Open mike 14/09/2014

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, September 14th, 2014 - 192 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 …

192 comments on “Open mike 14/09/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    14 September 2014 at 7:35 am

    Where did Mr Slater receive his diploma/degree in journalism?

    • phillip ure 1.1
      14 September 2014 at 7:45 am

      i have never really had any problems with slater claiming he is a journalist..

      ..’cos he is..

      ..critiques could be made of his tabloid/’truth’ style of journalism..

      ..but journalism it is..

      .and his blog is a media-outlet..

      ..these are just basic definitions/facts..

      • millsy 1.1.1
        14 September 2014 at 5:06 pm

        Yes.

        I think Slater is pretty much a really nasty person, but it seems to me that he fits all the criteria to be a journalist.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.2
      14 September 2014 at 11:19 am

      Why do you think someone needs one to become a journalist?

      • Paul 1.2.1
        14 September 2014 at 6:20 pm

        Can you think of any other profession that does not require formal qualifications?

        • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 7:18 pm

          And what, precisely, does a journalism qualification actually bestow upon someone?

          It’s obviously not logical thinking or the ability to understand what scientists are saying. It doesn’t seem to have anything to do with holding power to account either and, at the end of the day, anybody who’s been to school knows how to write an essay.

  2. Cancerman 2
    14 September 2014 at 7:49 am

    Wow National still really high in the Stuff poll, Disappointing they can govern alone. http://www.stuff.co.nz/interactives/polling/

    • karol 2.1
      14 September 2014 at 7:51 am

      The Sunday papers are all about National being set to win, and there being no chance for Labour.

      • Foreign waka 2.1.1
        14 September 2014 at 9:21 am

        It really shows how scared they are. Only those who lack confidence will shout loudest.

      • Clemgeopin 2.1.2
        14 September 2014 at 10:36 am

        Labour is in an insidious position with friends and foes unfairly undermining its leader and party, left, right and centre and stupidly talking up National at the same time, in spite of Cunliffe running a great campaign and Labour having such excellent policies! What the hell is wrong with the MSM and so many people?

        • Saarbo 2.1.2.1
          14 September 2014 at 1:55 pm

          @clemgeopin
          Todays Rod Oram has a good summary of Labour’s economic policies versus Nats in the SST, and it clearly shows why Labour’s polices are far superior. It makes me wonder why so few of our media can see what Oram clearly explains. I suspect that National’s concerted #dirty politics campaign over the last 6 years combined with the ABC cabal has wrecked labour for this election, which is why they are struggling. Also National have done a good job of lying to people about the state of the economy, if I think one area where labour strategyin thi election is wrong is they should have attacked National harder around their Economic Management, Labour needed to highlight if you backed out ChCh$40b insurance proceeds and last years dairy proceeds anomaly (both wont exist in the next 2 to 3 years) from GDP we would have had zero growth. One thing is for sure, who ever wins next weekend will have their work cut out for them in the next 3 years, they are going to be tough.

          • Foreign waka 2.1.2.1.1
            14 September 2014 at 6:46 pm

            Because the interests that are represented by National are not invested in a fair society. They just want to cash in on slave labor.

      • Tracey 2.1.3
        14 September 2014 at 7:36 pm

        SST hot on mccullum wanting to suppress their article… When they have material from whaledump AND no crowing about their win over slater trying to stop them publishing

    • Paul 2.2
      14 September 2014 at 7:55 am

      Slater sending his limitless helpers out early today.

      • Cancerman 2.2.1
        14 September 2014 at 8:02 am

        So on this poll how many list mps make it back in? Losing Parker, Adern and Little will be very damaging for Labour. Greens the party of opposition I see in the future. And the next Government after this National one.

    • Ben from West 2.3
      14 September 2014 at 9:11 am

      With Labour at 22.4%, I’m left to wonder how they could have got it so wrong this year. At this % some big names are not going to make it back in. A cleanout might be good, but not an enforced one.

      • alwyn 2.3.1
        14 September 2014 at 12:08 pm

        They didn’t get it wrong this year, at least if you mean they did something.
        The got it wrong about this time last year when they elected David Cunliffe as leader. Why didn’t Grant get the job?
        As you say a cleanout might be good but that isn’t what is going to happen. On the latest poll numbers the Labour Party is going to comprise a bunch of members who go back to last century. A cleanout would get rid of people like Goff, Mallard and King.

        • kenny 2.3.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 4:01 pm

          Hahahahahaha!

        • Foreign waka 2.3.1.2
          14 September 2014 at 6:49 pm

          It is precisely this indecisive hick hack with some good old backstabbing that is costing labor. None of the voters are interested in this yesteryear Maldoon methods. You just have to blame yourself.

    • Jo 2.4
      14 September 2014 at 9:27 am

      2017 will be a contest between National and the Greens. The Greens won’t be just after the party vote next time they will be out to win seats, and they will be contesting hard in any by-elections of Labour held seats, as Labour tries to rejuvenate their line up.

      12 months ago no one could believe Labour’s result would have a two in front of it, now the question is will it have a one and will it be bigger than the Greens?

      • Cancerman 2.4.1
        14 September 2014 at 9:43 am

        Just saw Norman and Turei on Q&A. Looking forward to the Greens in 2017! Very exciting govt. Want them to lead not be a junior coalition party.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 2.4.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 10:17 am

          Oh look, a brace of ratfuckers interviewing one another. The quintessential embodiment of irrelevance and mendacity.

          We need better wingnuts: these ones are shite.

        • kenny 2.4.1.2
          14 September 2014 at 4:06 pm

          Don’t be silly. THEY were so excited about changing the government next week.

      • infused 2.4.2
        14 September 2014 at 2:20 pm

        Sorry, but we on the right, predicted this in 2008-2009. You all refused to listen.

      • kenny 2.4.3
        14 September 2014 at 4:02 pm

        Hahahahaha!

        [lprent: You will have to improve your comments or I’ll ban you as a mindless troll. Maniacal laughing is a sign of boring pointless abuse as far as I’m concerned ]

        • Foreign waka 2.4.3.1
          14 September 2014 at 6:51 pm

          Maybe that is all his/her IQ allows lprent? We understand, stress can do this to people 😉

        • kenny 2.4.3.2
          14 September 2014 at 9:12 pm

          So writing drivel is OK but laughing at drivel is not?

          Genuine question.

          • Foreign Waka 2.4.3.2.1
            15 September 2014 at 6:54 pm

            whohaa, a sentence, hallelujah. If you laugh about something please have us anticipating what is it that is so amusing. Some might have a different point of view, some might be laughing with you and a genuine punter might evolve. 🙂

    • weka 2.5
      14 September 2014 at 9:35 am

      Party Vote percentages are only based on eligible and decided voters. Respondents who are undecided, do not intend to vote or are ineligible to do so are excluded from the Party Vote.

      Biased polling, can’t even report what percentage of people aren’t decided voters.

      They did manage to point out that their interpration of results is based on the smaller parties keeping their existing seats.

    • tricledrown 2.6
      14 September 2014 at 5:31 pm

      14% undecided which is unusually high this far out from Sept20!

    • mac1 2.7
      14 September 2014 at 9:16 pm

      How about the Stuff poll on National’s tax cuts?

      5200 replies so far, 67% say it’s bad, 10% say it’s marginal and 23% say it’s good.

  3. Awww 3
    14 September 2014 at 8:01 am

    Today’s must read:
    Looking at similar NSA documents, the information Key wants to release is likely classified SECRET or TOP SECRET. That means its release would cause “serious” or “exceptionally grave” damage to security or intelligence operations (see p. 55 – 58). You and I may not agree with those operations, or their idea of “national security”, but Key and the GCSB supposedly do – and those concerns don’t disappear simply because the PM decides it would be politically useful to release. Unless of course in their eyes, “national security” means “National’s security”.

    http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2014/09/national-security-or-nationals-security.html

    • Cancerman 3.1
      14 September 2014 at 8:06 am

      Maybe because Greenwald has already put the “top secret” information in the public domain and the government just gives the context.

      • Molly 3.1.1
        14 September 2014 at 8:09 am

        … or Greenwald’s take on the misuse and misappropriation of our spy agencies is accurate. And Key is providing an example of it.

      • Paul 3.1.2
        14 September 2014 at 8:11 am

        Were you one of those who complained about a Nanny State because of lightbulbs and school tuck shop food?
        So what’s your view on a surveillance state?
        The hypocrisy is unbelievable,

    • dv 3.2
      14 September 2014 at 8:45 am

      Who has the power to declassify docs?

      • David H 3.2.1
        14 September 2014 at 11:35 am

        But we have Key going on and on about “I won’t talk about security matters.” Or “It’s not in the public interest” But now that it’s in His interest. The Liar in Chief will even throw the countries security out the window, just to try and prove a point. That alone shows what contempt he holds ordinary Kiwi’s in.

      • Tracey 3.2.2
        14 September 2014 at 7:39 pm

        Key claimed he knew nothing of the declassification of slaters oia docs, sonot hum.

  4. disturbed 4
    14 September 2014 at 8:40 am

    Cancermole, & other Natz sinners,

    NZ polls are manipulated.

    Read & learn here.

    Corruption case to answer and a police investigation must be ordered by the opposition, here are some facts.

    A simple search last night of “Polls can be manipulated” – Google
    found about 1,400,000 results.
    Below leaves us all now with the knowledge of what in New Zealand is actually going on, it is more corruption of our MSM conducting manipulated polling results, and opposition now must call this as it is, corruption of the MSM and manipulation of all polls.

    We were contacted Friday 22nd of August at 4pm by Herald Digipoll by a lady who first said we are conducting a poll and could we participate?
    We said yes, then she said my supervisor is listening in, is that o/k?

    I hesitated but agreed and she went through a ten minute questioning, and then abruptly said we don’t need your input thanks, and hung up!

    This left us so disturbed we searched the web and found all 1.4 million cases of poll manipulations globally on Goggle, which include what is called “selective polling”

    We believe we were a victim of a Herald Digipoll selective polling strategy.

    NZ pols are corrupted, is this a crime?

    This is just one case of the 1.4 million sites on Goggle in India which may show what is happening here in NZ.
    quote;

    New Delhi: Public opinion gathered by leading opinion poll agencies is often tweaked to give misleading results, Operation Prime Minister, a sting operation by a private news network, News Express, has revealed Tuesday. Well-known faces from leading opinion poll agencies have been caught on hidden camera agreeing to such malpractices.

    Operation Prime Minister shows how opinion polls are conducted and manipulated at the instance of political parties, their results traded to show a particular party in a favourable position, for a price. Presenting snippets from the sting operation at a press conference, Editor-in-chief of News Express, Vinod Kapri said, “Our motivation behind conducting the sting operation was a letter written by the Election Commission of India to all regional and national parties inviting their views on the publication of opinion polls.

    We wanted to investigate the concerns of the Commission.” In its letter dated 4 Oct, 2013, the Election Commission had said, “The Commission has been suggesting to the government that there should be a similar prohibition or restriction on opinion polls also as there could be several manipulated opinion polls which could impact the voting pattern.”

    Another motivation behind the sting operation was the mushrooming of opinion polls. “There used to be one or two opinion polls every election. But now, one sees an opinion poll almost every week. Which leads us to the question- how is the data generated so quickly and processed,” said Kapri.

    “Operation Prime Minister has exposed eleven opinion poll agencies, whose surveys are published in leading newspapers and magazines besides being broadcast by leading news channels”, it was claimed in the sting opertaion.

    It demonstrates how the 810 million voters of our country are duped into believing trends or waves that are manipulated. – See more at:

    “Opinion polls seem to have become the latest weapon in the poll campaign.

    For a price, the prediction of seats tally can be changed to suit the interests of political parties.

    The agencies have no qualms accepting even black money for this purpose”,

    News Express claimed. The influence of opinion poll agencies goes beyond mere opinion polls. In some cases, the poll agencies have claimed they can even prop up dummy candidates in the constituencies where the rival candidate is on a strong wicket.

    It has also been claimed that some leading editors are hand in glove with these poll agencies.

    This is just a few of the 1.4 million sites on Goggle. – See more at:

    http://www.ummid.com/news/2014/February/26.02.2014/opinion-poll-companies-exposed.html#sthash.wqSJ2ylu.dpuf

    http://www.sciences360.com/index.php/statistics-16350/

    http://www.ummid.com/news/2014/February/26.02.2014/opinion-poll-companies-exposed.html#sthash.h8rTzw8V.dpuf

    http://ibnlive.in.com/videos/471548/exit-polls-manipulated-modi-will-never-be-pm-samajwadi-party.html

    http://www.rediff.com/news/report/general-impression-that-opinion-polls-can-be-manipulated-sibal/20131109.htm

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Many-agencies-manipulating-opinion-poll-projections-claims-sting-operation/articleshow/31013534.cms

    http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/2764415112001

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_statistics

    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/mhp-furious-over-opinion-poll-manipulation-claims.aspx?pageID=238&nID=62184&NewsCatID=338

    • Chooky 4.1
      14 September 2014 at 9:21 am

      +100 disturbed …right wing managed PR polls are the arse end of the dog influencing voter perceptions, discouraging people from genuinely voting and corrupting democracy

    • ianmac 4.2
      14 September 2014 at 10:32 am

      Current polls seem to show that Labour are losers so don’t vote for them. Just seems so wrong. Doesn’t fit with the mood that I see.

    • anker 4.3
      14 September 2014 at 10:41 am

      Brilliant. Thanks so much for taking the time to put this comment together.

      Very disturbing re the experience you had with the pollers!

  5. Rodel 5
    14 September 2014 at 8:49 am

    MMP Strategic voting?

    While looking at figures of the 2011 election I was a bit disheartened by the large National majorities and the smaller Labour majorities until I realized that the so called left vote was often split between Green and Labour.

    It does seem to me that party votes and list MPs aside, in some electorates the right wing candidate often slips in between a divided left.

    I know some young people who give their electorate vote to a green candidate and their party vote to Labour. They don’t realize that while their party votes are effectual their electorate votes are ineffectual in the immediate election.

    I also know of some farm workers who lean to the left but because they live in farmer dominated (National) electorates they believe they can have no influence so don’t bother voting at all, not yet understanding the importance of the party vote.

    1.In Waitakere, Bennet with her majority of 9 would have been defeated if just 10 more voters had chosen Sepuloni.

    3.In Tamaki Rukaurau 10,592 voted against ,Sharples and 7,120 voted for Sharples. The split ’left’ vote allowed him to win and support National.

    4.In Ikaroa- Rawhiti , Labour’s Horomia romped in with a 6541 majority as apart from Mana’s 2484 votes, the left vote was not divided

    5.In Te Tai Hauauru the combined vote of Mana, GP and Labour was 8732 and
    Turia Tariana got 8433.

    6. In Te Tai Tokerau where the vote wasn’t split Kelvin Davis wasn’t far behind the smallish 1165 majority of Hone Pani Tamati Waka Nene Harawira . (What a magnificent name)

    7.In Te Tai Tonga there was a similar smallish majority (1475) for Labour’s Tirikatene and the yet Mana+GP vote was 3906.

    8.Waiariki -10123 combined votes of the two purportedly left parties, Mana and Labour were more than Flavell’s 7651.

    9.In Coromandel the Nat majority was 12,740 but the combined ‘left’ vote of Green and Labour, nearly 11,500 was hopelessly split at 5000+each.

    10.In Ohariu Dunne got 14,357. The Labour and GP vote combined was 15,125.

    11.In Waimakariri Cosgrove was beaten by Kate Wilkinson by 642 votes. The GP votes plus Labour votes were 17,342, Wilkinson’s 16,787.

    12.In Christchurch Central, Wagner’s majority over Labour’s Brendon Burns was just 47 (yes 47) .Over 2000 went to the GP. (Incidentally ACT got a massive 110).

    13. In Epsom it is transparently obvious that if Greens and Labour had voted strategically and voted National, their combined votes( 5991)would have obliterated John Banks false majority of 2261 and we’d never have seen a charter school. I agree that for left leaning people, doing this would probably be too hard to stomach. Dunno if I could do it.

    There is also the other elephant.: the thousands and thousands who didn’t vote at all in 2011.
    What can be done? Me.. I’ll be door knocking on the day.

    • The Al1en 5.1
      14 September 2014 at 9:09 am

      If I were running a black ops rainbow alliance election campaign, I’d have adverts on TV promoting tactical voting.
      DC appearing in turn with other opposition party leaders, having a cup of tea with them and the nation.
      Party vote for either of us, but to get rid of the electorate nat mp or stop act and dunne etc… Vote for this candidate and so on until the message sinks home.

      But I’m not running a campaign, so don’t hold your breath.

    • Foreign waka 5.2
      14 September 2014 at 9:27 am

      All it shows is that Maori parties of what ever hue are right leaning, always were. So lets be clear here. If Maori vote right then they have to live with the policies.

      • weka 5.2.1
        14 September 2014 at 9:38 am

        History has a lot to do with. What are the best gains that Māori MPs have made? Was that under left wing or right wing governments?

        • adam 5.2.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 12:27 pm

          For treaty settlements, Maori have done better under National. As far as social policy, labour started well, but then has been slowly down hill. Not to mention the backstabbing by the last labour government. So on balance, both have been as bad as each other – why do you think a majority of maori have gone with NZfirst, the greens, maori party or Mana. The major parties have been, well, bloody awful.

          • Foreign waka 5.2.1.1.1
            14 September 2014 at 7:07 pm

            Are you sure about that? Isn’t is a publicity stunt? Labor had also a plan to have all settlements arranged by a certain date. But it wouldn’t have included selling assets that all NZlanders have paid for. Social policy under National certainly is not a highlight given the proportion of Maori and pacific people showing in the statistics of the poorest in the Nation. What it also shows however is, that to my biggest disappointment, the Maori tribal hierarchy is worse than whites. How else can one explain that after decades of multimillion dollar payouts nothing has trickled down? So really there it is the meeting of the minds of the far right and Maoridom.

            • adam 5.2.1.1.1.1
              14 September 2014 at 8:34 pm

              How can you say Iwi leadership is worse than whites – when the dominant ideological framework is white? How much of Paul Henry are you watching? And why you tethered to an outdated economic concept like trickle down theory?

              Or do you want to talk about the Tainui settlement, the land and money – oh wait just under 1% of what was taken and they have your expectation to solve all the problems, with getting less than 1% of what was stolen back. Lets go positive shall we. Ngāi Tahu, or Kāi Tahu, have done well getting back a mere fraction of a percent of everything taken. Like having the most PHD’s of any Iwi, Yes – they pay fee’s – School support programmes to clothe, feed and provided supplies for all the tamariki. Massive investment into Christchurch after the earthquakes – especially housing.

              OK not all good news, the virtual slave labour on board the sealord fleet is a bloody disgrace. But wait, the Iwi leadership is being held to account on that one.

              • Murray Olsen …
                14 September 2014 at 10:34 pm

                +1 adam

              • Foreign Waka …
                15 September 2014 at 6:50 pm

                Then why is it that the majority of poverty is in Maori households? Hasn’t the main argument been that the money that was paid back is to be used for an economic base for Maoridom? Decades later and nothing has changed. Sorry, but I am not falling for the political correctness that does not allow a voice of dissent in such matters. And do you mean that Iwi leadership is above reproach and all whites are bad? The framework is surely not white – I can 100%, what do I say 1000% reassure you. Too many people I know have to stay in line or are excluded on the base of race – and this means they are white or asian. All I see is a distribution of wealth within the Maori hierarchy that leaves the National Party with their policies in the dust. Sorry, but someone has to say it and I know it does not look good. But if Maori are serious with their assertion of being all that they have proposed, then somehow the results are not showing. So where are the facts – please no fiction, work in progress or consultants are working on it.
                PS.: 1% of all that is there is, is still 100% more than most people in this country have. If Moari want to convert the country back to were it was, please tell us all. More than happy to move on, really.

    • Draco T Bastard 5.3
      14 September 2014 at 12:55 pm

      This is why we need preferential voting in electorates or to get rid of electorates altogether.

      • Rodel 5.3.1
        14 September 2014 at 8:36 pm

        DTB
        Yep I’m thinking that too. Seems to me the one who gets the minority of votes slips through.
        Oh I forgot in Auckland central, Jacinta Adern with 14321 votes missed out by 737 and yet the Greens vote was about 2,903.
        Nats must be laughing…I’m not.
        ..but it does show that in spite of the nonsense polls the John Key government can be beaten by people thinking before they vote.

    • adam 5.4
      14 September 2014 at 3:29 pm

      On point three Tāmaki Makaurau Jones never had a chance. And anyway, Shane Jones has proved he was more right wing than Pita. Is this vote labour, because we know best list? Wil labour voters in Waiariki vote for the Mana candidate? It seems to me there is a double standard at play here or is that just me?

      • Murray Olsen 5.4.1
        14 September 2014 at 10:48 pm

        It’s not just you. Labour still tends to act as if they are the left, and the others are at best support parties. It’s an attitude more suited to FPP.

  6. Chooky 6
    14 September 2014 at 9:12 am

    I have been reading an article on Clare Robinson in ‘Your Weekend’ (The Press)…and what a contrast she is to Mihi Forbes ( also featured).

    Mihi Forbes is widely regarded by professional journalist commentators as a thoughtful listener and very skilled interviewer. An experienced journalist she has some notable interviews and has done investigative journalism into some important and controversial issues …She works for Maori television and heads the programme ‘Maori Affairs’.

    In contrast Claire Robinson seems to be a very shallow, self- aggrandising person who just lucked in to being a political commentator…”People would say it didn’t matter what I said as long as I came across as credible”

    …She has a PhD in political advertising and a bachelor of design degree…(in this article there is a lot about Robinson’s art design creative abilities, multiple job experiences and her family credentials ( mother a feminist, father a political scientist, ex-husband High Commissioner to Kiribati…marriage breakdown…she took off with the chosen house painter….)

    …In essence Claire Robinson is a self -styled right wing political commentator in ” Twitter world”

    She met David Cunliffe in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs …and her biggest beef against him seems to be that he was ” married, and no one else was “…and he was ambitious in his career and “wasn’t interested in socialising”…Today “We’re friendly to each other. He knows I’ve always given him a hard time.”……”He’s had to learn on the job, which is never a good thing to do…and learn about it in the public eye.”

    “If I had to write the perfect job description for me, I would write this sort of job”….(expounding her political views and tinkering with paint and pencils….she doodles in meetings and they’re very stylish doodles)

    • ianmac 6.1
      14 September 2014 at 10:41 am

      “Mihi Forbes is widely regarded by professional journalist commentators as a thoughtful listener and very skilled interviewer.”
      On National Radio Media Report this morning they talked about a major review of Maori TV but the review will not be released until after the election. It is possible that Mihi’s great Native Affairs program will/might be closed in favour of a magazine type program. Implies that Mihi is too good at her job and has upset some senior Maori leaders.

      • tc 6.1.1
        14 September 2014 at 11:12 am

        Maori tv displeases the corporate iwi and hollowmen so they rigged the board and dropped in a new CEO.

        This caused a director resignation over the process and his former employer to offer an insight on what this person was let go for but the board declined so they didnt risk his appointment with incovenient facts.

        The new chief is a conflict monkey sent in to ‘realign’ and crash into the trouble makers making their tenure unpleasant. Nats want maori tv to be the same subservant outlet that tvnz and rnz are for them.

        • Chooky 6.1.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 12:13 pm

          Act leader Jamie Whyte , in the aftermath of a widely pilloried speech about Maori privilege, went on Mihi Forbes’ ‘Native Affairs’ programme to explain himself ….and had to admit that he had never heard of whanau ora !….

          “When you are going to be attacking race–based policies , you should know about the number one policy for the Maori party ,” Forbes says.

          Maybe this is why the NACTS and their brown nosers could be keen to get rid of a seriously good journalist and her programme….she asks the questions which expose their arrogance and ignorance and incompetence…and is not a lightweight right wing PR flibbertijibbet …. masquerading as a journalist

          A Labour Left coalition simply MUST win this Election !

    • Saarbo 6.2
      14 September 2014 at 2:08 pm

      Agree with all you say here Ckooky. I have always had the impression that much of the anti Cunliffe rhetoric has stemmed from Claire Robinson.

  7. phillip ure 7
    14 September 2014 at 9:15 am

    must-watch key interview on q&a..

    (he does a great cornered-rat impersonation..)

    ..and he claims he is doing nothing more than clark did..

    (..once again..confirming that internet/mana and the greens are the only ‘clean’ parties..

    ..the only parties able to be trusted to do the reforms needed..)

    • The Al1en 7.1
      14 September 2014 at 9:23 am

      “once again..confirming that internet/mana and the greens are the only ‘clean’ parties..the only parties able to be trusted to do the reforms needed”

      Pu, do list all “the reforms needed” so we can fact check for ourselves.
      Make it a conclusive, once and for all type document, and just put it out there.

      You may be correct, you might have missed a press release or something and labour (no pun) under misapprehension, or you might just be gassing from your head hole, but at least we’ll have a definitive list to decide who to trust, or not, and for what reasons.

    • Chooky 7.2
      14 September 2014 at 9:24 am

      lol…”great cornered-rat impersonation”…John Key is on the ropes

    • marty mars 7.3
      14 September 2014 at 11:18 am

      “he does a great cornered-rat impersonation..”

      It’s not an impersonation.

    • Draco T Bastard 7.4
      14 September 2014 at 1:01 pm

      (..once again..confirming that internet/mana and the greens are the only ‘clean’ parties..

      Unless he backed it up with documentation then all it proves is that John Key is spinning again.

  8. crocodill 8
    14 September 2014 at 9:21 am

    “…doing nothing more than clark did…”

    Well at least he admits it. His supporters can now follow his lead, saying he is principled, because honesty is the best policy is it not? And principles are good yes? Therefore he is good in all things. Because good and bad cannot co-exist. That would be unfair otherwise. Honestly admitting to your crimes negates the crime. Yes. That’ll be it. Because 1-1=0 and zero means nothing gained nothing lost = balance.

    • Rodel 8.1
      14 September 2014 at 9:30 am

      On Mediawatch..Labour has said they will establish (re-establish) a public broadcasting TV channel. I want that. Other countries do it easily.

      • Chooky 8.1.1
        14 September 2014 at 12:45 pm

        +100

      • Once Was Tim 8.1.2
        14 September 2014 at 3:22 pm

        Actually I want that too – but I’m a greedy bugger. I want more than that. I want my children to have one too. One that is similar to the one only wealthy have (a la Kidzone – commercial free). I also want a channel that provides archive material that has been publicly funded, or that public funds have contributed to – which would otherwise have not been funded (a la Heartland).
        And I’m super greedy. I want a channel that provides access to the NZ citizenry for other publicly funded enterprises such as NZSO, NZ Ballet, NZ Opera, live music and culture of all descriptions including new music and any and everything that receives funding through NZ on Air, Te Mangai Paho, Ministry for Culture and Heritage or any other public money, and which reflects local/regional views.
        Since I’m super super greedy, I also want another radio channel that provides access to the many, for new music and arts and culture, AND publicly funded networking facilities for local iwi radio and the ability for them to express themselves to a wider audience.
        Public Sphere and all that quaint sort of thing that’s relevant to the diversity of 4.5 million people.

        • Chooky 8.1.2.1
          14 September 2014 at 4:24 pm

          +100…Once Was Tim….Yes, Yes, Yes!…maybe you can offer your services to the new Labour Left coalition Govt…sounds like you know what you are talking about!

  9. crocodill 9
    14 September 2014 at 9:28 am

    Discourses of Rumi: a sample taken from Discourse four…

    “…This is like the story they tell of a certain king. This king entrusted his son to a team of learned men. In due course they had taught him the sciences of astrology, geomancy and so forth so that he became a complete master, despite his utter dullness of wit and stupidity.

    One day the king took a ring in his fist and put his son to the test.
    ‘Come, tell me what I am holding in my fist.’
    ‘The thing you are holding is round, yellow and hollow,’ the prince answered.
    ‘Since you have given all the signs correctly, now pronounce what thing it is,’ the king said.
    ‘It must be a sieve,’ the prince replied.
    ‘What?’ cried the king. ‘You gave correctly all the minute signs, such as might well baffle the minds of men. Out of all your powerful learning and knowledge how is it that this small point has escaped you, that a sieve cannot be contained in the fist?’

    In the same way the great scholars of the age split hairs on all manner of sciences. They know perfectly and have a complete comprehension of those other matters which do not concern them. But as for what is truly of moment and touches a man more closely than all else, namely his won self, this your great scholar does not know. He pronounces on the legality or otherwise of every thing, saying. ‘This is permitted and that is not permitted, this is lawful and that is unlawful.’ Yet he knows not his own self, whether it is lawful or unlawful, permissible or not permissible, pure or impure.”

    • Draco T Bastard 9.1
      14 September 2014 at 1:17 pm

      /facepalm

      More ranting against the educated from what is, most likely, an uneducated dweeb.

  10. 100% Pure NZ 10
    14 September 2014 at 9:28 am

    Regarding manipulation of polls, please search for this article – The Guardian UK

    theguardian.com, Monday 14 July 2014 19.22 BST

    GCHQ has tools to manipulate online information, leaked documents show
    Documents leaked by Edward Snowden reveal programs to track targets, spread information and manipulate online debates

  11. phillip ure 11
    14 September 2014 at 9:34 am

    and cunnliffe released the wow!-policy for the last week of the campaign..

    ..and it’s something dreamed up by parker..a state-investment thingy..

    ..and it’s probably a good idea..

    ..but does anyone think it will come within a bulls’ roar of getting the undecideds off the couch..

    ..and rushing to vote for labour..?

    ..really..?

  12. phillip ure 12
    14 September 2014 at 10:07 am

    i guess key can use the word ‘henchmen’ so easily..

    ..because of his own long history of use of henchmen/women as detailed by/in ‘dirty politics’..

    “..It is now used to generally describe any person with subordinate status derisively- while most often used specifically to a hired guard or minion of a villain or master criminal..”

    ..i thought a good villain-name for key cd be ‘mr smiley’..

    ..or ‘chuckles’..

  13. phillip ure 13
    14 September 2014 at 10:12 am

    short political-quizz:..(without running to party website..)

    what are the top-three labour policies..?

    ..the ones that have grabbed yr imagination/attention..?

    • Vaughan Little 13.1
      14 September 2014 at 12:53 pm

      capital gains tax. will transfer investment from speculative to productive parts of the economy without destroying wealth (whereas speculation is fantastic for wealth destruction).

      broadening the central bank’s mandate so that the government can more directly support export, which has been suffering for yearsnyears.

      pumping up the minimum wage. because fuck yes. two names associated with pushing for higher wages – henry ford (look up “fordism”) and marriner eccles, former chairman of the ny fed. which is kind of america’s central bank, in a roundabout way.

  14. Iron Sky 14
    14 September 2014 at 10:13 am

    Really enjoyed Media watch and interview with Independent Journalist about the need for better independent reporting etc.

    Then came the news (note the order)
    Sunday RNZ news 10:00
    •Murray McCully wants to stop whaling
    •Green will be highlighting the spying going on in NZ, Key says they have not been doing Surveillance
    •John Kerry USA, soon terrorism will be everywhere

    Who scripts the news at RNZ? Is this irony

  15. tc 15
    14 September 2014 at 10:17 am

    The wheels have come off teamkey since dirty politics, expect the kitchen sink in the 6 days till the only poll that matters.

    the MSM will shill their butts off and key will say all sorts of whacky stuff as answering questions and telling the truth has never been demanded of him so he will dig himself a deeper hole.

    stay positive and focused as It was always going to be close. I have got as many expats to vote as possible, it was easy once I asked them how the whanau back home were doing under 6years of shonkey.

  16. Lanthanide 16
    14 September 2014 at 10:23 am

    Lynn have you sorted out some sort of live chat app for election night? Trying to post comments would of course be woeful. IRC is probably the best way to go, with a web-app, so those of us that can can use an IRC client and therefore not need to rely on (or add more load to) the webserver.

  17. RedBaronCV 17
    14 September 2014 at 10:32 am

    There have been comments in the media ( and all that early stuff) about letting the biggest party govern/Key being prepared to run a minority government.

    Can anybody tell me is it possible for Key the day after the election to get in a car (sod any negotiating) and go up to the Governor general and go, “I’ll have a warrant to be the next prime Minister and I’ll run a minority government”. The GG then goes “for the sake of National stability I’ll do it” or some like rubbish.

    Does this then mean that the other parties have to vote them down when parliament reconvenes and we have another election?
    Or do we park Russell or Hone or someone down the end of the GG’s drive and phone them up if Key appears?

    • ianmac 17.1
      14 September 2014 at 10:50 am

      That is only possible if all other options have been exhausted. So the various permutations have to be tried/negotiated based on Party votes.
      I guess if Labour gathered in Greens, NZF, Internet Mana, Maori Party, United Future, and the Civilians who together gained over 50% of the Party Vote, they can govern regardless of the National 45%, and other odd sods who offer a minority Government.

      • RedBaronCV 17.1.1
        14 September 2014 at 11:04 am

        Yes that is what normally happens but what questions does the GG have to ask. If Key tries some sort of end run like this does GG have to contact Cunliffe Turei Norman and check they don’t have a bigger block?

        Not sure I trust some of the leading players here?

        • Lanthanide 17.1.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 11:32 am

          The hopeful PM has to confirm they have the support of Parliament, and the GG has to be satisfied that they do (satisfaction can include a broad measure of things, such as whether the election was fair and free – if there are doubts, then the GG may refuse the hopeful PM until such concerns are resolved).

          So yes, what you’re proposing is possible if the hopeful PM lied to the GG and the GG simply believed it (ie, ignored all media reporting that the hopeful PM did not in fact have a majority), however would never happen in practice because it would be embarrassing to the GG, the Queen, and the public of NZ to install a government that was subsequently defeated at the first motion of no confidence (which is the first motion voted on at the start of each new government).

    • Petrus 17.2
      14 September 2014 at 11:04 am

      So far as I understand things, the conventions are:

      1. The PM and his ministers hold their warrants personally until they resign, whether there is an election or not.

      2. Post-election, the carry-over govt is regarded as a caretaker administration until new arrangements are made (old ministers resign, new warrants issued to new ministers).

      3. The GG “takes advice” from the caretaker PM about who will be the next PM and accepts his/her list of ministers and swears them in (issues their warrants).

      4. The GG and the Cabinet, acting as an Executive Council, set the date for the next sitting of Parliament.

      5. Parliament convenes, sitting as a Government and an Opposition (the Westminster system is technically only ever a two-party system: the political parties can shift from one side to the other at will without triggering an election).

      6. If the Opposition thinks it can overturn the sitting Government, it can bring a Motion of No Confidence, moved by the Leader of the Opposition.

      7. If the MNC is passed, the government resigns and the outgoing PM advises the GG to invite the mover of the MNC motion to form a government.

      8. And then points 3, 5, 6, 7, repeat until either stability is achieved or it all becomes too much and a new election is called for.

      The two flies in the ointment are that, firstly, it’s all done by custom/ convention (UNLESS the Acts establishing MMP set up new rules??), and secondly that the GG usually takes the advice of the PM, whatever it may be. Precedent exists for the GG to discard that advice (eg Whitlam’s dismissal in Aus), but if the PM chooses to gives bad advice for political advantage then the GG will usually follow it.

      Generally it all sorts itself out in the wash and doesn’t need a new election, just some discipline and negotiation.

      • RedBaronCV 17.2.1
        14 September 2014 at 11:06 am

        Thanks P. Wasn’t sure I trusted some of the leading players here to act ethically.

        • weka 17.2.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 11:20 am

          Won’t it come down to Peters? ie the only way there wouldn’t be a majority on one side or the other would be if NZF declines both of them.

          • Petrus 17.2.1.1.1
            14 September 2014 at 12:14 pm

            Quite true, Weka, but it’s even more complicated than that. The MMP rules allow individuals, once in Parliament, to change their allegiances – the famous “waka-jumping” rule. It’s based on the old figment of the imagination under FPP that not parties but only individuals may be elected to Parliament, and they may then decide to align themselves with a political party. That’s why in the good old days Winston et al could change parties during a session without resigning, because they held their seats personally. Under MMP successful List candidates were given the same protection resulting in, for example, Brendan Horan being expelled from NZF but retaining his List seat as an individual (a mistake in the MMP List rules, in my opinion).

            Even though we get a parliament elected by a tribal/ political party vote, party behaviour is still all by convention. JK raises the many-headed hydra image to frighten the faithful, but the truth is that (a) there are only ever two parties in parliament and (b) there are 120+ individuals who can align themselves whichever way they want to after they are sworn in. The good news is that this usually only happens at the fraying edges of the political parties. So far.

            The possibility of a minority grouping reaching across the political party divide and inviting individuals from the other teams to come and play nicely and form a government with them is always a political reality. Depends upon the incentive, I suppose.

            Fisheries ambassadorship, anyone? Or lovely baubles of office, perhaps?

            • yeshe 17.2.1.1.1.1
              14 September 2014 at 12:43 pm

              It was mooted on either Q and A or Nation this morning – that Winston could do exactly what you refer to in your last para, and become prime minister !

              Your para: “The possibility of a minority grouping reaching across the political party divide and inviting individuals from the other teams to come and play nicely and form a government with them is always a political reality. Depends upon the incentive, I suppose”.

        • Draco T Bastard 17.2.1.2
          14 September 2014 at 1:33 pm

          I certainly don’t trust National, Act, UF, CCCP, and mP to act ethically.

  18. Ffloyd 18
    14 September 2014 at 10:43 am

    Nice photo of John key’s henchman/lackey.

  19. Molly 19
    14 September 2014 at 11:04 am

    Thank god for technological advances, otherwise Tony Abbott’s Liberal Party will have troubles running Parliament with all their members equidistant from each other – and doing it on less government funding: Welfare cut for terror suspects.

    Joking aside, Abbott – like Key – continues to astound me when I think nothing that he does will surprise me again.

    • tc 19.1
      14 September 2014 at 11:31 am

      Like here the average punter in oz has little idea how owned the govt is by business interests as rupert controls a fair slice of media and reinhardt has a solid grip on fairfax ownership should she choose to go all the way.

      abotts polling is bad but they dont care, getting the job done etc with turnbull paitently waiting in the wings when they need a new front next election. Expect more from tony he is far from done yet.

      the wildcard is PUP, mining magnate clive palmers party who hold sway in the senate with senators like ricky muir and jacquie lambie take a seat and enjoy the show performed by its CT scripted actors.

  20. joe90 20
    14 September 2014 at 11:07 am

    Canada’s Conservatives have passed a bill giving foreigners the right to sue, in secret tribunals, to overturn Canadian law and First Nation treaties which might interfere their investments.

    .

    It’s official: Prime Minister Stephen Harper has approved the controversial Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) today.

    In a short, two-paragraph news release, International Trade Minister Ed Fast said the deal was now ratified. It will come into force on October 1, 2014, and will be effective for 31 years, until 2045.

    The original investment protection deal — which treaty law expert Gus Van Harten said could be in violation of the Canadian Constitution — was quietly signed in 2012 in Vladisvostok, Russia, but was delayed for two years due to public outcry

    […]

    First Nations argued that the deal was not valid, as it would violate section 35 of the Constitution requiring consultation over projects that could affect traditional territory. The Hupacasath First Nation in B.C. took the federal government to court last year over the FIPA deal, while citizen advocacy groups Leadnow and SumOfUs delivered 60,000 signatures from across Canada in opposition to the agreement. The court decision on the Hupacasath First Nation’s legal appeal is still pending, despite the ratification.

    http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/harper-oks-potentially-unconstitutional-china-canada-fipa-deal-coming-force-october-1

  21. Flipnz 21
    14 September 2014 at 11:18 am

    NSA and GSCB is being used for economic spying.

  22. Dont worry. Be happy 22
    14 September 2014 at 11:28 am

    Three questions for the Prime Minister.

    If as you have stated, the GCSB drew up “mass protection ” programmes for NZers why did you veto it? Are we now “unprotected? And “unprotected” against what/whom?

    • marty mars 22.1
      14 September 2014 at 12:02 pm

      Yep good questions and it will be interesting to see what they were proposing as these ‘mass protection’ programmes – we are now deep down the rabbit hole and the week ahead will be surreal and sickening as durrkey spins and slides.

  23. Grant 23
    14 September 2014 at 11:49 am

    If I were the cynical sort, I’d say that the metaphorical ink will still be dry on the documents ‘exonerating’ Key.

    I think it was a journalist in Yes Prime Minister who asked “Is it true that the documents have yet to be released because the PM can only type with one finger?”

    • joe90 23.1
      14 September 2014 at 12:08 pm

      The PM’s manual –

      THE GREASY POLE

      "It is only totalitarian governments that suppress facts. In
      this country we simply take a democratic decision not to publish
      them."
      "How to discredit an unwelcome report:

      Stage One: Refuse to publish in the public interest saying
      1. There are security considerations.
      2. The findings could be misinterpreted.
      3. You are waiting for the results of a wider and more detailed
      report which is still in preparation. (If there isn’t one, commission
      it; this gives you even more time).

      Stage Two: Discredit the evidence you are not publishing, saying
      1. It leaves important questions unanswered.
      2. Much of the evidence is inconclusive.
      3. The figures are open to other interpretations.
      4. Certain findings are contradictory.
      5. Some of the main conclusions have been questioned. (If they haven’t,
      question them yourself; then they have).

      Stage Three: Undermine the recommendations. Suggested phrases:
      1. ‘Not really a basis for long term decisions’.
      2. ‘Not sufficient information on which to base a valid assessment’.
      3. ‘No reason for any fundamental rethink of existing policy’.
      4. ‘Broadly speaking, it endorses current practice’.

      Stage Four: Discredit the person who produced the report. Explain
      (off the record) that

      1. He is harbouring a grudge against the Department.
      2. He is a publicity seeker.
      3. He is trying to get a Knighthood/Chair/Vice Chancellorship.
      4. He used to be a consultant to a multinational.
      5. He wants to be a consultant to a multinational."
      "To suppress an internal government report, rewrite it as
      official advice to the Minister. Then it is against the rules to
      publish it, so you can leak the bits you want to friendly journalists."

      http://www.jonathanlynn.com/tv/yes_minister_series/yes_minister_episode_quotes.htm

  24. Paul 24
    14 September 2014 at 11:59 am

    Talking of henchman and, as he brought up the subject, who is John Key the henchman for?

  25. marty mars 25
    14 September 2014 at 1:14 pm

    What does this mean

    Mr Key said “there’s total mention” the GCSB was considering something akin to mass surveillance…

    there is total mention?

    … “without a shadow of a doubt GCSB does not conduct mass surveillance on New Zealand”

    of course not but does it do mass surveillance on NZ citizens – that is the question/answer that is going to fuck you up key.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11324452

  26. phillip ure 26
    14 September 2014 at 1:43 pm

    good name for a covers-band..

    ..john key and the henchmen..

  27. Fred 27
    14 September 2014 at 2:21 pm

    Anyone know where I can still find a video of NIcky Hager Publically speaking at the Mt Eden War Memorial Hall on the 27th August. Everywhere I go it says it is unavailable. Thanking you

  28. joe90 28
    14 September 2014 at 4:11 pm

    Ben Uffindell writing ACT press releases?.

    ACT is holding the Balance of Power

    Dr Jamie Whyte, ACT Leader

    11 am Sunday 14 September

    Tasca Café, Newmarket, Auckland

    ACT will hold the balance of power after the election on Saturday.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1409/S00316/act-is-holding-the-balance-of-power.htm

  29. Stuart Munro 29
    14 September 2014 at 5:07 pm

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxUV8MTCEAMFbBu.jpg

    “Are you completely nuts? If I’d fixed Christchurch CERA would’ve been wound up – I’d’ve had to go back to being a failed woodwork teacher.”

  30. phillip ure 30
    14 September 2014 at 6:43 pm

    only one more sleep until utu-monday..

  31. ScottGN 31
    14 September 2014 at 7:17 pm

    It’s striking how often the four anglophone Commonwealth countries are often having the same conversation at the same time.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/raising-minimum-wage-could-rescue-the-economy-don-pittis-1.2516796

    • ianmac 31.1
      14 September 2014 at 7:22 pm

      ScottGN I liked this bit and wondered why the 3rd to last sentence isn’t used by David:
      Canada: “They are supported by a very traditional market argument that says raising minimum wage results in fewer jobs and is thus bad for the wider economy. Of course, the extension of this argument is that no minimum wage at all would be even better for the economy. If you think that, it is time for you to emigrate. There are many countries with no minimum wage.

  32. ianmac 32
    14 September 2014 at 7:19 pm

    On Q&A I thought Key looked serious and fluent and credible when talking to Corrin. Damn I thought!
    Tonight on TV3 News he looked petulant, sulky and if one more question was asked of him he would have burst into tears. You know when someone struggles to contain their emotions their face muscles tremble and give you away.
    The current issues are hurting him.

    • karol 32.1
      14 September 2014 at 7:27 pm

      John Key does not like being criticised or exposed. He does not like losing. It’s what drives him and, I guess it has brought him “success”: success as he sees it. However, it’s also his Achilles heel. He just will not back down, even when the evidence is clearly against him.

    • karol 32.2
      14 September 2014 at 7:47 pm

      He’s certainly not maintaining the smiley friendly guy front that is part of the two track strategy.

    • Clemgeopin 32.3
      14 September 2014 at 9:03 pm

      If he is so certain that he is not lying, may be he should simply offer to take a lie detector test devised by Greenwald and be done with it.

  33. Clemgeopin 33
    14 September 2014 at 7:56 pm

    ‘MOMENT OF TRUTH’ INFO:
    http://kim.com/

  34. weka 34
    14 September 2014 at 8:08 pm

    Fuck, fuck, fuckity, fuck fuck. I was pretty sure I was going to party vote GP, but I just watched Laila Harre interview Greenwald and Amsterdam and now I want to vote for her! She so should be in parliament. My heart says IMP, but my head says GP. I’ve never had a voting dilemma before. Anyone else not know what they are doing?

    • Lanthanide 34.1
      14 September 2014 at 8:15 pm

      Split the difference and vote Labour?

      • weka 34.1.1
        14 September 2014 at 8:23 pm

        Lolz, I don’t think so. I hope Labour do well, but I think we need a strong GP presence if we want to shift left.

        Wishing I lived in a democracy where tactical voting was unecessary.

        • Lanthanide 34.1.1.1
          14 September 2014 at 8:24 pm

          Quickie move and enrol in Helensville so you can vote for Harre?

          • weka 34.1.1.1.1
            14 September 2014 at 8:30 pm

            haha, I did think of that. Bit of a long way for me though.

            (I think it’s too late anyway, don’t you have to live in an electorate for a month to be able to vote there?).

            Maybe STV would solve the problem. Mostly the dilemma is because I don’t know how everyone else is voting. With STV, it would matter would it? because my preferences would be ordered depending on what other people did too.

            • Lanthanide 34.1.1.1.1.1
              14 September 2014 at 8:38 pm

              STV very much frees up voting for minor parties as your vote for them cannot be “wasted”.

              This would also mean ACT and UnitedDunne would almost certainly win their electorates, too.

              I think if we end up with 2 large parties on the left and 2 large parties on the right there will be a big appetite to change the way electorate voting works. But IIRC the MMP review recommended no changes, because people having a party vote and a candidate vote is already confusing enough as it is, without making the candidate vote into an STV.

              Possibly one compromise would be to just to let people have 2 votes for candidates, with the candidate winning the most votes winning. It avoids a full-on STV ranking confusion, while still allowing more representation.

              • weka …
                14 September 2014 at 8:52 pm

                “I think if we end up with 2 large parties on the left and 2 large parties on the right there will be a big appetite to change the way electorate voting works.”

                How come?

                • Lanthanide …
                  14 September 2014 at 9:01 pm

                  Because candidate voting is FPP – you just have to get the ‘most votes’, it doesn’t have to be anywhere near 1/2 of them.

                  If there were 4 roughly even sized parties, there could be some electorates where “the wrong party won” because the other bloc “split the vote”.

                  We’re already seeing it now with people voting for Greens candidates who realistically have 0 chance of winning, but in doing-so they hand the electorate over to National instead of Labour.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  14 September 2014 at 9:05 pm

                  Laila Harre is pretty amazing. The senior Cabinet Minister that Labour never had.

                  • Lanthanide …
                    14 September 2014 at 9:11 pm

                    Yip. Her stepping into the leadership of IMP was enough to shake my conviction for voting Labour.

                    Ultimately I gave up on IMP because they didn’t have any policies announced, and now that I’ve seen them I can’t say I’m super-thrilled with them either. They’ll have a lot more time to mature over this term and I’ll give them another chance next time.

            • Colonial Viper 34.1.1.1.1.2
              14 September 2014 at 9:02 pm

              Yep STV would be a good move for the electorate vote: just rank your top three candidates 1, 2, 3.

              • Lanthanide …
                14 September 2014 at 9:28 pm

                I think party votes with ticks and candidate votes with numbers would be too confusing for a lot of people.

                I think a reasonable compromise is 2 ticks for candidates, and 1 tick for party vote. Candidates still remains FPP and only a single candidate can win an electorate.

                Either system would mean the phrase “two ticks for X” would no longer make sense, though.

              • greywarbler …
                14 September 2014 at 9:41 pm

                @ CV
                This has probably been talked about before. But what would be against local bodies using STV.? In theory it sounds useful for them, does it have fishhooks?

    • Clemgeopin 34.2
      14 September 2014 at 9:04 pm

      Where did you watch that interview, weka? Any link please?

    • Murray Olsen 34.3
      15 September 2014 at 12:54 am

      Me too. I am having trouble choosing between Mana and the Greens. Every time I make a decision, the benefitting party says or does something I don’t like. Mana is slightly ahead at the moment.

  35. Liberal Realist 35
    14 September 2014 at 8:26 pm

    Just watched the clip below of Susan Wood interviewing RN & MT from the Greens.

    I honestly cannot believe the conduct of Susan Wood? At every opportunity she had to point out how badly Labour are doing in the polls, she even said ‘Labour are tanking’ with a smug grin on her face.

    Absolutely disgraceful TVNZ! Anyone with half a brain, including Susan Wood, knows that the polls are all over the place, often do not include undecideds and in some cases appear to be complete bullshit. Yet Susan Wood does her best to suggest that National have it in the bag? Bias much!

    Yet more evidence that MSM are in need of a serious clean up.

    http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/largest-party-gets-pm-everything-else-table-green-co-leaders-video-6080063

    • Lanthanide 35.1
      14 September 2014 at 8:28 pm

      The fact that the polls are crap is the elephant in the room that the MSM are doing their best to avoid.

      If the outcome of the election is sufficiently different from what polling suggests, then I think we may see a bit of a wake-up call for the media, as well as calls for the polling companies to explain themselves and reform their methodologies.

    • greywarbler 35.2
      14 September 2014 at 9:44 pm

      You could stop watching the puppets involved with the news as I have done. If you ever caught Thunderbirds you might get a whiff of connection with the actors there. Lady Penelope would be much more lively and stylish than Susan Wood.

    • Murray Olsen 35.3
      15 September 2014 at 1:07 am

      I am by no means sure that Susan Woods has half a brain.

  36. Your One inTen 36
    14 September 2014 at 9:44 pm

    This is a link to a ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ video of Key before the last election. As he’s asked a very embarrassing question, his smiling face transforms as he looks down into something hateful. It’s the absolute opposite of the charming front he usually strives to effect. Such a pity that few of the Nats’ believers would ever have seen this, the real face, of their golden boy.
    The video starts to get interesting from about 1 min 11 secs.

  37. Colonial Viper 37
    14 September 2014 at 9:59 pm

    An excellent very short summary of the core allegations in Dirty Politics. h/t @LostArcNZ

    https://twitter.com/LostArcNZ/status/511090593879973888/photo/1

  38. joe90 38
    14 September 2014 at 9:59 pm

    Polls huh.

    Commenting on a new ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph which puts Yes at 54 per cent and No at 46 per cent – and an Opinium poll for the Observer which puts Yes at 47 per cent and No at 53 per cent – Blair Jenkins, chief executive of Yes Scotland, said: ‘The new ICM poll gives Yes a record eight-point lead, which is hugely encouraging. Meanwhile, Opinium puts Yes behind, but just by six points.

    http://www.yesscotland.net/news/new-icm-poll-puts-yes-8-points-ahead-polls-all-show-everything-play-countdown-referendum

    • Colonial Viper 38.1
      14 September 2014 at 10:05 pm

      I think in terms of turnout, the YES vote will be more energised and they will have it. And a friend pointed this out to me: we will know the Scottish result as we turnout to vote…if they vote for a change I think it will push us over the line too 🙂

      • Not a PS Staffer 38.1.1
        15 September 2014 at 11:41 am

        The Scottish Vote results will start rolling around noon on Friday NZ time. Get your hoarding removals done first: then start the celebrations!

  39. rich the other 39
    14 September 2014 at 10:51 pm

    Scottish referendum ,
    I feel this has been poorly thought out and what ever happens the result will divide the Scottish people . The polls suggest a close result which will leave large numbers of scott’s in a state of despair which ever way it goes .
    The vote to change should require a much higher % of the population to support leaving , imagine if 49% vote to stay , that’s trouble ahead , perhaps civil unrest .

    • locus 39.1
      14 September 2014 at 11:36 pm

      “imagine if 49% vote to stay , that’s trouble ahead , perhaps civil unrest ”

      ….that view sounds a little like the ‘no’ compaign scare tactics

      ‘civil unrest’ tends to be associated with people who are poor, powerless, unemployed, marginalised, have nothing to lose, …

      If the ‘yes’ vote wins there will still be a democratic election process in Scotland. And you can be sure that most Scots will want Scotland to succeed even if they voted ‘no’

      Scots have been thinking and debating the pros and cons of being an independent nation for a very long time and whichever way the vote goes will not turn on each other