Open mike 11/05/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, May 11th, 2023 - 98 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

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

Step up to the mike …

98 comments on “Open mike 11/05/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. bwaghorn 1
    11 May 2023 at 6:30 am

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/132001093/wealthy-new-zealanders-say-they-want-to-pay-more-tax

    Imagine a world where the wealthy were proud of how much tax the contributed, not of how much they avoided

    • SPC 1.1
      11 May 2023 at 8:13 am

      Note the personal attack on them by David Seymour for betraying their class.

      Anyone who did not realise that Seynour and NACT are engaged in class war against those who do not have wealth/own property should be awakening from their sleep.

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/kushlan-sugathapala-questioning-our-extremely-unfair-tax-system-is-not-being-envious/CIOF3JGJBBALPO2YCWZND6I3PE/

      Can anyone provide a link without paywall?

      • Shanreagh 1.1.2
        11 May 2023 at 9:22 am

        And David Seymour has really let this one 'zoooom' straight over. I can see why Seymour has framed it this way though as ACT likes its govt small.

        My reading is that they wanted the tax arrangements to be such that they were taxed properly and so the funds went into the funds of Govt to add to the funds used by Govt for public services. Nothing to do with philanthropy etc.

        • tWiggle 1.1.3.1
          11 May 2023 at 10:00 am

          Dear Joe90, please would you consider using the alternative title option when posting links without a descriptor in the web address? I like to know what I'm jumping to. That link was worth a read when I got there, though.

          Once again, Labour shows it's poor on sound-bite messaging. You can present a rational argument in the background for those who read, but to drag the electorate your way you need two or three snappy slogans. Ram-raids, uppity Maoris and over-regulation are the only drums Luxon's banging.

          From the article in the link, attack the richy-richy may not be the best strategy, I'm thinking. Attack no-tax/lo-tax company structures is a larger target, and would hoover up rich tax evaders as well. Now for the killer sound-bite.

        • miravox 1.1.3.2
          11 May 2023 at 10:54 am

          I wonder what a tax trade-off of GST on food for a tax on capital gains will do?
          (a la the Key & English – income tax & GST trade-off)

          • Craig H 1.1.3.2.1
            11 May 2023 at 12:50 pm

            Based on the Key/English efforts, no guarantee that it will actually deliver the tax switch being advertised. In this particular case, the concern would be that retailers (like supermarkets) wouldn't pass on all of the savings.

      • weka 1.1.4
        11 May 2023 at 9:47 am

        Archive version from 10/5/23 https://archive.is/0pfz9

      • Mike the Lefty 1.1.5
        11 May 2023 at 11:49 am

        ACT represents those who have an overwhelming sense of entitlement.

        The entitlement comes from the historical association of wealth and power.

        Wealth means success, and success entitles them to have power.

        The only things ACT supporters care about is the size of their bank accounts and nothing, but nothing, should get in the way of any exponential growth of these.

        If ACT gets its way, the rich will be a whole heap richer and those at the bottom will be left to fight over the few crumbs that trickle down.

        It is a disgusting irony that Federated Farmers Andrew Hoggard is standing for a party whose policies are almost identical to those of the the great Rogernome in the 1980s, and were responsible for so many suicides in the rural sector.

        So much for caring about farmers!

      • bwaghorn 1.1.6
        11 May 2023 at 12:11 pm

        Yip act/seymour belive in no taxs or benifits, wealth sharing should only be done by the wealthy choosing to donate.

    • Sanctuary 1.2
      11 May 2023 at 8:19 am

      Well, hiow about donating to Labour and Greens the difference?

      • alwyn 1.2.1
        11 May 2023 at 10:01 am

        And what would Labour use the money for? They already use the taxpayer funds to pat for their campaign advertising. I received, with yesterdays mail, a leaflet from the PM saying how wonderful Labour is. In the smallest possible font the House of Representatives Crest was present to show that the taxpayer and not the Party was paying for it. I imagine it has probably been sent to every household in the country.

        Why should the taxpayer have to pay for something that is purely a political ad?

        • arkie 1.2.1.1
          11 May 2023 at 10:22 am

          parties are funded by a combination of state funds (aka taxpayer money) and private donations.

          …

          State funding is all the money political parties are allocated by the government (shout out to the taxpayer). Some state funding is through the Budget. Political parties are given sizable sums each year so that they can afford to employ people and keep thinking up new policies and ways to fix our problems.

          Other state funding comes through the Electoral Commission. This is the independent crown entity that manages everything to do with elections (their mascot is the weird orange guy). They put aside a lump of cash that each party can only spend on media advertising. The parties don’t actually get this money in the hand, it’s kind of like a media voucher.

          https://www.renews.co.nz/i-dont-know-anything-about-politics-where-do-parties-get-all-their-money-from/

          Meanwhile:

          The National Party may start election year with a $2.3 million war chest raised from 24 big donors in 2022, while Labour has declared just $150,000 in large donations, according to Electoral Commission records.

          https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/national-raises-unprecedented-23m-war-chest-from-richlist-donors-before-election-year/77GGZL32JRDMRNAEFJ7B4TGAUI/

          • Sanctuary 1.2.1.1.1
            11 May 2023 at 10:45 am

            I've already said how I think parties ought to be funded. No more than a small amount once annually from members, and every election voters at the polling station get given two vouchers with, say, $10 or $20 value. They then simply deposit one into the party donation box of their choice and they get to keep the other as a thank you for voting.

            I would also make election day a mid-week public holiday, unpaid if you don't vote and paid if you do. That way, if you don't bother to vote on the day off and you earn, say, $35 an hour, it is the equivalent of a $280 dollar fine.

            • alwyn 1.2.1.1.1.1
              11 May 2023 at 2:22 pm

              It is an interesting idea and I can see the first part of it working. As far as the payment for voting goes though it would seem to impose a massive penalty on those people who aren't eligible to vote.

              “Sorry fella. You are here on a visa that allows you to work but not vote so you have to take a day off without pay.”

              • Stuart Munro …
                11 May 2023 at 8:27 pm

                Meh – NZ is uniquely round-heeled when it comes to pissing away our citizens' franchise – they only need to be here for six months and they get to vote anyway. Something to do with the major parties, knowing they have alienated voters, looking for new marks potential supporters among those who have yet to experience their inadequacy.

          • Mike the Lefty 1.2.1.1.2
            11 May 2023 at 6:44 pm

            War chest is an appropriate description for a party that loves dreaming up imaginary wars.

        • Peter 1.2.1.2
          11 May 2023 at 11:03 am

          Indeed why should the taxpayer pay for political ads?

          My National MP who spend thousands over a couple of years, who was backed by the twisted logic and benign rulings of the system I dealt with in Wellington, in the end got to the insurmountable argument: “It’s legal.”

          The bastard lost in the election. All the money he spent, our money, would’ve been well used by our local schools.

          • UncookedSelachimorpha 1.2.1.2.1
            11 May 2023 at 11:20 am

            Indeed why should the taxpayer pay for political ads?

            To avoid having only the ads that are paid for by the rich. Think of it as having the taxpayer paying for democracy.

            • Stuart Munro 1.2.1.2.1.1
              11 May 2023 at 5:46 pm

              So a better regulation might cap political advertising spends – then we could mostly ignore the wretched self-aggrandizing numpties.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 1.3
      11 May 2023 at 11:18 am

      Some say that, while others donate heavily to ACT and similar, to avoid doing any such thing….

    • Chess Player 1.4
      11 May 2023 at 8:10 pm

      Imagine a world where politicians did what they promised, not whatever was necessary to get re-elected

  2. Mac1 2
    11 May 2023 at 9:51 am

    "Jealousy", "envy", "resentment". The words used by Nicola Willis to describe a capital gains tax she says is being secretly prepared.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nationals-nicola-willis-claims-labour-cooking-up-a-secret-capital-gains-tax-plan-from-labour

    When I see these kinds of words being used, I see them as a form of self-reflection.

    Is Willis resentful, jealous and envious of Labour being in government?

    She wants the power.

    That is why we get from National already the fear and envy tactics, the hyperbole and the cherry-picking of facts, the partial quotes, the accusations of secrecy and improper motivation.

    • Bearded Git 2.1
      11 May 2023 at 10:29 am

      can you cut and paste a couple of paras mac? I wont pay for the Herald.

      • Mac1 2.1.1
        11 May 2023 at 12:01 pm

        No paywall there on that article, BG. Go get it for free.

        • Bearded Git 2.1.1.1
          11 May 2023 at 4:14 pm

          Thanks….when I hit your link it blocked me…but when I searched for the article at the NZH site it was fine, as you said.

          She is talking bollocks anyway.

    • Hunter Thompson II 2.2
      11 May 2023 at 10:49 am

      As political journalist the late John Armstrong said:

      “Never forget that politics boils down to power – winning it and, just as importantly, retaining it.

      “The fascination comes in watching how politicians play the game.”

      All politicians want to get their hands on the levers of power. Some want unbridled power. That's why the ordinary citizen must be vigilant.

      • Patricia Bremner 2.2.1
        11 May 2023 at 12:12 pm

        That "late John Armstrong" was a lying user of a poisonous pen. He used his power to repeat untrue stories, especially one about a non-existent gift. He played a dirty power game for National.angry

      • Mac1 2.2.2
        11 May 2023 at 12:39 pm

        The factors that are most important are why and how they use power and for whom.

    • Anne 2.3
      11 May 2023 at 11:02 am

      Jealousy, envy, resentment. "… the accusations of secrecy and improper motivation"

      At a personal level it can extend to stalking the individual, breaking into the individual's home, reporting the individual to the authorities for misdemeanors never committed and setting the person up by way of covert hoaxes. In the more serious cases it can also iclude violence to pets and damage to property.

      Yep. It happened to me 30 plus years ago. All of it.

      But because the perpetrator had links to high places including a high ranked sibling, she was shielded by the 'establishment' and never brought to justice.

      Translate that story into politics and you have the same kind of behaviour occurring by National and ACT including the law breaking. Remember the DP years. Slater was never charged and sentenced by the police for his law breaking and nefarious conduct. But one of the victims was. Nicky Hagar. Slater knew people in high places and had a well metaphoricalplaced father.

      Jealousy, envy and resentment. No difference whether it be personal or political – or a mix of both.

      But if you know the ‘right’ people, you get off with not even the metaphorical wet bus ticket.

    • Mike the Lefty 2.4
      11 May 2023 at 11:57 am

      A CGT being secretly prepared?
      We wish.

      Typical National scaremongering.

      Labour will no more implement a CGT tax than National will nationalize Air New Zealand.

  3. Joe90 3
    11 May 2023 at 10:01 am

    It's not the fucking drains, Rimmer.

    Michael Field

    @MichaelFieldNZ

    Global Forecasting Systems – which has accurately predicted Auckland's storms – is projecting this in eight days.

    https://twitter.com/MichaelFieldNZ/status/1656016744639778816

    • weka 3.1
      11 May 2023 at 11:01 am

      it's probably both. But Seymour misses the point that no matter how good an infrastructure fix we do now, it won't be enough if we don't massively and immediately mitigate the climate crisis.

    • Patricia Bremner 3.2
      11 May 2023 at 12:25 pm

      Wow, that is scary.surprise

    • Anne 3.3
      11 May 2023 at 12:50 pm

      Its a sub tropical low which is expected to form off the coast of Brisbane. Shouldn't pack the same punch as Gabrielle and looks like it will cross over the country quite quickly. Fingers crossed. 😮

      https://www.windy.com/?-30.468,178.682,5

      For an idea of the rain intensity hit the rain/thunderstorm icon at top right.

  4. Herodotus 4
    11 May 2023 at 10:37 am

    Time for the Green Party display some recognition to its voters- As they are about to lose 1.

    I for 1 did not give my party vote so that 1 of "their" MP's can leave the party and sit as an independent. I gave them my vote as they were more focused on the environment than any of the alternatives. As TGP has displayed an attitude of contempt to a voter as you have reduced your say in parliament by 10%. (I note that EK was pictured in some committee that was hearing on vaping as an independent yet was placed there as TGP allocation !!!!)

    Regarding the allegations regarding Elizabeth Kerekere, if held true what were you doing to miss seeing and then reacting to these. If untrue then you are no better (Some could say that TGP is the worst example of a political party) than any other party in your manipulation into actively remove EK from parliament.

    • weka 4.1
      11 May 2023 at 11:11 am
      1. the GP took a stand a long time ago on waka jumping, on principles, and they can't toss that aside now for convenience sake because it would undermine their integrity and kaupapa. It would also be suicide in election year.

      2. wait to see what the final list is like. Fingers crossed there are more overt environmentalists in the top ten. At that point, everyone's vote matters if truly you want strong environmentalists in parliament. Here's the interim list, imo it's worth voting Green to get Abel and Pham into parliament,

      https://www.greens.org.nz/2023_candidates

      (had EK been forced to leave parliament via waka jumping, Abel would now be an MP, being next on the list. I'm annoyed he's not, but this is on EK as much as anyone. Look at the reasons for the GP not supporting waka jumping law if you want ot understand this better).

      3. Shaw and Davidson have both said, many times, that there were patterns of behaviour from EK predating the cry baby message, but they were unable to act on them because people were afraid to come forward. Once EK hoisted herself on her own petard, people felt more able to speak up. The impression I have is that JS and MD knew there was a problem but didn't have any hard details or people willing to speak, which they needed for a formal investigation. It's too their credit that they waited for firm evidence before proceeding.

      4. The process was decided by the whole of caucus, including EKm last year, in the wake of the report on bullying in parliament. I've not seen anything that shows JS and MD subverted or manipulated that process.

    • Ad 4.2
      11 May 2023 at 11:52 am

      It's completely the wrong focus worrying about candidates before the list is set. There ought to be drama in selection.

      What we need is a fully on fire Greens in the political arena scoring even better points than Act, so that Greens can grind back up to 10%. The focus needs to stay on policy not the usual pre-selection games.

    • Liberty Belle 4.3
      11 May 2023 at 12:17 pm

      Bryce Edwards has a piece published on TDB (Dr Bryce Edwards Political Roundup: The Civil war in the Greens | The Daily Blog) that set's out the internal warfare going on in the Greens. I genuinely hope the environmental arm win out. I genuinely doubt they will.

      • Ad 4.3.1
        11 May 2023 at 12:22 pm

        Minor handbag squabble compared to the Labour list bloodbath through June and July as about 20 existing MPs realise they don't have jobs in 4 months and rapidly jump ship.

        20 is optimistic. I smell zero sense of urgency from Labour, let alone the Greens.

        Labour itself needs to tilt the political discourse since the Greens aren't able to. Budget 2023 is yet to do that job.

        • weka 4.3.1.1
          11 May 2023 at 12:38 pm

          hopefully they're gearing up in private for the election campaign proper, but the year does seem to be getting on. Other elections the Greens have started early.

      • weka 4.3.2
        11 May 2023 at 12:37 pm

        Edwards is doing a hell of a lot of unevidenced speculation there.

        • Herodotus 4.3.2.1
          11 May 2023 at 3:10 pm

          The same could be said of this EK issue until we have anything of substance, I am sure with EK’s departure the need for anything to be aired could now be viewed as redundant, so the issue goes away, and in the eyes of those concerned guilt is passed. Either her behaviour is beyond what is acceptable or she has been targeted for personal gain of others. I am trying to not be condemning to either side until there is more to support one of the claims. I note that this was reported 6 April of the txt how long can it take if there was some motivation to sort this out ???

          • weka 4.3.2.1.1
            11 May 2023 at 6:57 pm

            I'd definitely like to know if the process they are using, that was established last year, is in the public domain. Someone could look that up I expect.

            Either her behaviour is beyond what is acceptable or she has been targeted for personal gain of others.

            Or there were some issues that needed to be investigated that were survivable for EK and she bailed before that process was completed. I'm sure there are other interpretations as well.

            My reading of it, based on what I've seen MD and JS say, and the reporting from credible and relatively unbiased sources, is that there was a pattern of behaviour and the co-leaders decided to act now because it was going to be terrible for election year if they didn't.

            Certainly from the outside, EK looks to me like a loose unit. Her behaviour during the BDMRR select committee raised red flags, but that could have been a one off and it wasn't like she was the only MP that displayed bias. But when you have multiple examples and people too afraid to speak, I think it's reasonable for the party to act from self preservation especially given the GP's history with election campaigns (something that EK seems to not take very seriously). Even the way she handled the call with members and how she resigned raised another set of red flags. Doesn't look like a team player or someone who has the interests of the party at heart.

            I also think that if the issues around behaviour weren't real or weren't of a meaningful level, that JS and MD wouldn't have taken the positions they did. I trust them in that, especially JS because of how he behaved in the 2017 election campaign during the fallout from Turei's speech. It's not too hard to read between the lines in what he has and hasn't said, without going deeper into the kind of speculation that Edwards is doing.

            • weka 4.3.2.1.1.1
              11 May 2023 at 7:10 pm

              I'll also say this. The gender/sex war has the potential to wreck the election. That could cost the Greens big time, and possible the left the election overall. If that sounds like hyperbole, it's based on watching what has happened in the UK, where in the end Labour had to accept that women have sex based rights. Because most people draw a line at saying people can literally change sex and society should be based around that.

              In the local body elections, in Brighton, one of the most strongly identity politics places in the UK, Green councillors just lost their seats (to Labour). Anyone not paying attention to this is missing something really important. Many people rightly believe that trans people should have the same human rights as others, but aren't ok with the excesses of gender ideology.

              I have no idea where the GP sit on the real politik of that, but if the election turns on 'what is a woman?' (and the right may indeed go down that track), then it has the potential to get nasty and I'm not sure the left has the capacity atm to parse what is going on with that because of the ideology. I hope it doesn't go down this track, but the potential is there. EK being out of the GP is a relief, because now at least is she goes off on one about genderism, the focus can be on her not the Greens.

        • Liberty Belle 4.3.2.2
          11 May 2023 at 3:52 pm

          Edwards typically pulls together a variety of opinion, and then draws his own conclusions.

          In this piece, Edwards cites "long-time Green Party commentator Gordon Campbell", "leftwing political commentator Steven Cowan", "The Herald’s Thomas Coughlan", and of course the one and only "Leftwing blogger and Green voter Martyn Bradbury".

          You could say this is 'informed' rather than 'unevidenced' speculation.

          • weka 4.3.2.2.1
            11 May 2023 at 6:48 pm

            None of the people you name are Green Party people. MB regularly slags off the Greens, over a long period of time. I would guess Cowan has some anti-Green bias. I've read Campbell's piece, it was interesting. But when Edwards says things like this,

            Activists within the Green Left Network, together with the Rainbow Greens, were keen to undermine and replace Shaw, seeing him as too conservative and the wrong demographic. And this year they’ve managed to force him to step aside from his long-held candidacy in the Wellington Central electorate, in favour of city councillor Tamatha Paul.

            Where is the actual evidence that these assertions are true?

            • Liberty Belle 4.3.2.2.1.1
              11 May 2023 at 9:21 pm

              Weka, it isn't necessary to be a green party person to have inside information on what is happening within the party. The people Edwards quotes from are far from disconnected from Green Party politics.

              As for Edwards assertions, what we do know, is that there was an attempt to dump James Shaw as leader of the party in mid 2022, and that followed the Greens voting to:

              "remove the male co-leadership requirement from its constitution. It now requires a woman and one person of any gender (providing leadership pathways for non-binary and intersex)."

              Green Party James Shaw co-leadership: MP Elizabeth Kerekere 'considering options' on challenge – NZ Herald

              Whether Edwards is correct as to the motives behind this, only those involved can confirm.

          • newsense 4.3.2.2.2
            11 May 2023 at 9:59 pm

            Or selective and self serving depending on what he has chosen.

        • Belladonna 4.3.2.3
          11 May 2023 at 7:25 pm

          Regardless of the conclusions Edwards comes to, he is right about this:

          The current policy environment is also highly favourable to the Greens. Voters say that they are especially concerned with issues which the Greens have the ability to campaign strongly on: climate change, housing, inequality, tax reform, and the cost of living.

          Some tighter focus on the issues which matter to the electorate (and some party discipline over going off message) – should pay dividends for the GP.

          • weka 4.3.2.3.1
            11 May 2023 at 8:02 pm

            I think they could definitely do well if they focused on those, but I'm less convinced they can break out of the 10% ghetto, and that is what is needed if we are to make serious efforts on climate and ecology. I hope they can pull something out of the bag. While I think Edwards was overstating the case and as I said, unevidenced, I do think the perception of the GP as too woke is a potentially a problem and I;m not sure if they know how to deal with that.

        • Chess Player 4.3.2.4
          11 May 2023 at 8:31 pm

          I disagree – on this matter he seems remarkably in tune with the feelings I, and many of my associates who have voted Green in the past, have expressed recently. I really think they need to give up the green brand, and maybe pitch as the rainbow party, social justice party, or something else – the environment really isn't a priority for them now, based on their actions over the last few years.

          • weka 4.3.2.4.1
            11 May 2023 at 10:55 pm

            I'm sorry you have that impression because it's simply not true. Look at their policy. Scroll through their press releases, and SM. Yes, social justice is featured, but environmental issues are too. Do they have the balance between the two right. I don't think so. But I don't see the point in throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

        • Incognito 4.3.2.5
          11 May 2023 at 10:19 pm

          Bryce Edwards is really starting to piss me off across a number of topics. I should do a Post this weekend to counter his biased pieces.

      • Phillip ure 4.3.3
        11 May 2023 at 3:32 pm

        Effing hell..!

        Edwards reports on davidson's dismal record as minister for the homeless.

        She was allocated$75 million to help the homeless..and she has failed to even spend $1 million…

        W.t.f…!

        Has davidson ever been asked about this epic fail on her part…?

        I have voted green since forever..

        The above has me thinking tpm..

        I am sure both of them would have used that $75 million..

        Seriously ..!..I am banging my head against the wall over this..

        What excuses could davidson possibly offer..?

        • Liberty Belle 4.3.3.1
          11 May 2023 at 4:00 pm

          Yes, she was challenged in the House on 3rd May about this. Her responses were farcical. Three times the Speaker had to intervene.

          Parliament TV On Demand – Parliament On Demand

          • Phillip ure 4.3.3.1.1
            11 May 2023 at 4:43 pm

            Thank you for that…

            Bluff/bluster/bullshit on a stick from davidson…

            She explained nothing..

            • SPC 4.3.3.1.1.1
              11 May 2023 at 9:41 pm

              National did what they did to manipulate those unable to handle simple complexity to cause disdain for the Greens among their own supporters.

              Because National think they are so clever they can do this.

              Rather than encourage them to think their strategy is working, how about just pondering this?

              How much money can be spent in one year when it is allocated over 4 years and the first year is for the design of the programme in which the money is spent?

              That question was clearly answered.

              The second question is why not allocate the money to existing programmes.

              She said the new programmes were set up because of liason with providers of existing programmes, as they saw a need to supplement them with new ones.

              That question was clearly answered.

              The third question was regarding the 200 16-17 year olds in motels and whether the new programmes would deal with this. She responded and Bishop intervened and said he did not want some list of spending allocations in response (related to existing programmes dealing with this particular matter) and the Speaker chimed in with his line, he was almost afraid to have the Minister answer the question again and then intervened when she began to after Bishop re-asked the question.

              KNOWN FACT. National did not want the new programmes being set up to deal with housing delivery.

              I would suggest you look at the programmes and see if you can find any relationship to this direction and things like Maori Health and National's opposition to that.

          • Belladonna 4.3.3.1.2
            11 May 2023 at 7:37 pm

            I thought the Speaker let her off very lightly. She should have been instructed to answer the question, or ejected from the House until she was prepared to do so.

            All Ministers take the opportunity to add a little fluff of the question-that-they-really-want-to-answer to an official response – but they are required to actually answer the question as presented.

        • SPC 4.3.3.2
          11 May 2023 at 9:12 pm
          1. The $75M was allocated over 4 years for new initiatives.

          2. The first part of the process was design and the money for them was to come in from July 2023

          3. Existing programmes have their own funding allocations.

          Bishop and his fans here are working to promote contempt for Greens and to overall question delivery by nit picking about new programmes set up to operate in the 2023-2026 period that a National victory would block.

          The Speaker was inept, or deliberately hostile to the Minister. The explanation was obvious.

          If I were the Greens and there was any continuance of it, not support the Speakers re-appointment.

          • Liberty Belle 4.3.3.2.1
            11 May 2023 at 9:25 pm

            The Speaker held her to account for being entirely unable to provide anything approaching a coherent reply. He was remarkably patient.

            • SPC 4.3.3.2.1.1
              11 May 2023 at 9:49 pm

              National did what they did to manipulate those unable to handle simple complexity to cause disdain for the Greens among their own supporters.

              Because National and their supporters think they are so clever they can do this.

              REALITY CHECK.

              How much money can be spent in one year when it is allocated over 4 years and the first year is for the design of the programme in which the money is spent?

              That question was clearly answered.

              The second question is why not allocate the money to existing programmes.

              She said the new programmes were set up because of liason with providers of existing programmes, as they saw a need to supplement them with new ones.

              That question was also clearly answered.

              The third question was regarding the 200 16-17 year olds in motels and whether the new programmes would deal with this.

              She responded and Bishop intervened and said he did not want some list of spending allocations in response (related to existing programmes dealing with this particular matter) and the Speaker chimed in with his line, he was almost afraid to have the Minister answer the question again and then intervened when she began to after Bishop re-asked the question.

              • Liberty Belle …
                11 May 2023 at 10:51 pm

                The Speaker, someone with both dignity and mana, disagrees with you. 3 times.

                • SPC …
                  11 May 2023 at 11:05 pm

                  So you claim. But you can make no case for it being a reasonable one.

                  • Liberty Belle …
                    11 May 2023 at 11:08 pm

                    I'll let the speaker do that:

                    "SPEAKER: That was a lot of information, but it didn't actually address the basic part of the question. Mr Bishop, do you want another question, or do you want to ask that one again?"

                    "SPEAKER: That still doesn't answer the question. I'm going to give the member an additional question."

                    SPEAKER: Yeah, I'm sure there is, but I'm on my feet and I'm about to make a ruling. Just simply reading out a long list of expenditure doesn't actually address the question that's being asked. The question was very clear around young people and transitional homes. I'm almost afraid to ask the member to say more, but I'll leave it to Mr Bishop, if he wants to ask that question again.

                    Three separate responses to three questions.
                    Hansard. 6. Question No. 6—Housing (Homelessness) – New Zealand Parliament (www.parliament.nz)

                  • Liberty Belle …
                    11 May 2023 at 11:20 pm

                    Perhaps you should write to him and tell him that. I'm sure he'll be very keen to hear from you.

                  • Liberty Belle …
                    11 May 2023 at 11:27 pm

                    smiley.

                    Have a good evening, SPC,

      • newsense 4.3.4
        11 May 2023 at 9:54 pm

        Doctor, Doctor I need you to give your insight on the politics of the left wing parties, for those of the right are perfection, except occasionally C. Luxon over whom some of even more angelic form have doubts.

        From the Dottore who thought it important in the fires on the lawn of parliament to point out that a couple of people once said mean things about John Key too. These were equivalent and so Jacinda was just a whining big girls blouse, unlike Bill English or John Key who were real politician men.

        There’s a reason the regular ACT aligned philosopher of a commenter introduced it.

        • Liberty Belle 4.3.4.1
          11 May 2023 at 10:54 pm

          The good doctor is a political commentator. Do you have anything to say about what he actually said, or just about what you think about him?

  5. Ad 5
    11 May 2023 at 11:49 am

    Well fine Minister Robertson can find $4 billion to reprioritise for the upcoming budget.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/grant-robertson-to-reveal-size-of-savings-in-budget-2023/XQNO5BOK3RAARA5OHSR3LNPZUA/#:~:text=The%20Government%20has%20found%20%244,day%20spending%20for%20this%20Budget.

    So far however the only significant pre-budget announcement has been for Defence.

    I am struggling to see the benefits from all those consultants that bullshit agencies like Education Review Office, Ministry of Pacific Peoples, Ministry for Culture and Hertitage and others are blowing out, when it's the basics of Police Education and Health that are begging for more salaried frontline staff.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/07/government-s-billion-dollar-spend-on-consultants-under-attack-from-national.html

    If this government were a retail store I think I'd probably go ask for a refund.

    Unless Robertson has an almighty trick up his sleeve as the Albanese government just pulled in the Australian budget this week, Labour are just not going to move the dial dial upwards.

    • arkie 5.1
      11 May 2023 at 11:57 am

      While they keep insisting on doing these pre-Budget announcements to a 'business audience' it is apparent who they are most concerned about and it's certainly not workers, frontline or otherwise:

      Speaking to a business audience at Parliament on Thursday morning, Grant Robertson said ministers were told if they wanted to progress particular opportunities, they had to look for savings opportunities within their ministries' existing budgets.

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/489670/watch-finance-minister-grant-robertson-makes-pre-budget-speech

      • Mike the Lefty 5.1.1
        11 May 2023 at 12:02 pm

        To be fair, most of the budget details uses complex figures and forecasts that would be way over the heads of the average Joe and Jill Bloggs and only the suits would understand them.

        • arkie 5.1.1.1
          11 May 2023 at 12:12 pm

          In case this wasn't a sarcastic response I would say speaking over the heads of laypeople represents a communication failure by a government that is supposedly for all, those besuited titans of industry and us mere mortals both. If we can have law written in plain language then there is no reason the pre-Budget announcement should be mostly business jargon.

          • Adrian 5.1.1.1.1
            11 May 2023 at 1:19 pm

            Try and explain anything complex and it will go over the heads of most people, my kids lost me at the Masters level. I used to just sit there nodding, no wonder they nicknamed me Homer.

        • Ad 5.1.1.2
          11 May 2023 at 12:18 pm

          That wasn't the audience of the speech.

          They were the dedicated government-watchers and government-analysts.

    • Herodotus 5.2
      11 May 2023 at 3:16 pm

      Perhaps they could adequately fund the Dunedin hospital to allow what was specified to be built. How they are a bunch of #%^ers to pull this and now we find there was $4BILLION that is now out there to be spent. How we have been let down by words and NO action. On this issue of the hospital they have funded this to fail the local community – A strong labour community at that !!!

      • Ad 5.2.1
        11 May 2023 at 3:39 pm

        100%

        Was so weak to see Labour MP Rachel Brooking defend the cuts in the ODT, then nek minnit Labour Minister of Health Verral 'restores' $70 million of the cuts …

        … and still forget to tell us that the redesign would cost the whole project a year, which of course costs programme and redesign costs.

        That MoH Major Capital team are just a law unto themselves.

      • Bearded Git 5.2.2
        11 May 2023 at 4:23 pm

        I think Robertson has been excellent as a Finance Minister and he is a superb performer in the house.

        But I agree with you here Herod. When he can find four thousand million dollars in his back pocket the penny-pinching on 100 million or so on the oh-so-politically sensitive and oh-so-needed Dunedin hospital looks stupid.

        It will cost votes if not rectified.

        • Stuart Munro 5.2.2.1
          11 May 2023 at 5:56 pm

          Unhappily, NZ's finance ministers have been almost universally lousy. Cullen would be the only one to rate above the international average, and he was no Keynes. The rest have been distinctly sub-par – as is reflected in national productivity and the largely unchallenged follies coming out of Treasury.

          We are supposed to be a democracy – not a dictatorship of useless far-right economic pretenders stymying every plausible policy initiative. Our country is being left to rot.

    • Phillip ure 5.3
      11 May 2023 at 3:41 pm

      My understanding is that when washed up the albanese budget over promised (remind u of any other labour parties/leaders..)..

      And turned out to be just another outing for neoliberal-incrementalism…

      So yes…that is what we can expect from robertson/labour..

      It has always been thus..since the time of douglas..

      And of course this version of labour is echoed in other labour parties..in their bows in unison to the demands of the right/neoliberals..

      And that poxy excuse for an ideology.. neoliberal-incrementalism..is what has got us all up shit-creek.. without a paddle..

      • Tiger Mountain 5.3.1
        11 May 2023 at 5:24 pm

        “For the many not the few” is anathema to the neo Blairists of the NZ Labour Caucus.

        Aotearoa NZ will not move forward until Rogernomics and Ruthanasia are retired for good by the new gens.

    • Peter 5.4
      11 May 2023 at 3:55 pm

      Maybe 'bullshit' agencies like Education Review Office will be got rid of with Act as a big part of the next government.

      Anyone see them getting rid of that monitoring of schools? And if that model goes what replaces it? Or do they have none?

  6. Tony Veitch 6
    11 May 2023 at 3:07 pm

    Wow! Ginny just made Mercenary Mitchell look like a plodding, incompetent fool in the house again today! Either she's very good, or he's an idiot. [Probably both!]

  7. Stephen 7
    11 May 2023 at 3:39 pm

    Is there something fundamentally wrong with local government?

    Tauranga, Invercargill, Gore, and now West Coast.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/489694/fiery-talk-at-west-coast-council-not-a-wellington-issue-internal-affairs-says

  8. Phillip ure 8
    11 May 2023 at 4:15 pm

    Any parker fanboys/girls out there..?

    Do they know what his excuses are for both enabling one of the top ten polluters in nz (according to stuff) the glenbrook steel mill..to just carry on in that role..for the foreseeable future..when he could have done differently..?

    And now for doing nothing to stop deep sea mining..?

    Parker/labour: putting the 'rad' in environmental-degradation..

    • Bearded Git 8.1
      11 May 2023 at 4:26 pm

      I said in a post a couple of weeks ago that Parker supports wind-farms being located in Outstanding Natural Landscape.

      Like Chris Trotter, and many others, he is old school Labour without a green bone in his body.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.