Open mike 15/02/2011

72 comments on “Open mike 15/02/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. travellerev 1

   15 February 2011 at 7:07 am

   Hi there,

   Just wondering how Iprent is going. Will you please keep us posted on his progress (hopefully)?
   • lprent 1.1

     15 February 2011 at 9:07 am

     I’m doing ok. Just got moved out of the “you’re not allowed to die” individual cell into the spacious double cell because they seem to think I won’t upset my cellmate with medical ructions 😈

     Personally I have been feeling pretty good for the last couple of days after the day that they put the stent in. The first day was somewhat vague. Lyn is (as usual) more suspicious and asserts that I forget things. But since forgetting things that I find unimportant is normal state – how can she tell?

     This morning I feel really perky apart from the result of resuscitation on my chest. Like many of my tech head friends who have been in hospital, what I am really really missing is WiFi. The lifeline is the iPhone. But they will probably have to watch out for the Ethernet jacks in the panels shortly.
     • r0b 1.1.1

       15 February 2011 at 9:13 am

       apart from the result of resuscitation on my chest

       Yeah – CPR isn’t really something you can do gently though is it! Once again, thank goodness that Lyn was there with the skills. Has certainly reminded my family to go and update our first aid qualifications.

       Great to hear from you of course, but take it easy, and do as you’re told…
       • lprent 1.1.1.1

         15 February 2011 at 9:16 am

         Yeah when I was an army medic, we were Ordered not to be gentle (unless there was a complication like a sucking chest wound)
         • Billy 1.1.1.1.1

           15 February 2011 at 10:22 am

           lprent,

           Very sorry to hear you have been poorly. Get well soon.
           • r0b 1.1.1.1.1.1

             15 February 2011 at 11:17 am

             Blast from the past. G’day Billy.
             • Billy …

               15 February 2011 at 12:03 pm

               Guv’.
     • Lanthanide 1.1.2

       15 February 2011 at 10:32 am

       My dad had a few heart attacks a couple of years ago, although is heart attacks were very much more mild than yours – he had one at night at 2am and wasn’t entirely sure whether it was one until he had a worse one a couple of days later.

       They put a stent in, and he seems fine now. Mum’s put him on a pretty strict low-fat diet though.
     • prism 1.1.3

       15 February 2011 at 11:23 am

       L prent – Good, good, you are showing positive progress. A test on your sense of humour shows that it is fully functioning. Just take it smoothly there, take it easy, don’t try too much, laugh too hard etc.
       • Tigger 1.1.3.1

         15 February 2011 at 12:14 pm

         Great to see you have priorities sorted Lp! All the best.
     • travellerev 1.1.4

       15 February 2011 at 3:19 pm

       hi Iprent,

       Good to hear you’re doing OK. Sorry for not responding sooner but contrary to general opinion I do have a life in the real world too. LOL.

       I was thoroughly shocked to hear about your heart attack and realised I would know sort of what to do but not really so I’m going to have to do the training I reckon.

       Wifi isn’t going away and you just take the time to heal. You’ve got excellent moderators here and as you may have noticed even the trolls and are on their best behaviour.

       Cheers

       Ev
       • lprent 1.1.4.1

         15 February 2011 at 10:19 pm

         Actually I have been surprised. I am back several pages with minimal commentary so far.

         Could be the Arny effect though… 😈
2. joe bloggs 2

   15 February 2011 at 8:01 am

   So much for Mickey’s spirited defence of the indefensible -http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-11022011/#comment-297042 – It was Rodders, sir, he made us do it! Another Tui’s moment, eh Mickey?

   Loony Len has moved from $400k funding for the Maori Statutory Boardto $3.4m – whoa, hold the horses – no we’re back to $1.9m… given Len’s shameful charade, this little gem from Emerson is hilarious!

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10706243

   head of nail meet hammer
   • Colonial Viper 2.1

     15 February 2011 at 9:00 am

     can’t ignore the fact that Rodney Hide was fully supported by John Key in setting this system up.

     Now the test is to see whether Len Brown can make it work to meet the hopes of and promises to the people.

     Now the funding cut for the Maori stat board – any savings are going to be eroded by legal costs now because the board says that the Council has no authority in law to reduce its funding.

     Law set up by Rodney Hide and John Key.
     • joe bloggs 2.1.1

       15 February 2011 at 9:13 am

       Law set up by Rodney Hide and John Key…

       Posturing and Flip Flop set up by Len Brown
       • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1

         15 February 2011 at 9:17 am

         Len Brown was trying to avoid an expensive law suit against the City Council – now under Key’s and Hide’s law, he has one.
   • mickysavage 2.2

     15 February 2011 at 9:16 am

     Nah Joe it is Rodney’s stuff up.

     I blogged about it at http://waitakerenews.blogspot.com/2011/02/who-is-to-blame-for-aucklands-maori.html

     Basically it goes like this:

     1. No one except perhaps the Maori Party thought that the advisors were going to have a vote. It is inconcievable that the Government would refuse to have democratically elected Maori voting representatives but would then allow to have appointed voting Maori representatives. The intention always was that they would not have a vote.
     2. The appointees clearly have a vote.
     3. The Government and Hide have stuffed up by allowing this.
     4. The legislation requires the advisory committee to be properly funded and the amount is to be calculated by reference to an independent report which calculated the amount required at $3.4m for the next financial year.
     5. The difference is that the Transition Authority thought that we were dealing with appointees who would have no vote.
     6. Len has been caught in a bit of a pincer movement. He is doing his best to live up to the legal obligations that Hide has fostered on him but is being attacked by the right on Council.

     I suspect the advisory committee will have fun with its declaration application. Council should offer to make a joint application to get the matter sorted out.

     Good try Joe. Want to address the points in detail?
     • joe bloggs 2.2.1

       15 February 2011 at 10:06 am

       dead simple Mickey despite your referencing some obscurantist blogger on a local website.

       Len ticked off $3.4m and recanted when the public expressed outrage – now he’s down to $1.9m – ain’t it amazing that he could change the number so easily… what a pity he didn’t exercise enough judgement to go in offering $2m in the first place.

       The cost of the lawsuit will in all probability be a heck of a lot less than Len’s $1.5m blunder – despite the parasitic bottom dwelling legal fraternity getting in on the act.
       • Mac1 2.2.1.1

         15 February 2011 at 10:18 am

         A common trick of this government especially is to fly a kite and when people object, ameliorate the proposal to somewhere more in keeping with what was originally intended, anyway.

         That way the politician claims to be “listening to the people” and the opposition is disabled by not being so credible if it attacks the amended figure. Perhaps Brown has watched Key and Hyde.

         Government by focus groups and by straw men………….
       • Bunji 2.2.1.2

         15 February 2011 at 11:44 am

         The finance sub-committee approved the $3.4mil recommended by their report, and the full governing body (of which Len is only 1 vote in 21) has overruled it and only allowed $1.9mil… and a lawsuit. I will not be surprised if the lawsuit is successful, leaving them with the $3.4mil or something close to it, plus legal costs. According to the law, the council cannot refuse reasonable costs and the breakdown of costs looks quite “reasonable” for a voting body, to make sure it is properly informed etc.

         It’s all a mess, and it’s all Rodney’s blunder. It’s what happens when you push law through without proper process – something this government specialises in.
       • Colonial Viper 2.2.1.3

         15 February 2011 at 12:02 pm

         what a pity he didn’t exercise enough judgement to go in offering $2m in the first place.

         the Maori board says $2M (or whatever figure you want to make up) is not sufficient to meet its statutory requirements (drawn up by Hide). Further it says that Council has no right to underfund it under law (as drawn up by Hide).

         This is not Len’s “blunder”, Hide – with Key’s support – owns this debacle.
         • joe bloggs 2.2.1.3.1

           15 February 2011 at 12:37 pm

           the Maori board says $2M is not sufficient to meet its statutory requirements…. Further it says that Council has no right to underfund it under law….

           Then Brown should have offered $400k and demanded the Maori Board prove it needs more. But no … Brown’s been caught playing pork barrel politics – that IS ENTIRELY his fault.

           He allowed the Maori board to appoint its own ‘independent’ remuneration consultant who came up with the figure of $3.4m. Talk about rolling over and letting the Maori board tickle his tummy…

           And he’s failed completely to deliver anything like his election promise to keep rates low and near the rate of inflation. Where’s the $60m in savings needed to keep rates increases to under 5% coming from? Don’t ask Len ‘cos he doesn’t have a clue.
           • Colonial Viper 2.2.1.3.1.1

             15 February 2011 at 12:44 pm

             Then Brown should have offered $400k and demanded the Maori Board prove it needs more. But no … Brown’s been caught playing pork barrel politics – that IS ENTIRELY his fault.

             Meh, the fight is going to court so if you want proof looks like you are going to get it.

             Hide set up this nightmare structure, the SuperShitty hens are coming in to roost.

             Ane we don’t need you putting words into Len Brown’s mouth, SuperShitties are expensive to run and I for one do not recall Len saying that rates would stick with inflation. All the public transport projects he publicly backed will have to be paid for, for starters.
             • joe bloggs …

               15 February 2011 at 1:59 pm

               You’ve got a selective memory CV

               I don’t need to put words in Len Brown’s mouth – aside from having his own two feet in his mouth he’s quite adept at words as well. Try this quote from Hissoner:

               So, Guyon, I have made a commitment: rate increases in and around the rate of inflation. I’ll be standing by that.

               Len Brown to Guyon Espiner, October 10, 2010

               http://business.scoop.co.nz/2010/10/10/qa%E2%80%99s-guyon-espiner-interviews-len-brown/

               Try hiding that from reality Draco
               • Draco T Bastard …

                 15 February 2011 at 2:34 pm

                 Um, you said that the $3.4m was Len Browns fault when, in reality, it is the fault of Rodney Hide and the present government.
               • Draco T Bastard …

                 15 February 2011 at 5:17 pm

                 Maori Stat Board funding centres around being “reasonable”

                 “While Auckland councillors may not agree with the legislation, we are all committed to making this work and playing the hand we’ve been dealt with. It’s unfortunate that the legislation has made the board’s funding almost impossible to define.

                 Yep, still the fault of Rodney Hide and the present government. Can’t change that reality.
   • Draco T Bastard 2.3

     15 February 2011 at 12:26 pm

     Just another dog-whistle and misdirect from a RWNJ trying hard to hide, and to hide from, reality.
   • Zaphod Beeblebrox 2.4

     15 February 2011 at 3:19 pm

     Last time I looked the mayor only had 1 vote of 20. Unless of course you feel Christine Fletcher, Jamie-Lee Ross and Cameron Brewer are mere pawns of the mayor.
3. joe90 3

   15 February 2011 at 8:50 am

   The response to a peaceful sit-in at Duraz, Bahrain.

   Google translation:

   Watts riot Bahraini suppress a peaceful sit-in Duraz in Bahrain, on 02/14/2011 at 2.30 pm.
   Participants in the protest calling for abolition of the 2002 Constitution and replace a constitution written by the people and the government and prime ministers are elected by the people directly. As well as to dissolve the Shura and Representatives, and the work of a new Parliament has full legislative powers. Bahrain 14 feb bh14feb

   From #Bahrain.
   • joe90 3.1

     15 February 2011 at 12:02 pm

     Live blogging from Tehran.

     #Tehran
4. Gotham 4

   15 February 2011 at 9:57 am

   What do you guys think about the Greens vetoing Gillard speaking during the sitting House? I have been surprised by the backlash (though to be fair they type of people going on about it are the type of people who would hate the Greens no matter what they did).

   But Labour supported her speaking…so I was wondering if any of you had an opinion one way or another?
   • Pascal's bookie 4.1

     15 February 2011 at 10:12 am

     I think they did good. If Key or Labour, or anyone else, wanted her to speak while the house was sitting, then I’ve got problems with that.

     And Key turning around and saying the difference between the house being in or out of session is ‘just semantics’ is, to coin a phrase, breathtakingly par for the course.

     I can plz haz pm that gvz a sht?
     • Gotham 4.1.1

       15 February 2011 at 10:58 am

       Yeah I was surprised he dismissed the point too. (Actually no. Not surprised at all.) The Greens made it clear they welcomed her, and were looking forward to hear her speaking but contested her speaking during the sitting session. Fair enough.

       I did wonder if they Greens were perhaps taking such a principled stance on this despite the possible backlash because they have learnt a few lessons from the CERRA nonsense….

       But I wonder why Labour didn’t back up the Greens….?
       • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.1

         15 February 2011 at 12:41 pm

         But I wonder why Labour didn’t back up the Greens….?

         Can our opposition parties please stand firm on issues of sovereignty, material and symbolic.
5. orange whip? 5

   15 February 2011 at 10:17 am

   So John Key unofficially endorsed Rodney Hide for Epsom the other day on Willie & JT’s radiolive show.

   Thoughts?
   • Zorr 5.1

     15 February 2011 at 10:28 am

     haha another flip-flop from Mr Smile-and-Wave

     His polling must be showing him something terrible if that is the case because only a week ago on National Radio news it was announced that National would be contesting Epsom.
     • orange whip? 5.1.1

       15 February 2011 at 10:36 am

       Well to be fair they always “contest” it, it’s the nudges and winks that send the real message.
       • Pascal's bookie 5.1.1.1

         15 February 2011 at 11:10 am

         Yeah, I think the line a week ago was that they would campaign sensibly in Epsom.
         • Lanthanide 5.1.1.1.1

           15 February 2011 at 11:42 am

           Which is so waffly it doesn’t mean anything.

           If National are polling at 52%, sensibly means “go all out and hope Act stays out”. If National are polling at 42%, it means “do everything possible to covertly support Act”.
6. ianmac 6

   15 February 2011 at 10:17 am

   “Readership of the newspaper increased 7 per cent over the past 12 months” reports the Herald. But notice that is “readership” not circulation. Wonder how Nielson gets figures which show increase of readership? Online, more sharing of a paper? They say “sales are up slightly to 170,677” but does that mean by 3 or 300 or 3,000 more sales? There are facts and stats and……… umm spin.
   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10706283
   • ianmac 6.1

     15 February 2011 at 12:01 pm

     Over the last 2 years the Herald has fallen 10,000 in circulation, according to Waddington. So the slight rise (190) this year is nothing against the 2 year figure. Wonder if the anti Labour line at the Herald is having a detrimental effect on circulation? Mind you the on-line version is free!
   • Bright Red 6.2

     15 February 2011 at 12:18 pm

     I have serious doubts on the circulation figures, which are done by survey. The circulation is independently audited.

     didn’t someone make a joke post about this once – falling circulation but rising readership? ah, it was old SP:

     http://thestandard.org.nz/the-inks-red-theres-less-of-it-and-no-ones-reading-it/
     • ianmac 6.2.1

       15 February 2011 at 12:52 pm

       Ta Brightness. Makes sense.
7. M 7

   15 February 2011 at 11:14 am

   ”I’m not going to back down from what I believe because of a few bad headlines.” So said David Cameron today. A few bad headlines? Two thirds of voters told a Times poll that the “big society” is no more than the government’s attempt “to put a positive spin on the cuts”. Worse, the big society has entered the national bloodstream as a joke. Top Shop and Vodafone demonstrators jump up and down, singing “we are the big society”. People set to lose their jobs in cascades from April say dryly: “I’m about to join the big society.” People seeing home care cut for an elderly parent, or their library closing, say “it’s the big society” with heavy sarcasm. Many a Tory can be heard calling it BS, as they roll their eyes. When a political idea becomes a shared national joke, it is probably beyond saving.’

   http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/14/david-cameron-big-society-charities

   Bet Key would like to shake this guy’s hand.
   • Colonial Viper 7.1

     15 February 2011 at 11:25 am

     And get a photo op
8. Colonial Viper 8

   15 February 2011 at 11:28 am

   Criticism of Pepsi Skinny Can Imitates Criticism of John Key

   lol. John Key, all fizz no nutrition. (Emphasis added below)

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/wellbeing/4656192/Skinny-Diet-Pepsi-canned

   The National Eating Disorders Association said it took offence to the can and said the company’s comments were both “thoughtless and irresponsible”.

   Libby Copeland summed up many of the criticisms in an article for Slate.

   “Same old story – aspirational, looks-oriented advertising with a thin layer of faux-empowerment on top,” Copeland wrote.
9. prism 9

   15 February 2011 at 11:42 am

   I just noticed that gummint has taken 12c tax out of 67c interest paid in one of my bank accounts. My point? That this sort of snatch and grab when one does manage to save something hardly encourages further efforts to save. Considering that inflation will always have to be contended with which diminishes the eventual spending power. I think that the sentiments expressed by government finance ministers about this, when placed by their lack of relief on both tax on savings and the heinous secondary tax on wage earners, shows they are a lot of lying, forked-tongued tossers.
   • Bright Red 9.1

     15 February 2011 at 12:11 pm

     yeah. I reckon what they could do is make no tax on interest and Kiwisaver returns up to the rate of inflation, but it would have to cut out at, say, $500 worth of returns a year – which is still $10,000 worth of savings – otherwise you’re jsut going to be shovelling money into the pockets of the guy with a $100,000 savings account and everyone else gets bugger all.
     • prism 9.1.1

       15 February 2011 at 12:19 pm

       BR Yes small savers would notice the tax relief with a bit extra in their pockets most.
10. Pascal's bookie 10

    15 February 2011 at 11:45 am

    I see that Chris Tremain there wrote a letter to the HBtoady stating his position re :being elected:

    My plan is to grow my majority as I have at the last two elections.

    However, if I were to lose, I would not return on the list, even if I had a list position which guaranteed me a seat you have my word on it.

    If people think this is arrogant, so be it. From my point of view, this returns power to the people.

    Got that?

    He reckons that if he loses his 9k majority then he gives his word that he won’t enter parliament via the list.

    Reckons that this returns the power to the people.

    Stupid, but fair enough. Many people don’t understand mmp, so why should he?

    But the thing is, he is saying that if he is put on the list, and elected from it, he won’t take the seat he was elected to and that this is a way of returning the power to the people.

    the seat won’t be emty, it will be taken by the next candidate on the list, cascading down to eventually benefit a candidate that wouldn’t ahve otherwise been elected.

    So what he’s doin is rewriting the list, post election, and removing his name from iit and handing the seat that he would have taken, the seat he was eleted to, and giving it to someone who had a position on the list below wht the voters determined was the ‘elected’ threshold.

    So yeah, I do think that’s arrogant. If you don’t want to be on the list. Don’t be on the fricken list.
    • Lanthanide 10.1

      15 February 2011 at 8:19 pm

      Good point. I don’t think there’s any requirement that all electorate MPs also be on the list. That’s generally how it’s done, but it doesn’t have to be.

      It just feels like cheap electioneering of the type that Bob Parker indulged in – “I’m too busy to have a public debate!”
11. Nick C 11

    15 February 2011 at 2:17 pm

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/02/newspaper_circulations.html

    The people are voting with their wallets
12. Draco T Bastard 12

    15 February 2011 at 3:16 pm

    Ten Myths About Welfare

    Sometime during the week of February 21, the Welfare Working Group chaired by former Commerce Commission head Paula Rebstock will release its final report on welfare reform in New Zealand. From day one, the exercise has hardly been a wide-ranging or rigorous investigation. The WWG chose to fixate on a symptom (welfare dependency) selected a cause from its ideological kitbag (an alleged lack of personal motivation and of strong incentives to seek work) and shaped its policy recommendations to suit.

    A long list of relevant issues have not been part of the WWG agenda. So far, the WWG’s investigations have not involved any substantial analysis of :

    A must read from Gordon Campbell
    • Vicky32 12.1

      15 February 2011 at 10:42 pm

      It’s excellent, DtB!
      Deb
13. bobo 13

    15 February 2011 at 4:01 pm

    John Key blogs about his big gay out 🙂
14. Herodotus 14

    15 February 2011 at 4:55 pm

    Either MMp is still confusing me or Trev Mallard is confused refer our exchanges
    Herodotus says:
    February 14, 2011 at 5:52 pm
    Question: If Michael Wood was sucessful- can anyone tell me who on the list of Lab MP’s would lose their position, and what Nat list canditate would become an MP?
    Just for those who want to send a signal to JK and are not fully supportive of JLR

    Trevor Mallard says:
    February 14, 2011 at 8:54 pm
    @Herodotus. If Labour wins we get extra MP. Nats lose one. No list change cos no list MP running.

    Can anyone confirm who is correct. As if I follow Trevs logic- Lab would then have more MP\’s than their party vote reps, and nat would have less. Then it is not MMP
    • Draco T Bastard 14.1

      15 February 2011 at 5:14 pm

      I don’t think by-elections during term come under the MMP formula which is counted at the general election.
      • Herodotus 14.1.1

        15 February 2011 at 5:21 pm

        If that ws the case why then was there this gossip going around that should Lab stand an existing list MP then Tizzard would re enter parliament, thus maintaining the ratio of MP’s in accordance with the party vote %
        If there was a single seat majority in parliament 60 nat 59 Lab (I know this does not add up to 120 and take into account for the speaker!!) and this reflected party votes. nat electorate MP’ dies. result by election, are you saying in this case that a by election could change who was in govt. Even if Nat achieved 50.2% and Lab 49.8%.
        • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1.1

          15 February 2011 at 6:46 pm

          That does, as a matter of fact, seem to be correct. It seems that a by-election mid-term could result in a change in government.
          • Lanthanide 14.1.1.1.1

            15 February 2011 at 8:23 pm

            Unlikely that it would actually result in a change of government in reality, though, unless there were only 2 parties in power, because the now-no-longer-majority-government could form a coalition with another party or independent in the house.

            I guess it’s possible this could happen in Oz at the moment, as Gillard’s majority is just a single MP and she’s already relying on the independents.
        • Pascal's bookie 14.1.1.2

          15 February 2011 at 8:51 pm

          Herodotus, I get what you are saying about maintaining proportionality, (and I’m winging it here), but I suspect it works something like this:

          At a general election the electorate races are decided, and the list votes are tallied.

          Based on the list vote, (and the number of electorate MPs that party has), it is decided how many list candidates each party has had elected. These list seats are decided at this point. They are duly filled by people who have been elected to them.

          Who those list MPs are, is determined by their place on the list, subtracting MPs who were elected to an electorate.

          If that is true, then it makes sense that if a list MP then wins an electorate by-election, then they lose their list seat, (as one MP cannot sit in two seats) and that seat is given to the next person from the same list. A list seat can’t change parties mid term, because there hasn’t been an election for it, and it’s already been declared that party ‘x’ won that seat.
          • Herodotus 14.1.1.2.1

            15 February 2011 at 10:36 pm

            Thanks to DTB for putting me straight here, and that in fact by elections can in some cases result in more or less seats than the proportion of votes. Even after dinner there is still time to learn something, MMP is not so straight forward 😉
            There is also the case of say Rodney Hide comming to some misfortune, Nat win a by election, yet the remaining MP’s for Act maintaining their position in Parliament. Yet not achieve 5% threashold and at the time not have a electorate seat. Some could say in the case of said Rodney misfortune that all the remaining Act MP’s should be replaced by those parties that did achieve the 5% threashold, and a rejig to maintain the % or votes = % makeup of MP’s.
            • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1.2.1.1

              16 February 2011 at 12:07 am

              Oh, no doubt that our present system needs looking at but MMP is still the best overall electoral system representative democracy can supply.
15. The Voice of Reason 15

    15 February 2011 at 6:16 pm

    Crikey! Anti-Nat quinella on the TV tonight. Both One and 3 news at 6 lead with stories on National’s failings. Luxury Beemers for ministers on One, a bogus job scheme on the other (including a couple of cycleway digs, too). Watch out John, the worms are turning!
    • Tigger 15.1

      15 February 2011 at 7:45 pm

      The BMW story was eye-rollingly poor. TVNZ didn’t press them on it, just took Key’s line that it was Labour’s fault (since they are apparently just following the contracting arrangement set down by the ‘previous govt’). Prob is Johnny, things have changed since then or hadn’t you noticed?
      • Draco T Bastard 15.1.1

        15 February 2011 at 8:19 pm

        It probably is the contract that Labour signed – it was a multi-year contract after all. It was a good contract that was certainly cheaper (by ~$50k/year IIRC) than the Fords that the government were using at the time. The cars are also much better than the Fords as well – better suited to purpose and more efficient.

        That BMW story shouldn’t be a ZOMG, they using BMWs story (which really all it is) but one which shows the good economic management of the previous government.
16. mickysavage 16

    15 February 2011 at 8:28 pm

    Thank you, thank you, thank you National.

    You could not help yourselves. The desire to be driven around in really plush new bmws was too much and you decided that three year old luxury cars were not good enough and you had to have brand new cars.

    I was embarrassed at Labour’s decision. It had the justification that the cars chosen were very fuel efficient and there would be a saving of running costs but it did not look good. National cannot claim the same.

    So for the next 9 months the new BMWs are going to be a significant part of the campaign,

    The problem when you are born to rule is that you do not realise how easy it is to make an asshole of yourself.
    • higherstandard 16.1

      15 February 2011 at 8:43 pm

      “BMW corporate sales manager Neil Ready said other cars in the model 7-series range sold at up to $300,000, but they had additional features. The model supplied for the VIP fleet would probably sell for about $170,000, he said, but ministers would have to do without sunroofs, fridges, liquor cabinets or televisions in the back of the cars.”

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/388712

      what no fridges, liquor cabinets or TVs …….. Poor dears !
      • Colonial Viper 16.1.1

        15 February 2011 at 8:50 pm

        I have to say, a $170K car without a sunroof is a bit of a rip off.

        I mean, in a Porsche Boxster S the entire roof is a sunroof 😀
17. Vicky32 17

    15 February 2011 at 8:57 pm

    I particularly liked that Clive, after reading all the emails from the Uncompassionate, following the item about the Free Store, went back, and analysed all the footage they had taken. The emails had said things like “bludgers, getting free food they don’t need, because they are fat” and “they’re in the queue for free food while they are smoking”…(my pet hate – the self-righteous wowser who doesn’t even get that smoking is a stress reliever.)
    So – Clive’s staff analysed all the footage they had, and he announced that of several hundred people filmed in the line – two, count ’em, two were smoking.
    Suck on that, middle class kiddies!
    Deb
    • Olwyn 17.1

      16 February 2011 at 1:10 am

      Yes, especially since a few months ago a TV3 reporter went begging in Melbourne and was treated with great kindness by everyone. This hatred directed at the poor is very scary, along with the associated belief that if there were no poor people everyone else would be as rich as they dream of being. Something that should ring alarm bells in New Zealand is the number of people who leave and say that they hate the place and will never return. Even turbulent, impoverished places tend to be remembered with greater affection by those who have felt compelled to leave. It is high time we revisited some of the nobler values in which New Zealand once prided itself.
18. Colonial Viper 18

    15 February 2011 at 9:41 pm

    UK Energy Companies Spy on Protestors

    More of the same corporate malfaesence and arrogance

    Leaked documents show how the security firm’s owner, Rebecca Todd, tipped off company executives about environmentalists’ plans after snooping on their emails. She is also shown instructing an agent to attend campaign meetings and coaching him on how to ingratiate himself with activists. The disclosures come as police chiefs, on the defensive over damaging revelations of undercover police officers in the protest movement, privately claim that there are more corporate spies in protest groups than undercover police officers.

    Senior police officers complain that spies hired by commercial firms are – unlike their own agents – barely regulated.

    Sir Hugh Orde, the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers, which until recently ran the secretive national unit of undercover police officers deployed in protest groups, said in a speech last week that “the deployment by completely uncontrolled and unrestrained players in the private sector” constituted a “massive area of concern”.

    Revelations about Mark Kennedy and three other undercover police officers in protest groups caused a furore last month and led to four official inquiries into their activities.

    Now a Guardian investigation has shed new light on the surveillance of green campaigners by private security firms whose intrusive operations include posing as activists on mailing lists and infiltrating full-time agents into campaign groups over many years.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/feb/14/energy-firms-activists-intelligence-gathering

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS