Open mike 13/10/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, October 13th, 2011 - 46 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 link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

46 comments on “Open mike 13/10/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Pete George 1
    13 October 2011 at 7:05 am

    UnitedFuture and Peter Dunne feature in Vote Chat today:

    This week in Vote Chat United Future Leader and MP for Ohariu, Peter Dunne, is with us on Thursday. Peter is the current Minister of Revenue and Associate Minister of Health, and incidentally if the first Minister to join us for a Vote Chat!

    Peter will be interviewed by Bryce Edwards at 12pm in the University Media Production Studio, Owheo Building.

    You can follow it live on Twitter: @OtagoPolitics #OUVoteChat2011

    Video will be available later on Youtube – or if you are in Dunedin you can go along.

    Phil Goff had cancelled his chat scheduled for yesterday.
    Tomorrow will be Labour’s Grant Robertson.

    • William Joyce 1.1
      13 October 2011 at 5:24 pm

      Peter will be interviewed by Bryce Edwards….Video will be available later on Youtube.
      Thank god for National and the UFBB network think big project – soon we will be able to see the promiscuous Peter Dunne, the rent boy of NZ politics, in full HD.
      Until then I think I’ll pass.

  2. mickysavage 2
    13 October 2011 at 7:21 am

    Thought for the day from a 99% banner, “Respect existence or expect resistance”.

    And while we are on the subject there is a weekend of action and protests in the main centers in support of the  99% protests.  Details for the Auckland protest are here.

    • Carol 2.1
      13 October 2011 at 8:03 am

      Something wrong with your link, MS.
      Here: http://www.occupyauckland.org/

      I’ll see if I feel up to going. I’m wary of crowds with my current injury, and a bit short on energy. I’d like to go for the march at least. I am definitely not up to joining the occupation.

      • AAMC 2.1.1
        13 October 2011 at 1:07 pm

        How about joining at Aotea Sq for a while post march but not for the long run, there by saving energy on the march, but being there in solidarity.

        I hope we can take on board the success of the international movement, i.e. It’s not centeeds around the traditional “march” mentality, but around occupation and around a genuine grassroots growth and momentum, and a horizontal structure, not something which is taken over by specific vested interests and doesn’t revolve specifically around our election and specific political groups, rather around fundamental change.

        Other thoughts, from Steglitz – “we need less regulation of democracy and more regulation of finance”

        Privatization of profit, socialization of risk. End corporate welfare. Read -Rena, Mediaworks, Warner bros, South Cant Finance, RWC – put ya hands in ya pockets lion nathan, sole benefactor of the exercise, et al

        Political finance is not free speech, corporations are not people.

  3. g says 3
    13 October 2011 at 8:38 am

    at the risk of causing a ruckus…
    we have a leader who was helicoptered into the top job enjoying unprecedented popularity against a back-drop of: deteriorating economy, disgruntled home-owners in chch, caught fibbing (repeatedly), buying trains from overseas and investing in THAT country’s economy, an unknown toxic brew disintergrating @ tauranga, pike river and an unprecedented period of urgency in the house passing legislation (including that last one of making the constabulary’s illegal actions legal etc.
    NOW where is the effective opposition? WHO is the alternative?
    it certainly isn’t the labour crew. the straw that broke this camels back was phil and the team pulling the tories out of the hole with helping to pass the legislation making the illegal spying on the public legitimate.
    surely i am not alone here?

  6. Richard Down South 6
    13 October 2011 at 10:14 am

    A question on election day, its illegal to display party logo’s etc… what about the referendum, is it illegal to have a sign up to say, ‘KEEP MMP’ ?

    *ponders*

  7. Draco T Bastard 7
    13 October 2011 at 10:20 am

    Hefty rises in student service fee

    Student Choice spokeswoman Lauren Brazier said the lobby group was concerned Massey was increasing the student services levy “by an amount equivalent to the compulsory [Massey University Students’ Association] fee from 2011”.

    “The Massey council has effectively taken the cost of MUSA membership and passed this on to students through the student services levy,” she said.

    Gee wiz, who would have predicted that?

    • freedom 7.1
      13 October 2011 at 10:49 am

      pretty clever really, collect the funds to run the services that the levy once provided,
      then add user-pays charges so Students pay double for the same service.
      or am i being overly cynical

      • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1
        13 October 2011 at 10:57 am

        No, that’s about what I’d expect in this profit at all costs society.

      • mickysavage 7.1.2
        13 October 2011 at 11:31 am

        Don’t forget the loss of democracy and representation.  More expensive AND less democratic.  Who would have thunk it?

        • McFlock 7.1.2.1
          13 October 2011 at 12:46 pm

          but ms, student representation is maintained under the new regime – we can expect strident representation from reps who serve at the whim of the Vice Chancellor. /sarc

          So now “student choice” is surprised that what happened in Aus, what they were told would happen here, is actually happening?
           
          Stupid fucking tories.

    • Chris 7.2
      13 October 2011 at 11:52 am

      I thought the main opposition to the VSM bill was that it would result in a loss of services, but this implies there won’t be?

      Or am I missing something?

      • freedom 7.2.1
        13 October 2011 at 12:07 pm

        no Chris, the services are not going anywhere unless the university now decides they cannot pay for it, which is where the double dipping into student ‘s pockets now comes into play, combined with the students no longer having a strong voice to speak in the defense of vital services destined for the chop.

        it always was and always will be about choice,
        the choice of students to be secure in the supply of essential services
        the choice of going to a University that values all students, not just business students
        (who are probably the least difficult to supply services to. What do they really need, a few hotspots for FB and a place to read whatever press releases the Biz roundtable is passing off as reference texts.)

        now it is only about the the destruction of choice , increasing costs and the limiting of student services

      • Draco T Bastard 7.2.2
        13 October 2011 at 12:16 pm

        Or am I missing something?

        you’re missing something – we haven’t seen which services the university will cut yet (they will cut some). They’ll certainly remove the students say in those services.

    • KJT 7.3
      13 October 2011 at 12:20 pm

      So. Replace a levy which the students were able to have democratic control over, with one where they do not.

      Increasing their rights? NACT style.

  8. thejackal 8
    13 October 2011 at 10:53 am

    John Key’s Election Hoardings

    Maritime New Zealand said the vessel had spewed an additional 130 to 350 tonnes of oil into the Bay of Plenty: World News Australia – 11 October 2011.

    National Party Leader John Key is helping hammer in the first of a new series of election hoardings in Hamilton: National Party website – 11 October 2011.

  10. logie97 10
    13 October 2011 at 11:40 am

    Cast your mind back to those curious Winston’s billboards. Now we know what was just off camera – an oil slick and a container or two. Man, he was such a visionary. And to think he got replaced by a bridge from Te Atatu.

  11. freedom 11
    13 October 2011 at 12:30 pm

    Interesting to see the hyped up fire-sale of Fletcher Building is underway.
    A company that is going to make an absolute killing in CHCH when the rebuild gets underway, releases a report that shows things are a bit slow right now and shares just fly out the door. Who sells a sure thing?
    Who is buying the reported 36 million shares that changed hands?

    perhaps the new CEO of Meridian Energy could shed some light on that one?

  13. freedom 13
    13 October 2011 at 1:35 pm

    RUN RUN RUN, CHECK IT OUT BEFORE ITS TAKEN DOWN

    http://www.act.org.nz/policies/tertiary-education

    • lprent 13.1
      13 October 2011 at 1:42 pm

      Pig-latin….. Makes as much sense as their actual policies.

      • freedom 13.1.1
        13 October 2011 at 2:00 pm

        i found it much less aggravating than the rest of their policy, but some of the phrasing seemed familiar and i think they are using Key’s speechwriter

      • Tigger 13.1.2
        13 October 2011 at 2:01 pm

        I don’t know, this stuff is compelling policy.

        ‘Consequat beef aute, cow shankle hamburger magna veniam ex deserunt drumstick aliquip ullamco laborum. Mollit ribeye occaecat turkey sirloin, ham in aliqua voluptate meatball irure magna nostrud shank beef. Bresaola cow irure capicola. Tail spare ribs sed salami non drumstick. Fugiat swine ribeye mollit minim esse. Exercitation drumstick culpa commodo, ribeye bacon duis in beef chuck fugiat. Ut chuck pariatur meatloaf pig, in sausage est anim in eiusmod labore.’

    • mickysavage 13.2
      13 October 2011 at 2:00 pm

      It is now clear to me.  I can see why ACT is excelling in the way that it is.  I was particularly impressed by their policy to “[t]ail sint pork chop in, proident ea deserunt. Frankfurter occaecat aute”.
       

  14. Penny Bright 14
    13 October 2011 at 5:55 pm

    How come, under National’s Minister of Justice (and Commerce) Simon Power – NZ STILL has not yet got our domestic legislative framework in place in order to ratify the UN convention Against Corruption?

    (And how on earth can NZ be ‘perceived’ to be the least corrupt country in the world along with Denamrk and Singapore according to the 2010 Transparency International ‘Corruption Perception Index’ – WITHOUT having yet ratified the UN Convention Against Corruption?)

    In my considered opinion, when it comes to fighting ‘white collar’ crime and corruption, it is a clear ‘conflict of interest’ for the person to hold the Ministerial Portfolios for Justice and Commerce.

    Is that a significant reason why NZ still has not ratified the UN Convention Against Corruption?

    Because organisations such as the one for whom Minister for Justice (and Commerce) is going to work – such as Westpac – have a vested interest in NOT having more stringent controls in place to help prevent ‘white collar’ crime and corruption?

    How is it that in 2009, the NZ High Court upheld a total tax assessment of NZ$961 million by rejecting an avoidance scheme used by Westpac Banking Corporation?

    Westpac Banking Corporation being the NZ Government’s ‘bank’ – involved in tax avoidance?

    [Westpac Banking Corporation v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue CIV 2005-404-2843, 7 October 2009 ]

    How is it that a key advisor to Westpac in this case was John Shewan, who became Chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers, and, according to the above-mentioned judgment – advised Westpac to make tax payments as low as 6% (at a time that NZ’s company tax rate was 30%)?

    If these tax avoidance arrangements were found to be ‘unlawful’ – then how can it be ‘lawful’ for John Shewan to have given advice on ‘unlawful’ tax avoidance?

    I cannot find any evidence of John Shewan being charged with any offence relating to this matter.

    What I have found, however, is that this same John Shewan, ended up on the ‘Tax Working Group’!

    Check it out for yourself…..

    http://www.victoria.ac.nz/sacl/cagtr/pdf/tax-report-website.pdf

    “Foreword
    The Tax Working Group (TWG) was established by Victoria University of Wellington’s Centre for
    Accounting Governance and Taxation Research, in conjunction with the Treasury and Inland Revenue, in May 2009.

    Although an independent Group, it was formed with the support of the Minister of Finance, Hon Bill English, and the Minister of Revenue, Hon Peter Dunne.
    The Group’s task was to identify the major issues that Ministers will need to consider in reviewing medium-term tax policy and to better inform public debate on tax.

    Members of the Tax Working Group
    Bob Buckle, Victoria University of Wellington (Group Chair)
    Rob Cameron, Cameron Partners
    Paul Dunne, KPMG
    Arthur Grimes, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research
    Rob McLeod, Ernst & Young
    Gareth Morgan, Gareth Morgan Investments Limited
    Mike Shaw, Deloitte
    Geof Nightingale, PricewaterhouseCoopers
    Casey Plunket, Chapman Tripp
    John Prebble, Victoria University of Wellington
    John Shewan, PricewaterhouseCoopers
    Mark Weldon, NZX Limited
    David White, Victoria University of Wellington ”

    I note that in this Tax Working Group Report there is no reference to tax avoidance or tax evasion.

    Looking at the membership of this Tax Working Group – I guess it’s a case of ‘no surprises there’?

    Penny Bright
    Independent Public Watchdog
    Candidate for Epsom

  15. ropata 15
    13 October 2011 at 7:26 pm

    “It is in the best interests of the national party to keep the people distracted” http://is.gd/OyhBEV #KeyLines

  16. Penny Bright 16
    14 October 2011 at 12:23 am

    CAN AUCKLAND COUNCIL BY-LAWS ‘TRUMP’ s.155 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2002 OR THE NZ BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990?

    If you don’t know your rights – you don’t have any.
    If you don’t defend the rights you’re supposed to have – you lose them.

    I’ll be reminding Auckland Councillors of the lawful rights of citizens:

    Friday 14 October at 2pm in the Auckland Council Chamber
    Auckland Town Hall
    Queen St

    My subject matter being:

    The Auckland Council bylaw http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/council/documents/bylaw/part20.asp

    sections of which, which, in my considered opinion unlawfully violate s 155 of the Local Government Act 2002,

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/DLM173401.html?search=ts_act_Local+Government+Act+2002_resel&p=1#DLM173401

    and the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990.

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM225513.html?search=ts_act_Bill+of+Rights+Act+1990_resel&p=1#DLM225513

    Penny Bright
    Independent Public Watchdog
    Candidate for Epsom

Links to post