Open mike 13/04/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 13th, 2016 - 75 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

75 comments on “Open mike 13/04/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Gristle 1
    13 April 2016 at 6:58 am

    It annoys me when the “Labour – broad church” argument is raised. Sure, a party that is going to lead a FPTP election needs to get around the 50% level, and so to an extent is all things to everybody. But we are now in MMP territory.

    Often this broad church stance is often accompanied by another attempt by Labour to dominate or burn off possible coalition partners. National and Labour display a huge amount conceit that they are the natural parties of government. CVs position about Labour being lost in the past and sadly not going get to be government resonates with me.

    Being a centrist left right left centre party just paves the way for repeat failure and becoming and increasingly fractured party full of cognitive dissonance: where mutually contradictory positions are held.

    Whilst the Mana Party Internet party was a strange beast, Hone should have been not have been opposed by Labour. There appears to be no long term gain to the LP by squashing Mana. Labour cannot be broad enough to accommodate a Minto alongside a Shearer. Having a scorched earth approach is counter productive. Act survives on the margin and attracts lightening bolts away from National. National can withdraw from dogmatic Neo liberal posturing and let Act fill that territory. All the time knowing that it has Acts support on most things.

    IMO shedding the desire to be all things to everybody is part of Labour’s healing. Signs of a Labour that has a future include:
    1. Being able to articulate what it is and what it is not.
    2. Being able to leave space for other political parties.
    3. Being excited/passionate about what it is.

    The Labour Party needs to be reconceptualised so it thrives when working with (and not necessarily lead) multiple parties to form a government. The broad church is no longer internal to the party but external to it. Potential partners need to be allowed space to live.

    • b waghorn 1.1
      13 April 2016 at 7:08 am

      Labour needs to accept that 50% voter support is not achievable for them under MMP, and it could take the negative connotations of polling lower than national if they worked out away to sell the fact that unlike national they don’t destroy their partners support,

      • Sabine 1.1.1
        13 April 2016 at 7:58 am

        .

        It is a certain type of voter that needs to understand that Labour does not need 50% as it can form a coalition government with other parties on the left/centre left stage.

        And i do believe that the opposition parties have a good chance at beating National. Not one of them by themselves but together. And this is what i am advocating for.

      • Molly 1.1.2
        13 April 2016 at 8:37 am

        National as a party – only needs to deliver the appearance of a good economy and stoke the fires under the meme that all success is individual. They have a fairly simple task to speak to and coerce the voting public that all is well under their watch (because they don’t care about the environment, the vulnerable, the long-term effects of their policies, global responsibilities).

        Progressive voters on the left – however – are passionate about a myriad of issues. Workers rights, global accountability, climate change, environmental degradation, economic reform to benefit all – and that is where the choice of different parties leading to a coalition can work for voters on the left.

        However, as you say, this is not occurring. But the strongest message that Labour could perhaps take from the movements that have happened in the UK and the US with the rise of Corbyn and Sanders, is perhaps to stop listening to the PR and political strategies that have not delivered on the last three elections, and consider a clarity of purpose around policy, and a team approach to the next election.

        • b waghorn 1.1.2.1
          13 April 2016 at 12:59 pm

          “is perhaps to stop listening to the PR and political strategies that have not delivered on the last three elections”
          Or sack the ones they’ve got , get some good ones , get a simple message and don’t waiver .

      • Stuart Munro 1.1.3
        13 April 2016 at 10:30 am

        I don’t agree – 50% is quite achievable for Labour – but it has more to do with the false reputation for economic competence ascribed to National than anything else. These buffoons are only able to forestall a collapse by unprecedented levels of borrowing – none of their policies are sustainable. Once the public understand that, 80% of National’s support is gone.

        The idea that the middle in NZ has shifted right is where Labour was misled – as Corbyn & Sanders prove yet again, socioeconomic class is determined economically, so that the further a country goes right, the larger the groundswell on the left. NZ Labour is working this out, but as the Blairites in England find, it is not a welcome truth for long-serving MPs.

        • Puckish Rogue 1.1.3.1
          13 April 2016 at 11:07 am

          Really? 50% seriously?

          National with only a very small party on the right (Act) which doesn’t suck up many votes, with NZs most popular leader since…well John Keys rewriting the record books on popularity and an ineffectual opposition (lets face it if Labour were a patient the life support cord would have been pulled long ago) even with all that National can’t quite break 50%

          Yet you think Labour, with the Greens constantly scoring 10%, can somehow hit 50%

          Every time I think I’ve read the most delusional post on here someone always manages to top it

          Well done Stuart

          • swordfish 1.1.3.1.1
            13 April 2016 at 11:46 am

            “NZs most popular leader since … well John Keys rewriting the record books on popularity.”

            Really, Puckers ???

            (1) In the Colmar Brunton and Reid Research Preferred PM Polls, Key’s fallen to his lowest average (39%) since becoming PM. That’s 10-14 points down on his First Term ratings.

            (2) His Favourability ratings are down to a net positive of just + 2 – that’s his lowest rating ever. Key may be well ahead of Little in the Preferred PM rankings (arguably, a somewhat blunt instrument given the traditional incumbency advantage) but he’s been trailing the Labour Leader on the Favourability measure for most of the last year:

            2015 Quarterly Net Ratings
            ……………..1/4…………2/4………..3/4…………4/4
            Key………+ 22………..+ 15………..+ 10………..+ 16
            Little…….+ 24………..+ 25………..+ 16………..+ 15

            Notice, incidentally, how far Key has fallen since 2015 – a net positive favourability rating of + 22 in the first quarter of 2015 and now, in the immediate wake of the Flag referendum fiasco, a plunge to just + 2. Back in 2009, Key was on + 58. !!!

            (3) Over the last year, Key has been only slightly more popular on the Preferred PM measure than Clark was at the same point in her Third Term.

            (4) Clark was enjoying higher Favourability and Performance ratings in 2006-2007 (same point in Third Term) than Key is now.

            You’ve been reading Farrar and the MSM rather than exploring the actual Poll data.

            • Puckish Rogue 1.1.3.1.1.1
              13 April 2016 at 11:50 am

              But you have no other issues with my reasoning as to why Labour will never get near 50%

              But speaking of popularity and kiwiblog:

              http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2016/04/2014_election_study_on_leaders.html

              http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2016/04/houston_we_may_have_a_problem.html

              • adam …
                13 April 2016 at 12:11 pm

                I see the merchants of hate, have fallen out of your little bubble, into the Petri dish, telling each other the same lies.

                It’s like any lie will do, as long as it can be a diversion form your utter lack of virtue. And utter lack of moral fortitude.

                • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell …
                  13 April 2016 at 12:29 pm

                  8 years into John Key’s term and the Left sticks with their line since the beginning: Key losing his mojo!

                  29 October 2007:

                  http://thestandard.org.nz/key-losing-his-mojo/#comment-2424

                  • adam …
                    13 April 2016 at 4:41 pm

                    Wow dude, you need to get down to spec savers.

                    My comment was about the spin your lot are spinning. I mean apart from the data being old, and I had difficulty find the source – If the spin being done, had been by the left – you’d have been having kittens. It was really in the bubble stuff The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell. Have a read, even you have to admit – a lot of naval gazing going on. Something I’d expect from the liberal branch of the labour party.

                    Plus it was about the comment section over there at kiwiblog – which is still in the gutter, mistruths, misinformation and out right lies. Do I need to mention it is as low brow as ever. No wonder you come on the standard.

                    So where did I have a go at Key? That one on you bro. Personal couldn’t care less for the man, he just another Muppet in a long line of Muppets. It’s the national party and a evil economic system it up holds, – I want gone by Friday 😉

                    • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell …
                      13 April 2016 at 5:32 pm

                      Sorry, I was talking to swordfish. Apologies for not making this clearer.

              • swordfish …
                13 April 2016 at 12:30 pm

                @ Young Master Puckers

                Yep, in the 2014 New Zealand Election Study Key had a net positive Favourability rating of + 32 (as Farrar shows), in UMR Research polling, his 2014 Favourability average was very similar: + 27.

                By 2015, it had fallen to + 22 in the first quarter, plunged further down to + 10 by the third quarter, recovered slightly to + 16 by the final quarter and has now, as I’ve pointed out, sunk to an unprecedentedly low + 2.

                Massive fall from 2014

                I’ll get around to Farrar’s amusing Houston we may have a problem spin when I have time.

                For the time being, let’s just point out that:

                – Farrar’s little graph is a textbook example of how to abuse the Y-axis.
                – Fails to mention that leaders always receive their Highest ratings during Election Year (hence Goff’s late rise. Little is actually doing far better than Goff did during his first 16 months as Leader)
                – No appreciable difference between the Preferred PM figures for Little and his two immediate predecessors (all within very similar parameters at a demonstrably higher level than Goff). I’ll need to take a close look at Farrar’s stats, but it looks to me like he’s restricting things solely to the Colmar Bruntons. Whereas, I’ve based my figures on all of the main public Pollsters.

              • sabine …
                13 April 2016 at 5:20 pm

                Labour does not need to get over 50%.

                Understand that in an MPP environment Labour will never have to reach a 50%. All Labour needs to do is to work cohesively with the other Parties to form a Coalition Government.

                So frankly all that pearl clutching, passing of the smelling salts to prevent fainting, its for nought. Labour does not need 50%.

          • Stuart Munro 1.1.3.1.2
            13 April 2016 at 3:35 pm

            Unusually stupid even for you PR –

            What was National polling when Bill English led it? 27%?

            Their economic performance is not a whit better – so of course Labour can get 50% – probably 60, without touching Green or NZFirst votes.

            Chances are they’d only get 40 odd though, as both of those parties are solidifying at present, as we see in Northland.

            Key’s ‘popularity’ is a balloon full of hot air – he’s done nothing good for New Zealand – and soon he’ll be gone with nary a trace except for a farting sound.

            • Puckish Rogue 1.1.3.1.2.1
              13 April 2016 at 4:15 pm

              What was National polling when Bill English led it? 27%?

              – To be honest the only time I see Labour beating National is when you compare Labout to National under Bill English although the esteemed Mr Little seems to be wanting to do worse

    • saveNZ 1.2
      13 April 2016 at 9:57 am

      +1 Gristle – Mana were never a threat to Labour, however Labour’s knee jerk reaction was shocking.

      Don’t forget many further left voters on party votes, also vote Labour too for electorate to keep Natz out.

    • swordfish 1.3
      13 April 2016 at 11:10 am

      “There appears to be no long term gain to the LP by squashing Mana”

      Not so sure about that. Polls (including the just-released 2014 edition of the New Zealand Election Study) suggest Internet Mana was a pretty toxic brand for most voters. They had very low favourability ratings (7% Mana / 4% Internet Party) and very high unfavourability numbers (64% Mana / 75% Internet Party).

      (NZES – Respondents were asked to express how much they favoured each Party on a scale of 1-10. Unfavourable = 0-4 / Favourable = 6-10. So, the only caveat is that we don’t know the strength of feeling. How much of the IP’s 75% unfavourability, for instance, involved a mildly negative score of 3 or 4 and how much a truly dismal 0-1 ? But, regardless, you’d have to say that in broad terms a large-to-overwhelming majority of voters didn’t much care for the hybrid party of the Left)

      True, ACT, UF and the Conservatives were also far from popular (and you could argue that this didn’t prevent people voting National, despite knowing that Key might have to rely on these smaller parties of the Right). But their Unfavourability ratings weren’t quite on the same scale (mid-40s to mid-50s).

      So you could mount a reasonable argument that, by effectively throwing Internet-Mana under a bus, Labour made several long-term gains:

      – National prevented from scaremongering over potential Internet-Mana influence on a future Labour-led Govt (as with UK Tories tactics vis-à-vis Labour and SNP). So, less able to scare off ‘swing voters’. (means: the Nats are reduced to scaremongering about the Greens – which just doesn’t have the same resonance)

      – Four Parliamentary Opposition parties (rather than the current three) would have been a gift to National’s Dangerous, incompetent, unwieldly Labour-led Coalition, all rowing in different directions meme.

      – Four Opposition parties = harder for Peters to head Labour’s way if NZF holds balance of power.

      – Polling suggests perhaps half of IMP supporters have been absorbed into the Labour/Green support base (so not much wasted Left vote at next election)

      Not saying I’d necessarily agree with all facets of the above argument, mind thee, just that you could make a reasonable case along those lines if you were taking an unsentimental strategic approach. (Big fan of Laila Harre, incidentally. Party-Voted Alliance 1999-2002, so I’m not arguing here from some kind of conservative Labour Establishment perspective. And I do agree, in general, with the argument against Labour heading down the scorched earth route).

      The other thing I’d say – It’s generally pretty well accepted that Labour need to be polling above 35% to be seen as serious contenders. That’s gonna be a pretty bloody difficult task in itself, so I really don’t think anyone’s even remotely envisaging a 50% + scenario.

      • Cowboy 1.3.1
        13 April 2016 at 2:28 pm

        Thanks Swordfish, that’s excellent analysis.

        Seems to me that the rise of Bill Shorten In Aussie is going somewhat unheralded here. He was in a hopeless position a few months back given the initial popularity of Turnbull. However he and Chris Bowen have set about articulating some clear differentiated policies and have been gaining traction, even leading in some polls. Helped no doubt by a hapless showing by Turnbull, who is all over the show. Surely they are the template for Little and Labour to follow?

      • Colonial Viper 1.3.2
        13 April 2016 at 3:16 pm

        So you could mount a reasonable argument that, by effectively throwing Internet-Mana under a bus, Labour made several long-term gains:

        – National prevented from scaremongering over potential Internet-Mana influence on a future Labour-led Govt (as with UK Tories tactics vis-à-vis Labour and SNP). So, less able to scare off ‘swing voters’. (means: the Nats are reduced to scaremongering about the Greens – which just doesn’t have the same resonance)

        National are always going to scaremonger about any small left leaning third party which may align with Labour.

        Does your argument suggest that Labour will continue to “throw under the bus” such small political parties?

        Also note how Left wing UK Labour supporters were not put off by Tory scaremongering over the SNP. In fact, Scottish Labour voters seemed to take Tory scaremongering about the SNP as confirmation that they should vote SNP.

        • swordfish 1.3.2.1
          14 April 2016 at 12:12 am

          Some interesting points, CV.

          I was playing Devil’s Advocate here, of course, … just throwing around a few ideas. Always useful, I think, to force yourself out of your comfort zone assumptions, look at things from a new perspective (in this case, a cold, clinical, unsentimental one). Personally, I’d love to see Harre and a true Left Party in Parliament – and I’d quite possibly give them my Party Vote. But that doesn’t mean I’m blind to the potential pitfuls from a wider strategic perspective. Like I say, though, I’m not necessarily convinced by the points I made or the assumptions on which they were based, really just tossing about a few musings to mull over.

          On the SNP, true – but most post-Election analyses (there are one or two exceptions) suggest a crucial section of English swing voters were indeed influenced by Tory SNP-scaremongering. Probably not quite as important as concerns over Labour’s “economic credibility” or the deep disquiet over Miliband’s suitability as a potential PM, but the scaremongering over the SNP does seem to have been an important secondary factor in Labour’s abject failure to win so many of the key marginals throughout England.

      • Bearded Git 1.3.3
        13 April 2016 at 3:41 pm

        Nice work Swordfish.

        It really gets to me the way the whole of the media climbed all over that 28% poll without mentioning Key’s plummeting 39% rating.

        If the Nats drop to 45% they are gone.

    • McFlock 1.4
      13 April 2016 at 12:04 pm

      I don’t think that Hone would ever have been the loyal lickspittle that Rimmer is, devotedly running distractions whenever bad news for key comes up.
      Although I see that this time they had to use Brash to go racist, so maybe even seymour told them to get stuffed this time.

    • Ad 1.5
      13 April 2016 at 12:45 pm

      Politics really is a popularity contest.

  3. Draco T Bastard 3
    13 April 2016 at 8:17 am

    It’s the criminal economy, stupid!

    Too Big to Jail
    The firms employing the services of Mossack Fonseca include a rogues’ gallery of brand name corporations with a track record of breaking financial regulations with virtual impunity. Remember back in 2013 when HSBC was slapped with a $1.9 billion fine by the U.S. Justice Department for laundering drug cartel money? Its fine amounted to less than one tenth of its annual profits. And remember when UBS was caught in 2012 spreading false information to manipulate banking exchange rates? It was fined $1.5 billion, which sounds like a lot, until you learn UBS’ revenues are almost $40 billion a year. Both banks are clients of Mossack Fonseca.

    The reason banks and financial institutions are ignoring regulations comes down to simple economics. The organized criminal economy is over $2 trillion a year, and someone has to launder it, says journalist Drew Sullivan, co-founder and editor of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and a 2014 Institute for the Future (IFTF) Fellow. “You can either be a bank that takes that money or a bank that doesn’t take that money. Because nobody is penalizing you seriously for this, and nobody holds it against you, you don’t get a reputation of being a bad bank, and you can keep doing this.”

    These slap-on-the-wrist fines are simply the cost of doing business, says Sullivan, who compares the bank’s criminal behavior to the Koch Brothers’ modus operandi: violate sanctions and fight the fines in court for as long as possible. “It’s a risk minimization plan, rather than honorable business,” he says.

    Our financial systems are corrupt and it’s time we started doing something about them but, as the article makes clear and as we’ve seen:

    We can’t expect governments alone to solve the problem, especially when government leaders are often entrenched players in the crooked game.

    We need to know that our public servants aren’t also the criminals. At the moment we can’t be certain of that. In fact, considering John Key’s profession, we can be almost certainly assured that at least one of them is. “But it’s legal” is no longer good enough.

  4. esoteric pineapples 4
    13 April 2016 at 8:37 am

    Auckland average house price now over $800,000 and rising again and creating a “halo” effect all around New Zealand as other regions rise in response. This is a property market going into la la land.

    • Bearded Git 4.1
      13 April 2016 at 10:02 am

      You want la la land? The median house price in Queenstown is now $782k.

      This in a local economy where the main employer, the tourist industry, pays $15.25-$19 an hour.

      See the little pixies….

  5. ianmac 5
    13 April 2016 at 8:57 am

    Andrew Little was hammered politically and by the Press for suggesting that employment vacancies could be filled locally before importing people from overseas.
    Woodhouse has announced a policy to make it compulsory for employers to prove the need before importing people from overseas.
    Have I misunderstood something here?

    • saveNZ 5.1
      13 April 2016 at 9:50 am

      +1 Ianmac

    • Craig H 5.2
      13 April 2016 at 8:41 pm

      Employers were already supposed to prove that they had attempted to fill the vacancies locally by providing evidence that they had advertised the position. The issue was that they did not have to engage with Work and Income for lower-skilled positions, whereas now they explicitly are required to do so prior to an application for a work visa being made.

  6. ianmac 6
    13 April 2016 at 9:06 am

    Where is Guyon? There on Monday I think, had a good interview, then gone again.

  7. greywarshark 7
    13 April 2016 at 9:19 am

    Radionz on cannabis growing in the USA by NZr. Now. Most interesting.

    John Lord, legal cannabis dealer
    Former Waikato dairy farmer John Lord is at the helm of the Colorado cannabis dispensary chain LivWell which employs 500 people. LivWell is a medicinal and recreational marijuana business. Its success makes John Lord one of the largest legal drug dealers in the US .The firm is seen as a pioneer in the development of the legalised marijuana industry in the state of Colorado. Livwell not only has stores selling cannabis products, but also employs scientists, inventors, and farmers. The cannabis is cultivated at a secret and highly secure location in Denver.

  8. travellerev 8
    13 April 2016 at 9:30 am

    One of my readers asked: Is John Key A Serial Fraudster Who Participates In organized Crime? I thought my response (By means of what some authorities have to say on the subject) might be of interest to the Standardistas and their readers!

  9. Adrian 9
    13 April 2016 at 9:32 am

    the IMF were in town in the last few weeks and rumours of a stand-off between them and Key over our debt situation.

  10. saveNZ 10
    13 April 2016 at 9:49 am

    On a different topic here, why do people seem to get so vitriolic about breastfeeding? A Sydney cafe offered a free cuppa to breastfeeding mums…. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=11621600

    Ministry Of Health states “Breastfeeding helps lay the foundations of a healthy life for a baby and also makes a positive contribution to the health and wider wellbeing of mothers and whānau/families. Exclusive breastfeeding is recommended until babies are around 6 months”

    In NZ only 17% of mothers exclusively breastfeed for 6 months. (I wonder why, when you see the bizarre reactions of some….. sarc).

    • b waghorn 10.1
      13 April 2016 at 1:05 pm

      ” why do people seem to get so vitriolic about breastfeeding? ”
      Man see booby, man like booby, baby attached to booby, man feel guilty ,
      Easier to blame booby owner for making him feel guilty.

  11. saveNZ 11
    13 April 2016 at 10:08 am

    Herald on damage control…. notice they do not mention how rich non residents pay 0% tax on NZ trusts or how Facebook pays a pittance and so forth….

    From Granny H

    “The average single worker in New Zealand pays the second lowest amount of tax in a comparison against similarly wealthy countries.

    Single workers in New Zealand face taxes of 17.6 per cent in 2015, compared with the OECD average of 35.9 per cent.

    The publication on income tax in OECD countries calculates a “tax wedge” – the amount of tax on wages including social security contributions to the Government, including family benefits and tax provisions.

    It does not include indirect taxes such as GST.”

    • ianmac 11.1
      13 April 2016 at 10:48 am

      Some Western European countries happily pay much higher taxes and enjoy better Health, Education, Security and better welfare.
      In NZ we spend much less on the above and suffer accordingly.
      How come taxing and re-distributing has become dirty words?

  12. saveNZ 12
    13 April 2016 at 10:21 am

    ON the other hand at least in British media, they can have a laugh… (this is funny).
    “Politicians don’t know the price of milk – but they do know how to set up a shell company”
    by Frankie Boyle
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/frankie-boyle-tax-havens-panama-papers

    • adam 12.1
      13 April 2016 at 10:49 am

      ” I sometimes wonder if austerity might be less of an ideology and more of a pathology.”

  13. adam 13
    13 April 2016 at 10:44 am

    Keeping the laughs coming

    • ianmac 13.1
      13 April 2016 at 11:00 am

      No doubt Eddie could be explosive in the wrong hands Adam. Why Eddie could be a suicide bomber. So Samantha stick to innocent guns!

  14. John Shears 14
    13 April 2016 at 12:26 pm

    Heard this on Nine to Noon as I was driving this morning .

    http://tinyurl.com/jee7r93 for the audio file.

    Will go back to it later as there were some very interesting comments
    relating to economic progress ,or the lack of, and shortage of skilled
    labour to boost exports.

    Not all the beer & skittles that we are being sold.

  15. saveNZ 15
    13 April 2016 at 1:52 pm

    Great insight into the way the TPPA roadshow and submissions is being run.

    National MP Mark Mitchell and his breath-taking display of arrogance
    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2016/04/13/national-mp-mark-mitchell-and-his-breath-taking-display-of-arrogance-2/#comment-332913

  17. Brendan 17
    13 April 2016 at 2:05 pm

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/301350/hire-new-zealanders-first,-govt-says

    Is it just me or is this policy pinching by the party with the better PR machine (or more money to throw at PR)?

    I know Labour says some dumb things about race, but they say some things, that when they are not viewed through an ethnicity lense, rather, an economic lense, actually make sense and people agree with.

    This is what Labour was trying to elucidate about a month ago. Why did it come out so wrong? When somebody says they should limit immigration and focus on employing, educating, and upskilling the local population why do they get labelled racist? When we don’t have the infrastructure to support more immigration, and you point this out, are you somehow now a keen New Zealand First supporter?

    What wound me up the most is when Woodhouse was asked on Morning Report this morning why employers were going to the international labour market he made up some cock and bull story that was obvious spin-doctoring rather than stating the obvious, the point Labour was trying to make: cheaper wages. Flood low-wage local jobs with immigrants who expect less, or see New Zealand wages as more attractive than other countries’, and boom! Our lowest wages stagnate, and locals suffer as a consequence.

    Why was this not communicated by Labour, and why did it turn into a farce about chicken chop suey? It was an embarrassment for all concerned.

    • BM 17.1
      13 April 2016 at 2:16 pm

      Because Labour are working to the script, the Chinese are taking over NZ and it’s all John Keys fault.

    • Puckish Rogue 17.2
      13 April 2016 at 2:23 pm

      Hard to get your point across when you constantly have your foot in the mouth or it could be that Mr Little engages his mouth before his brain, possibly a hang over from his union days

      • Whispering Kate 17.2.1
        13 April 2016 at 3:57 pm

        Well he was full steam on twin cylinders the last I heard him this afternoon on Parliament TV – an amazing rark up of the Government telling it how it is – methinks Puckish Rogue you protest too much in support of your leader. The best I’ve heard him and by crikey was he giving it to the PM about his lies, corruption you name it. Where there is smoke there is fire and there is lots more to this disgusting state of affairs and eventually it will be revealed. There’s only so much dithering, sarcasm and lying that the PM can deliver before he gets tripped up and makes a complete ass of himself. He is a liability to National and they will roll him soon as look at him if he is lying about his investments.

        Today in the house the PM was his usual useless self, not once did he answer a question like any competent leader would. A psychologist would have a field day with him with his body language, he is the ultimate liar personified – its cringe worthy watching it, we deserve a better leader than this, National will be seeing this soon enough., if they haven’t already done so.

      • Stuart Munro 17.2.2
        13 April 2016 at 3:57 pm

        Times have been hard for unions PR, it’s not a sector in which worthless sacks of shit like Gerry Brownlee or Nick Smith would be subsidised.

        Key is counting on the reverse racism angle to mute criticism of his disasterous anti-NZ policies. Migrants in sufficient numbers are never welcome anywhere, and a large population like China or India can overwhelm NZ’s capacity without even realising it.

        Traditionally responsible governments have regulated migration – but as Woodhouse’s backpedalling on National Radio this morning showed, they’ve been letting in anyone without even bothering. Small countries cannot do that and prosper. And we’re not prospering.

        • Puckish Rogue 17.2.2.1
          13 April 2016 at 4:03 pm

          “Times have been hard for unions PR, it’s not a sector in which worthless sacks of shit like Gerry Brownlee or Nick Smith would be subsidised. ”

          – Damn strait union leaders are worth every thing they get paid 🙂 especially when they promote numpties like Little in the leadership position

          If I seriously believed conspiracies I’d think Little was a National plant

          • Stuart Munro 17.2.2.1.1
            13 April 2016 at 4:15 pm

            It’d make sense – you can’t have two utterly worthless major parties.

            National needs Labour to rebuild the economy – and Christchurch, and Auckland housing, and the labour market, and our credit rating. And our international reputation and our standing as a country with the rule of law.

            They are simply incapable of governing. So of course they’d support Little.

            But a righty like you should be into cutting out the middle man – why retain this useless non-performing National party that can’t balance its books without massive borrowing and whose only trick is shouting in parliament? These fuckwits represent you PR? You must be even stupider than I think.

    • saveNZ 17.3
      13 April 2016 at 3:16 pm

      +1 Brendon

      It seems you can’t just state the obvious in NZ anymore – in particular about migration. Nobody is trying to put migrants down when questioning what’s going on. But if NZ has no jobs, no houses and not enough money for health, education, superannuation, social welfare etc for local people why are we increasing our population approx 1.5% per year with more people! People who have more money in most cases to buy up property and assets. In 35 years we are going to have all these migrants on superannuation with the unemployed millennials to support them and the rest of the population. Does not sound like it will end well. In addition actively encouraging tax evaders with NZ as a tax haven as JK’s economic dream for NZ and creating an underclass of unemployed, homeless Kiwis, bankrupt farmers, and struggling middle class, with a new super rich class financiers who have all their tax affairs set up using off shore trusts so they pay nothing, or lose money in NZ and get tax credits while buying up the country cheap! It’s unreal.

      National’s very own social engineering project.

    • Craig H 17.4
      13 April 2016 at 8:50 pm

      Labour’s mistake was to mention ethnic chefs (although Little made a good point there, it got drowned out by cries of “racism!”), rather than point it directly at the lower-skilled occupations.

      Today’s announcement from Michael Woodhouse has been in the works for some time – collaboration between two large government departments (Immigration NZ and MSD) isn’t something that happens literally overnight, and was trialled voluntarily in Queenstown first before being rolled out nationwide.

      The main point here is not that employers could bring people in willy-nilly, it was that they were not required to engage with Work and Income before offering the job to a migrant worker, whereas now they are required to do so for lower-skilled occupations (defined as occupations which are skill levels 4 and 5 on the ANZSCO).

  18. Rosie 18
    13 April 2016 at 2:15 pm

    Bring on the resistance!

    Bill put up a post over the weekend, titled Simplicity, about a new French movement, Nuit debout, which had it’s origins in resisting planned labour law changes in France but has spread into more encompassing social issues, such as inequality. The night time mass outdoor meetings have spread from Paris to three other cities. The Guardian link is from Bill’s post:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/08/nuit-debout-protesters-occupy-french-cities-in-a-revolutionary-call-for-change.

    In the meantime, across the Atlantic Americans are getting fed up with corporate money controlling their democracy and calling for “an end the corruption of big money in our politics” They are expressing their opposition to the status quo with mass sit ins and a 10 day march from Philadelphia to Washington DC, and aim to be the biggest civil disobedience America has seen in a generation.

    http://www.democracyspring.org/

    Last night Al Jazeera stated 400 people had been arrested at the Washington demonstration, but I can’t seem to find that news clip on line, although the link above does state that.

    Now surely, in our little corrupt seedy corner of the South Pacific surely we can stand up too? We had a burst of energy in February with the very effective anti TPPA rally which gridlocked the Akld CDB for hours, Joyce took a dildo the face, Brownlee took some matter to his suit, and Key, was loudly booed in a variety of settings.
    In Iceland, the PM had to resign over his wife’s shares in Wintris, where as our PM enabled the law change to turn our country into a tax haven and has a deposit with a company that provides tax avoidance advice and he’s still freaking here!

    Now is not the time to hibernate! Where’s the action?

  19. Gangnam Style 19
    13 April 2016 at 2:45 pm

    Why many of us never reported our abuse, about the harrowing ‘justice’ process in NZ. http://publicaddress.net/speaker/three-times-over-and-never-again/ (I was too young to know, wasn’t until I was in my 20s that it all came back to me). Trigger warning & all that.

    • Jenny Kirk 19.1
      13 April 2016 at 4:58 pm

      Thanks for putting this up, GS. Awful reading, horrific experiences for this young woman …. and it is so unfair, and keeps on happening. We have a lousy justice system for rape and sexual assault victims.
      One thing tho – the prominent NZer whose name and details have been suppressed by the Court – he might have a cushy job given to him by rich playmates at a classy golf club, but everyone in the north knows who he is and his name is mud ! It won’t be easy for him to walk down any street in the north any more.

      • adam 19.1.1
        13 April 2016 at 6:18 pm

        I agree Jenny Kirk.

        We have a critical system failure on this issue. Right across the system, it is just not capable of bringing justice to anyone.

        The basics of a combative justice system, don’t help.

        But the thing that makes me mad, it is exactly the same things I wrote after roast busters exploded, then I wrote again after it got swept under the carpet.

      • Anne 19.1.2
        13 April 2016 at 6:32 pm

        It may take time to appreciate it, but these young girls will find they come out the other end so much stronger for what they did. And in the process they did the rest of us a favour. The man was forced to resign from his powerful position and with it… any future control over other citizens.

    • sabine 19.2
      13 April 2016 at 5:41 pm

      Never reported my abuse/rape, but the day my mother passed “my” abuser said something so outlandish, so utterly devoid of any decency – and mind this is now several decades after the initial abuse and rapes, that in that instance everyone in the room knew what until then had been hush hush. A lot of people that day made excuses as to why they did not believe me, or did not interfere and help me. Cause it just did not look like it, and he was a man of such good standing and so on and so on..

      The one thing i hope for these girls is that by going to court that they have put the fear of heaven and hell in his heart and that he will now stay away from them,
      but I am not holding my breath. They way he spoke about them really does seem to me that in his eyes he did nothing wrong.

      He might have been not found guilty due to lack of witnesses/evidence, but he was not found innocent either.