Open mike 12/02/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 12th, 2024 - 49 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 …

49 comments on “Open mike 12/02/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. gsays 1
    12 February 2024 at 7:06 am

    Sigh SSDD. This is the speaker of the house

    At least he's not "facilitating commercial activities" for lobbying firms.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/508914/lobbyists-are-back-at-parliament-with-a-new-privacy-measure-hiding-their-identities

    • Tiger Mountain 1.1
      12 February 2024 at 7:23 am

      Mr Brownlee allowing various spivs and spruikers to have swipe access was not unexpected, but the non disclosure of who is slithering in and out should be of concern.

      Some of the lobbyists are undermining democracy in my view with their special pleading and interaction with political parties and politicians that an ‘ordinary’ voter does not get.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 1.2
      12 February 2024 at 9:03 am

      That is anti-democratic and utterly corrupt. If you have the money, you can pay people for special government access (and influence) – and keep it all a secret.

      Other parties in government should make the identities of these people known (unless there is actually a good reason for secrecy – e.g. they represent women's refuge or something – which I doubt!).

    • Robert Guyton 1.3
      12 February 2024 at 9:38 am

      "At the time, National's deputy leader Nicola Willis backed the swipe card ban and said there should be a "transparent, publicly accountable register of who's doing the lobbying and who they're lobbying for". "

      No doubt she'll provide comment.

      Brownlee say, only 4, so with Key and English a given, who are the other 2?

      🙂

    • Rolling-on-Gravel 1.4
      12 February 2024 at 10:48 am

      Goddamn disgusted with this shifty move.

      I hope these corrupt pillocks are run out of our country when the time comes.

      It's moments like this when you wish there was a revolution sometimes. If it can even defy the actual history of revolutions…

      God, I am so not proud of being Kiwi when we allow this crap.

      • gsays 1.4.1
        12 February 2024 at 12:15 pm

        Just pause and consider the last regime.

        Kris Fafoi, a cabinet minister, reigned to spend more time with his family set up a consultancy business.

        Hipkins employed his Chief of Staff 1 day after he reigned from lobbying for the alcohol industry.

        The behaviour (secret lobbying) is wrong. As US points out above, it is anti-democratic and undermines trust in the system. Eg why does the trucking industry get away with not paying it's way?

        Labour, with unprecedented political capital, tinkered with addressing this – swipe cards gone from 80 folk rather than meaningful reform.

        • Drowsy M. Kram 1.4.1.1
          12 February 2024 at 1:45 pm

          Labour, with unprecedented political capital, tinkered with addressing this – swipe cards gone from 80 folk rather than meaningful reform.

          Would 'meaningful reform' have lasted any longer than Labour's tinkering?
          One (tinkering) step forward, two steps (swipe card access & privacy) backward.

  2. Muttonbird 2
    12 February 2024 at 8:29 am

    Seymour doesn't like the wero, thinks it intimidating:

    Wero (meaning "to cast a spear"), also known as taki, is a traditional Māori challenge, performed as part of the Māori protocol. Its purpose is to ensure that visitors come in peace*. It also establishes their steadfastness, and the prowess of the challenging warriors.

    *No wonder he feels intimidated.

    But what next of tikanga Maori would he like to extinguish, waiata, haka…everything?

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2024/02/act-leader-david-seymour-says-a-lot-of-customs-traditions-at-waitangi-designed-to-intimidate.html

    • Robert Guyton 2.1
      12 February 2024 at 9:33 am

      The wero, intimidating?

      It'd be terrifying, imo, especially if you'd antagonised everyone there.

      The celebrations at Waitangi are not designed to be intimidating.

      Some of the actions are though.

  3. Robert Guyton 3
    12 February 2024 at 9:29 am

    Well!

    He comes across…well.

    Pity someone didn't advise him about creating optimal conditions for a Zoom interview 🙂

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2024/02/green-party-activist-alex-foulkes-pitches-radical-manifesto-in-leadership-bid.html?ref=ves-vid1

    • Tiger Mountain 3.1
      12 February 2024 at 10:08 am

      As you were Mr Foulkes…jeez just leave Chlöe to it this time, I recall the mini circus NZ Labour ran a few years back with several leadership contenders including Grant Robertson, in the end a tiny shift in a union affiliate vote delivered Andrew Little–not going to happen for Alex.

      • gsays 3.1.1
        12 February 2024 at 12:08 pm

        I dunno so much.

        One demographic where the Greens can pick up more votes.is in the stale, pale, male crowd.

        Foulkes looks a bit like some of them. (Not for a moment do I think 41 is stale).

        Plus, isn't a bit of this sort of competition good for an outfit such as The Greens?

        • Tiger Mountain 3.1.1.1
          12 February 2024 at 1:01 pm

          No probs with Mr Foulkes, he says things I support and have done for a long time, but…I like Chlöe better at this time because she has runs on the board in various areas and the proven ability to swat down media channel pundits and Natzos.

      • Robert Guyton 3.1.2
        12 February 2024 at 12:29 pm

        A clear run for Chlöe would be ideal. Testing democracy with putting up a counter, sounds fine, but wastes energy that could be going into fine-tuning Chlöe for the role.

        Alex said he campaigned for Chlöe previously. Perhaps he'd be better to be doing that this time as well.

        Perhaps he is.

      • weka 3.1.3
        12 February 2024 at 12:46 pm

        As you were Mr Foulkes…jeez just leave Chlöe to it this time, I recall the mini circus NZ Labour ran a few years back with several leadership contenders including Grant Robertson, in the end a tiny shift in a union affiliate vote delivered Andrew Little–not going to happen for Alex.

        I don't know why you would compare the Greens to Labour, they have completely different kaupapa and processes around leadership.

        The better comparison is with the leadership contest after Metiria Turei left, where we had Julie Ann Genter and Marama Davidson standing. They campaigned within the party and publicly, the profiles of both MPs were raised as well as understanding their similarities and differences, and extra exposure of the Greens and the party policies/positions. This is healthy for the Greens and democracy in NZ.

        To give you an idea of how that works,

        • Friday 2 February – Nominations open
        • Friday 9 February – Nominations close
        • Monday 12 February – Full list of nominations announced
        • Saturday 3 March – Co-leader candidate session held at Green Party policy conference in Napier
        • Sunday 25 March – Zoom conference to be held between candidates and delegates.
        • Monday 26 March – End of official campaigning, balloting opens
        • Saturday 7 April – Balloting closes
        • Sunday 8 April – Ballots counted and winner announced

        and

        On 1 March a live-streamed debate between Davidson and Genter was held in the Legislative Council Chambers, Wellington hosted by Henry Cooke.[16] Davidson and Genter again met in a debate hosted by Lisa Owen on Newshub Nation on 10 March,[17] and in another hosted by Mihingarangi Forbes on The Hui on 11 March.[18]

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Green_Party_of_Aotearoa_New_Zealand_female_co-leadership_election

        https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/03/green-party-co-leader-debate-marama-davidson-and-julie-anne-genter.html

        • weka 3.1.3.1
          12 February 2024 at 12:49 pm

          Faulkes comes across really well in that Newshub interview. One of the great things there is showing how people can work alongside each other rather than the dagger in the back of some other parties.

          He's not going to win, that's not the purpose. The purpose is as he says, to put out some additional ideas on party direction and get those talked about and considered.

        • Tiger Mountain 3.1.3.2
          12 February 2024 at 1:08 pm

          I don’t write novellas at The Standard. No need to sea lion me.

          My sole point is that sometimes a contested leadership is unnecessary if there is an outstanding candidate. Going through the process to demonstrate “hey we have a process” and are democrats, is good to have but in this case not needed imho.

          • weka 3.1.3.2.1
            12 February 2024 at 1:17 pm

            sealioning is harassing someone faux politely with endless requests for evidence and backup. I didn't do that, I pointed out the problem with your position. This is what we do here, we arguing our positions.

            You want the Greens to just put CS in without contest, I explained why the contest is a good thing. It's not simply about demonstrating process. I already explained the value.

            • Robert Guyton 3.1.3.2.1.1
              12 February 2024 at 1:47 pm

              There may be value in contest, but there is also value in Tiger Mountain's point.

              Given it's widely felt that the outcome is a win for Chlöe, there's less value in hearing what Alex would do, imo. If the race was tight, the prospectives equally strong, as with Metiria Turei and Sue Bradford, a contest would be necessary.

              That's not the case here.

              • weka …
                12 February 2024 at 2:02 pm

                Given it's widely felt that the outcome is a win for Chlöe, there's less value in hearing what Alex would do, imo

                why?

                • Robert Guyton …
                  12 February 2024 at 2:33 pm

                  Is anyone at all excluded from making a challenge for leadership?

                  • weka …
                    12 February 2024 at 2:43 pm

                    afaik the only criteria is that they have to be a member, and they have to get 5 other members to nominate them.

                    can you please answer my question.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      12 February 2024 at 3:01 pm

                      I wrote less value. Presumably, if Alex was to win, his ideas would have a greater chance of being implemented than they would have if he was to lose; an individual Green Party member in Dunedin does not have the same influence as the Leader of the Party.

                      Therefore, if Chlöe wins, time invested in listening to, and discussing, Alex's ideas, is lessened in value.

                    • weka []
                      12 February 2024 at 3:09 pm

                      Foulkes isn’t going to win. The contest gives a range of ideas a chance to be aired, that wouldn’t be aired if there was no contest. Diversity of ideas is a good thing, I have to admit to being puzzled at the resistance to this.

                      The contest gives CS more MSM and SM coverage as well.

                      I also think it’s good for CS to have to present and defend her leadership ideas in this relatively benign context before she becomes co-leader.

                      Maybe I’m not understanding your point.

                      Therefore, if Chlöe wins, time invested in listening to, and discussing, Alex’s ideas, is lessened in value.

                      Is the issue about time invested?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      12 February 2024 at 3:05 pm

                      "the only criteria is that they have to be a member, and they have to get 5 other members to nominate them."

                      Pretty easy to rig that up.

                      Not saying this is the case here. NOT saying 🙂

                      The method has been employed since time immemorial, even in the animal kingdom (vague white ant allusion).

                    • weka []
                      12 February 2024 at 6:04 pm

                      pretty easy to rig up how? Let’s say Joe Blogs decides to rig the contest. He becomes a member and waits for the next opportunity. He gets five others to do the same. When a co-leader steps aside he throws his hat in the ring with the support of five member nominations.

                      If it’s not known to any one in the party, how many votes do you think he will get? It’s the delegates that vote, and they have to talk to their local members after those members have been given information about the candidates. What do you think the members and the delegates will do with a candidate with no background in the Greens?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      12 February 2024 at 8:48 pm

                      "how many votes do you think he will get?"

                      Doesn't matter. They get the opportunity to draw attention to themselves in the media, get to broadcast their message, get to comment on their competition and the Party, should they choose to, etc. etc.

                      Sometimes, I despair!

              • Ad …
                12 February 2024 at 2:04 pm

                Like going through US Primaries, which were invented in 1972 to get stronger internal mandate for candidates, rather than stitch up Party leaders in the dealbroking of 'smoky back rooms' or statewide contests.

                However, on average the play for membership-based democracy doesn't actually yield a better candidate than just the caucus putting the new leader up there fait accompli.

                Was Cunliffe really better than Goff, with the huge internal fight for democratic process? Probably not.

                Was Ardern really better than Little, with no Membership input at all? Not really.

                And Shaw rose to the top to lead the Greens to their best result, despite the best internal efforts of its own mid-term selection process.

                With a decade of hindsight, I prefer not see how sausage is made.

                • weka …
                  12 February 2024 at 2:15 pm

                  Members chose Shaw. I'm not sure that the Caucus necessarily would have. From memory there was a lot of support for Hague.

                  Also, Vernon Tava put his hand up, which was very useful in exposing him for the bluegreen that he was.

                  And Shaw rose to the top to lead the Greens to their best result, despite the best internal efforts of its own mid-term selection process.

                  As with Faulkes, the purpose of that challenge to Shaw wasn't to win (they didn't even have a candidate). It was to shake the party awake from its sleep. Shaw himself said afterwards that it was a useful thing in terms of understanding where the membership was at. There's a direct line between that and CS's plan for leadership and taking the Greens down the more radical path.

                  With a decade of hindsight, I prefer not see how sausage is made.

                  sure, but that's not how the GP rolls. Those that don't want to know can look away.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    12 February 2024 at 2:30 pm

                    " It was to shake the party awake from its sleep."

                    Which is fine, if the shaker has the Party's best interests at heart.

                    If a Seymour clone put their hand up to challenge Chlöe and seized the media opportunities that come with that, would you be so relaxed?

                    • weka …
                      12 February 2024 at 2:50 pm

                      Do you mean like Vernon Tava?

                      Tava was a member of the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand until resigning from the party in late February 2017.[3]While a member of the Green Party, he served as their Auckland co-convenor, Standing Orders Convenor on the National Executive, and as their electorate candidate for Northcote in 2011. In 2015, Tava contested the Green Party's male co-leadership election. He campaigned on returning to the party's roots and core values as neither left nor right wing and placing the environment back at the top of party priorities.[2] The male co-leadership contest was ultimately won by first-term List MP and former management consultant, James Shaw, with Tava coming third-equal with Gareth Hughes MP, both receiving one delegate vote each.[5][2]

                      In late February 2017, Tava quit the Green Party, claiming that the party had strayed away from environmentalism and become "too socialist." During the 2017 New Zealand general election, he joined the 2017 campaign team of the centre-right National Party's East Coast Bays candidate Erica Stanford.[3] Tava then sought the National Party nomination in the 2018 Northcote by-election.[6] He did not make National's candidate shortlist.

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

                      I don't know about relaxed (you would have to be more specific in the scenario you have in mind eg what negative things would happen), but I still support the GP process on this.

                      I'd probably be less relaxed in an election year, but I still trust the party.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    12 February 2024 at 2:56 pm

                    Support and trust the GP process, sure, but here we are sharing our opinions on whether we would enjoy the process more if Chlöe were to be given a cleared path. I don't think anyone's saying that it's wrong to have Alex challenge, just that they favour the simpler option (at least, that's what I think the several here are meaning).

                    • weka …
                      12 February 2024 at 3:03 pm

                      yes, I understand there are people here saying give CS a clear run, but I'm not seeing the rationale explained.

                      If the rationale is that you would enjoy the process more, that I can understand. I'm not sure that it carries much political weight for me personally when held up against the benefits of having a contest. But each to their own.

                  • Ad …
                    12 February 2024 at 4:37 pm

                    You may think Green Party people are somehow special. But they ain't. They're just folks. And the point of democracy in leadership contests is that it's a spectacle in which no one looks away.

                    The Greens have had a fulsome share of internal stoushes involving both members and MPs. The real outliner to internal cohesion is found in the more secretive parties in ACT and NZFirst. They are rewarded for their stability no matter what is happening behind the curtain.

                    And you may well believe this is no place for a Labour member to have an opinion. Except more than ever our political interests align.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      12 February 2024 at 4:55 pm

                      I go with your comment further up the thread:

                      "However, on average the play for membership-based democracy doesn't actually yield a better candidate than just the caucus putting the new leader up there fait accompli."

                    • weka []
                      12 February 2024 at 6:05 pm

                      do you think the party would be better off with the caucus choosing the leaders? Why?

                • KJT …
                  12 February 2024 at 6:47 pm

                  However, on average the play for membership-based democracy doesn't actually yield a better candidate than just the caucus putting the new leader up there fait accompli.

                  I'm not sure about that. May have avoided the ACT party hostile takeover of Labour in 1984, for one.

                  Removed Vernon Tava when he showed his true colours, and I suspect a couple more after this term.

  4. Ad 4
    12 February 2024 at 10:40 am

    I still haven't had time to sit down and do a piece on what this government is doing to local government.

    But in the meantime this is GreaterAuckland doing a good summary of what the new Minister of Transport is doing to Auckland Council.

    https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2024/02/12/the-governments-war-on-auckland/

    Great work Matt and the team there for having a functioning historical memory with actual facts.

    I really don't mind the course correction to concentrate on road maintenance, and to complete the existing projects, and fix the deadly SH1 link from Karapiro through to the Kaimai's.

    But in reality what this government is doing is simply eradicating the entire RLTP and LTP consultation process that was set up way back in 2003 in the Land Transport Management Act. This is a huge erasure of democratic process and consultative power.

  5. Rolling-on-Gravel 5
    12 February 2024 at 11:12 am

    Louise Upston, Christopher Luxon, Winston Peters and David Seymour of the National, NZ First and ACT will ALL be responsible for atrocities that will result from the new welfare legislation.

    https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/02/11/more-beneficiaries-to-face-sanctions-under-new-govt-minister

    During the election, National pledged to introduce more sanctions for unemployed beneficiaries who "persistently" do not meet benefit obligations. The sanctions could include mandatory community work experience of up to three months, benefit suspensions or reductions, and Work and Income having a greater role in managing a beneficiary's money.

    Do not forget that the most vulnerable Kiwis are on the welfare system. The overwhelming majority of the people on income payments are there through no fault of their own.

    As humans, you owe it to your humanity to protest against this oncoming attack.

    Make this government ONE TERM!

    • Kay 5.1
      12 February 2024 at 12:11 pm

      Also, how to throw a massive distraction from smoking, Maori bashing etc. Look over there, bad beneficiaries need to be punished. And plenty of people (and media) more than happy to lap it up without question. Works every time.

      • Visubversa 5.1.1
        12 February 2024 at 12:27 pm

        Dealing with WINZ – or whatever it is called these days is not easy. I had to do a lot of it on behalf of some of my refugee friends who were on various benefits. It seemed to me that if they could make it awkward for my friends – they would do just that.

        I did get my revenge at a later date when a chap from WINZ rang me to try and track down one of my friends who had gone to Australia with some of her family. He said that she owed them some money and did I have an address for her? I took great pleasure in reminding him that the Privacy Act can be used by more than one party and as WINZ had refused to even let me make an appointment for my friend when she had just come out of hospital and needed me to take her to see them, I was not in any mood to give them any information.

        I did tell him not to bother wasting the taxpayers $$$$ by ringing people with the same surname in Melbourne, as her culture does not have family names which are passed down the generations.

    • Patricia Bremner 5.2
      12 February 2024 at 5:03 pm

      Rolling-on-gravel Get your extra copies of everything. Find a really good Advocate. I know how manipulative their systems become.

      Reporters are beginning to pick holes in the fabric of their "Policies" or rather .. the lack of them. Thinking of you and Kay and others under threat of their austerity push. You are correct, we need to question, complain and demonstrate to keep the Public up with the nasty changes.

  6. Ad 6
    12 February 2024 at 1:56 pm

    Very interesting to see Department of Internal Affairs take a civil case against Sky City on money laundering etc.

    Can anyone remember the trade that PM John Key made over a decade ago for huge weakening of gambling regulations and specific gaming concessions to Sky City in exchange for the huge future benefit of a national convention centre?

    Over a decade later, not so much as a single Punch and Judy show at the national convention centre let alone anything resembling the massive negative hit New Zealand has taken on the basis of that big fat barely legal deal.

    But oh sure we should trust the next National government to make similarly massive swinging deals and expect a different result.

    • Robert Guyton 6.1
      12 February 2024 at 2:31 pm

      I do remember.

    • Patricia Bremner 6.2
      12 February 2024 at 5:06 pm

      yes Only too well. Now that story could stand a retelling complete with "interested parties".

      Johnny’s infrastructure conduit for money going overseas? A monument to greed? imo.

  7. SPC 7
    12 February 2024 at 5:14 pm

    Tough day at Allegiant Stadium for the GOP, the 49ers (blue state, liberal as, Chad property values) or team Swiftie.

  8. SPC 8
    12 February 2024 at 5:29 pm

    Those who are not aware of how unhinged the right are in Auckland, read this X concrete – the hate for left wing women politicians is palpable.

    The not so hidden message, that the white race heritage and culture rule of man by right wing men is the natural order under God.

    https://twitter.com/LeoMolloyNZ/status/1756456859467383050?cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email

  9. Obtrectator 9
    12 February 2024 at 10:23 pm

    Re the latest candidate for the GP co-leadership: is it Faulkes or Foulkes, folks? Both spellings seem to be getting used interchangeably, sometimes within the same post.