Open mike 14/11/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 14th, 2011 - 140 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…

140 comments on “Open mike 14/11/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Pete George 1
    14 November 2011 at 6:36 am

    Phill Goff visited Dunedin yesterday, plenty of support, but a theme of “doing it tough”.

    “Doing it tough” is not new for families. Expectations of “getting it easy” seems to be a modern malaise.

    • Blighty 1.1
      14 November 2011 at 6:54 am

      “getting it easy” – like when National stands aside in an electorate and tries to get its voters to support a desperately unpopular party?

    • millsy 1.2
      14 November 2011 at 7:10 am

      So think that having a decent wage to cover basic living expenses and ensure one has a decent standard of living as well as access to things such as healthcare and education is ‘getting it easy’?

      • Pete George 1.2.1
        14 November 2011 at 7:26 am

        Relatively (especially relative to history) – yes. We should certainly strive for everything decent, but shouldn’t expect it as “deserved”.

        Achieving success through your own efforts is still a critical part of living.

        • millsy 1.2.1.1
          14 November 2011 at 7:37 am

          So you would slash wages and conditions and privatise health care and force everyone to buy health insurance, because that is part of ‘achieving success through ones efforts’.

          Oh thats right, UF’s policy is to privatise health care isnt it?

          • Pete George 1.2.1.1.1
            14 November 2011 at 7:56 am

            I wouldn’t do anything like that. I think individual effort is important. And don’t think people should be promised an easy life nirvana that can never be delivered. But that’s quite different to the extremes you try and smear with, it’s reality.

            Socialism has proven to be a dismal failure, on a small scale and on a large scale.

            Good social policies, social support and assistance, are essential in a decent society, but so is hard work, so is as much self sufficiency as possible, and so is self responsibility.

            • mickysavage 1.2.1.1.1.1
              14 November 2011 at 7:59 am

              Petey is into banal trolling mode.  Suggest we ignore him the same way the voting population is ignoring United Follicles.

            • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1.1.2
              14 November 2011 at 8:10 am

              And don’t think people should be promised an easy life nirvana that can never be delivered.

              Its what the rich want. That’s why Key gave himself a $1000/week tax cut for doing nothing different.

              Socialism has proven to be a dismal failure, on a small scale and on a large scale.

              Except in the Christchurch earthquake of course, where the sharing of food, financial resources, and physical resources between neighbours, neighbourhoods and suburbs helped get everyone through.

              As usual, you’re a short sighted idiot.

              • Pete George …
                14 November 2011 at 8:15 am

                That wasn’t socialism in Christchurch, it was people supporting each other. But I doubt they will pool their property and close the income gap (same pay for differenrt effort) anytime soon.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  14 November 2011 at 8:20 am

                  That wasn’t socialism in Christchurch, it was socialism.

                  Really, what else did you think socialism was?

                  And, no, we’re not after “same pay for different effort” but the same pay for the same effort.

                • William Joyce …
                  14 November 2011 at 1:26 pm

                  You’re sounding like some J Edgar Hoover re-run who could not tell the difference between authoritarian Stalinist style communism and socialism.
                  Ackshully, most Americans can’t tell the difference either.
                   
                  IMHO, socialists make the best capitalists.

            • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1.1.1.3
              14 November 2011 at 8:19 am

              Socialism has proven to be a dismal failure, on a small scale and on a large scale.

              No it hasn’t. If anything, it’s been the most successful political system yet. The failure has always been capitalism.

              Good social policies, social support and assistance, are essential in a decent society, but so is hard work,

              Wrong. Hard work is not essential. The only reason why we need hard work now is because the capitalists are taking all the benefits of increased productivity and then accusing those made worse off by their greed of being bludgers.

            • AAMC 1.2.1.1.1.4
              14 November 2011 at 10:32 am

              “Socialism has proven to be a dismal failure, on a small scale and on a large scale.”

              I’m not necessarily endorsing Sociali
              Per say, especially not in it’s authoritarian form, which is where it failed. I’d say though Pete, village life in many agrarian cultures through history would show your assertion that Socialism fails on a small and large scale false.

              More interestingly though, we are now witnessing that not only Communisim, at it’s extreme, but Capitalisim, at it’s unfettered crony extreme has also failed. And tho is where you cold war thinkers fail. Both systems have failed, history didn’t end in 1989, it’s time to stop worrying only about the reds under your beds! It’s time for new thinking which relates and reacts to this moment!

            • Deadly_NZ 1.2.1.1.1.5
              14 November 2011 at 2:50 pm

              I am going to break my own rule about your drivel. Because I saw this…

              Peter Dunne says on Radio Live: “We are not a right-wing party,” he said, “We can work with either side.”

              Yep Peter Dunne is a vote Whore, who will do anything to get his nose in the Trough..

              Now back to my No drivel rule.

              • Pete George …
                14 November 2011 at 4:41 pm

                I think all politicians should work with most sides as much as possible. Surely they are there to do what’s best for the people, not have political hissy fits if they are on the wrong side of the spectrum of the day.

                United Future aren’t the only ones who will work with any reasonable party, Greens do it too – well, they would if Labour didn’t shut them out. Same for Maori Party.

                • lprent …
                  14 November 2011 at 8:53 pm

                  Greens shut out? An interesting rewrite of history. The greens in 2005 were short of seats. United Future and NZ First stated to Labour that they would not go into coalition with the Greens, but were happy to go into coalition with each other and Labour.

                  That meant Labour could form a government with a majority without the Greens which lasted through to the election, or a minority government with the Greens which was likely to be unstable.

                  The Maori party were brand new in parliament, asking for too much, and looked as unstable as they have proved to be this term…

                  United Future, the party that Pete George is standing for, helped to lock the Greens out of their first realistic chance of government in 2005. Now he prefers to lie about it for political point scoring. You really do look like a kiwiblog candidate….

            • mik e 1.2.1.1.1.6
              14 November 2011 at 10:22 pm

              Pure Guile Singapore China growing centrally planned economies Laissez fair is the failure,No laissez fair economy is growing.
              In the US a economic survey carried out by the BBC economics reporter show high taxed more socialist states are actually growing the low taxed laissez fair sates are depressed or in recession not one laissez fair state is growing Follicle F/wit

        • mik e 1.2.1.2
          14 November 2011 at 10:15 pm

          PG Why Don’t you ask the 100,000 that left for Aus
          Every body I know with a family is feed up with the continual loss of spending power
          lower incomes
          These people work harder than you
          They have suffered under you greasy leaders watch
          Pathetic
          Git

  2. mickysavage 2
    14 November 2011 at 6:41 am

    Out in Waitakere things are heating up.  Bene basher bully Bennett’s helpers have been playing silly buggers with Labour billboards. Paula’s campaign manager Mark Brickell was seen  taking down some labour signs from fences. When asked what he thought he was doing he said  the people who owned the Fences had said Labour was not given permission to put the signs up and that they had wanted them down. 

    There is a truth and reality problem with this explanation though.  Carmel’s crew were told at one house that Bennett had shown up wanting to know why they had let Labour put a sign up and at at no point did they ask her or her team to take it down. The sign is back up now.

    It is poor form for a Cabinet Minister to terrorise Waitakere constituents for putting up a Labour billboard.  There again when you think of the appalling way she treated Natasha Fuller this behavior is not surprising.

    • BLiP 2.1
      14 November 2011 at 7:47 am

      National Ltd™ are playing silly buggers over in Maungakiekie too. Poor sod at the Council has nearly had enough. Mind you, some of the “rules” have arbitrarily changed: it seems, a double-sided billboard with the same image on both sides is now considered one sign. Silly little things like that which make more work for everyone with nothing in return – welcome to the Super Shitty. One moment of light entertainment – a complaint about a Labour sign being too close to the fence resulted in the Council finding that so too was National Ltd’s. There’s also a couple of National Ltd signs under the “drip line” of trees – just waiting for a couple of rainy days before reporting those. Oh, what fun.

    • Kty 2.2
      14 November 2011 at 3:22 pm

      On the subject of billboards, (700 of them).

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10765970

      Nothing like the truth, eh!.

      • Mac1 2.2.1
        14 November 2011 at 10:27 pm

        One local Nat hoarding has had John Key drawn on with a black eye patch and moustache.

        Long John Shonkey is my name for him. He walks the plank on November 26. Ahaaarhh!

  3. The Voice of Reason 3
    14 November 2011 at 7:10 am

    Democracy Under Attack Shock!


    Secret tape reveals that the PM is an “arse”, “the worst PM since Gladstone” and a “despicable creature without any redeeming features”.
     

    • grumpy 3.1
      14 November 2011 at 7:29 am

      True, as far as Cameron goes, however in NZ, we have a PM who is rising in the polls, as is his party. In fact, he is now our most popular PM ever!

      • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1
        14 November 2011 at 7:37 am

        Er, no, grumpy. Key still hasn’t reached the heights of popularity reached by either Clark or Lange and the most recent polls have him, and his party, dropping in popularity. But other those points, you’re 100% right.

      • millsy 3.1.2
        14 November 2011 at 7:40 am

        Its amazing what kicking public servants, and poor and low income workers can do, isnt it?

        • BLiP 3.1.2.1
          14 November 2011 at 7:49 am

          Its amazing what kicking public servants, and poor and low income workers, hoisting costs on the sick and elderly, depriving children, removing democracy from Christchurch, acting like a goober on the world stage, while also growing the underclass can do, isnt it?

          FIFY

          • McFlock 3.1.2.1.1
            14 November 2011 at 12:31 pm

            and “goober” is a technical term used in the field of international relations to denote a diplomatically incompetent social tourist masquerading as the leader or representative of an insignificant pimple on the geopolitical atlas. It’s needed, because after the official visit of a goober you need to schedule at least two days before the next diplomatic engagement simply so you can clean the *** stains out of the red carpet.

      • AAMC 3.1.3
        14 November 2011 at 10:54 am

        Popular for a brief moment maybe, but of he wins and dolls out Austerity during the coming depression, he’ll soon be able to add most hated to most loved.

  4. Tiger Mountain 4
    14 November 2011 at 7:27 am

    Nice one Voice, he’ll get his. Back to local recordings…

    Part of Key’s defence line on the “Teapot Tapes” yesterday was “the public don’t like this covert snooping”. Rich, given the Nats Search and Surveillence Bill extension of powers to every copper and tin pot beauracrat. Today on TVNZ the line was protecting us all from News of the World tactics, and nothing to ‘see’ in the soundtrack anyway. “I’m not going to reward the Herald on Sunday for News of the World tactics”.

    • The Voice of Reason 4.1
      14 November 2011 at 7:43 am

      Yep, Key must also be livid at Paula Bennett’s releasing of the personal information of beneficiaries in a News of the World style breach of privacy. Isn’t he?
       
      And if he’s right that the public don’t like this kind of snooping, how does he explain the sales of womens’ magazines, which rely almost exclusively on actual or thinly veiled snooping on the lives of celebrities?

      • mickysavage 4.1.1
        14 November 2011 at 7:54 am

        This is a National beatup to obliterate media coverage for a while.  Expect this to be spun out for as long as possible.

        The last pollie who sought an injunction to prevent publication of damaging media was coincidentally Don Brash who attempted to inject the publication of the Hollow Men. 

        • Janice 4.1.1.1
          14 November 2011 at 8:39 am

          I agree MS. Natrad has headlined it all morning – a nice distraction from anything Goff might do. What a clever set up – got him on the news to not say anything apart from News of the World tactics.

  5. infused 5
    14 November 2011 at 7:36 am

    How does Labour, and those that vote Labour, feel facing oblivion?

    • millsy 5.1
      14 November 2011 at 7:38 am

      How does it feel knowing that your dream of single mother and their children living on the street, and people dying because they have no health insurance is going to become a reality.

      Youre a real nasty fuck, you know that?

      • higherstandard 5.1.1
        14 November 2011 at 7:53 am

        ‘……and people dying because they have no health insurance is going to become a reality.”

        You must have had a bad experience in the health system at some stage Millsy. Nevertheless, you should stop spouting this rubbish, NZ’s health system is and will remain primarily tax payer funded for the foreseeable future. The only things people may benefit from in relation to health insurance is faster surgery for non-urgent procedures.

        • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1
          14 November 2011 at 11:56 am

          The only things people may benefit from in relation to health insurance is faster surgery for non-urgent procedures.

          Guess what happens when those insurance funded private procedures go wrong? As they do in up to 10% of cases?

          That’s right, those private patients get shipped over to the public hospitals to get their postsurgical infection or whatever sorted out.

          Private company keeps the profit, socialises the losses on the rest of us.

          • In Vino Veritas 5.1.1.1.1
            14 November 2011 at 1:05 pm

            Colonial, a couple of questions about this statement

            (1) whats your source for 10%?
            (2) what percentage of public hospital procedures go wrong?
            (3) “Private company keeps the profit, socialises the losses on the rest of us”. Surely the loss is less than if would have been had the patient gone to the public hospital in the first place?(given that there must be a percentage of public hospital procedures fail and this particular one could have been one of them)
            (4) where’s your source that says that the private hospitals don’t patch up their screwups?

          • higherstandard 5.1.1.1.2
            14 November 2011 at 1:11 pm

            Hi CV

            Yes as I stated above private hospitals/insurers are there to primarily provide non-urgent surgery and are set up to provide that service to private. This takes some pressure off the public waiting times for orthopaedic, cardiovascular and ophthalmologic surgery in particular, as you know they are also contracted to provide extra capacity for the various surgery where publicly funded operations are performed at the private hospitals.

            In the rare instances that procedures go seriously wrong the patient may be transferred to a specialist critical care/intensive care provider at one of the large DHB hospitals.

            I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make ?

            • mik e 5.1.1.1.2.1
              14 November 2011 at 10:26 pm

              CV is right private hospitals in New Zealand rely on back up from the public system they don,t have a great depth in their facilities like the public system has!

        • rosy 5.1.1.2
          14 November 2011 at 8:38 pm

          The only things people may benefit from in relation to health insurance is faster surgery for non-urgent procedures.

          No it’s not. Try having a chronic long-term condition. See your specialist in the private system every 3 months, or see the very same specialist for the very same condition in the public system every 6 months (planned), however due to long waiting lists that 6 months stretches out to 9 months. All the while, for optimal health the meds need prescribing and adjusting every 3 months (and can’t be adjusted by a GP).

          The meds cost nothing to get from the specialist, but cost to get from the GP when then need to be prescribed between specialist visits. It’s almost a false economy to stay in the public system.

          Time for resources to be diverted back to public IMO.

    • LynW 5.2
      14 November 2011 at 8:14 am

      Actually infused, extremely concerned and deeply disappointed that fellow New Zealanders will possibly be so self-centred and short-sighted. And I say ”possibly” because I still hold hope that compassion and caring for the less fortunate and simple common sense that selling our assets is such a ridiculous thing to do, New Zealanders will rally and make the right choice at the time. Call me an eternal optimist but clambering over others, pulling the ladder up and rewarding greedy behaviour to get to the ‘top’ just doesn’t seem to fit with the average Kiwi I know. Nov 26th will be a defining moment in our history and I still hold hope for a fairer NZ.

      • marsman 5.2.1
        14 November 2011 at 8:29 am

        Well said LynW, my sentiments exactly. I am appalled that Key even has a chance of being re-elected. He is a liar and he wants to sell off our country to the detriment of all except a few.

        • Ianupnorth 5.2.1.1
          14 November 2011 at 10:04 am

          +1 – people need to actually wake up to the current situation across the whole of the country, not just their local suburb.

          • AAMC 5.2.1.1.1
            14 November 2011 at 11:07 am

            And the whole of the world and the lessons out Antipodian hindsight allows us. We – like it or not – are a globalised world, and what is being rolled out in British Universities and Hospitals and Prisons should be a warning to all Kiwi’s, and what’s happening in the Global economy should be a lessonn in the failings of NACT inc’s Ideology.

            But we’re caught in our parochial bubble, while the corporations rub their hands in glee at the opportunity in our ignorance.

      • infused 5.2.2
        14 November 2011 at 10:45 am

        Maybe Labour should be doing more then eh?

        If Labour is STILL losing votes, obviously NZ is reject labour and their policies. It’s not about greed. It’s about how poor Labours policies actually are.

        Even though I support National, I don’t believe everyone is voting National because National have great policies. I think most people see this as the better of two evils. Just look at the asset selling policy, yet people are still sticking to National.

        Labour need to dump Goff, stop hating on the rich, and actually bring some fair balanced policy. Not just spending more on useless shit, which seems about as much as Labour can think up.

        • felix 5.2.2.1
          14 November 2011 at 11:42 am

          “I think most people see this as the better of two evils.”

          I think that’s overstating it. From my own observations I’d say most people aren’t paying attention.

        • McFlock 5.2.2.2
          14 November 2011 at 1:07 pm

          “Labour need to dump Goff, stop hating on the rich, and actually bring some fair balanced policy. ”

          Actually, the voters of NZ need to stop falling for such simple mythologies distributed by toryboys – Labour policies are still tory-lite compared with MJS, most of the labour leadership are pretty well off (their only weakness is a tendency to sympathise with people other than themselves), and Goff is actually a better leader than “dodge the bad news, coast from one lie to the next, whatever it takes [to win]” Key.

          • infused 5.2.2.2.1
            14 November 2011 at 1:31 pm

            I don’t believe that for a second.

            Everyone has an opinion on this years election and I think a lot of people do care.

            No one wants Goff. Look at preferred prime minister. I won’t if Labours vote would go up with him gone.

            Another example of ‘the people’ rejecting Labour is the Greens gaining their vote.

            • McFlock 5.2.2.2.1.1
              14 November 2011 at 1:52 pm

              “I don’t believe that for a second.”
              Which bit? There were multiple assertions. Savage would have just nationalised all major infrastructure including banks, compulsory unionism, and so on – Labour have moved away from asset sales, but they haven’t quite seen the light yet.

              “Everyone has an opinion on this years election and I think a lot of people do care.”
              But do they care enough to research the topic and see Key lie, or do they just passively accept the perceived truth from TV3? And if a lot of people do care, why are the “undecided/did not respond” counts at anywhere between 20 and 40%?

              “No one wants Goff. Look at preferred prime minister. I won’t if Labours vote would go up with him gone.”
              Look at Helen’s before she became PM.

              “Another example of ‘the people’ rejecting Labour is the Greens gaining their vote.”
              Actually I think the Greens might be poaching a bit from the nats. And don’t forget the “undecided/dnr”!

  6. tc 6
    14 November 2011 at 7:43 am

    Ah the brighter future…..the roar of a drilling rig all weekend on west coast Waikato farmland. Aparrently the permit expired late October and noise control have no idea what to do as the complaints pile up……snapper spawning grounds are immediately offshore and they’re due to offshore drill as well.
    Residents feel powerless and angry……acshully it’s a dinimic situation. Sinosteel and a very large local land owner with limited friends in the community due to his priors.

  7. Georgy 7
    14 November 2011 at 8:15 am

    My take on “PM blocks release of chat tape”

    -the PM is hiding the instructions he gave Banks to roll Brash if they get in
    -the PM is hiding the the info he gave Banks on the full Asset sales programme
    -the PM is hiding the the info on changes to welfare not yet revealed in policy
    -the PM is hiding further changes to tax
    -the PM is hiding further borrowing he intends
    –
    –
    –

    You can add to the list

    The PM has not made and specific promises or policy changes – because he knows they will be so unpalatable to the electorate he would lose. But he no doubt shared them with Banks

    .

    • Ianupnorth 7.1
      14 November 2011 at 10:07 am

      Maybe telling/or asking Banks what dirt is he currently hiding, so that teflon Key can go into denial mode at a later date.
       
      maybe dates when Banks can borrow the Key holiday home in Hawaii?

    • mik e 7.2
      14 November 2011 at 10:30 pm

      While we are about it we will scupper Len Brown aye shonkey the smiling assassin said

  8. ianmac 8
    14 November 2011 at 9:07 am

    I think that it is likely that Key expressed contempt for the mugs in the press and the suckers in Epson.
    You can fool some of the people some of the time…….

  9. Adrian 9
    14 November 2011 at 9:19 am

    If Key or Banks said anything at all in front of all those cameras that wasn’t “hows the kids,shitty weather eh, etc etc”, they are complete fuckwits.

    • William Joyce 9.1
      14 November 2011 at 1:41 pm

      Key : How are ya Banksy?
       
      Banks : I’m in a word of pain. I have a prostrate the size of a grapefruit. I’ve called it Don.
       
      Key : Why don’t you have it cut out?
       
      Banks : I’d like to but it’s too close to the election.

  10. Adrian 10
    14 November 2011 at 9:20 am

    And if you think that they have not been talking privately already, you’re a fuckwit.

  11. prism 11
    14 November 2011 at 9:22 am

    The free trade regime is deja vue. In British colonial days India grew cotton but was not allowed to process it. The country was forced to be a commodity producer but not allowed to do the added value work that would have provided much needed jobs. Those went to Britain, in factories owned by British who got much wealth. The workers however had ‘slappers’ employed to keep them awake during their long days. Teenagers died of overwork after having been employed since they were five rising at about 4 a.m. so they had time to walk miles to work. The workers need to be protected – children were preferred over parents because of their small quick fingers. A heart-wrenching societal practice.

    The same thing here in NZ. The well off can get cheaper items by having advantage of overseas labour. This is while there are people unemployed who could be making the items just as well and be earning money and self-sufficient. They get a sop that keeps them quiet (and shopping if they have some spare cash) – they can get cheaper garments and other items, that seem good and well-priced but often break, tear, unravel in a very short time. That’s happened to all at the lower decile levels.

    Who will be our Ghandi? He pushed a movement for Indian people to weave their own cotton at home. There are pockets of do-it-yourselfers for all skills here already but how wide is it? And buy New Zealand is still going, pushed by the Greens. But with TPP we will have less control over what’s imported, less local input, less information on country, whether it has GMO ingredients etc. And that’s just part of the swingeing changes. WHICH ARE SECRET BUT BINDING ON US ALL. It is like kings or dictators consulting not like a democracy where the people are informed and can pass judgment and make well-balanced decisions.. We are undermining and debasing the codes and practices of the past for servings of untreated sewage.

    • William Joyce 11.1
      14 November 2011 at 1:43 pm

      I hope that this will be a focus of protest. NZ being asked to ratify an agreement that is secret.

  12. ianmac 12
    14 November 2011 at 9:51 am

    Note that the Dom is running a poll over who do you think would tell the truth.
    Key 638
    Goff 808
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/election-2011/5958940/Cuppa-recording-tabloid-tactics?comment_msg=posted#post_comment

  13. Tiger Mountain 13
    14 November 2011 at 10:00 am

    HoS editor (few min ago on ‘Fear Facts’ online)
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5960522/Tea-tape-embarrassing-for-PM

    • Puddleglum 13.1
      14 November 2011 at 10:28 am

      And TV3 are reporting the HoS editor’s blast at Key and Banks on National Radio:

      “While Mr Key and Mr Banks say the conversation was banal, Mr Johns – who hasn’t listened to the recording, but has read a transcript – says it’s anything but.
      “What is said there is potentially game-changing, and the method used by the prime minister and the National Party over the last 24 hours to deflect attention from what’s said onto how it was gathered does make me think that this is even more serious than I thought it was.
      “It’s breathtaking in that they’ve got the audacity to say these things within a metre, literally a metre, of the media pack who are on the other side on a piece of glass.” 

      He’s clearly spitting tacks at Key’s accusations of ‘News of the World’ tactics. 
       

    • Draco T Bastard 13.2
      14 November 2011 at 10:52 am

      However, the tape was not Watergate “by any stretch of the imagination”.

      “It’s just some silly ‘this is how we are going to rule the world stuff’.

      This guy doesn’t understand what Watergate was about does he?

      It is illegal to tape a conversation if neither party knows they are being recorded.

      That’s true in a phone conversation. I’m reasonably sure that it’s not true of a public space where, technically, anybody could overhear the conversation.

      “Once you start with me, then it just goes to other well known New Zealanders.

      “The British public saw what that was like and in the end it’s very distasteful.”

      That may be true when the paparazzi start chasing movie stars but politicians who want to lead the country don’t get private conversations when they’re talking about their plans for the country.

      “It’s in the public interest and we would love to publish it but ethically we are the ones that have made the right call here by not doing it.”

      Wrong. You’re just protecting NAct from their own actions and words which the public have a right to know as it affects them.

      • felix 13.2.1
        14 November 2011 at 11:51 am

        “politicians who want to lead the country”

        Worse than that Draco, it’s the leaders* of the two** parties who are now governing the country.

        *Yes he is.

        **Sorry Pete, it’s true – Hairpiece and those pesky brownies count for zip.

      • Deadly_NZ 13.2.2
        14 November 2011 at 3:24 pm

        Unless it’s something derogatory about the people from Epsom being sheep like, and obedient.

    • William Joyce 13.3
      14 November 2011 at 1:51 pm

      It’s interesting the Joyce is weighing in on this issue. What’s it got to do with him? Why him and not McCully ot Wilkinson or Parata or Bennett.
      Could it be that he is the campaign manager and as campaign manager he wants to shut this development down immediately?

  14. tsmithfield 14
    14 November 2011 at 10:11 am

    So, why did Labour get us into such a a shitty investment?

    • Colonial Viper 14.1
      14 November 2011 at 10:26 am

      All that points out is that NZ needs to start cutting ties with the globalised financial ponzi schemes. And start investing in itself – not selling ourselves off.

  15. Uturn 15
    14 November 2011 at 10:29 am

    Further to the durable clothing question earlier:

    Does anyone here wear/use hemp fabric and what kind of wear does it display over it’s lifetime? What existing fabric (synthetic or not) would it be comparable to.

  16. randal 16
    14 November 2011 at 10:37 am

    sounds like paula beenit is about to spit the dummy.
    she knows she is gone burger.

  17. joe90 17
    14 November 2011 at 10:46 am

    Matt Taibbi: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the OWS Protests.

    That’s what I was thinking during the first few weeks of the protests. But I’m beginning to see another angle. Occupy Wall Street was always about something much bigger than a movement against big banks and modern finance. It’s about providing a forum for people to show how tired they are not just of Wall Street, but everything. This is a visceral, impassioned, deep-seated rejection of the entire direction of our society, a refusal to take even one more step forward into the shallow commercial abyss of phoniness, short-term calculation, withered idealism and intellectual bankruptcy that American mass society has become. If there is such a thing as going on strike from one’s own culture, this is it. And by being so broad in scope and so elemental in its motivation, it’s flown over the heads of many on both the right and the left.

  18. Lanthanide 18
    14 November 2011 at 11:05 am

    And the 400,000th comment goes to millsy in Open Mike 13/11/2011:

    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-13112011/#comment-400000

    Yeah because Sam Mahon is an evil person because god forbid makes a game that shows John Key in a non flattering light.

    I seem to recall you saying horrible things about Helen Clark through the years.

    Time for a 100,000 comment milestone retrospective, Lynn?

  19. vto 19
    14 November 2011 at 11:29 am

    weary weary
    not contrary
    how does your townhouse shake

    with spilling shelves
    and no more elves
    just awaiting the next big quake

  20. Ianupnorth 20
    14 November 2011 at 12:08 pm

    Crusher Collins on the Herald live chat now – I suspect none of my pointy questions will be answered http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10765894
     

    • Ianupnorth 20.1
      14 November 2011 at 12:25 pm

      Are these the most patsy questions and answers ever?

      11:13
         
         
      nzherald.co.nz:
      National’s law and order spokeswoman Judith Collins will be joining us for a live chat at 11.45 today. You can send us your questions now.

      11:44
         
         
      nzherald.co.nz:
      Just about ready to kick off…

      11:46
         
         
      Comment From David
      Is there any plan for police over the next 3 year?

      11:49
         
         
      nzherald.co.nz:

      Just sorting through some technical issues

      11:50
         
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi David, We would like to see the Policing Excellence programme continued to be rolled out around the country. We’ve seen some great results of that including a 7 % reduction in crime around New Zealand. In addition, to continue with the 600 extra front line Police and supporting the Commissioner’s decision for better access to firearms and tasers for front-line Police.

      11:50
         
         
      Comment From Gillian
      Have you ever been a victim of crime?

      11:54
         
         
      Judith Collins:
      Yes Gillian, I have been a victim of burglaries and of someone trying to break into my home in the middle of the night when I was there with my then tiny baby. Some people might think that burglaries are minor but knowing that someone has tried to break into your home in the middle of the night has had a lasting impact.

      11:54
         
         
      Comment From Morgan
      Hi Judith. Considering that the majority of youth offences are property related, and bearing in mind that as an offender gets younger the chances of them reoffending after prison increases exponentially (to even a huge 84% for under 20s!) does the National Party believe that there is a place for increased community sentencing for young offenders in the justice system? (not LSVs, MACS – they’re not community sentencing)

      11:59
         
         
      Judith Collins:
      Morgan, when people break into other people’s homes, I don’t think it’s a minor offence. The Justice system is very much geared to keeping young offenders out of prison in the first place. By the time that offenders get sent to prison for property offences, they might well have racked up 10s of these and every other intervention tried. Prison is certainly not the first option for property offences but it must be available for recidivist offenders. In relation to community sentences, we already have around 45,000 of these managed by Corrections in its Community Probation Service.

      11:59
         
         
      Comment From Rach
      Should all police officers be armed?

      12:01
         
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi Rach, No not all Police Officers in New Zealand should be armed. In my opinion, much of the incredible levels of respect shown to New Zealand Police is because they are not routinely armed. However, I fully support the Commissioner’s view that front-line Police must have very quick access to firearms and tasers.

      12:01
         
         
      Comment From Sandy
      How effective do you consider the “crusher” policy (and will you permit a live broadcast of, or perhaps let a small audience attend, the first “crushing”?)

      12:05
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi Sandy, The car crushing policy has been incredibly successful. I always said that with the 3 strikes nature of the policy, it would be a success if the right deterrence meant that we didn’t have to crush any cars. So far, we haven’t. We’ve had 17 illegal street racers given their second warning and so far, not one has been foolish enough to rack up a third. Illegal street racing has declined to the extent that it is no longer the issue it was. As for live broadcasts, I’m fully confident that the media will do that!

      12:05
         
         
      Comment From Gareth
      Hi Judith. do you have any plans to review the role and independence of the IPCA?

      12:06
         
         
      Comment From Joel
      Good afternoon Mrs Collins. Compared to the rest of the prisons, how do privately run prisons stack up when it comes to reoffending (for similar crimes)? What trend do you anticipate?

      12:06
         
      Judith Collins:
      Gareth, the IPCA comes under the responsibility of the Minister of Justice and not the Minister of Police.

      12:08
         
      Judith Collins:
      Joel, it’s early days yet when looking at recidivism rates from the Mt Eden prison but improving recidivism rates is an important part of the contract with the company and we will be holding them to that.

      12:08
         
         
      Comment From Tara
      Do you want to keep MMP?

      12:12
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi Tara, I think that Supplementary Member is a better system than MMP. One of the problems with MMP is that for electorate MPs, the electorates are often very large and it means that constituents don’t get the face to face time with their MPs that they should expect. SM would bring in more and smaller electorates while still retaining a party list.

      12:12
         
         
      Comment From Des
      What did you think of David Cunliffe’s comments about you? Were you offended?

      12:13
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi Des, I thought his comments were sexist and frankly inappropriate for a Parliamentary colleague to say about another. However, to his credit, he phoned me the next day to apologise and I accepted the apology.

      12:13
         
         
      Comment From The Aucklander
      Hundreds of National Party billboards were altered overnight. Does National know who is behind this and what action do you plan to take?

      12:14
         
         
      nzherald.co.nz:
      Last couple of questions folks…

      12:15
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi the Aucklander, I’m not aware of what has occurred to the billboards. Every election, some of my billboards get stolen and I report them to the Police.

      12:15
         
         
      Comment From Derek
      Do you want to replace Simon Power as Minister of Justice after the election?

      12:16
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi Derek, if we are fortunate enough to be returned to Government, then that is a decision entirely for the Prime Minister.

      12:16
         
         
      Comment From Des
      If you believe that drinking and driving is a problem why do you not regulate to fit devices to car ignitions that can only be activated by alcohol free drivers?
      12:17
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi Des, Yes it is a problem and we have legislated to do that for repeat drink drivers.

      12:17
         
         
      Comment From Luke
      Minister, what single issue do you feel you have helped promote or change in your local Papakura electorate and what do you see as being the biggest issue your electorate faces this election and over the next 3 years?

      12:22
         
      Judith Collins:
      Hi Luke, the single biggest issue that I believe that I have been able to help my electorate with is the issue of crime. We campaigned on 300 extra Police for the Counties Manukau Policing District within 2 years and delivered on it. Crime has fallen dramatically. In the fiscal year ended 30 June 2011, crime in Counties Manukau South ( Papakura to Pukekohe) has fallen by 15 %. This is on the back of constant rises under the Labour Government. For this election, no law abiding resident wants to see a return to the soft of criminals approach from Labour. The economy is vitally important to Papakura residents and is this year’s number one issue. Thank you everybody for your questions!
      12:23
         
         
      nzherald.co.nz:
      That’s all the time we have today folks, thanks Judith for joining in

       

      • Draco T Bastard 20.1.1
        14 November 2011 at 5:37 pm

        One of the problems with MMP is that for electorate MPs, the electorates are often very large and it means that constituents don’t get the face to face time with their MPs that they should expect. SM would bring in more and smaller electorates while still retaining a party list.

        We already have processes to increase electorates which is why we now have 69 rather than the 60 odd we had when MMP started. And there’s no way everyone’s going to get a face to face with the MP anyway unless she wants to increase the number of electorates to one every 5000 or so people.

        This is on the back of constant rises under the Labour Government.

        And that is an outright lie.

        Counties Manukau Police District Commander Superintendent Steve Shortland says the results over the 2007 calendar year are encouraging and a credit to the hard working men and women of the District.

        “We’ve made a conscious effort over the last few years to be innovative and forward thinking in our approach to tackling the challenges of policing a District of this size and demography – the resulting reduction in crime makes these efforts satisfying.”

        Overall crime was down 3% and resolutions up from 38.7 to 41.8%.

      • millsy 20.1.2
        19 November 2011 at 9:20 am

        Does anyone actually know how crushing a car is any different than just confiscating a car and selling it? In both cases the offender is deprived of a car, its just that it seems that the latter option is possibly the cheapest.

  21. The Voice of Reason 21
    14 November 2011 at 12:19 pm

    Oh, this is good!
     
    There is still room for political activism in the form of pisstaking, no matter what the electoral laws say.

     
     

  22. Penny Bright 22
    14 November 2011 at 12:32 pm

    PROTEST: TO DELIVER FORMAL REQUEST FOR SFO TO APPLY SAME LAW TO DON BRASH AND JOHN BANKS AS FELLOW FORMER DIRECTORS OF HULJICH WEALTH MANAGEMENT (NZ) LTD:

    TODAY: MONDAY 14 NOVEMBER 2011
    LEAVING AOTEA SQUARE 2.30PM
    ARRIVING OUTSIDE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE 3PM
    ADDRESS: SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE, LEVEL 6, 21 QUEEN ST, AUCKLAND CITY.

    ‘ONE LAW FOR ALL’?

    Let’s see it.

    The CEO of the Finance Markets Authority – Sean Hughes has stated in an email to myself dated 13 November 2011:

    “FMA’s position is unchanged from that expressed in my email to you on 28 September 2011. I am satisfied that the position of both Mr Banks and Dr Brash was carefully considered by the Securities Commission and that competent advice was received in relation to the entities or persons against whom charges ought to be brought. Unless you have new information or evidence to bring to light which was not previously considered by the Securities Commission, FMA does not consider you have any basis on which to suggest it should bring proceedings against either Mr Banks or Dr Brash in relation to Huljich Wealth Management.”

    How about ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ‘WHITE COLLAR’ CRIME?

    How about the ‘ONE LAW FOR ALL’ that ACT Leader Don Brash trumpets so loudly to equally apply to himself, and the ACT candidate for Epsom John Banks?

    I am looking forward to the SFO charging Don Brash and John Banks for the same offences for which former fellow Director of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Ltd, Peter Huljich was charged.

    I am also looking forward to an investigation of the CEO of the Finance Markets Authority, Sean Hughes for arguably failing to do HIS job.

    Is the failure of the CEO of the Finance Markets Authority, Sean Hughes to equally charge Don Brash and John Banks a form of CORRUPT PRACTICE?

    Who appointed Sean Hughes as CEO of the FMA?

    ‘Hand-picked’ National Party political appointees to the FMA ‘Establishment Board’?

    Is that why Sean Hughes isn’t exactly vigorous in applying the same ‘ONE LAW FOR ALL’ to the former LEADER of the National Party – Don Brash and former National Government Minister of POLICE (and Local Government) John Banks?

    All this happening in NZ – ‘perceived’ to be the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ along with Denmark and Singapore according to the Transparency International 2010 ‘Corruption Perception Index’.

    What an absolute travesty of ‘justice’.

    What a disgrace.

    Penny Bright
    Independent Candidate for Epsom
    Campaigning against ‘white collar’ CRIME, CORRUPTION (and its root cause – PRIVATISATION) and ‘CORPORATE WELFARE.

    • William Joyce 22.1
      14 November 2011 at 2:42 pm

      This is a trend world wide. We have former employees/CEOs etc from the finance sector being appointed to the regulating authorities. Henry Paulson, Larry Summers, Robert Rubin etc. Same with the appointment of Mr Hughes.
      Foxes in charge of the hen house!
       
      Now the money people are becoming the leaders of nations!
      New Zealand, then Greece, now Italy.

  24. Puddleglum 24
    14 November 2011 at 1:00 pm

    The link goes to a ‘page not found’ (for me).

    But the original post is on NRT’s homepage.

    From the post, and prima facie, it certainly seems like political corruption and, hence, grounds for an investigation. 

    Edit: This was a reply to felix at comment 23

    • Draco T Bastard 24.1
      14 November 2011 at 1:24 pm

      Felix missed the l at the end.

      http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2011/11/this-stinks.html

      The behaviour of the electorate manager was bad enough but…

      Astoundingly, Sharples is standing by this behaviour from his staffer. He needs to pay the political price for that. An MP who allows his electorate staff to behave corruptly and extort bribes for doing their jobs is no different from Taito Philip Field.

      …having the MP that he is the aide to backing him is actually worse, IMO. Our politicians should not be supporting what appears to be corruption.

    • felix 24.2
      14 November 2011 at 1:38 pm

      Oops sorry Puddleglum, thanks Draco 🙂

  25. William Joyce 25
    14 November 2011 at 1:20 pm

    A couple of pics you can send to friends and foes

  26. Deuto 26
    14 November 2011 at 1:23 pm

    Politicaldumpground.com has a post today pointing out a new ‘for sale’ on Trade Me – Karapiro Dam! hope this link to the TM sale works.

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RgiNXi8QMGg/TsBMJBd93BI/AAAAAAAAAjE/wEIpiAcoNJ0/s1600/karapiro+-+Copy.png

  27. ianmac 27
    14 November 2011 at 1:26 pm

    Your link didn’t felix but http://norightturn.blogspot.com/ has the “This Stinks” corruption alleged in Peta Sharples’ office.

  28. Herodotus 28
    14 November 2011 at 1:32 pm

    I heard on ZB this morning, Phil lossing the backbone he is reported to have grown.
    When asked the though questions, what does Phil do – sidestep, avoid, duck, weave anything to escape answering them !!
    Point is case re Lady from a Proverty Action group questioning why Lab (when the govt) went to court to prohibite WFF being paid to beneficaries and now after fighting and winning the case (Even the UN commented against this exclusion) it has become Lab policy? Yet Phil did not get within cooeee of addressing the question. This is contained in the Mon 14th 8:00 am section
    http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/weekondemand.asp
    http://www.cpag.org.nz/infocus/cpags-case-in-the-human-rights-review-tribunal/
    Next how to grow NZ economy (Was this not the 5th Lab govts priorities – progress up the OECD rankings into the top 1/2?? – until we started slipping backwards) the main basis that Lab is basing our growth is on “to increase savings”. Great especially with our wage rates, the lack of protection e.g. finance coys etc. And even if we could save where would our investments be? Overseas- That will help us.
    Phl is becomming as elusive as Key, difference is that Key is far superior at being Key than his imitator is.

  29. randal 29
    14 November 2011 at 2:23 pm

    herod is a nitwit and expert at producing so much vierbiage that no one can understand him.
    kweewee is gone and so is government and good riddance.

    • Herodotus 29.1
      14 November 2011 at 2:41 pm

      OK Randal so you have an issue with my composition. Did you listen to the link?
      I get the impression that many here that they are unwilling to test the left on what they are saying, and question then on inconsistancies. So Lab govt were taken to court re WFF being paid to beneficaries, even the UN was againstthe exclusion. Now when questioned Phil now cannot answer why the about the flip flop. He cannot even address the question, and you think that is OK? You may be fooled by believing a politian I prefer to test comments and actions.

      • felix 29.1.1
        14 November 2011 at 2:48 pm

        No-one noticed your link as it was buried in a solid block of indecipherable gibberish.

        • Herodotus 29.1.1.1
          14 November 2011 at 3:07 pm

          And you were unable to listen to the link and work out the jist my comments, or are you unwilling to test what you also hear?
          I will ask in 1 sentence When did Phil address the question?
          I will wait with baited breath – but expect nothing, because there is nothing to suppport Phil.

          • Herodotus 29.1.1.1.1
            14 November 2011 at 3:36 pm

            Just incase some thought I was being a troll- forgot to finish with
            I will wait with baited breath – but expect nothing, because there is nothing to suppport Phil “IN THIS CASE”

            • McFlock 29.1.1.1.1.1
              14 November 2011 at 4:35 pm

              lolz.

              I made an exception just for you and trawled through the recording. Are you referring to the question beginning at 18m30s? The two part one which was “whyy the turn-around and why the delay?”

              Reason for implementation delay: answered first up – fiscal constraint
              Reason for turnaround: answered more in depth – things are getting worse.

              Seems pretty clear to me.
              What a waste of my time.

              Whereas Key said on prime last night that the income gap between NZ and Aus is closing because our after-tax income rose 10% and theirs only rose 6%. No mention of whether the absolute gap closed – if we earned $50 and they earned $100 in real terms, then a 6% increase for them vs a 10% increase for us means the gap is still widening. Love to know what data he was making up using.

              • Herodotus …
                14 November 2011 at 5:06 pm

                Diane Roberson Why Lab has opposed WFF in regard to benefits thru court? No response
                Re the implementation – Fiscal restraints as the reason- If (And many here would I take it) agree that eliminating poverty ishould be the major focus. It is about priorities and the delay inplies that this is not as high a priority as it should be. Otherwise he could borrow earlier for this- or bring forward things like CGT earlier.
                Not worried about Key- he has been tested enough here and in other places for me.
                Surprised at the lack on this site regarding commentary on the breakfast- Perhaps that says something in itself ?

                • McFlock …
                  14 November 2011 at 5:47 pm

                  Now I’m beginning to agree with Felix.
                  The ACTUAL QUESTION ASKED was

                  Look we welcome any policies that actually improve the lives of the 200,000 children living in poverty in NZ, but I am wondering we /um/ for the last five years your party actually has opposed the welfare/WFF package through court and now you’ve done a turnaround on that and you’re offering it to beneficiaries’ familes, so why the turnaround and why so long to implement the policy?

                  English101: the statement takes the form of a background description:
                  “but I am wondering we /um/ for the last five years your party actually has opposed the welfare/WFF package through court and now you’ve done a turnaround on that and you’re offering it to beneficiaries’ familes,”

                  followed by the actual interrogative clauses:
                  “why the turnaround”, “why so long to implement the policy”

                  Goff answered both, clearly, as I mentioned before.
                  Mind you, given that you’re not worried about “I had nothing to do with it, oh yeah I had a full briefing and signed the papers” Key’s honesty, you’re obviously a moron.

                  • Herodotus …
                    14 November 2011 at 7:03 pm

                    Should have lenghtened re Key- I am not worried re testing him as many here already done so – And I have some ability to decipher from info gathered re the many issues I have with Key and co. And are facing the issue of “Least damage to NZ” as my basis on voting
                    If you follow the time time re WFF, comments made by the likes of Cullen (That it was never intended to be made payable to beneficaries) and was to asist working families (Some believe that it was a backhanded means of tax cuts to the middle class) refer link as to court decision, and on what basis the crown based their arguements on
                    So why now make it available to beneficaries. I have commented previously that if benefits are inadequate that address the issue directly and increase them to an adequate level.-WFF requires knowledge as to what each family is eligible to and by visiting the IRD and having to complete the appropiate forms, that is if they even are aware that the family is entitled to this- this can be confusing and intimidating to many. By increasing the benefit then we are guaranteed that each family recieves what they are entitled to – and should the families financial position change (e.g. employment) they could be in a position of having to repay monies back, as the WFF is based on a annual income, if the actual income is higher then the amount of wff that they are entitled to, reduces. But you will not know your annual income and WFF entitlements until the financial year has past.
                    http://www.cpag.org.nz/assets/CPAG%20v%20Attorney%20General/CPAGvAttorney-General.pdf
                    “They(The Crown) also argued, somewhat implausibly, that beneficiaries already get more in government assistance than everyone else so there can be no disadvantage.” As this decision was released in Dec 08.
                    And in final conclusion. So there was to me an acceptance that those families that were dependant upon benefits were still to remain below the poverty line. Goff still never addressed why Lab fought to keep WFF exempt from beneficaries?
                    “Whatever the stated purposes of the IWTC, the effect has been to substantially disadvantage children living in beneficiary households that did not receive it. In practice this means children live in households where food runs out; where children rely on luck or folk remedies to remain healthy, or live four or five to a bedroom to keep accommodation costs down. The fallacy that a monetary incentive alone would suffice to enable families to move off a benefit, and into work, is demonstrated by the government’s own figures suggesting that only about 2% of sole parent families would do so. Of those that did, figures show many had a pre-existing attachment to the workforce. Now that the so-called new economy has been unmasked as the old boom and bust economy, the fundamental injustice of the IWTC will become even more apparent. The justification for the discrimination found, namely that the outcomes for families in work are generally better than those for families on benefit income, depends for its success on an economy that creates jobs. In an economy losing jobs, it seems like a cruel joke.”
                    And as for the delay of implementation- yo are worried about me yet did not address the priorities of Lab in deferring this. If the removal of children out of proverty was SO important then I am sure they could find the money. As just one means instead of increasing age of entitlement re pension 2 months every year- Why not fast track it to increase the age by 3 months per year. There can be when motivated to reprioritise and find the $$

                    • McFlock …
                      14 November 2011 at 7:47 pm

                      Riiiiighht.

                      Key = less bad. Got that, disagree.

                      You seem to make a lot of irrelevant points, such as:” Goff still never addressed why Lab fought to keep WFF exempt from beneficaries?”
                      True, that (well, he did but only indirectly). The reason being that he was not asked that question. He was asked why the change from fighting it to making it policy, and why the delay in implementation.

                      He gave answers thusly, and I repeat:
                      Reason for implementation delay: fiscal constraint
                      Reason for turnaround: things are getting worse.

                      Or are you really truly annoyed that a politician had the sheer gall to answer the question that was actually asked?

                      Lastly, your comment: “And as for the delay of implementation- yo are worried about me yet did not address the priorities of Lab in deferring this. If the removal of children out of proverty was SO important then I am sure they could find the money.” is a bit naive – I know Key is happy to bankrupt the country (how many billions are we up to after only 3 years, after a zero deficit budget in 2008?), but that just helps the bastards force privatisation and kill more kids via overcrowding, access to water and lack of heating.

                      In the real world the govt has to work for everyone, so yeah, there are fiscal constraints because keeping elderly in poverty is as bad as keeping kids in poverty. I mean, I’d be in favour of introducing FTT alongside a CGT and a higher tax rate for the bigger companies and wealthier individuals so that the country can pay for both and free healthcare and education, but your man Key just wants to keep everyone in poverty.

                    • Herodotus …
                      14 November 2011 at 8:38 pm

                      You have no idea of key = less bad or Goff = less bad in my book. To help neither have an idea of a real solution, but how can they as they cannot or will not see the real issues.
                      How is it naive re finding the money, or is it that child poverty is less on an issue worth solving? National has allocated something like $9b over the next 3-7 years to be spend on roads, including 4 big spendups relating to 4 parts of the motorway SH1 Jafaland, Sh27 Ham to Tauranga, SH1 Chch, by deferring is one souce for an immediate source of funds, another spread out the $1k govt handout re Kiwiwsaver from 4 to 5 years. I gather you and I have come to a pt where we are arguing over the same position, just that we differ re if Goff addressed the issue of sidesteped it. If times have changed and benefits require readdress then why not readdress ? Try claiming as commented before it is not an automatic qualification, whereas the benefit is to recieve the max allowable amount. WFF is a clumsy manner to determine what is to be paid out, it is all on the in this case beneficary to claim noy automatic
                      So the state (Lab govt) argued ” that beneficiaries already get more in government assistance than everyone else so there can be no disadvantage.” Benefits have not lost that much ground compared to the rest in paid employment

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      14 November 2011 at 8:55 pm

                      Benefits have not lost that much ground compared to the rest in paid employment

                      So due to inflation, increased GST, increased energy prices etc the median worker has seen the water level lift a whole foot from chest height to neck height. Things are pretty uncomfortable I’ll give you that.

                      While beneficiaries have only seen the water level lift a couple of inches, from their chin height to just above eyelevel. Drowning in other words.

                      Now who are you saying is better off again?

                    • McFlock …
                      14 November 2011 at 8:56 pm

                      You appear to be a bit too stream-of-consciousness for me to follow with that typsetting, or I’m a bit too tired to be still at work. Look, in your previous post you put pensions against WFF. Now it’s roads. But then of course we still lose something like 30 kids a year to transport accidents, so roads aren’t such a bad idea either. I’m not going to go line by line through the budget talking about what should be cut to immediately extend WFF to beneficiaries, for two reasons:

                      A) I actually support the concept of increasing revenue to balance the budget, rather than decreasing expenditure; and
                      B) Goff wasn’t asked that question.

                      Maybe you should have been there to ask the questions you wanted asked, but don’t bitch that a politician for once actually answered the questions he was actually asked. That’s a rare and wonderful event.

                    • Herodotus …
                      14 November 2011 at 9:47 pm

                      MS – I wil try to say this simply for everyone
                      If benefits are inadequate increase them, is it that difficult to do?
                      WFF is an opt in = It is the manner that Lab are proposing to fund that I object to – it is more complicated than it needs to be and allows for families to miss out on funding that they would be entitled to if it was paid out as a simple benefit.

                  • mickysavage …
                    14 November 2011 at 9:05 pm

                    H

                    As a partisan Labour hack let me spell this out.

                    1.  WFF was a really good idea because it improved the plight of working families and helped heaps of kids.  It did not help beneficiaries.
                    2.  It left a number of kids in poverty.  Coincidentally all of the kids were the children of beneficiaries.
                    3.  If you want to help poor kids then there is no way around it.  You have to raise the income levels of houses that rely on benefits.
                    4.  This is normally really stupid because ordinary people who are not beneficiaries hate them.  They have been trained to do this through decades of beneficiary propaganda which paints them as the authors of their situation rather than the victims of a sick economic system. 
                    5.  If you help poor kids then this really upsets some people who get really upset even at the idea of funding school breakfast clubs where kids who otherwise will starve get a basic breakfast so that they will learn properly.

                    So go for it, tell us that six years ago Labour were not brave enough to fund the really poor but it is now prepared to advocate this.  Then tell us that somehow it is wrong.

                    But I will tell you what it is, it is brave.  If we win there will be a number of five year old kids lives whose lives will be better. 

          • felix 29.1.1.1.2
            14 November 2011 at 5:10 pm

            “And you were unable to listen to the link and work out the jist my comments, or are you unwilling to test what you also hear?”

            I’m not the slightest bit interested in anything you say to be honest Hero.

            • Herodotus 29.1.1.1.2.1
              14 November 2011 at 5:21 pm

              You are very good at taking pot shots at people yet when ask to substantiate your position, display the characteristics of a straw man. Not willing to support any position you supposedly stand for.
              Being closed to any and all displays a total arragorance. Even those on opposing sides of the political spectrum have things to offer.

              • felix …
                14 November 2011 at 5:41 pm

                “You are very good at taking pot shots at people yet when ask to substantiate your position, display the characteristics of a straw man. Not willing to support any position you supposedly stand for.”

                You’ve confused me now Hero. What position am I being asked to substantiate? What do I stand for in this instance in your mind and why?

                “Being closed to any and all displays a total arragorance. Even those on opposing sides of the political spectrum have things to offer.”

                “Any and all” means you, right? I have no idea where you sit on the political spectrum Hero, as I very rarely manage to make any sense of the gibberish you leave here.

                • Herodotus …
                  14 November 2011 at 7:49 pm

                  How would I know what you stand for, I have yet to come across the 1st epistle of felix. For all I know you could be John Key or Sue Bradford or anyone in between.
                  So I will play your game- Where do you stand re WFF in regard to beneficaries? You know my position 😎

                  • felix …
                    14 November 2011 at 8:04 pm

                    WTF are you on about?

                    You’re the one who says I’m refusing to support the position I “supposedly stand for”.

                    So what position do I supposedly stand for, Hero?

  30. joe90 30
    14 November 2011 at 4:15 pm

    ~snort~

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-12/foreclosures-prompt-four-u-s-cities-to-sue-banks-for-mowing-home-repairs.html

    Four major U.S. cities that pay for the upkeep of foreclosed properties are trying to recoup the costs of services including lawn mowing, repairs and security by suing banks they claim contributed to their “urban blight.”
    A federal judge in Memphis, Tennessee, on May 4 and another in Baltimore on April 22 denied Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC)’s request to dismiss the predatory-lending lawsuits brought against the bank. A lawsuit by the city of Cleveland against JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Ally Financial Inc. is also pending before an Ohio judge.
    In one case, Deutsche Bank AG, described by Los Angeles City Attorney Carmen Trutanich as one of the city’s “major slumlords,” may be found liable for hundreds of millions of dollars, including restitution for current and former tenants, according to a statement by the city.

    • joe90 30.1
      14 November 2011 at 4:27 pm

      More laughs.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/bill-oreillys-lincoln-book-banned-from-fords-theatre-because-of-mistakes/2011/11/11/gIQAhJpyFN_story.html

      Of all the places you’d expect to find Bill O’Reilly’s new history “Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination That Changed America Forever,” Ford’s Theatre — the site of the dreadful act — should rank right at the top. But you’d do better to search for the bestseller on Amazon because it has been banned from the theater’s store.

      The crime? O’Reilly and his co-author Martin Dugard have displayed a serial disregard for historical fact.

      For a purported history of the assassination — an “unsanitized and uncompromising … no spin American story,” as the authors put it, “Killing Lincoln” is sloppy with the facts and slim on documentation, according to a study conducted by Rae Emerson, the deputy superintendent of Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site, which is a unit of the National Park Service.

      Other Lincoln experts also have sounded off. In a review published in the November issue of “North & South — The Official Magazine of the Civil War Society,” historian Edward Steers Jr. cites many instances where the book strays from documented history, then asks, “If the authors made mistakes in names, places, and events, what else did they get wrong? How can the reader rely on anything that appears in ‘Killing Lincoln’”?

      • William Joyce 30.1.1
        14 November 2011 at 5:39 pm

        This doesn’t surprise me. You cannot tell me that O’Reilly has time in his life to do any meaningful research – for anything.
        Writing his many books, Appearing on shows like The View and the Daily Show, Filming shows, Books tours, Road shows, travel, private time, managing his business ventures, Photo-ops with troops in Afghanistan…..and on top of that he wants us to believe he does extensive research. He doesn’t have time for even sufficient research.
        He fronts up to the studio, gets told what issues the researchers have come up with and they decide what to got to air with. He film the segments and goes home.
        The same with his books. Someone else researches/writes and he puts his name to it. Very little hands on.
         
        A bit like our Prime Minister, when does he have time to do an honest day’s work?
         

    • William Joyce 30.2
      14 November 2011 at 5:27 pm

      It’s a slow and expensive process to seek judicial redress against the finance/banking institutions. I guess the hope is that if we “the people” get sufficient findings for damages then the institutions will think twice next time.
      Trouble is it won’t work. For two reasons…
      1. Unless their is regulation by bodies not populated with financiers, compliance inspections and hard and fast lawsuits – then this will all happen again.
       
      2.  While the institution continues to exist it’s life is greater than that of it’s employees. The actual people have since moved on and taken their enormous wealth with them. The institution pays for the crimes of individuals.
      A way needs to be found to go after the individuals and attack their wealth.
       
      Wouldn’t it be nice if “the people” had sufficient resources to engage in guerilla action against this private wealth. One day Larry Summers is relaxing by the pool and he gets an sms from his accountant saying that the invisible hand of the market had totally destroyed his wealth……. 🙂

  31. Herodotus 31
    14 November 2011 at 5:33 pm

    We are still building leaky developments, even after all the compliance requirements that councils are requesting to recitify this problem.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/eastern-courier/5943425/New-centre-leaking

  32. KerryC 32
    14 November 2011 at 9:20 pm

    Just heard on the news that Apec are pushing for those high stream shower heads that Nat were crying about in 2008 – Shane Jones visionary

    • mik e 32.1
      14 November 2011 at 11:25 pm

      KC No doubt national will insist that they be golden ones so we can feel the effects of trickle down poliicies