat an eyelid.

  21. karol 21
    10 August 2014 at 9:15 pm

    Intriguing tweet from Bryce Edwards – Nicky Hager launching a book on Wednesday – title unknown? Edwards wonders if it’s on surveillance:

    I’m looking forward to going to launch of new Nicky Hager book (on surveillance?) at Unity Books Wgtn, Weds 5pm: pic.twitter.com/tGjD4Y8oxa

    I searched and couldn’t find any Hager book in the pipeline – only this compilation with a chapter by Hager:

    Saturday, August 30, 6pm, the Garden Room, Grey Lynn Community Centre, 510 Richmond Rd
    Book Launch Invitation: Beyond the Free Market: Rebuilding a Just Society in New Zealand. Contributors include Nicky Hager, Sue Bradford, Peter Conway, Tim Hazledine, Mike Joy, Kevin Hague, Helen Kelly, John Minto, Bill Rosenberg, The Rt Hon Sir Edmund Thomas, Manuka Henare, Jane Kelsey, John O’Neill – what a wonderful cast! Edited by David Cooke, Claire Hill, Pat Baskett and Ruth Irwin; supported by funding from the Council for Trade Unions and the Tertiary Education Union; published by Dunmore http://www.dunmore.co.nz

  22. Local kiwi 22
    11 August 2014 at 8:54 am

    Anne,

    “RNZ’s Monday morning political spot starting around 1110am will be well worth a listen.
    A word of warning: batten down your cerebral hatches because Matthew Hooton will be spinning like a Force 10 hurricane”

    Thanks for the tip, will watch. and record on my VCR that GCSB Key cant download or spy on.

    I am an electronic engineer, and have discovered why they took us all rapidly off analogue and into the digital era,.

    This was the only way we can be spied on with mass surveillance.

    So now I keep taping video and audio only into the old magnetic tapes and store in a library outside a commuter on line source.

    Five eyes Key & co go f….ck off.

    • Gosman 22.1
      11 August 2014 at 9:12 am

      Do you wear a tinfoil hat as well?

      • RedLogix 22.1.1
        11 August 2014 at 9:54 am

        I started my career in electronics too (these days I work in a closely related field) – and Local kiwi is perfectly correct.

        Analogue could be always be snooped on – but mass surveillance was impossibly slow and cumbersome to implement.

        By contrast digital communications is an open book.

        No tinfoil hats needed Gosman.