web analytics

Open Mike 12/09/2017

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, September 12th, 2017 - 105 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 …

105 comments on “Open Mike 12/09/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

    • tc 1.1
      12 September 2017 at 6:46 am

      No they want consistency so their rent seeking behaviour can carry on, they don’t want to appear against the mood or the incoming govt.

      Mainfreights done very well out of national and will look to do same from the next govt, no surprise Skycity is cuddling up also.

      • ScottGN 1.1.1
        12 September 2017 at 7:02 am

        I get all that tc. It’s the way they’re all nailing their colours to the mast that’s interesting.

    • Graeme 1.2
      12 September 2017 at 7:11 am

      It’s been coming in business for a while. the Nats are seen as a dead end street.

      Sustainable Business Council’s pre election report had these main recommendations,

      “1. Transition to a low-emission economy: we want to collaborate to develop a clear pathway to a low- emission economy. This will be necessary if we are to meet our Paris Agreement commitment to reduce our emissions by 30% emission reduction on 2005 levels by 2030.. We would like greater clarity and certainty on climate change policy so that decisions about investment, innovation and business growth are future- proofed.
      2. Leave no one behind: as employers, taxpayers, and corporate citizens we want to ensure nobody is left behind on the journey to a socially, environmentally and economically prosperous New Zealand. We want government to welcome business as an important partner in improving social outcomes for all New Zealanders.
      3. Strengthen NZ Inc: our members would like to see government showing more leadership on balanced and transparent reporting. We need to ensure that social and environmental outcomes are better re ected in decision-making by government and business.
      4. Back business to be sustainable: we would like
      to see government remove barriers and incentivise innovations and technologies that can help commercial enterprises be more sustainable and to scale at speed to help build a more resilient New Zealand.”

      http://www.sbc.org.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/129479/SBC-2017-Pre-Election-Brief-Manifesto.pdf

      That group’s members account for 29% of GDP , so there’s a bit clout there. When I first read I didn’t realise where it came from and thought it was from a left leaning fringe group, not businesses and mainstream as these.

      • Ad 1.2.1
        12 September 2017 at 8:27 am

        Very encouraging read.

        If Labour get in there will still be a rump of hard core business opposition.

        Almost all of agribusiness will oppose them. Esp Fonterra and the irrigators.

        Major construction will be under massive scrutiny.

        Real estate and property will fund straight out opposition campaigns.

        Transport companies will be mixed.

        Banks and wealth managers will be very nervous.

        Labour need to be ready to engage. And better than in 1999.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.3
      12 September 2017 at 10:33 am

      They want change but would prefer a National led change.

  2. Ed 2
    12 September 2017 at 6:56 am

    Someone on RNZ pimping for the TPP and saying Labour should adopt a bipartisan approach and support it.
    No argument made saying National should adopt a bipartisan approach and abandon it.

    That’s fair and balanced RNZ. The 15 minute business section at 6.45 is basically an advertorial for neoliberalism. Funny you don’t get 15 minutes prime allocated to workers’ issues every morning.

    RNZ pumping out propaganda for the elite, ably directed by Griffin.

    There is a secret government of NZ that will not allow the dismantling of the neoliberal apparatus.

    • Carolyn_nth 2.1
      12 September 2017 at 7:57 am

      This just tweeted by RNZ referring to current interview with Jacinda Ardern:

      TPP: “It’s an important agreement.” @jacindaardern won’t reveal hand, but wants in on TPP w/ carve-out for foreign buyers policy.

      Well, there you have it. Kelsey has already reported that the draft TPPA-11 (leaked to her) includes that regulation of foreign property sales will be allowed. So, Team Ardern is going with what really has already been decided.

      https://itsourfuture.org.nz/jane-kelsey-labour-tppa-not-bloody-minded-enough/

      • Pat 2.1.1
        12 September 2017 at 8:09 am

        If Labour support TPPA mk2 with only this change then that is an extremely disappointing position, one which I suspect will dog them for a long time to come.

        • Carolyn_nth 2.1.1.1
          12 September 2017 at 8:17 am

          Ardern is very good on rental changes Labour will make – great for renters, in the RNZ interview – follows Green Party policy. Says there will likely be GP ministers.

          But on TPPA-11, she is very disappointing. What about Pharmac and medicine patent issues, Investor State Dispute Resolution, lengthening of copyright?

          I protested against Clark govt on sending troops to Afghanistan; was against Clark govt on Foreshore and Seabed…. and it’s clear why we need a strong GP presence in Ardern’s up-coming govt.

          Also, Ardern says no inheritance tax, while claiming her government will not be neoliberal.

          • Bill 2.1.1.1.1
            12 September 2017 at 10:53 am

            Says there will likely be GP ministers

            Not in the interview I just listened to!

            What I heard was clumsy avoidance – (paraphrasing) it’s all down to which party or parties we’re in coalition with and that could be NZF regardless of whether the Greens are in parliament or not.

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2
        12 September 2017 at 11:36 am

        Can’t say I’m surprised. Labour still haven’t woken up to the fact that the present system simply doesn’t work. That we have to remove ourselves from FTAs and the WTO if we actually want to be able to trade freely.

      • One Two 2.1.3
        12 September 2017 at 12:04 pm

        TPPA has powerful energy backing its progression , which is why NO NZ Govt will outright reject it

        Nz has ratified the agreement, it’s a done deal unless Japan pulls out

        At a future time when USA decide to be involved again, the full damage to NZ will have been locked in

        Jacinda, like all MP’s, understands how the system works…therefore she is not being transparent…

        Deliberately!

    • Bill 2.2
      12 September 2017 at 10:14 am

      Assuming this is from the same interview.

      The opposition leader, outlining her economic ideology to RNZ in a lengthy interview, was asked if she agreed with former Prime Minister Jim Bolger’s assessment of neoliberalism in New Zealand: that it had failed.

      “Yes,” she replied.

      So, that’s good, right? She “gets” it. Except in the next breath …

      “Being fiscally responsible is not akin to a neoliberal agenda,” Ardern replied.

      Fucken, head meet desk.

      • Carolyn_nth 2.2.1
        12 September 2017 at 11:01 am

        I didn’t listen to the interview. i was just following RNZ tweets.

      • Draco T Bastard 2.2.2
        12 September 2017 at 11:39 am

        She’s actually right in that last sentence but she’s viewing it the wrong way which makes her wrong.

        Being fiscally responsible must start with stopping the private banks from creating money and capital controls on the flow of money in and out of the country.

        Doubt if either of those things are on her to do list.

    • Bill 2.3
      12 September 2017 at 10:49 am

      No commitment to having Green presence in Cabinet if the Greens are in Parliament.

      I’m thinking NZ Labour has had someone down the bottle store selecting a nice single malt. And to reiterate – this election isn’t and never was about NZ Labour or National, but about Green or NZF.

      • marty mars 2.3.1
        12 September 2017 at 11:40 am

        Sorry i disagree. Put it this way – without labour the Greens are fucked. without the Greens labour isn’t fucked apart from those of us you support the green kaupapa and want that in there to drag better outcomes out. But the gnats have to go and only labour can do that. That is reality.

        • Bill 2.3.1.1
          12 September 2017 at 12:02 pm

          Maybe I should have been more precise.

          Jacinda Ardern in her interview with Espiner this morning wouldn’t even indicate a desire, never mind a preference, to have Green MPs in Cabinet.

          If NZ Labour can go into coalition with NZF, they will. (Ardern held that out as a possibility).

          If you merely want National gone, then vote for NZ Labour or the Greens or NZF or the MP.

          But if you want Liberalism challenged within the beehive, then the only way to vote is Green or MP. With a NZF/NZ Labour coalition, Winston will be granted traction on his conservative social policies in return for leaving economic settings ‘as is’. (Jacinda’s of the opinion that economic settings are merely a somewhat superfluous detail of Liberalism rather than the core driver)

        • weka 2.3.1.2
          12 September 2017 at 12:13 pm

          Sorry i disagree. Put it this way – without labour the Greens are fucked. without the Greens labour isn’t fucked apart from those of us you support the green kaupapa and want that in there to drag better outcomes out. But the gnats have to go and only labour can do that. That is reality.

          Unless NZF chooses National (I just put up a post about it 🙂 ). So changing the government is dependent on either Labour getting more than half the seats (extremely unlikely), or the Greens being in parliament in enough numbers to enable Labour for form govt. It’s possible that NZF would choose Labour, but it’s not inevitable.

          • Bill 2.3.1.2.1
            12 September 2017 at 12:21 pm

            It’s not about who NZF would choose, but who NZ Labour would choose.

            They’ve indicated time and again that they’d happily work with NZF. I actually think they’d prefer to work with NZF over working with The Greens…and Ardern on RNZ openly stated the possibility of a NZ Labour/NZF coalition this morning

            But regardless of how accurate my reading of their preference is, it’s down to prospective progressive minded NZ Labour voters to deny NZ Labour that option by voting Green or (where applicable) MP.

            • weka 2.3.1.2.1.1
              12 September 2017 at 12:26 pm

              “It’s not about who NZF would choose, but who NZ Labour would choose.”

              Well, it’s both. I think that in addition to the points you are making (which I agree with), that it’s also important to remind people that Labour are dependent on the Greens to even govern, if they want a surer bet.

            • marty mars 2.3.1.2.1.2
              12 September 2017 at 12:29 pm

              Why are you promoting the MP when they supported the gnats on so much. You trust them more than Winnie? Why. Perhaps anti labour alignment?

              • Bill …
                12 September 2017 at 12:44 pm

                The Greens and the MP and Mana seem to be fairly tightly aligned.

                Policy aside, there’s spontaneous interactions that can be indicative or revealing.

                So in one televised debate, Hone was asked about “blue teams” and “red teams” and it was Shaw’s aside about a “green team” that got Hone’s approval. Likewise the “high five” between Flavel and Shaw in another. The unscripted ‘bonhomie’ on display between Metiria Turie and Marama Fox in another…

                I disagreed with the MP deciding to get inside the Nat tent to piss out, but I can accept it as a legitimate piece of political positioning. Am I wrong to think that there would have been a Nat led government regardless?

                edit. I don’t have an “anti-NZ Labour” alignment. I’m anti-Liberal.

              • weka …
                12 September 2017 at 12:58 pm

                “Why are you promoting the MP when they supported the gnats on so much. You trust them more than Winnie? Why. Perhaps anti labour alignment?”

                I trust the Mp more than NZF. One reason is that the Mp will go back and consult with their members about who to support to form govt. NZF hand that decision over to an elite.

          • marty mars 2.3.1.2.2
            12 September 2017 at 12:23 pm

            Fair point and without labour taking the treasury benches the Greens get very little.

  3. AsleepWhileWalking 3
    12 September 2017 at 7:53 am

    Evicted from State and Private rentals for taking in homeless

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/339207/families-evicted-after-taking-in-homeless

    “If you go along Marine Parade, you’ll see a hell of a lot of families, and I’m not talking like two or three kids, I’m talking about nine kids with their solo parents or both parents in there… talking about working couples that are actually homeless as well.”

    • AsleepWhileWalking 3.1
      12 September 2017 at 8:02 am

      Statements from hnz and City Council contradict the quote above. Not the first time we have seen diametrically opposed representations of what is happening in our housing market (Hamilton the most recent, and now Napier).

  4. marty mars 4
    12 September 2017 at 8:15 am

    Good article

    The mispronunciation of Māori names is still a prevalent issue in Aotearoa society. In this feature, Māori share personal stories of the damaging effect it has had on their lives. The next feature in the series will look at why pronouncing names correctly matters.

    http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-mispronunciation-issue-what-it-looks-like-in-aotearoa

    I also see Stuff website starting to use macrons – excellent.

    We can all do better on these things.

  5. ianmac 5
    12 September 2017 at 8:27 am

    Live is Joyce v Robertson debate.
    “Mood of the Boardroom – Grant Robertson and Steven Joyce go head to head”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11921238

  6. Eco maori 6
    12 September 2017 at 8:39 am

    Now when I was younger and a fisherman I use to give all my friend’s and nabours free fish and I did Not expected anything in return.
    So giving more tax is the best way to sort out this shit national has created. We need to help our vulnerable and poor so we can be proud of ourselves and our country.
    Now the Winston is showing his true colours which is Why most of my fellowship bloggers on this site don’t trust him because his only agenda looks like what’s is best for Winston not our country or our poor and valuable get with it Winston we need change not stay the same the wealth going to the few. Fuck that Winston is pissing in the wind

    • greywarshark 6.1
      12 September 2017 at 8:50 am

      Eco maori
      +1

    • The Fairy Godmother 6.2
      12 September 2017 at 8:53 am

      Good on you for sharing your fish. We share excess vegetables from our garden and honey from our hives in the same way. If we were neighbours we would get fish and you would get honey and vegetables with no talk of payment whatsoever. I believe this is just natural behaviour for human beings. Capitalism is not natural and doesn’t fell good like sharing foes.

    • mary_a 6.3
      12 September 2017 at 11:38 am

      You got it there eco maori @ (6) … Winston is in it for what he personally gets out of it and nothing more in my opinion. He’s prepared to prostitute himself to the highest bidder! I’ve had a gutsful of his BS.

      Where are those 450 English/Dickson texts he’s supposed to know about? He’s an attention seeking has-been, stale, boring old windbag, never more so than at election time! Always got something up his sleeve to play, but keeps it secret!!!

      Apologies to Winston’s supporters who want a change of government, but a vote for him and NZF could well be a vote for National and more of the same of the past nine years. Because despite him bleating about Labour not being transparent re its tax policy, he’s not too forthcoming with NZF’s budget details. It’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black! He plays the power game, by refusing to declare which party NZF will go into coalition with!

      I’m in the same age group as Winston, but I just wish he would retire. He’s had his day. Leave NZF up to the younger generation in the party to serve.

    • Cinny 6.4
      12 September 2017 at 3:56 pm

      Peter Talley was at Winstons meeting at the Motueka RSA a couple of months back, first time I’ve ever seen PT at a public election/campaign event/meeting. JS

  7. Ant 7
    12 September 2017 at 8:45 am

    “Truth may be losing its value as a moral compass by which we set our daily direction. But the 2017 election result may remind us that truth matters and saying sorry counts.”

    Nice line from Judy McGregor (Herald this am)

    Surely in a world of false news and alternative facts – indicators of moral chaos, actual truth takes on an almost mystical enticement of absolute necessity.

  8. greywarshark 8
    12 September 2017 at 8:48 am

    NZ now summed up in news headings one after another on Radionz:

    Our plans for America Cup yachts.
    and
    The situation in Napier – tenants taking in homeless into houses, garages, getting he push. (It does cause extra wear and tear on houses to have them jammed
    beyond capacity, but this is example of how government is uninterested in setting in place emergency provisions. It is happening with both Housing NZ and private.)

    Let’s spread the love and not channel it to the ‘grinders’. Let it go also to the ‘strugglers’.

  9. Hami Shearlie 9
    12 September 2017 at 9:19 am

    Sorry Jacinda, now you have told Espiner that you are all for globalism, I am OUT – Voted labour all my life, but not any more. Your total worship of Helen Clark and the UN have really bothered me, but this admission that your party agrees with the TPPA will see my vote going elsewhere, probably never to return.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1
      12 September 2017 at 9:43 am

      “Let me be clear”, she says, as she obscures the issues she doesn’t want to address.

    • greywarshark 9.2
      12 September 2017 at 9:55 am

      H Shearlie
      In short, vote strategically. We must get a change or go down.

      It’s lifeboat time. You are in it, you are bailing out the sea seeping in, and others are leaning over holding onto loved ones and the needy in the water but unable to fit in the boat. That’s where we are.

      The leaky boat will help us but you would have to keep bailing and we all must prevail against anything but a very pared down TPPA. And have some alternative proposals to ensure that we don’t lose access to foreign markets. Have we enough bi-lateral agreements? What have we got to replace Australia that is turning as ugly as Germany did to its surrounding countries?

      Lifeboat time now, better designs in your mind occurring as you vote. That’s what we need – better designs, ways, active, rational, clever minds. And then write a post and tell us your ideas and get us to exercise our minds and add to it.

    • McFlock 9.3
      12 September 2017 at 11:17 am

      You do realise that it’s possible to be “for globalism” (i.e. recognising that we live in a global environment, not just a wee silo in the South Pacific, impervious to all geopolitical forces and trading with none) and anti the TPPA?

      Either way, if you can’t abide voting for Labour, vote Green.

      Worst case is a nat govt because on the day lefties decided to cut off their nose to spite their face: 4%green, 4%TOP, 4% mana, 40% Labour, and a government of 38% Nat and 10%NZ1.

    • Draco T Bastard 9.4
      12 September 2017 at 11:58 am

      Vote Green. It’s really the only choice you have left for a party that will change the course of our economic system.

    • Patricia Bremner 9.5
      12 September 2017 at 1:54 pm

      I have been on this site as a reader and contributor.

      Hami Shearlie is not an easily overlooked name. Are you real?

      Your deliberate extension of what was said on RNZ also leaves me wondering.

      NZ has always been a trading nation. How and what we trade is the issue.

      To hold Jacinda liable for Globalisation (which is hard to turn around), and Helen Clarke’s position seems a tad extreme.

      Perhaps you never intended to support.

      To expect her to provide all your wish list is revealing.

      She is a caring human, not a bloody magician.

      Vote Green to give her grist to her elbow.

      If too many throw sulks and withdraw, guess what!! “Hello Bill.”

    • indiana 9.6
      12 September 2017 at 2:01 pm

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96739673/jacinda-ardern-says-neoliberalism-has-failed

      “For me the neoliberal agenda is what does it mean for people? What did it mean for people’s outcomes around employment, around poverty, around their ability to get a house?

      I’m struggling to know if she is deliberately trying to redefine neo-liberalism.

  10. greywarshark 10
    12 September 2017 at 9:44 am

    Now on RadioNZ
    A national [phenomena – that clinical leaders in hospitals and 50% burn out of doctors – vacancies are rife but many vacancies.
    $1.5 billion sucked out of hospital and health system.
    According to Ian Powell? speaking for the health profession.
    There is a deal going until April 2020 to provide more for salaries.

    (But there is still a sinking lid effect on overall hospital to be made up – that $1.5 billion perhaps. Don’t vote back the do-nothing, ideologically-hostile-to-government-itself National Party.

    How can we expect to have a well-run, successful and happy country when run by a government that doesn’t want that? National wants to run our services down, say that we as government know we can’t do this well, we will have to sell all this for a song to some private company that we will get a directorship on when we leave government.

    If you can’t stand unpleasant information that goes to the core of your beliefs don’t read on. The National Party is hostile to NZ as a country. Are you scared of communists, dislike them? Be scared of fascists which operate by a government controlled by Big Business – which is what is happening right now in New Zealand! Fascism is a political system that we fought against in WW2. But now we have been taken over by stealth, while we were sleeping. Wake up NZ. The alarm bells gongs need to sound loudly hit with a hammer like this.)

  11. millsy 11
    12 September 2017 at 10:16 am

    English should be careful when carrying about inheritance taxes. It is, after all, a government that he was part of that introduced the biggest inheritance tax of them all — asset testing for rest home care.

  12. Karen 12
    12 September 2017 at 10:29 am

    Have a look at this NZF candidate for Northcote speaking at a candidates’ meeting in Beachhaven last night – she is going full Don Brash it seems. Didn’t go down well with the audience it seems.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/election/2017/09/nz-first-candidate-promises-to-remove-treaty-from-law.html

    • Karen 12.1
      12 September 2017 at 11:10 am

      This is another reason to party vote Green so that Labour doesn’t have to rely on NZF.

    • weka 12.2
      12 September 2017 at 11:19 am

      wow, that is really bad.

    • marty mars 12.3
      12 September 2017 at 11:31 am

      Yucky racist boo – lots of these low thinkrs out there

      • weka 12.3.1
        12 September 2017 at 11:40 am

        Will be interesting to see how Peters handles this seeing as how half of what she said is actual NZF policy and position.

        • marty mars 12.3.1.1
          12 September 2017 at 11:44 am

          Maybe now he could release the English texts lol, i can’t wait for this election to be over.

          • weka 12.3.1.1.1
            12 September 2017 at 11:50 am

            lol.

            I want more time for the election, to bring up the Green vote. The thought of a the post-election period with Peters as kingmaker doesn’t make me want to bring it on 😉

            • DSpare 12.3.1.1.1.1
              12 September 2017 at 1:59 pm

              Weka
              Yes! The more time the better from the GP perspective. The Ardern wave has to break sometime, and her support for the TPPA might just be the rock that collapses it.

              It won’t matter to ex-National voters who just want to vote for the winning side (strategically electorate voting for the least odious of the two leading candidates, and not wasting your party vote for a sub5% in our current version of MMP are not the same thing as that kind of bandwagoning). But for wavering previous Green voters, this will be a big red flag – even NZF is better on that score (scorecard is at the big yellow link on the right under feeds).

              Which brings me back to the Koloni verbal diarrhoea. Number 38 on the list which means NZF would have to get 31% of the party vote for her to become an MP, so at least there’s that. As you say above, only; “half of what she said is actual NZF policy and position”, and even that is a bit more nuanced in how it is presented. There is a difference between dog-whistling and simply blurting out your toxic bigotry – epitomised by Ansell’s slogan; “We want Kiwi, not iwi”, that she parroted.

  13. Carolyn_nth 13
    12 September 2017 at 11:15 am

    Now this from Ardern, is music to my ears: TVNZ article plus video of Ardern announcement:

    Part of the $38m fund would go to a project called RNZ Plus, which Ms Ardern said would mirror services offered overseas, including BBC in the UK and ABC in Australia.

    She said it would create an ability for RNZ to cover multiple platforms, including television.

    New Zealand On Air would also share in the $38m.

    Ms Ardern said there were no proposed changes to Television New Zealand.

    However, $38 mill doesn’t sound a lot to me for RNZ, which has been starved of funding for 9 long years.

    Finlay McDonald tweeted that:

    They even have Campbell Live on ice, ready to thaw.

    In the context of FMcD’s response to Russell Brown, maybe this just means that Campbell on Checkpoint could be morphed into Campbell live Mark 2….?

    Details of Labour policy here:

    http://www.labour.org.nz/broadcasting

    • tc 13.1
      12 September 2017 at 11:51 am

      one of their first acts in broadcasting should be to remove the nactiods from NZ on Air.

    • Cinny 13.2
      12 September 2017 at 4:04 pm

      Coolies, maybe in time we could have parenting, dealing with being a teen, growing old, mental health etc etc information style programmes. Breastfeeding and babies info at 3am rather than infomercials, geez that would save many new mums from much misery, it really would.

      Educate the nation please and thank you, it would help EVERYONE 😀

  14. Timbeau 14
    12 September 2017 at 11:20 am

    Over on the thread about Euthanasia and Suicide, there’s some interesting discussion about the role of religion in NZ Politics.

    This reminded me that I read a brilliant article on the Daily Kos website yesterday about the pervasive myth that 81% of American evangelicals voted for Trump. The article makes some withering points about the inherent racist bias of pollsters, who assume that “evangelical” means “white”, and that this then skews the statistics badly.

    She observes that the conservatism of white evangelical leaders is costing them a lot of their non white base, and the unholy alliance of white evangelical leaders with Trump will starve them off the renewal they need as secularism undermines white American church going. Those non white Christians will go elsewhere, to politically progressive churches, most of which are quite happy to be called evangelical; they’re just not dominated by white leaders.

    https://m.dailykos.com/stories/1695694

  15. greywarshark 15
    12 September 2017 at 11:28 am

    Better education needed in NZ to help understand our world, past, present and how to navigate the future. Don’t vote for cutbacks and simple open classrooms like learning sports courts. And no mind to pen personal involvement in learning, no using machines for indoctrinated learning that machines are best, and personal thought must feed into and from. Some of the best ideas have been Written on the back of a Placemat, Designed on a Serviette.

    Tertiary education, university or trade training – essential for NZ’s survival as a modern nation. It means everything to us, one and all.
    https://www.facebook.com/pg/publiclocallearning/photos/?tab=album&album_id=1715619475411537

    Tertiary education – together we can keep it public.

  16. greywarshark 16
    12 September 2017 at 11:49 am

    The petition re tertiary education is still open. Signing it could give you a feelgood moment!
    http://www.together.org.nz/keep_it_public

    The Bribe-O-Meter – this from the Taxpayers Union. I don’t know about it but it is not the Association of Cutpads and Thieves. Whether it’s a great little runner from the same stable?

    But looking to see whether policies are simple bribes or planned, reasoned spending promises addressing real national needs, is relevant as the promises pile up on the floor all fresh and appealing but ready to sweep under the shagpile carpet if National is returned.
    ‘Promises, what promises, oh the ones that we will institute by 2050, no hurry, no worry’

    http://www.taxpayers.org.nz/bribe_o_meter_update_week_8
    This seems to be looking closely at the facts for each Party.
    For instance Greens are raising taxes and spending more on containing certain farming practices. But they will save – ‘We have estimated that cancelling these irrigation subsidies will save $280 million in the next three years.’

    • Gabby 16.1
      12 September 2017 at 1:16 pm

      Footpads. Cutpurses.

      • greywarshark 16.1.1
        12 September 2017 at 1:24 pm

        You’re right – I got obsessed by cutpads and looked it up. The word has got muddled in my synapses.

        Association of Cutpurses and Tantalisers is my latest description of ACT.
        (tantaliser, tantalizer – someone who tantalizes; a tormentor who offers something desirable but keeps it just out of reach. Thanks Free Dictionary)

  17. dukeofurl 17
    12 September 2017 at 1:10 pm

    She got her facts all wrong thats clear isnt it. ?

    I gave the link but the spin continued that ‘this thing never happened, not that it was ever a thing anyway and we arent like this , because… months have passed….’

    [which facts? Be specific. – weka]

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    • One Anonymous Bloke 17.1
      12 September 2017 at 1:24 pm

      Fact: the word “discussion” and the word “policy” are not synonymous. So your assertion just fell over.

  18. Chats Williams 18
    12 September 2017 at 1:12 pm

    Crucified by TV1, shrouded by Red Radio now a promised resurrection on public owned Red TV, J C wil be rehearsing his resurrection show for Sept 25 if he is not part of a deal making throat slash…

    • greywarshark 18.1
      12 September 2017 at 1:28 pm

      Whats Chilli am
      What’s that about. Are you implying we are deepest communist leaning. You must be too high in your skyscraper, or deep in your green cower bower. Come closer ducks we are safe to approach and talk to.

      • Chats Williams 18.1.1
        12 September 2017 at 3:52 pm

        Neither, purely a comment from someone who has been a communist, a socialist, an extreme stirrer of the political pot for sixty years and found refuge in asking people to see all is but a delightful game of ego versus beliefs. Name any time in recorded history/herstory when any group that set out to do good for all didn’t ultimately do harm.

        • lprent 18.1.1.1
          12 September 2017 at 4:10 pm

          Just off the top of my head….

          NZ Labour Party 1935.
          UK Labour Party 1945.

          Try to tell me where either of these caused significiant harm.

          You do realise appear to be a ridiculous, historically ignorant and probably a lying fuckwit who is just making crap up. Why don’t you go and play with your genitals elsewhere.

          I’d suggest that whining like a child about someone replying to you is not going to do you any good. It will just confirm my opinion of you.

          Trying to divert from your statements will just bring out the moderator in me – I really can’t stand moronic trolls who are so weak-minded that they can’t argue their own position.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1.1.2
          12 September 2017 at 4:22 pm

          a delightful game of ego versus beliefs

          Revealing.

          set out to do good for all

          False premise.

          didn’t ultimately do harm

          Moot point. Locking up murderers harms murderers.

          • greywarshark 18.1.1.2.1
            12 September 2017 at 6:57 pm

            Amazing how diverse humans are. And yet? They say that there only 25 basic jokes. In every discussion there could be about 8 different approaches with the usual spectrum of negative neutral positive to them so differing levels of opinion would flesh out the general feeling.

            I think Chat comes somewhere there, and could be labelled. I’m a seeker after truth, so that I can decide if I want to know it or not. I guess that makes me a bit of a dissembler, but sometimes I just can’t handle the truth.

            In my old Handy Guide to Public Policy Proposers and Their Proposals (thanks Michael Marien) I come into the Languishing Liberal with View of present and future that they are Troubled Times needing More money and programs; racial integration.
            I’m also a Radical Romantic – View a Cancered civilisation with Proposal of Small experimental communities.

            Chats you seem to be a Rumbling Revolutionary with View – A repressive, racist, imperialist, capitalist establishment and Proposal of Confront and destroy The System (other details worked out later).

    • Patricia Bremner 18.2
      12 September 2017 at 2:15 pm

      Yes Please. John back would be great.!!

  19. Eco maori 19
    12 September 2017 at 1:22 pm

    Must have really ruffled national feathers the tack tick are going down hard.I’m going to fight on for our goals of change the government YES

  20. Steve Wrathall 20
    12 September 2017 at 1:30 pm

    So explain to me how taxing poor workers in order to pay the “solo” parent benefit to someone shacked up with a millionaire (as the greens advocate) is remotely fair?

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    [no idea wtf you are on about, but a warning to not troll, and up your game in terms of debate if you don’t want further moderator attention. The Greens don’t advocate what you implied, do that shit again and I will ban you – weka]

    • One Anonymous Bloke 20.1
      12 September 2017 at 1:44 pm

      Can’t you figure it out? Sad really, to be so limited, although it explains why you believe the crap you do.

      It’s fair because it matches the terms of the Matrimonial Property Act. See if you can figure out why that makes it fair. I’m picking you’re incapable of understanding the point whether or not you agree with it.

      • dukeofurl 20.1.1
        12 September 2017 at 4:42 pm

        What on earths name are you talking about ?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 20.1.1.1
          12 September 2017 at 8:37 pm

          You’ve got a few weeks to ponder this. Luckily, you have a couple of clues.

          1: Steve “blow harder” Wrathall posed a revealing question about fairness.

          2. I answered it with a reference to the Matrimonial Property Act. By a curious coincidence, other advocates have also made similar allusions.

          3. If you need further help, please ask.

  21. dukeofurl 21
    12 September 2017 at 2:04 pm

    Getting the basic facts wrong was Wekas problem, and this is from someone who is supposed to to be close to the Greens .

    Weka is highly respected here and normally has well put opinions. Dont understand why the blundering around on this particular point

    [I’ve already asked a moderator question on this. Point to where I got the facts wrong, or withdraw that, or cop a ban. Also, you’ve been here long enough to not make false connections between authors and political parties. You’re getting one chance here before you get turfed out for trolling – weka]

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    • One Anonymous Bloke 21.1
      12 September 2017 at 3:49 pm

      Whereas you’ve taken the basic facts and interpreted them in a sophisticated way.

    • Once was Tim 21.2
      12 September 2017 at 4:41 pm

      Oh please! Just ban the fukwit – this sort of shit is why people get turned off TS at times.
      You know (hopefully by now) that anything the prick says is just disingenuous ideological-driven kaka.
      Your a fukushima more tolerant than I – which I ‘spose is a good thing. Why do we subscribe to, and even entertain this fukwittery?
      It’s not as though they don’t have another bubble to vent.
      They’ve even managed to capture an 83

    • dukeofurl 21.3
      12 September 2017 at 5:56 pm

      My brief comment was:

      ‘hubris is gone of a while back of talk about forcing a new election if labour shuts the greens out of ‘government’

      Which is what occurred as referenced by my link to comments by a Green MP

      http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/green-mp-threatens-new-election-if-labour-goes-with-nz-first.html

      That was fact 1- Yes there was TALK

      Forcing a new election ?

      “Mr Coates has said a Labour-NZ First Government would be “unacceptable” to the Greens.

      Fact 2 : Coates said ‘It could’ in regard to forcing a new election

      So rather than accepting what had been common knowledge there began a process of disputing the facts

      1) who said that – answered with link

      2)single Green MP made an inference off his own bat – (yes those things can happen, MPs can ‘misspoke’ as they say) but …he added the further detail

      ‘Green MPs had discussed refusing to support a Labour-NZ First combination as a caucus’

      So the MP revealed they had a caucus discussion about they very thing you said was an ‘inference of his own bat’

      Weka said “The MP subsequently also said that it wasn’t about forcing another election’ [No supporting evidence for this but Ill presume you are ‘vague’on this]

      The story unfortunately had his reply “it could’ in quotes, so either he lied initially or he was lieing about his denial. Yes Mps do lie to get out of difficult situation.

      Weka said.. the co-leader of his party promptly said he was wrong, that the Greens had no intention of doing this.’

      The link provided Shaws words walking back Coates comments

      “Mr Shaw wouldn’t discuss what the party’s options were should the scenario play out the way Mr Coates has painted it.

      “Frankly I think that there’s a lot of scenarios that could play out at this election and we just think everything is hypothetical until you know how many MPs each party has got.”

      “”Look there’s a lot of scenarios I don’t want to get into what all of the hypothetical situations are.

      “Obviously it would be very difficult for anyone to form a Government without us.”

      No sign of Shaw saying – ‘he was wrong’, thats another case of you ‘ saying what Green Mps said ‘ with no links or references. Was it being vague?

      Shaw did say: Mr Shaw said the Greens would not hold the country to ransom.
      “That’s not our style.”

      Whatever that means. Not quite ‘ no intention of doing so’ as he first wouldnt say what the Greens options would be at all ! Mps are supposed to be masters of wordplay to give statements to give some wriggle room- no surprises there

      This is the basis of my response of ‘not supported by the facts’ whereas my comments were.

      You had not a single link for your inferences Weka, in some cases you were appearing to speak for Green Mps without backing it up or were using different words to them.
      Perhaps you were pushed for time and didnt read the full link and then tried to remember events from 2 months back.

      [From what I can tell from that comment, you believe I was factually wrong on two points.

      1. that Coates didn’t subsequently makes statements that it wasn’t about forcing another election.

      Mr Coates added: “There are various ways of not necessarily going back to the polls – not providing confidence and supply for example, sitting on the crossbenches – there’s a lot of different scenarios.”

      From your own link http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/green-mp-threatens-new-election-if-labour-goes-with-nz-first.html

      2. that Shaw didn’t promptly say that Coates was wrong and that the Greens had no intention of forcing a second election.

      Green co-leader James Shaw is “imagining some scenarios” of how to punish his newest MP, over suggestions the Greens might force a second election.

      …

      Mr Shaw, himself a first-term MP, said that would not happen.

      “We have no intention of forcing an early election,” he told The AM Show on Thursday morning.

      “We are committed to changing the Government, but we only want to change it once in the next three years.”

      He said it was up to the party’s leadership to make calls on coalition arrangements, not “new MPs”.

      http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/no-intention-of-forcing-an-second-election-james-shaw.html

      I’m also noting that you have again tried to make out that I have connections to the Green Party that I don’t.

      So you have asserted that I was wrong on fact, and you’ve tried to tie me to the Greens when I don’t have those ties, and you’ve wasted a fair chunk of my moderator time. I have no idea what is going on in this, because you’re not stupid and a simple google would have told you that I was factually correct on the Coates things, plus I already warned you on the GP association thing.

      Looking at your recent comments, I see it’s a mix of debate that contributes to the site and regular negative pokes at people over the Greens with comments clearly designed to undermine them. You’re allowed to hate the Greens, and you’re allowed to put that in your comments, but there is a limit and you crossed over that today. Today looks like an outright attempt to slur the Greens and mislead people in the middle of a political debate, and you did so under an offsite author’s post. You also repeatedly made misleading statements about a TS author.

      Overall it looks to me like you are trying to inflict damage, and given we’re approaching an election I’m going to ban you for four weeks. The reason it’s not longer is that you often contribute to the site and because you made an effort to explain, but expect to get a longer ban if you do this again. The first two paragraphs of the Policy under Rules give some hints about where the line is in terms of what works here in debate, and as always, the bit about wasting moderator time. – weka]

      • Once was Tim 21.3.1
        12 September 2017 at 6:51 pm

        You did so yes Keemoosavvy (spelling to suit your ‘understandings’ as in ‘learnings’)
        But then you’ve always come into this bubble with an ego the size of a bus and with your self-appointed title as that of a Duke.
        I have ‘imaginings’ of your cock being of lower specification (going forward), and of your ‘learnings’ coming from ideological tutorage (probably from a Steven Choice inspired Ultimate Learning Academy [ULA] ).
        I’m truly in awe, and I aspire to your absolute superiority. Have you ever thought of creating a following? Lesser beings than ye have.
        Possibly you could take advice from Brian Tamaki – but then if he’s unavailable, there are now a series of cultists you could seek advice from in your locale. There’s a Bennett, a 10 Bridges, an O’Connor and half a dozen of their cast offs (going foward).
        And even then, there’s the last resort: Matty Hooter who’s probably about to be available with half a flask of Johnny Walker unless his little ‘wifey’ and RNZ staff continue to work as social workers rather than journalists on a Monday

        • Once was Tim 21.3.1.1
          12 September 2017 at 6:55 pm

          Probably easier said that you’re full of shit really. Cheaper, leaner, more efficient and effective (going forward).

  22. Clashman 22
    12 September 2017 at 2:26 pm

    So as far as Labours tax ideas go , they are ruling out CGT on the family home, an inheritance tax, and a increase on the rate applied to the TOP tax bracket.
    I’ve been telling people not to worry about what Labour might do when they have finished their tax working group, my reasoning being I couldn’t imagine Labour addressing childhood poverty (for example) by raising G.S.T or the lower tax thresholds, yet (unless I’ve missed it) these have been specifically not ruled out.
    What are peoples thoughts on this, are they perhaps just trying to not ‘scare the horses’ or …?

    • Andre 22.1
      12 September 2017 at 2:41 pm

      I think it’s quite reasonable to say they’ll wait for expert recommendations before deciding on specific tax changes.

      What kind of tax reform to implement depends entirely on the overall goal of that tax reform. That overall goal will be shaped by the coalition that emerges after the election.

      But I would like to see Labour be more explicit about what goals they want to achieve with tax changes. Whether it’s things like more progressivity in the tax system, increase govt revenue to restore cuts made to social services without increasing debt, reduce emissions, slow housing price rises (or even reduce the price of exisitng housing if they’re feeling really brave)…

  23. Once was Tim 23
    12 September 2017 at 3:15 pm

    Good signals from Labour over public broadcasting policy. Whilst being a supporter of CBB, I did not believe they were ambitious enough (and still don’t).
    There is NO reason why a population of 4plus million is not able to support
    – National Radio
    – Concert FM
    – IWI broadcasting with network capability
    – Youth Radio ( a la The Wireless ACTUALLY on air)
    – A TVNZ7 style Television one
    – a second Televison 2 (a la a Heartland)
    – Childrens TV (a la a KIDZONE 24)

    when others do

    That is but for the fact that we’re still wedded to some sort of funder-provider model that’s reminiscent of a neo-liberal’s idea on how we should fund Health.

    – NZoA and all its bureacracy
    -TVNZ and all of the same
    – Radio NZ and all of the same
    -TMP, and all of the same
    – there’s a couple of others I’m trying to remember

    However, in any event – if you subscribe to the view that public money should go to public benefit – you’ll understand what I mean.
    And if you’re not of the most ardent neo-liberal, you’ll appreciate that there’s no reason why the profits of entities such as Kordia, or the transmission spectrum, or indeed the public space that is ‘the ether’, there is NO fucking reason why thre’s not enough money to provide all of the above and more

    • tc 23.1
      12 September 2017 at 4:05 pm

      TVNZ can generate a fair bit of what’s needed and there’s plenty of savings in cleaning out it’s overpaid management and opinionators like Hoskins.

      A solid public broadcaster is a major cure for the BS and spin that’s dominating the NZ media landscape.

      That’s why Turdbull/Murdoch are continually undermining/nobbling and attacking the ABC across the ditch.