Open mike 17/12/2013

Written By: - Date published: 6:24 am, December 17th, 2013 - 174 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step right up to the mike …

174 comments on “Open mike 17/12/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. phillip ure 1
    17 December 2013 at 6:52 am

    ‘rawdon-ron’ strikes again..!

    http://whoar.co.nz/2013/ed-heh-rawdon-ron-burgandy-christie-has-his-first-ron-burgandy-moment-of-the-day/

    ed:..(heh..!..)..i have commented before how rawdon christie is such a ‘ron burgandy’..who has regular ‘ron burgandy’ moments/episodes..

    ..and he kicked off this morning with an early one..

    ..an ‘angry-ron’..

    ..where he stared down the lens and fulminated about those terrible people who go to the city mission xmas dinner and who..in rawdon-rons’ eyes..don’t deserve to be there..

    ..because they aren’t poor enough..

    (cont..)

    phillip ure..

  2. dv 2
    17 December 2013 at 7:01 am

    From the world of bizarre
    SAS soldier buy their own gear!!!!

    ttp://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9524403/Soldiers-fend-for-themselves

    They’re New Zealand’s fighting elite but when they go into action it’s with gear they’ve got themselves on-line because the Defence Force will not provide or doesn’t do so in time.

    News photos of Special Air Service (SAS) soldiers in action over the streets of Afghanistan’s capital Kabul hid the fact that the lanyards stopping them from falling out of helicopters were paid for by the men themselves; online for $100 each.

    Soldiers discovered there were not enough of charging handles – crucial to firing their weapons – so they paid $70 apiece to get their own.

    I took it upon myself to buy some more,’’ the soldier said, saying he didn’t want to have to stop fighting to clear his eyes.

    “The enemy don’t wait and I enjoy my eyesight.’’ He spent US$15000 (NZ$18,000) online to buy his own gear, including body armour, helicopter lanyards and safety boots. Other soldiers did the same.

    • Grumpy 2.1
      17 December 2013 at 8:25 am

      Completely disgraceful……

    • g says 2.2
      17 December 2013 at 8:37 am

      it reminds me of the phrase about schools having enough money and the armed forces have to have a cake stall to buy guns.
      only problem is while the soldiers dont have enough money now, neither, still, do the schools

    • greywarbler 2.3
      17 December 2013 at 11:51 am

      Thanks dv for putting that up. A WTF moment.

    • exkiwiforces 2.4
      19 December 2013 at 6:14 pm

      Sorry my late reply as I’ve been a little bit busy with work and silly season drinks etc.

      Old Phil needs too clam down a bit and be careful on what he say’s when opens his mouth as it may come back and bite him in his ass.

      All Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen all over the world buy their own or swap gear because their Governments/ Bean counters and the Joe public want to do defence on the cheap. I can tell you from own time in Military the cheapest bidder (90% of the time) isn’t always the best option and as a result I’ve had to buy my own gear, in some cases make our gear such as Gun mounts etc., or using private funds (Social Club funds) or private donors to kit out our wagons when I was serving in the NZDF. (Royal New Zealand Armoured Corps 1993-1998). This was one of many reasons why I left NZ in 1998.

      I now served in a foreign defence force and guess what I’ve had to go out buy my own gear here as well. In the last 15 years I’ve spent about 10K on kit from boots, webbing/ belt kits, packs and gas cookers etc. But it’s not as bad as our Kiwi cousins where they are still getting cheap and nasty kit from boots to some of the bigger gear like the OPV’s (which are 100ton over weight) and the RNZAF are still flying around in 50 year aircraft aka C-130 all because the Pollies and the NZ public want to do Defence cheap.

      One last thing I’ve seen a report that NZDF are facing $22 Billion Capital Equipment Shortfall over the next 15- 20 years. Some of this Equipment shortfall could’ve sorted out back in the mid 90’s and all the way through to the last Labour Government. If the Equipment was replaced when it was meant to have happened the Capital Equipment Shortfall would be well under $10 Billion.

      Have a Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year to everyone here at the Standard apart for those Tories as you lot are one of the reasons I NZ as well.

  3. amirite 3
    17 December 2013 at 7:11 am

    The Treasury says the Avatar deal is a turKey:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9524275/Critical-eye-on-Avatar-deal

    Crony capitalism at its worst. I guess that in an election year it looks sexier to subsidise Hollywood than the Independent Fisheries.

    • chris73 3.1
      17 December 2013 at 7:22 am

      Or Treasury get it wrong…again

      • infused 3.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 8:18 am

        Well it would hardly be the 11th time would it?

      • Tracey 3.1.2
        17 December 2013 at 8:57 am

        or the government got it wrong again

      • Tracey 3.1.3
        17 December 2013 at 3:41 pm

        and yet Bill English is championing its (treasury) forecasts this very day.

      • Draco T Bastard 3.1.4
        17 December 2013 at 4:24 pm

        Sometimes Treasury actually get things right. It’s usually when they come up with a position contrary to that of National and Act. Amazing that eh? 😈

        This is an interesting article about economists. It would seem to suggest that the policies followed by National and Act are contrary to what economists actually say and are actually a misunderstanding of economics. Not sure how much I agree with it as I’ve met too many economists who slavishly support NACTs policies.

      • Tracey 3.1.5
        17 December 2013 at 5:23 pm

        “Mr English said that there was still a lot of work to do to make the forecasts a reality and the Government was this year still borrowing a net $78 million every week.

        In dollar terms, net debt would peak at $64.5 billion in 2015-16.”

  4. Philj 4
    17 December 2013 at 7:16 am

    Xox
    Seems Len Brown can ‘court’ as many as he likes. There is no accountability /authority to bring him into line, other than himself and the public at the next election! Sounds like a corrupt dictatorship is running our largest, out of Control city. This is not going to end well for NZ. This is a very serious mistake. Has Rodney Hyde moved the Gold yet?

  5. satty 5
    17 December 2013 at 7:17 am

    If an investor pays up to 25% for a movie production, one would expect the investor would want around 25% of the revenue/profit the movie makes in sales, like cinema tickets, video disks, merchandise etc.

    So is the NZ government an investor or are they simply paying for Cameron’s farm or Jackson’s next private plane without expecting a considerable, measurable return on their investment?

    • phillip ure 5.1
      17 December 2013 at 7:36 am

      @ satty…

      ..the latter..

      phillip ure..

      • greywarbler 5.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 12:12 pm

        phillip u
        Business doesn’t believe in its own bullshit, or rather that of the theorists it employs whose ideas it deigns to notice, and the idea they don’t believe in is that real businesses don’t have subsidies.

        It’s only silly little NZ leaders and pollies who actually listen and act on those fanciful economic theories, or have followed them in the past. Now we are confronted with business as it is operated or as it might be called Realbuzinezz.

        And we are paying out some good 5% seed money and withholding our 15% Gst tax to get some good business. It’s a compromise we are willing to make. So let all you purists out there who would rather starve to death than put out a begging bowl find your own way to salvation.

        • phillip ure 5.1.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 1:19 pm

          @ greywarbler:..i think the point being made/question being asked by satty ..(which i was responding to..)

          ..is if we are doling out these squillions to squillionaire movie-makers..

          ..why aren’t we doing deals where that money is an investment..?..where the govt gets a return on that investment..if the film is a success..

          ..a question which in the case of avatar..is academic..

          ..i don’t think anyone would argue against the benefits of the movies being made here..

          ..it is the execution/direction that is being questioned..

          ..that just hand over fist spilling of squillions…

          ..with no return on that money..

          ..as satty asked..yes..it is pure cream/profit for them..

          ..to be trousered/to pay for new moats..

          ..and the like..

          ..it could all be done so much better..for nz..

          ..phillip ure..

          • greywarbler 5.1.1.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 4:32 pm

            Well yes that’s a point phillip u – we should be getting some return. I know – form a private public partnership with the film company and have a minority shareholding but get some of the returns. Brilliant.

            I am so good. Me for Finance Minister. Probably couldn’t do much worse. Except I don’t know how to run a country that is borrowing money all the time and yet says that’s the right way and Labour are a bunch of dreebs. (I warn you that’s going to be my favourite word next year. I understand geeks has gone mainstream and I want a word that pings with condescension.)

          • Tracey 5.1.1.1.2
            17 December 2013 at 4:48 pm

            cos Mr key would rather gamble on the intanglibl return of “tourism” than actually have some more certainty from having a piece of the film… anyway Warner Bros would have laughed and told him to PO. if he had asked. They are trying to save money not give away profit.

  6. Philj 6
    17 December 2013 at 7:27 am

    Xox
    Seems Len Brown can ‘court’ as many as he likes. There is no accountability /authority to bring him into line, other than himself and the public at the next election! Sounds like a corrupt dictatorship is running our largest, out of Control city. This is not going to end well for NZ. This is a very serious mistake. Has Rodney Hyde moved to the Gold Coast yet?

    • vto 7.1
      17 December 2013 at 7:52 am

      editorials – anonymous wastes of time

    • Tracey 7.2
      17 December 2013 at 9:02 am

      I guess it’s the perpetual problem though. The line between allowing an elected government to run the country and allowing people an opportunity to strongly object to something. I believe parties ought to declare their interest in coalitions with other parties prior to an election. Voters have the right to know with whom their vote will be bedded. It would certainly strengthen the “we have a mandate” idea.

      As I have stated many times if people who didn’t want assets sold voted for National then we got what they deserved. There was NO doubt in my mind that if National were able to they would form a government with anyone who would let them sell assets. For that reason I agree the time to object was in 2008 and 2011.

      I am not a fan of binding CIR’s because of the s59a CIR which was so full of deceptions and misleading information. People rely so heavily on those who get printed int he media or who can get postal pamphlets printed to get their information from and so much of it was misleading. Unless and until we have honesty out of the mouths of the politicians and lobbysist and the media who delve before printing press releases, CIR’s are up for hijack.

      • KJT 7.2.1
        17 December 2013 at 9:40 am

        Politicians are up for hijack. Fixed it for you!

        You really think people are that thick, don’t you.

        So thick that we should leave important decisions, about all our lives, to 20 or so politicians. Politicians FFS. Politicians that should have their sponsors names on their shirts.

        And. Just because, you, or I, individually objected to the results of one referendum, does not invalidate the concept of democracy.

        The changes to the bill, which resulted from the concerns many expressed in the lead up to the referendum, improved it greatly. Sent the politicians back to the drawing board.

        Why have voting at all. We could just leave everything up to our “wise” choke, politicians.

        • aerobubble 7.2.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 9:49 am

          Worse.

          A very media coup of the duly elected Mayor of Auckland. Brown wasn’t going to lose,
          so the right made a decision, a choice, between weakening him before the election or
          after. Weakening him before would have be the ethical choice and made a stronger
          Auckland, and so little power, but weakening him afterwards, led by media, clearly
          undermines the will of Auckland. Councilers want seats at the independant Mayor
          table! Something they would never had gotten either way, returned or not, had
          Brown’s transgressions been brought out before his re-election. And guess what, the
          right made such a strong Mayor! designed the system that way! And backed Banks, who
          they should have dropped for his failure and not forced him on ACT. But hey, like
          voters didn’t know Banks was extreme right, maybe the right would not have so much
          trouble had Key pushed moderate right candidates rather than extreme ACT child
          passport grave robbers, and what helicopter its no cabbage boat, or perk buster
          busted. With company like this no wonder Key’s teflon has gone missing.

          Bennett gazumped. CC finds candidate, so political alike as Bennett, but half the
          size, to run in North Harbor, insuring National voters a clear choice of one.
          Bennett will get listed into pariament, and North Habor will vote in the religious
          party into power. North Harbor next Epson! Well unless voters get fedup being pushed
          to the right, leaky moldy right wingers. Its possible to be played, sure, but will
          some moderate National voters vomit less voting Labour in the seat, instead of
          extreme right Nat/CC. If you vote Bennett, why wouldn’t you vote CC instead and get
          Key over the line possibly, but of course that’s if you wanted to vote CC and be
          played by CC. Its not about serving the voters, its about power plays to get the
          rightwing cabal over the line. Desperate

          • lurgee 7.2.1.1.1
            18 December 2013 at 12:54 pm

            “CC finds candidate, so political alike as Bennett, but half the size …”

            Are we really reduced to making snide references to Paula Bennett’s weight?

        • KJT 7.2.1.2
          17 December 2013 at 9:50 am

          Note: They are happy to throw progressives a few bones in the form of laws which don’t really cost anything. or seriously change things.

          Changing the law doesn’t cost. Increasing parental education and support, does!

          The sneaky cutting of funds to child mental health services, for just one example, is very obvious to us.

          Watch them ignore it, if we had a referendum on changing the underlying causes of child poverty in NZ. Something which, will, like stopping asset sales, cost NACT’s sponsors money.

    • alwyn 7.3
      17 December 2013 at 10:38 am

      There was an hilarious letter in the letters column just below the editorial in the Dom/Post today.
      The heading above the letter was “Helen Clark would’ve heeded the result”.
      After a general whinge against John Key, saying he would plough on with asset sales, that he was telling New Zealanders their opinions don’t count, etc, etc, etc he then drifted of into a patch of inspired lunacy.

      He said “By contrast, it’s my feeling that the way former prime minister Helen Clark, for example, might have handled a result that she was personally opposed to would have been to have the decency to say: “It’s not the result I personally believe is best for New Zealand, but we’re a democracy, and I respect the will pf the people. Asset sales will stop for now, but we welcome further discussion on this topic”. That’s the kind of leader I want”.

      Is there anyone out there in the Blogosphere who also resides in the letter writer’s strange fantasy world where Parliament must have 99 MPs and the “anti-smacking” bill was repealed?

      • Naturesong 7.3.1
        17 December 2013 at 1:12 pm

        Not sure she would have plowed through with the same “Damn the torpedos!” attitude and two fingered salute to the NZ electorate the way Key has.

        With any policy that was controversial or of national importance, she worked with the opposition to reach a consensus. Examples being the Free Trade agreement with China, and the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007.

        Also, I dont think Cullen would have let her enagage in such financial idiocy in the first place, so the question is moot.

        It is strange though, every step along the way Key has said they would only sell if they got a good price. And it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by the opposition, treasury, as well as independant economists that from a financial point of view, the sales will leave the government books in a worse position, and lead to higher power rises, which have knock on effects for businesses with increasing overhead, as well as more strain on the health system as more people struggle to heat their homes in the winter.

        It is also very clear that the cabinet are very aware of the damage to the government books, wider economy and society.

        Another thing that has not been mentioned very often is the huge missed opportunity for New Zealand small businesses.
        Stock markets over the past few years have been running hot, primarily with printed money looking for actual businesses and assets to invest in.
        It’s has been the perfect time for startups that have found their market, and have a good business model to float for capital and expand.
        If you are a New Zealand company that was looking at an IPO; the government just ate your lunch.
        And not just a bite, they ate the fucking lot.

        • Rogue Trooper 7.3.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 1:23 pm

          KiwiSaver Costs, ‘cheap as chips’?
          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11173368
          or another political hot-dog…

          • Naturesong 7.3.1.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 1:40 pm

            Not sure why they framed it as “Govt blows $5b on KiwiSaver in five years”.

            That money is a down-payment on peoples retirement, and in the mean time is invested. Be nice if there was a requirement for all Kiwisaver funds to be reinvested in the New Zealand economy. In any case, it’s has not been wasted.

            It’s not as if they actually got a few billion dollars in a big pile and just torched it, they way they have with the sale of New Zealands public utilities.

            • alwyn 7.3.1.1.1.1
              17 December 2013 at 2:01 pm

              Perhaps we should describe the KiwiSaver scheme in something along these lines.

              “KiwiSaver is a means of returning to the taxpayer some of the excessive tax levies that have been imposed on them. It is a means of allowing the normal citizen a means of choose where their retirement savings should be invested rather than having it done by an overarching state bureaucracy”.

              There that would get all the National voters in favour of it and all the Labour supporters demanding that it be abolished.

              The problem of forcing all the funds to be invested solely in New Zealand is that you can’t get the spread of investments that reduce risk. It is something that the Greens in particular don’t understand. They wanted to print money to restock the earthquake repair reserves and then to invest that money in New Zealand.
              Similarly the Labour party seem to want to start an insurance company that will operate only in New Zealand

              • Naturesong …
                17 December 2013 at 3:39 pm

                The problem of forcing all the funds to be invested solely in New Zealand is that you can’t get the spread of investments that reduce risk

                I would agree with you if it gets invested in the same industry within New Zealand, or if the entire New Zealand economy gets wiped off the face of the earth – Which is much more likely under a National Government (or the 4th Labour Govt – wankers).

                With regard to the redistribution of tax, I imagine the rump of the National Party would be opposed to it on ideological grounds. Mind you, my dad likes Kiwisaver – and he worships the ground Roger Douglas walks on – his reasoning is that there are so many stupid people out there, that if the Govt didn’t do something to ensure they helped themselves he’s have to pay to support the lazy bludgers in the end anyway.

                I think the Labour Partys Insurance thing is a good idea, but its hardly an amazing, “wow”, kinda policy.
                Introduce into the market a company that is required to re-insure to appropriate levels and doesn’t make excessive profits to keep the rest of the buggers from taking the piss. And any profits stay in NZ Same principle as KiwiBank
                It’s not rocket surgery.

                The Greens paper detailing QE through earthquake bonds, was actually a well thought out idea, for that particular place and time.
                It would have reduced borrowing, kicked inflation up a couple of points when it had completely flatlined due to zero demand, stabilised the exchange rate, resulted in a much better balance of payments, and saved some, if not a significant number of the 40,000 manufacturing jobs that went to the wall over that 12 month period.

                The “sky is falling” reaction to Dr Normans paper was quite bizaare as it was obvious that most people didnt read it, and really didn’t understand the principles behind it.
                It would have been nice if there had been at least a rational, reality based conversation about it.

                Instead, we borrowed a shitload of money that someone else printed.
                We got higher government debt, inflation (and demand) remained flatlined, manufacturers and exporters (along with 10’s of thousands of jobs) went to the wall, and our balance of payments got worse.
                Result! Good work Mr English.

                If you want examples of utter fiscal incompetence, you need look no further than the current government.

                • alwyn …
                  17 December 2013 at 4:14 pm

                  Hmm. I won’t get into a catfight with you over which party is the worst economic manager. Let’s just agree to disagree.

                  The description of KiwiSaver I offered was just a lighthearted attempt to describe it in such a way that both sides of politics might reflexively take the opposite line to their normal one.

                  If you are going to set up an insurance company that only operates in New Zealand you would have to reinsure almost all the house and contents cover overseas. Surely that would be accomplished most easily by having the insurance offered by multinationals that are inherently globally spread. Why bring in a middleman? As for a KiwiAssure being somehow “better” and “fairer” etc than an overseas version? Well you are aware that KiwiBank are under the gun for the unfair fees they have been accused of charging, aren’t you?

                  As far as the Earthquake fund goes. It is a long time since I looked at it but if my memory serves me they wanted to invest the fund in New Zealand. That is absolutely insane. If you ever needed the money, after another earthquake in Wellington say, it would be exactly the time that you didn’t have the werewithal to sell assets and use the funds to pay out on the earthquake damage. A good chunk of the assets would have been destroyed and would need replacing themselves. If you think you can simply print money and invest it overseas than you have a great deal more faith in the cupidity of International bankers than I do. I may have forgotten the details of Norman’s proposal of course but I do remember thinking that what he was suggesting would only lead to inflation. That may have been what he wanted of course. It gives you a good opportunity to claim that people have made (fake) capital gains and to tax the hell out of them.

              • Tracey …
                17 December 2013 at 4:03 pm

                it’s ok, English is setting himself for a lolly scramble in election year with veiled comments about tax cuts… and no mention of the 65b government debt despite this from English

                “Now it’s time to pay down debt and get our books in order.” English 2013

                “Questions for oral answer
                Content provider
                House of Representatives
                Information

                Date:
                2 July 2013

                Metadata

                Related documents

                Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) for Tuesday, 2 July 2013

                6. State-owned Assets, Sales—Purpose and Use of Proceeds

                [Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11416. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]

                6. Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: Are the proceeds from selling power companies and other assets being used to pay down debt, to build schools and hospitals, to fund irrigation projects, to rebuild Christchurch, or to fund Auckland transport projects?

                Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) : The Government has been clear that the proceeds of the share offer programme will be used to buy a variety of new public assets and will help the Government avoid having to borrow to procure those assets. The Future Investment Fund was outlined in Budget 2012 and further details were provided in Budget 2013. The purpose of that fund is to ensure complete transparency about the spending of the proceeds from asset sales. The Budget confirmed another $1.5 billion of these proceeds will be invested in schools, Christchurch hospitals, KiwiRail, and irrigation projects. However, the share offer proceeds are only a proportion of the Government’s overall new capital spending.

                Hon David Parker : Does he agree with John Key that asset sales are necessary to “avoid a credit downgrade”, or does he agree with Tony Ryall that asset sales are necessary to pay down debt, or does he agree with another John Key that asset sales would be used to build new schools and hospitals, or does he agree with Nathan Guy that money would be used to subsidise irrigation on multimillion-dollar farms, or does he agree with Gerry Brownlee that asset sales money be used to rebuild Christchurch, or does he agree with yet another John Key that asset sales will fund the Auckland rail link?

                Hon BILL ENGLISH : Yes.

                Hon David Parker : How much funding has already been allocated for spending from asset sales via the Future Investment Fund, and how much has actually been raised for the Future Investment Fund from asset sales to date?

                Hon BILL ENGLISH : The details of that are set out in the Budget, but, as the member will be aware, the Government’s programme hopes to realise between $5 billion and $7 billion, which is, actually, quite a lot of money. I would have to say that that $5 billion to $7 billion is much more useful as cash than it is as 49 percent shares in electricity companies owned by the Government.

                Hon David Parker : I seek leave to table documents showing that $1.7 billion has so far been raised—

                Mr SPEAKER : What is the source of the document?

                Hon David Parker : There is a combination of documents: the National Party manifesto and Treasury documents.

                Mr SPEAKER : No, both are freely available to members if they so want it. Has the member got a supplementary question?

                Hon David Parker : Yes. Why does he continue to claim asset sales will reduce debt when Treasury—his own department—states that from 2017 the Crown is worse off to the tune of $50 million a year, growing to $100 million a year worse off because of asset sales thereafter?

                Hon BILL ENGLISH : We do not claim it will reduce debt. What we have said it will mean is that the Crown does not have to go and borrow the money from overseas bankers. We have never understood why Labour and the Greens would rather borrow money from offshore bankers than get the money from New Zealanders who want to invest in a large New Zealand company.

                Hon David Parker : Has he been advised that in January 2011 John Key said the Government needed to sell power companies and other State assets to avoid a credit downgrade; if so, is he aware that 8 months later New Zealand was downgraded by both Standard and Poor’s and Fitch Ratings?

                Hon BILL ENGLISH : Yes, I am aware of those things. I am also aware that the sale of the assets means that 49 percent of the ownership has gone largely to New Zealanders but also to some offshore investors. In return for that, they have put cash in the Government’s bank account. I know it is profoundly irritating to the Labour Party, but we are able to use that cash to buy new public assets. The public is starting to understand that Labour’s arguments against the asset sales were poorly conceived and wrong.”

                I recall when cullen did this in 2008 it was “lolly scramble”

                ” English told reporters at the Treasury lockup today that tax cuts were “unlikely” next year, although the $1b of ACC cuts in the pipeline are a proxy for that.

                But they surely cannot be ruled out longer term, though he is not about to get ahead of himself, or blow a powerful political weapon for the next campaign by signalling them this early.

                Next year, though, a contingent promise of tax cuts – at the least a move on the thresholds to counter the “fiscal creep” that pushes taxpayers into higher tax brackets – must at least be an option on these numbers.” English 2013

                “National Party Finance spokesman Bill English says if Michael Cullen is not planning an election year spend-a-thon, why did Helen Clark say ‘it has taken a while to build up the kitty for a substantial tax package’?

                He is responding to a speech today in which the Finance Minister referred to Labour’s laughable claim that it is maintaining a ‘tight fiscal stance’ and the statement that there will be no ‘lolly scramble’ in election year.

                “Dr Cullen has presided over the biggest spending Government in New Zealand history. Labour’s spending has consistently outstripped economic growth, productivity growth has slumped, and Kiwis have been leaving for Australia in droves.

                “It has taken Dr Cullen eight years to start thinking about refunding some of the money he has taken from hard-working Kiwis through over-taxation.Â

                “In the last Budget he signed off on some $4 billion in total of over-spending, even though he warned his colleagues that not sticking to their limit would keep interest rates higher for longer.

                “Kiwi households are paying for Labour’s last lolly scramble, with interest rates which are among the highest in the developed world, coupled with rates that put us in the top half of the OECD for being overtaxed.”

                The ANZ makes it clear in its latest Market Focus newsletter that ‘the biggest losers in an inflationary environment are middle to low income households’.” English 2007

  8. Bearded Git 8
    17 December 2013 at 7:48 am

    Hone was very good on Morning Report this morning, a stark contrast to Key’s whining.

    Key really doesn’t get the Mandela/anti-Apartheid thing. Not only does he take a delegation of largely pro-tour representatives (Sharples, late in the day, claiming he was there to represent the protesters, though nobody can remember him protesting) to SA but he then slags off Hone Harawira, who everyone accepts did lead protests, for attending several memorial services and Mandela shrines/museums, in a trip undertaken for the express purpose of representing the protesters.

    I’ve never thought Key was much of a politician, or much of a charmer for that matter, but he is really digging himself into a hole here.

    • Colonial Viper 8.1
      17 December 2013 at 8:10 am

      Key really doesn’t get the Mandela/anti-Apartheid thing.

      That’s because he likely has given the issue literally, no moral thought. Not the issue of the South Africa trip; the issue of apartheid and the oppression of the majority by a small minority. It’s what he does every day, for goodness sakes.

    • Lanthanide 8.2
      17 December 2013 at 10:47 am

      “I’ve never thought Key was much of a politician, or much of a charmer for that matter, but he is really digging himself into a hole here.”

      Actually if you looked at the comments on stuff when it was first announced that Hone was going to go, there was a huge anti-Hone backlash.

      If those people are representative of middle NZ, then Key slamming Hone, for absolutely anything Hone does except turn water into wine, is a vote-winner for him.

      • vto 8.2.1
        17 December 2013 at 11:10 am

        You’re onto it there Lanthanide.

        Key is simply doing a Brash and tapping into the swathe of kiwis who will support anything to put Maori “in their place”.

        Key is an outright racist for this.

        edit: actually, not quite onto it lanth. your assumption that this reflects “middle” is out there

        • Lanthanide 8.2.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 12:46 pm

          I don’t assume it. I said “if those…”

        • Naturesong 8.2.1.2
          17 December 2013 at 1:30 pm

          Having grown up in middle class pakeha Auckland, it’s representative of a lot more than I think most people realise.

          And that’s not even considering the uneducated rednecks.

        • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 8.2.1.3
          17 December 2013 at 2:45 pm

          @ Lanthanide(8.2), VTO(8.2.1) and Naturesong(8.2.1.2)

          Oh that sounds like it might be horribly accurate what you both say 🙁

          …perhaps I might exchange ‘political institutions’ for ‘political spin’ or ‘dogwhistles’ and I think this following quote of Rousseau sums up my views on the attitudes of the group of NZers you speak of.

          “All ran headlong to their chains, in hopes of securing their liberty; for they had just wit enough to perceive the advantages of political institutions, without experience enough to enable them to foresee the dangers.”

          Its truly deeply saddening if what you say is correct.

          🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁

  9. bad12 9
    17 December 2013 at 7:59 am

    A ‘Jolly’, so says Slippery the Prime Minister of Mana Party leader Hone Harawira’s trip to the funeral of Nelson Mandela,

    Whining that Harawira wasn’t part of the ‘official party’ and therefor should not have gone to the funeral in South Africa would seem on the surface to be from the PM a simple attempt at diversion, the diversion from what can only be described as an atrocious display from Slippery the PM and the British Prime Minister David Cameron as they were photographed at the ‘official service’ for Mandela laughing uproariously,

    No matter what any of us think of Nelson Mandela, He is respected the world over as one of the ‘great’ Statesmen of our age and for the Prime Minister of New Zealand to be publicly seen to be making ‘light’ of the official funeral service for leaders from across the whole world, giving the gravity of the service the air of a mere scherzando, a joke, shows our Prime Minister as unfit to hold this office,

    Far from being asked to explain His actions during the approved trip by the House Speaker, Harawira should be applauded for attending services including a private ceremony at the Mandela House, the Speaker should be writing to Slippery the PM asking why He felt the need to breach the Parliamentary Convention that Members do not comment on other Members absence from the Parliament as this is a Privelege reserved entirely to the House Speaker,

    What tho is exercising Slippery’s sphincter this early on in the week after the Parliament has risen for the year, did the ‘spin-meisters’ on the ninth floor give Him the message that every time He attacks the Green Party, far from the desired effect, they go up in the polls,

    Or did the latest round of National Party internal polling give the PM’s arse muscle cause to tighten in such a painful manner that His vocal chords began a litany in the language of the ‘Clown’ as they exposed for the PM ‘the elephant in the room’ in the form of Mana having enough support to bring into the next Parliament the form of John Minto on the Party List…

    • phillip ure 9.1
      17 December 2013 at 8:15 am

      i think a lot of people would like to see john minto in parliament..

      ..y’see..he has this record of being on the right side of history..eh..?

      ..phillip ure..

      • alwyn 9.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 10:45 am

        Not nearly enough to get him there though Phil.
        Mana got 24,168 votes in the end. To get Minto into Parliament, assuming that all the other parties got the same number of votes as they did at the election, Mana would have had to have got 45,810 votes. They only got about half the number they needed.

        • Lanthanide 9.1.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 10:48 am

          But they have a much better shot at it in the upcoming election. Remember 2011 was the first election Mana had contested.

          • alwyn 9.1.1.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 11:14 am

            It’s possible although the polls don’t seem to point that way. Three seats needs about 2.3% of the vote and I haven’t seen any polls giving Mana a figure that high.
            If Labour run Kelvin Davis against Hone though it might all be moot as Hone might be beaten.

            • phillip ure 9.1.1.1.1.1
              17 December 2013 at 11:44 am

              @alwyn..also the media ignored harawira last time..

              ..that wont happen next time..

              ..plus the poverty-fighting policies etc of mana (and the do-something-about-it!-imperatives are much more urgent than they were last time..

              ..plus the disintergration of the maori party is almost complete..

              ..and again..this was not the case last time around..

              ..so mana doubling their vote (at the very least)..

              ..and thus getting minto in as an mp..

              ..is eminently do-able..

              ..and as an aside.. personally..i reckon one of the few good things to come from the death of nelson mandela..

              ..has been what i see as the seachange in attitude of many mainstream nz’ers/media towards minto and the other demonstrators against apartheid..

              ..what has been bought sharply into their focus..is how they..(not the muldoons/bolgers/mckinnons/keys)..were on the right side of history..and on the right side of right/wrong..

              ..and how in the grand new zealand scheme of things..

              ..for their moral courage/convictions..

              ..minto et.al are their generations’ heroes..warriors even..

              ..they were all standing on the right side of history..

              ..and on the right side of that right/wrong divide..

              ..phillip ure..

              • Naturesong …
                17 December 2013 at 1:25 pm

                Not sure about the sea change.

                The media in New Zealand defaults toward advertising, and if giving the National Party a bit of a stir every now and again sells a few papers, they are happy to do so. It also allows them to say “look, we’re unbiased – see, we really took it to John Key on that social issue”.

                I had expected the honeymoon to end when John Key had jack booted thugs charge into the herald offices at the last election.

                But for the editors, and owners of New Zealands mainstream media organisations Upton Sinclair comes to mind

                It is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding

                And for the rump of the National Party, Carl Sagan

                “You can’t convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep seated need to believe”

      • swordfish 9.1.2
        17 December 2013 at 12:49 pm

        Speaking of Minto and Mandela, here’s a (typically) excellent audio comment by Wayne Brittenden (Nat Rad, Sunday Morning, 15 Dec 2013 11:36am) on Obama living up to his own soaring rhetoric at Mandela’s funeral.

        Here: http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/2579951

        This is an excerpt form 1:24 – 3:19: “Obama also spoke of the great inspiration of Mandela, the importance of inclusion, generosity and truth, the power of action and of taking risks. The (US) President has the perfect opportunity for promoting those values by taking a tough stand against another State practising a form of Apartheid – an ally, Israel. Even South Africa’s Apartheid never built a Wall – twice the height of the Berlin one, complete with sniper-posts and checkpoints limiting free Palestinian movement and economic development. There are even buses and roads that are segregated. The World rose up against the injustices in South Africa – it has yet to do the same against the long-standing injustices in Gaza and on the West Bank.

        Exactly 13 years ago, Nelson Mandela attended the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people and called for their self-determination and statehood. He said that his own people’s freedom was incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians…….The truth is Israeli-style Apartheid wouldn’t be possible without the immense political and economic backing of the US. What better way then for Obama to honour the memory of the man he so deeply admired than by slashing the 3 Billion dollars that the US gives Israel each year in military aid, along with the caterpillars that demolish houses, water supplies and Olive Orchards.”

        • greywarbler 9.1.2.1
          17 December 2013 at 1:04 pm

          Wayne Brittenden
          gets my vote for taking over from Chris Laidlaw.
          A little bit on him from Paper Plus he has written a book on NZ Theatre)
          Biography
          Wayne Brittenden is a New Zealand journalist who has worked overseas for most of his career. A former National Radio correspondent in Tokyo, he later worked for the BBC and now works as an independent documentary maker, based in London. He has done extensive research in New Zealand for this book.

          Then there is something interesting about him near the end of page on Wikipedia about Political Compass.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass

          • swordfish 9.1.2.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 1:47 pm

            Cheers, greywarbler. I’ve sat the Political Compass test myself (Left and Liberal, as it turns out). But I had no idea Wayne Brittenden was behind it !

            On the SA Apartheid / Israeli Apartheid comparisons, I’d say that, if anything, Brittenden doesn’t quite go far enough. For a start, the most important point about the so-called ‘Separation Wall’ is surely that Israel has built it DEEP inside Palestinian territory, to act as a defacto future border – completely and utterly in contravention of International Law.

            And, it’s a little to mild to say “There are even buses and roads that are segregated.” Israel has constructed a whole series of Jewish Settler-only Highways throughout the Palestinian West Bank (as part of its ethnic-cleansing and land-appropriation goals). So, it’s systematic segregation throughout the Occupied Territories on land, water resources, building and so on.

            But, it’s the ethnic cleansing itself that bears a striking resemblance to the latter stages of SA Apartheid – the same attempt to force the occupied/oppressed population into small Bantustan-style enclaves, thus enforcing dispossession.

            • greywarbler 9.1.2.1.1.1
              17 December 2013 at 4:35 pm

              Israel sounds Fascist. Would you define it as being in that part of the political scene?

              And idle curiosity. Is Swordfish chosen because of thinking about an old type of plane? I saw a mention of one in a photo history of WW2.

              • swordfish …
                17 December 2013 at 7:58 pm

                Well, you know, greywarbler, the Zionism on which Israel was established derives from precisely the same deeply reactionary, anti-Enlightenment ideological mix that so inspired the Nazis. Namely, German Imperialism and East-Central European Romantic Nationalism. ‘Blut und Bone’.

                Zionism’s always been, first and foremost, about ethnically-cleansing the Palestinians in order to carve-out an overwhelmingly Jewish (they’d prefer ENTIRELY Jewish) ‘Greater Israel’. Much like the Nazis wanted an entirely German, ethnically-cleansed, Eastern Europe (and Ukraine, Belorussia and Baltic States).

                And, of course, the Israeli Right were openly fascist during the first half of 20C. (Jabotinsky’s Revisionist movement – which included future Israeli PMs Shamir and Begin). Not that I’m suggesting the Israeli Labour Party is much better. The differences across the mainstream Israeli political spectrum are far more marginal (particularly with respect to aims and strategies in the Occupied Territories) than a lot of people in the West would like to think.

                Bad mistake for Labour Party people here to assume its entirely the fault of Lukid and its allies (although, pleasingly, very few do these days). In fact, in some ways, the Israeli Lab Party’s been worse. Throughout the so-called ‘Peace-Process’ of the 1990s, for instance, both Labour and Lukid governments alike massively expanded their illegal network of Jewish Settler-only Highways throughout the West Bank. And the supposedly “dovish” Labour Party under first Rabin and then Peres, have an even worse record than Lukid in that regard.

                • swordfish …
                  17 December 2013 at 8:10 pm

                  Swordfish. No, I’m something of a Tom Waits fan and I’ve always particularly liked his 1983 stand-out album ‘Swordfishtrombones’. But, I’m also a bit of a lazy bugger, at least to the extent that, after writing “swordfish”, I just couldn’t be arsed typing out the rest of the name. Sad but true.

                  But, yeah, I do have a vague idea that the swordfish was a British Naval aircraft during WW2.

                  • lprent …
                    17 December 2013 at 11:58 pm

                    Also known as the stringbag because it was a biplane. Top speed was something like 90mph. But it did some very nasty damage to the Italian fleet at ? Taranto.

                    • rhinocrates …
                      18 December 2013 at 12:03 am

                      So I heard, with a good headwind, Italian battleships could outrun them. Played a major role in disabling the Bismarck.

                      Good album too.

    • ScottGN 9.2
      17 December 2013 at 8:21 am

      I can’t for the life of me figure out why Key has launched this broadside at Harawira. Probably it boils down to nothing more than his ego is bruised by being laughed about as the ‘unidentified guest’ at Cameron’s side and he wants to create a bit of a diversion. Such are the weighty issues of moment on Planet Key.

    • Tracey 9.3
      17 December 2013 at 9:03 am

      and yet not one word against Mr Bank’s behaviour.

    • Rosie 9.4
      17 December 2013 at 9:13 am

      “Far from being asked to explain His actions during the approved trip by the House Speaker, Harawira should be applauded for attending services including a private ceremony at the Mandela House, the Speaker should be writing to Slippery the PM asking why He felt the need to breach the Parliamentary Convention that Members do not comment on other Members absence from the Parliament as this is a Privelege reserved entirely to the House Speaker”………….

      Indeed Harawira should be applauded. He did the right thing and in the right spirit. Key knows nothing of mana and nothing of the heart and just saw a cheap opportunity to be divisive and wanky.

      Key has shot to buffoon level 10 for his tacky comments.

      • alwyn 9.4.1
        17 December 2013 at 10:50 am

        Perhaps you could ask the same question of Winston Peters and some of the Labour MPs. They quite happily pont out in Question time that Key is never there on a Thursday. No Prime Minister, or Leader of the Opposition does attend on Thursday of course, at least in the last 20 years, but it doesn’t stop the Opposition rabbiting on of course.

        • bad12 9.4.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 2:12 pm

          alwyn, the assertion you make here has all the appearnce of an out-right LIE, Slippery the Prime Minister is also well known for this type of conversation,

          Provide us the proof of the assertion you make…

          • alwyn 9.4.1.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 6:24 pm

            I’ll track down the reference after you do the following.
            Provide us with the proof that John Key has pointed out that a member of the opposition was absent from the house.
            I don’t feel like bothering to justify my comments to someone who makes unsubstantiated statements of his/her own.

            • Te Reo Putake 9.4.1.1.1.1
              17 December 2013 at 6:47 pm

              Bullshit. You’re making the claim. Back it up.

            • karol 9.4.1.1.1.2
              17 December 2013 at 6:57 pm

              Yesterday, as reported on Stuff.

              As quoted in the article, Key says the same in the accompanying video:

              Prime Minister John Key has slammed Mana Party leader Hone Harawira for his taxpayer-funded trip to Nelson Mandela’s funeral, saying Harawira has “barely turned up” to Parliament this year.

              I watch Question time quite a lot. I’ve never heard opposition MPs comment about Key’s absence from the House on Thursdays.

              I’ve seen non-Mp commenters here comment on it.

              • Pascal's bookie …
                17 December 2013 at 7:29 pm

                Maybe they have, maybe they haven’t.

                I don;t really give a shit.

                Key brought this up. It’s a fight he wanted to start for some reason.

                Go read kiwiblog comments on it and you’ll see why.

                Flat out racist dog whistle. “The lazy Maori, who does he think he is? How dare he be right”

              • alwyn …
                17 December 2013 at 9:01 pm

                You will note that the statement made by Rosie. It said that “the speaker should be writing to the PM asking why he felt the need to breach the Parliamentary convention etc, etc”. The Parliamentary convention she is referring to one of the Rules of the House and relates to what a member can say in the chamber. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what any member says outside the house. If the Rules of the House applied to everything a member said in all circumstances we wouldn’t have any of them left.
                So no, your quotation doesn’t answer what I am asking for.
                Actually Winston’s complaint, as I remember it, was when he complained about the Government transferring a question to another Minister so that John Key could avoid being in Parliament that day.

                I am not sure whether I should feel sorry for you or congratulate you on your bravery for wathching Question time. I generally read it through but I don’t think I could take watching it.

                In terms of being in the House on Thursday, no PM or Leader of the Opposition is ever there. John Key isn’t and Helen Clark wasn’t. Neither were the various Leaders of the Opposition on both sides.

                • felix …
                  17 December 2013 at 9:23 pm

                  If you read QT as thouroughly as you read this thread then it’s little wonder you have no idea who is saying what in the house.

                • karol …
                  17 December 2013 at 9:40 pm

                  In terms of being in the House on Thursday, no PM or Leader of the Opposition is ever there. John Key isn’t and Helen Clark wasn’t. Neither were the various Leaders of the Opposition on both sides.

                  FFS, we all know that, and it has nothing to do with the issue.

                  Winnie’s complaint sounds like ones he would make about Key deliberately dodging answering questions in the House. Key does that one slippery way or another. It’s not the same as being critical of someone not being in the House.

                • Rosie …
                  18 December 2013 at 8:59 am

                  LOL. The statement was made by bad12. I was quoting him. Theres two parts to that statement. One is about applauding Hone for being in S.A, the second about Shoneky inappropriately raising Hone’s absence in parliament (in a mocking way – those 4 words are mine)

                  My main response was around Hone doing the right thing. I had a swipe at Key, as an aside.

                  My comment is a mere agreement with bad12 who went to the bother to thoughtfully reflect on shonkey’s lack of parliamentary protocol and general desperation which manifests in his petty outbursts.

      • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 9.4.2
        17 December 2013 at 6:51 pm

        +1 Rosie (9.4)

  10. Chooky 10
    17 December 2013 at 8:28 am

    +100 …Good on Harawira for going to South Africa as NZ’s real representative !

    ( Harawira puts John Key to shame ….and Key’s false wannabe pretenders hangers on…NZ’s shame! contingent )

    ….and GO GREENS for also showing up Key and his moribund NACT Party…and getting under Key’s skin ….

    • RedBaronCV 10.1
      17 December 2013 at 9:21 pm

      Something in the polling has scared John Key . The prospect of Mana MP’s and Labour party vote in all the Maori seats? This feels a lot like the attacks on Winston Peters before the 2008 election. Trying to tie Hone up in a negative fight and maybe even cost him large lawyer’s fees.
      So congrats Hone, Nact see you as a real threat.

  11. CC 11
    17 December 2013 at 8:33 am

    The ‘unidentified guest’ at the Mandela memorial service used the term ‘jollies’ in referring to Speaker approved pilgrimage of Hone Harawira MP. The latter represented the spirit of anti-apartheid New Zealanders in places of spiritual significance while the former took his pro-racist ex MP/PM stooges to the forum of the grand-standers to joke with his mate Dave. Once again, John Key has resorted to Textor Crosby type smear lines when he has been upstaged by a person who often demonstrates the sort of statesmanship that the petulant Prime Minister is never likely to attain.

  12. Fair Observer 12
    17 December 2013 at 9:14 am

    [deleted]

    [lprent: Already banned. Another IP for autospam. ]

    • Fair Observer 12.1
      17 December 2013 at 9:49 am

      [deleted]

      [lprent: Already banned. Another IP for autospam. ]

      • greywarbler 12.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 10:36 am

        Please Fair Observer do stand for the mayoralty of wherever you are or even as councillor.

        NZ needs exemplary people like you counting the cents, and checking on the cleanliness of toilets, and phoning all the homes of fellow dignitaries to see if they are home and tucked up in bed (with their own spouses) by 10 pm. We need people who have high moral energy to get a good night’s sleep ready to attend to the duties of their office and who keep their orifices clean as well.

        You are wasted as someone just sitting sniping at the miscreants. There’s a saying that if you want a job done properly, do it yourself – it’s just so right. Creeping corruption must be dealt with and you’re the person to do it.

    • Te Reo Putake 12.2
      17 December 2013 at 10:04 am

      And yet he will win the next mayoral election. And the one after that and the one after that …

      • felix 12.2.1
        17 December 2013 at 10:25 am

        Would you be pleased with such an outcome? Why?

      • Molly 12.2.2
        17 December 2013 at 11:33 am

        Would prefer Penny Hulse. Her attempts to work on affordable housing and her voting record against SkyCity would give her my vote. Have my fingers crossed that Len will stand down next election and she will step up to the plate.

        • karol 12.2.2.1
          17 December 2013 at 11:39 am

          I will be watching to see how Hulse performs at the Thursday public meeting. The problem is that she also needs to draw in campaign funds & the usual way to do that is to suck up appeal to some of those who lean more to “neoliberalism”.

          Hulse always comes across well (as caring for the less well off, etc) in interviews/panel discussions.

          • Naturesong 12.2.2.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 1:46 pm

            She also gets actual work done.

            And seems to take the job of representing her constituents seriously.

          • Penny Bright 12.2.2.1.2
            17 December 2013 at 3:39 pm

            Perhaps you missed this Karol?

            24 June 2013

            ‘Open Letter’ from Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright to Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse:

            “Are you a genuine community advocate or corporate /property developer MOUTH PIECE?”

            Dear Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse,

            In the 2010 Auckland Council election, you stood as an ‘Independent’, and quoted the following glowing endorsement from Sir Ron Carter, about your ‘commitment and ability to look after business interests’ :

            http://www.elections2010.co.nz/2010/candidates/penny-hulse

            Commercial Activities

            I think the endorsement of my campaign for Auckland Council by Sir Ron Carter speaks volumes about my commitment and ability to look after business interests. Ron says “Our city needs Councillors who will apply their knowledge and experience for the good of all. A great Council team will be built from those who respect and commit to each other. Penny’s wisdom and consensus style will help create a Council for all Aucklanders. We need her on our Council.”

            Who is Sir Ron Carter:

            In 2010 – Sir Ron Carter was the Chair of the Committee for Auckland:

            http://www.unitec.ac.nz/news-events/ftf/unitec-forum-for-the-future-2010.cfm

            Session 1, July 20th – Why? – What’s the case for creating a super city? Why do we need to change regional governance structures to do so?

            Panelists:

            Peter Salmon, Chairman of the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance,
            Bob Harvey, Waitakere City Mayor, and
            Sir Ron Carter, Committee for Auckland Chairman.
            _____________________________________________________________________

            Who are the Committee for Auckland:

            http://www.committeeforauckland.co.nz/

            “Our vision: Auckland as a global city.

            In 2013 we will be an influential voice for all of Auckland, creating cross-sectoral solutions to the city’s issues andfocusing on a future beyond the electoral cycle helping New Zealand’s only world-ranked city to achieve its potential for the region and the country.

            The Committee for Auckland (CFA) has played a prominent role in galvanising positive change for our city. Our members are all specialists in the city’s issues and fervent advocates for its success. Having contributed significantly to the new shape of Auckland as one city, 2013 is the platform for a re-focused Committee to drive the agenda for Auckland as a world leading destination as well as the welcoming gateway to New Zealand.”

            Membership of the Committee for Auckland:

            http://www.committeeforauckland.co.nz/membership

            “Membership to the Committee for Auckland is by invitation. Members meet quarterly and are invited to be involved in those aspects of the work programme that interest them.

            Members are Chairs of Boards, Directors and Chief Executives

            Corporate Membership annual fee $10,000. ……”

            The current list of members of the Committee for Auckland:

            http://www.committeeforauckland.co.nz/membership/member-organisations

            (It is interesting to note how members of this VERY powerful private lobby group are intertwined with Auckland Council and Auckland Council ‘Council Controlled Organisations’ (CCOs).

            For starters…………….

            Doug McKay Chief Executive Officer Auckland Council

            Brett O’Riley Chief Executive Officer ATEED

            Robert Domm Chief Executive Officer Regional Facilities Auckland

            Mark Ford Chief Executive Officer Watercare

            John Dalzell Chief Executive Officer Waterfront Auckland
            Also, how the Committee for Auckland includes key members of the NZ Property Council and property developers, such as…………)

            Connal Townsend National Director Property Council of NZ

            Evan Davies Chief Executive Officer Todd Property Ltd
            ____________________________________________________________________

            On the face of it, Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse, your range of ‘community credentials’ appears impressive:

            http://thedailyblog.co.nz/about-us/about-penny-hulse/

            About Penny Hulse

            Penny has strong links with her community and cares passionately about the Auckland region.

            Her community involvement includes Patron of Waitakere Special Olympics, Community Waitakere Charitable Trust, Henderson Riding for the Disabled, The Trust Waitakere Brass Band, Northern Football Association, Trustee of Swanson Railway Station Trust, Waitakere Anti Violence Essential Services and former Director of EECA Board.

            Penny’s special areas of interest are Climate Change, Sustainable City Development, Environmental Advocacy, Community Development and Youth. …………”

            ________________________________________________________

            However, the reality, in my considered opinion, is that you cannot work simultaneously both for the community (the ‘99%’ ), and corporations/property developers (the ‘1%’).

            It is my intention as a 2013 Auckland Mayoral candidate to continue to ‘blow the whistle’, against the the ‘corrupt corporate coup’ which set up the Auckland ‘Supercity’, and those who are serving the interests of the ‘1%’.

            In my considered opinion, Auckland Council Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse, you are NOT a genuine community advocate – you are in fact, a corporate /property developer MOUTH PIECE, working for the ‘1%’.

            No disrespect – but I shall ‘call it as I see it’.
            (I don’t expect you to like it).

            So be it.

            Yours sincerely

            Penny Bright
            ‘Anti-corruption / anti-privatisation’ campaigner

            2013 Auckland Mayoral candidate

            (For more evidence linking the Committee for Auckland with Auckland Council :

            http://www.occupyaucklandvsaucklandcouncilappeal.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/OCCUPY-AUCKLAND-APPEAL-APPLICATION-BY-APPELLANT-BRIGHT-TO-ADDUCE-NEW-EVIDENCE-pdf.pdf

            • karol 12.2.2.1.2.1
              17 December 2013 at 3:58 pm

              Yes, Penny. I’ve seen that before.

              I disagree.

              Hulse was deputy mayor for Waitakere City and worked well within that structure. The problem is as much the way the amalgamated Auckland Council has been set up. It/’s impossible for anybody to become mayor without some support in the business community, corporations etc. It may not be my ideal. But as far as I can see, Hulse is about the best potential candidate that I am aware of at the moment. She would be better than Brown.

              I have not seen any evidence of corruption by Hulse. She does have a fairly consultative consensus building style.

              if it’s a choice between the likes of Brewer or Hulse. I’ll take Hulse.

              Good on you for taking a strong stand against corruption and the rule of the elites. But meanwhile, many people in Auckland are struggling to survive. Hulse does have a heart.

            • RedBaronCV 12.2.2.1.2.2
              17 December 2013 at 9:17 pm

              Well can the ratepayers ask if they are footing the $10,000 annual membership per corporation joining the Committe for Auckland? I’ll bet they are and it’l be used for stuff they I don’t agree with I bet.

            • karol 12.2.2.1.2.3
              17 December 2013 at 9:36 pm

              Actually that committee for Auckland, while it includes a lot of corporates, also includes Unis, The City Mission, The Salvation Army and others.

              Yes the membership fee seems pretty high. What do they do with it? Ah, they have projects.

              Like matching skills of migrants and others to employers. Why the focus first on migrants?

              But I would need to see evidence of how they go about doign things before I can make a decision.

              And, ultimately, it seems to me the problems with Auckland Council re far wider than any one individual. The problem is the CCOs, which have too much power and are unaccountable.; and with the relative lack of power for the elected representatives.

              That’s what needs to be the focus.

              • RedBaronCV …
                17 December 2013 at 9:45 pm

                Thanks Karol. I’m always a bit suspicious about what happens to this sort of funding – out of the public eye as it is.
                And before they can bring in guest workers why do these companies not have to prove they or their industry has a well established training facilty plus paid internships for younger people/students and a pathways in programme for older people in need of a career change before they can plead skills shortages and bring in people from overseas.

      • Fair Observer 12.2.3
        17 December 2013 at 4:03 pm

        [deleted]

        [lprent: Already banned. Another IP for autospam. ]

        • Te Reo Putake 12.2.3.1
          17 December 2013 at 6:48 pm

          Yep. Brown will continue to win every mayoral election he stands in. Call it the Clinton factor, if you like, but the right have no answer for him.

    • karol 12.3
      17 December 2013 at 10:52 am

      The vast majority of councillors, however, decided to censure the mayor at Thursday’s council meeting, discuss Mr Brown meeting some costs for a $100,000-plus review into his behaviour and clip the wings of the mayoral office.

      Good on the councillors for taking a stand. They are trying to take a small step to make Hide’s anit-democratic monstrosity into something a little more democratic.

      The whole Auckland Council infrastructure needs to be reviewed and restructured – with more real say for councillors and local boards. These are the people who are meant to represent their local communities. We don’t need a presidential style mayor. Nor do we need the undemocratic CCOs with their overpaid chief execs.

      The real corruption was done in 2010, by Hide and Key’s mob. imagine what dodgy John Banks would have done if elected mayor? Major pay-back to Dotcom, Sky City etc?

  13. Rosie 13
    17 December 2013 at 9:25 am

    “National has a big asset sale problem” Peter Dunne does too, in his electorate. The fabulous chart in yesterdays article shows a 49.1% turnout with a 64.6% NO vote for the electorate. Will that make Dunney boy squirm?

    So this interesting result doesn’t go unnoticed, we at People’s Power Ohariu have been busy with our placard making. Every time something awkward comes up for Dunne (GCSB vote, Sky City vote, meridian sale failure etc) we turn that into a message on one of our “Hey Peter!” themed placards that we put in place in a few of the neighbourhoods in the electorate.

    Currently on display is

    “Hey Peter! Ohariu 65% NO. Sold out by 1 vote: Yours!”

    Our signs look like this

    http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=61648

    The next one, all ready to go is “Hey Peter! Family Man? Voting No on Feed the Kids?”

    • Tracey 13.1
      17 December 2013 at 9:29 am

      Keep up the good pressure

    • Tiger Mountain 13.2
      17 December 2013 at 9:42 am

      Well done Rosie and People’s Power Ohariu!

      It is a minor revelation of the year that asset sales were/are not supported by a lot of tory voters. This was well known anecdotally but there is now more solid information following the referendum.

    • Bearded Git 13.3
      17 December 2013 at 10:50 am

      Now you need to get the Greens to agree not to stand against Dunne. Urgent this.

      • Rosie 13.3.1
        17 December 2013 at 3:31 pm

        They have already selected their candidate BG. I can’t remember where I read it so can’t link it. I read it about two weeks ago. They are standing a guy who I think stood for Rimutaka last time. His background is in Civil Defense.

        Disappointing. I thought Greens and Labour may have come to an agreement. In the meantime I’ve written to the NZLP via their website and asked when they will announce their candidate. Am really keen to know who it is.

  14. aerobubble 14
    17 December 2013 at 10:10 am

    Cyclists don’t have disk breaks, they don’t have mirrors, road works means they can’t hear you. Worse! Cyclists need to turn right, cyclists are human, they make mistakes, but like cars, who you give way to because of the cost of a dent, you still need to give way to because you would give way to bad car drivers. So imagine my shock to have a motorcyclist shout something out, could not make out what, possible somehow I infringed on his line. Is breaking for a cyclist is so bad? In a suburb back street where you should be slowing down anyway, cyclists aren’t cars but that still doesn’t mean you get to ride or drive up to them close, because bicycles are also something else, they are unstable, with unstable humans on them, unprotected by a high powered engine and working power brakes. Geez, already.

  15. Penny Bright 15
    17 December 2013 at 10:26 am

    Seems that the UK SFO is also having problems doing their job?

    https://theconversation.com/hamstrung-sfo-not-capable-of-holding-bankers-to-account-21545

    Penny Bright

  16. Euan R-T 16
    17 December 2013 at 10:41 am

    There is to be a protest calling on Len Brown to resign tomorrow – Wednesday – outside the Town Hall at 12 noon and for councillors to unite and move a motion of no confidence in the mayor. Anyone wanting to support the calling for Brown’s resignation will be welcome. Several of the councillors have been asked to address the gathering.

    • karol 16.1
      17 December 2013 at 11:25 am

      As far as I know, the only councillor calling for Brown to resign is Dick Quax. Are you his PR person?

      • Euan R-T 16.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 11:39 am

        Certainly not karol. I have no affiliation to any political party, I am an Auckland ratepayer who has had enough of the dishonourable attitudes and deeds shown to hold office in Auckland. It should not be a divisive right vs left issue. unity and honour should be the ambition of our council.

        • karol 16.1.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 11:41 am

          “Ratepayer”, huh? Defining yourself thus is also telling.

          • Te Reo Putake 16.1.1.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 11:50 am

            Euan is a WO regular who once suggested scab workers at the Ports of Auckland should get commendations from the council. Just another frothing flea.

            • karol 16.1.1.1.1.1
              17 December 2013 at 1:18 pm

              Thanks, TRP. Figures. My experience of people who label themselves as (neutral) “ratepayers”, seem to think property owners (especially the more wealthy ones) have a privileged status in local democracy. They don’t usually speak for the less well off in Auckland, nor for us renters (who pay rates indirectly through rent).

              Unite left and right? Yeah, right. T’is WO & Quax who have been trying to usurp democracy and pressure Brown to resign by fair means or foul.

              I’ll wait to see what the majority of councillors have to say at the Auckland meeting on Thursday.

        • weka 16.1.1.2
          17 December 2013 at 11:54 am

          “It should not be a divisive right vs left issue”

          So if Brown resigns, who becomes mayor?

          • Euan R-T 16.1.1.2.1
            17 December 2013 at 12:10 pm

            Someone who can proudly wear the title of ‘Honourable’. Anyone who can represent Auckland and, as I noted above, has the ambition to unite. The majority of Aucklanders couldn’t give a care if the new mayor was left right or centre, as long as they really did have a passion about Auckland and our future together.

            • KJT 16.1.1.2.1.1
              17 December 2013 at 12:47 pm

              Banks>? for instance……………………..

              • Euan R-T …
                17 December 2013 at 12:53 pm

                He would not get my support!

                • Te Reo Putake …
                  17 December 2013 at 1:30 pm

                  Yet you voted for him. Funny old world, eh?

                  • Euan R-T …
                    17 December 2013 at 2:19 pm

                    Your memory is good. But you didn’t mention that it was under protest, and that I would never vote for him again. But hey, don’t let the truth get in the way of how you want things spun, and before you go off half cocked again, the comment I made was that he would not get my vote for mayor, and yes I would happily vote for a left leaning mayor if I believed she or he would be honourable and capable of leading this city.

  17. Molly 17
    17 December 2013 at 11:41 am

    The Fabian Society in London has released a report on the problems facing London.. A few similarities to those facing us here at home.

    It was instigated by the Labour MP for Tooting, Sadiq Khan who believes Housing, housing, housing is the priority for London.

    The report notes the difference between calling developments affordable housing, and the actuality of it being affordable. Brings to mind the trumpeting of Isaac Davidson for Nick Smith and the “success” of the newly released tranche of SHA’s.

  18. veutoviper 18
    17 December 2013 at 11:53 am

    Another Labour Party selection has just been announced.

    Rob McCann selected as Otaki Candidate

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1312/S00237/rob-mccann-selected-as-otaki-candidate.htm

    I know nothing about Rob other than what is in the (very good) press release, but his credentials look very positive.

    Rob McCann is a communications and marketing expert, and has been the White Ribbon Campaign Manager since 2009. He was a press secretary to Ruth Dyson in the last Labour Government and more recently headed the drive to collect signatures for the Asset sales referendum in the Otaki electorate. Educated at Otago University with a Law and Drama degree, he is a keen debater and was a former president of the Otago University debating society.

    Mr McCann is also the chair of the Paraparaumu Branch of the Labour Party, chaired the Region Three Labour Party Conference, and sits on the Labour Rural & Regional Sector Council.

    Otaki had the highest turnout in the referendum at 54% with Nos at 66.7% so an excellent result.
    I also like the quotes attributed to Rob in the press statement on the Otaki result – clear and to the point.

    I am currently looking at moving from Wellington (Rongotai electorate) to the Kapiti coast and this could be another incentive to do so.

    • karol 18.1
      17 December 2013 at 1:19 pm

      Wasn’t there another Labour candidate announced yesterday?

      • veutoviper 18.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 2:32 pm

        There have been several announced over the last few days. I thought there were some comments on TS yesterday but cannot find them (cursory look only).

        Here is the first on Sunday – Dr Deborah Russell for Rangitikei.

        http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1312/S00220/labour-completes-first-formal-selection-for-2014-election.htm

        Farrar has a post up at KB (my first visit for months earlier today – then had a shower) on Deborah’s selection and posters there seem to think that there have been other LP selections in the last few days (eg Tauranga) , but I cannot find any announcements on Scoop or the LP website.

        A comment on the KB post says

        “To add to Deborah Russell and Rachel Jones, Clare Curren tweeted yesterday that Liz Craig (Clutha Southland) and Glenda Alexander (Waitaki) have also been selected for Labour.

        It would seem that the manban is already well into top gear.”

        As you can imagine the thread there deteriorates into manban and slating Deborah etc – despite Farrar having praised Deborah in his post.

        • karol 18.1.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 2:40 pm

          Thanks. I can only find those two candidates as well.

        • mickysavage 18.1.1.2
          17 December 2013 at 3:35 pm

          It is a shame these are not winnable seats …

          I don’t know the others but I do know Liz Craig. She is highly intelligent and dedicated and would be great in Parliament, hopefully through the list. I hope not to sound too defensive but the day we win Clutha Southland …

          • Colonial Viper 18.1.1.2.1
            17 December 2013 at 6:09 pm

            Remember that Waitaki, albeit with different boundaries, was held by David Parker for one term.

          • Tracey 18.1.1.2.2
            17 December 2013 at 6:16 pm

            Have National chosen a real farmer this time or a pretend one like English he career bureaucrat?

        • Murray Olsen 18.1.1.3
          17 December 2013 at 6:25 pm

          I strongly suspect that Farrar’s problem is that he has been personally manbanned from the social lives of any women who get within a kilometre of him. If the “manban” can get rid of Goff, Mallard, Jones, and Parker, I’m all for it. I’d willingly accept 100% women in parliament. I doubt if much of any substance would change, except that under a leftish government, the police might move a bit quicker on roastbuster type rubbish.

          • McFlock 18.1.1.3.1
            17 December 2013 at 6:27 pm

            now, now, I’m sure there’s someone for everyone…

            • swordfish 18.1.1.3.1.1
              17 December 2013 at 7:27 pm

              I think you’ll find Farrar has very recently met the person he considers his life-partner and soul-mate. I am, of course, referring to senior Labour MP, Trevor Mallard. Suspect we’ll hear the pitter-patter of tiny feet in 9 months time (and I’m not only talking about Farrar’s).

  19. greywarbler 19
    17 December 2013 at 12:44 pm

    I think it was the business part of the news after noon. There was something about derivatives and hedge funds and why they are needed.

    And it occurred to me what a good way these financial instruments, or Instruments of Torture, are for making a great income by the few. First you create an unstable financial sea, and then you sell lifeboats that people have to carry with them to ensure they negotiate it. Or you might say the financiers set up a sea of uncertainty and then sell little hedge coracles that enable businesses to float and and guide themselves with a little dessertspoon of an oar. Fucking nuts really. When you think of trying to manage our livings personally and for countries, in this way..

    Or you might say that the financiers set up a virtual world like Chriss? in The Truman Show. Truman thought he was in Real Life but in actual fact it was a stage set and he was being manipulated and surveilled for the benefit of everyone else who was in the know who found him irresistible and watching him compulsive viewing. He didn’t suffer from TB consumption, it was TV consumption. In real life, out here today, those watching are really the top 10% or so who are in the know to some extent. The rest of us are watching each other, but imagining we personally are part of the 10%.

    Metaphor, allegory, the spectacle of Total Recall or futuristic thing where someone had to save their life by running away watched by TV cameras and home audiences. Isn’t that another view of us. What about working out better systems and super-imposing them on the poorer systems now working? Wait a minute that’s how elections and governments and government service departments making policy are supposed to be working. Okay you monkeys, let’s see you dance for your taxes, while we play the barrel organ.

  20. Watching 20
    17 December 2013 at 12:53 pm

    Never heard of Rob McCann and he maybe a creditable candidate but these two statements from his press release sum up the Labour party selection processes that is not engaging with voters.

    He was a press secretary to Ruth Dyson in the last Labour Government

    currently looking at moving from Wellington (Rongotai electorate) to the Kapiti coast

    He’s another journalist/press secretary who worked in parliament for the Labour party and is moving from his Wellington base ……

    …. ffs another one

    • Te Reo Putake 20.1
      17 December 2013 at 1:56 pm

      Watching, Rob is a top bloke. He organised the the first of the LP leadership meetings in Otaki, got an amazing turnout on the day and did a great job setting the scene for the rest of that campaign by marshalling the throng of media that turned up. He is well respected in the party generally and in the central region particularly. If he can get rid of the odious berk (Guy Smiley? Something like that) currently pretending to represent the interests of the Horowhenua then all power to him.

      Ps Where did you get the quote about moving from Rongotai from? It’s not in the press release and it’s not actually the case, as he lives on the Kapiti coast.

      • veutoviper 20.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 2:12 pm

        Thanks for that TRP.

        And Watching needs to read more carefully. I, moi, am thinking of moving to Kapiti – not Rob – as per the last sentence of my original comment at 18 above.

        LOL. Watching jumped too fast. (And the press release states that Rob lives in Kapiti with his partner and two children!)

    • swordfish 20.2
      17 December 2013 at 2:05 pm

      Yeah, I by no means disagree with the broad thrust of your argument, here, Watching. In general, we could probably do without more Parliamentary Staffers as Candidates. But, you wrongly suggest McCann is: “currently looking at moving from Wellington (Rongotai electorate) to the Kapiti coast. In fact, that was veutoviper’s assertion about his/her own plans. McCann lives in the Otaki seat (Otaihanga) and is chair of the Paraparaumu Branch.

      • Te Reo Putake 20.2.1
        17 December 2013 at 2:14 pm

        Thanks for clarifying the Rongotai thing, swordfish, I hadn’t seen Veuto’s comment.

        To be equally clear, Rob is not a Parliamentary staffer. He worked for Ruth Dyson over 5 years ago and is currently campaign manager for the White Ribbon anti-violence group.

  21. Lanthanide 21
    17 December 2013 at 1:33 pm

    So right at the bottom of this article about how National is going to get a $75m surplus, there’s an explanation for the u-turn on reducing ACC levies on cars: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9526871/Govt-upbeat-but-surplus-on-knife-edge

    The 2012 half year update only managed to maintain that the Government was on track to reach its surplus target because of an 11th hour announcement of petrol tax increases.

    This year’s release came with no surprises, although the decision not to reform that way ACC charges are made on vehicle licences, as proposed by the Crown entity was crucial to maintaining the forecast.

    Today English maintained that it expected to cut ACC levies by $1b in 2015-16.

    It came out in the media a few weeks ago and then Collins made some rather baffling statements about why the government wasn’t going to do it, including the ridiculous statement that if ACC is going to offer subsidies to some car owners it therefore logically follows that they must be increasing costs on others.

  22. Rogue Trooper 22
    17 December 2013 at 1:34 pm

    The Continuing Saga of the Chorus Ransom
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11173870

    Customs : Integrated Targeting Operations Centre Tongue the FBI
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11173895

  23. Will@Welly 23
    17 December 2013 at 1:38 pm

    Treasury announced that the partial ale of assets will see the Government forgo $327 million in dividends, thanks to the reduced sale price, bad timing, etc.
    John Key, master trader – right. How to lose money and control of your country in one easy lesson.
    They say a fool and his money are easily parted – New Zealand must be a nation of fools.

  24. vto 24
    17 December 2013 at 1:45 pm

    While the author of this opinion piece is on the money, the direction is lost and all at sea at the last sentence and falls into stereotyping and men-bashing, or bloke-bashing… “Painful as it might be, we’re going to have to give the concept of the Kiwi Bloke a right old do-over.”

    Stop implying all men are rapists ffs. Bloody generalisations, derogatory implications, it just goes on and on and on. Take the fight to the rapists and leave the non-rapists out of it. Sick of it. Saps the cred. Does the fight no good.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/assignments/rape-in-nz-join-the-debate/9523204/Rape-in-NZ-Kiwi-bloke-needs-a-do-over

    • karol 24.1
      17 December 2013 at 1:53 pm

      It doesn’t imply that at all, vto. Or can you show me where it does? it’s about rape culture. And I would think, going by the author’s name (Daniel Copeland), it’s written by a man. Some extracts that show it’s about how rape culture contributes to a climate where some men rape (actually, the article states, “where “some people commit rape”). Copeland begins with a story about a bus of guys returning from a rugby match:

      Then they got up to the verses that were pretty graphic about what they would do to ‘all the ladies’.

      At that point the other man who wasn’t singing rang the bell and got off in disgust. I would have followed him if I hadn’t still had to get across town.

      To anyone who doubts the existence of rape culture in New Zealand, what else would you call that?

      Why do some people commit rape? Because they feel they’re entitled to use others’ bodies for sexual gratification, without the other person’s consent. It couldn’t be clearer than that rugby song: to those men, at least while they were singing it, women were merely objects to be used.

      For some of them, hopefully, most of them, it would have been just a joke. But statistically that number of men must have included at least one or two who really did treat women as objects to be used, and to them the song would have meant: this is normal, this is just being a guy, what I do is what all men do. That’s rape culture.

      • vto 24.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 2:54 pm

        Absolutely Karol, the sentence I quoted implies exactly that. That is why I quoted it and highlighted it.

        • McFlock 24.1.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 3:14 pm

          nope. Your inference has nothing to do with the bit you quoted (or indeed anything in the article).

          The bit where Copeland says that “For some of them, hopefully, most of them, it would have been just a joke” clearly states that not all men, even in bloke-culture, are rapists. Indeed, in any particular sample, most of them might not be rapists.

          But the problem, the bit that “needs a do-over”, is that for the one or two rapists who statistically were probably in that group (i.e., just to spell it out for you, if the group only contains one or two rapists, then all the others in the group are not rapists, so your “Stop implying all men are rapists ffs” has nothing to do with what he actually wrote, and has more to do with what inferences you are prone to leap to), the group’s behaviour gave them acceptance and social reassurance.

          That’s not calling all men rapists. That’s a man pointing out that some bits of blokish culture encourage rapists.

          • Flip 24.1.1.1.1
            17 December 2013 at 7:31 pm

            To many things are considered just a ‘joke’ or just for ‘fun’ when they are not. Rape is not fun or a joke. It is a serious violation of human rights.

    • Tracey 24.2
      17 December 2013 at 3:36 pm

      It’s like you and I read a different article. Was yours in french?

  25. captain hook 25
    17 December 2013 at 2:18 pm

    I see donkey going on about Hone Harawira going off to South Africa. What parvenu ringins like key dont realise is that members of parliament are elected to represent the electorate and not just turn up every day in Wellington to get their hands stamped.

    • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 25.1
      17 December 2013 at 2:26 pm

      No I don’t think he gets that he probably assumes all parliamentarians are ‘bought’ in to represent the elites

  26. Penny Bright 26
    17 December 2013 at 2:32 pm

    FYI – this is the LAW that applies to Local Government elected representatives:

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/DLM175643.html

    Vacation of office by members

    1Disqualification of members

    (1)A person’s office as member of a local authority is vacated if the person, while holding office as a member of the local authority,—

    (a)ceases to be an elector or becomes disqualified for registration as an elector under the Electoral Act 1993; or

    (b)is convicted of an offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of 2 years or more.

    (2)If subclause (1)(b) applies,—

    (a)the disqualification does not take effect—

    (i)until the expiration of the time for appealing against the conviction or decision; or

    (ii)if there is an appeal against the conviction or decision, until the appeal is determined; and

    (b)the person is deemed to have been granted leave of absence until the expiration of that time, and is not capable of acting as a member during that time.

    (3)A person may not do an act as a member while disqualified under subclause (1) or while on leave of absence under subclause (2).
    _____________________________________________________________________________

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM328753.html

    105 Corruption and bribery of official

    (1) Every official is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who, whether within New Zealand or elsewhere, corruptly accepts or obtains, or agrees or offers to accept or attempts to obtain, any bribe for himself or any other person in respect of any act done or omitted, or to be done or omitted, by him in his official capacity.

    (2) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who corruptly gives or offers or agrees to give any bribe to any person with intent to influence any official in respect of any act or omission by him in his official capacity.

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM328730.html

    99 Interpretation
    In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires,—
    bribe means any money, valuable consideration, office, or employment, or any benefit, whether direct or indirect

    official means any person in the service of Her Majesty in right of New Zealand (whether that service is honorary or not, and whether it is within or outside New Zealand), or any member or employee of any local authority or public body, or any person employed in the education service within the meaning of the State Sector Act 1988.
    _______________________________________________________________

    Penny Bright

    (Complaint to SFO available here: http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz )

  27. Penny Bright 27
    17 December 2013 at 3:15 pm

    Auckland ‘Supercity’ for the 1%?

    Whose interests are being served?

    Follow the money …..?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10833136

    City acts on contractors’ complaint

    By Bernard Orsman

    5:30 AM Tuesday Sep 11, 2012

    “AECOM New Zealand managing director Dean Kimpton said the company provided a range of services to the council, including a number of on-going commissions to the IES department.”
    ___________________________________________________________________________

    http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/newseventsculture/OurAuckland/mediareleases/Pages/newchiefoperatingofficerappointed.aspx

    New chief operating officer appointed
    21/06/2013

    After a comprehensive search, Auckland Council has appointed Dean Kimpton as its chief operating officer. Chief Executive Doug McKay says Dean is a passionate Aucklander who is excited to be playing a role in shaping the future of Auckland.

    “Dean joins us from AECOM NZ where he was Managing Director.

    “AECOM is a global leader in all aspects of infrastructure planning, design and delivery.

    “Dean has a breadth of experience at the senior executive and governance levels, as well as in the regulatory and infrastructure business of council and its customers and suppliers.
    ___________________________________________________________________

    http://www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/about-us/ProcurementAndSuppliers/Awarded-Contracts/Documents/AwardedContracts.pdf

    160-14-093-PS SIMUL8 RAIL OPERATIONAL MODELLING SERVICES PS AECOM NEW ZEALAND LIMITED $88,000.00 Direct Appointment 10 September 2013

    314-14-128-PS PS PORTAGE RD CYCLE WAY – LAND USE CONSENT APPLICATION PS AECOM NEW ZEALAND LIMITED $72,050.00 Direct Appointment 10 September 2013
    ________________________________________________________________

    Penny Bright

  28. Pascal's bookie 28
    17 December 2013 at 3:55 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11173895

    Ruh Roh Customs.

    ‘Brownie points’ from the FBI for feeding them tidbits about Dotcom? And no one wants to comment? Seems legit.

    • Murray Olsen 28.1
      17 December 2013 at 6:59 pm

      I am beginning to suspect that all enforcement branches of our state apparatus owe their first loyalties to Washington. While NAct seem to be entirely happy with this, and in fact it aligns police, customs, spooks, air force, etc with the prumstah, what is more worrying to me is that more than a few in Labour seem to accept it. Of course, it is just a deepening of the giving of our economic sovereignty to Wall St and the City by the first ACT government. We need to take control of our country and fight for a true internationalism rather than the internationalism of our business classes, which is the internationalism of a subservient colony.

      Greg Davis should be sacked. If he wants to work for the seppos, let him go to Hawaii with Key and they can both ask for jobs there.

  29. Morrissey 29
    17 December 2013 at 4:16 pm

    Possibly the most repellent Panel pre-show ever.
    Radio NZ National, Monday 16 December 2013
    Jim Mora, Linda Clark, Jane Clifton

    Each week there seems to be at least one edition of this program that is so bad, so depraved, so determinedly ignorant, so vacuous and so vicious that you swear the nadir has been reached. And then along comes a horror show like this one….

    JIM MORA: I think Linda Clark is with us right now. I can hear her! Linda are you there?
    LINDA CLARK: [perkily] Yes I’m here! My God, here I am, chattering away! Hellooooooooooo!
    MORA: Hello!
    LINDA CLARK: How ARE you? Merry Christmas!
    MORA: Thank you! She’s talking to you too, Noelle!
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Thank you.
    MORA: It’s Noelle McCarthy with what the WOOOOOORLD’s talking about! ….[suddenly grave]…. And not a nice topic to start the round-up today. Roger Waters the lead singer from Pink Floyd is stirring up a controversy.
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Yeeee-e-e-e-es. He’s been doing this for a whiii-i-i-i-i-ile now. He has compared the state of Israel to Nazi Germany.
    MORA: [concerned tone] Mmmmm.
    NOELLE McCARTHY: But he’s provoked a vigorous response. This is not new for him of course. In one of his concerts last year he had a giant PIG-shaped balloon with a Star of David on it. He says there were a whole lot of political symbols on it, and that he did not single out the Jews—-
    MORA: [grave tone to indicate moral seriousness] Hmmmm…..
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Now at least one U.S. rabbi has come out and answered him in print.
    MORA: [with utmost gravitas] He’s not the first rabbi to speak out about this, is he?
    NOELLE McCARTHY: The Jewish Chronicle and the Simon Wiesenthal Centre have been keeping a watching brief on him, but he doesn’t seem to be tempering his message however.
    MORA: [grimly] No he hasn’t.
    NOELLE McCARTHY: [grave tone] There’s more about this on our Twitface pages.
    MORA: Twitface—that’s our shorthand for Twitter and Facebook, by the way!
    LINDA CLARK: Ha ha ha ha! I just love that!
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Ha ha ha ha ha! We’ve broken the fourth wall!
    MORA: Ha ha ha ha ha! Okay, anything else?
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Yes, a study shows that girls’ schools are places which enforce conformity more than other schools!
    MORA: Oh really? They enforce conformity?
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Yes, there is a lot of pressure on you to be a more “girly” kind of girl!
    LINDA CLARK: Hmmmmm….
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Shall I talk about Kanye?
    MORA: [sarcastically] Yeah, let’s talk about Kanye! Please!
    NOELLE McCARTHY: He says rapping is as fraught as fighting the Taliban or serving as a police officer!
    MORA: Ah, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    LINDA CLARK: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    NOELLE McCARTHY: He says that when the Taliban start shooting, the soldiers should just stand up and start rapping!
    MORA: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    LINDA CLARK: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Yes, THAT is going to work! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    MORA: Jo McCarroll, the editor of Gardening magazine has just texted, saying she thought Kanye was talking about Christmas wrapping!
    NOELLE McCARTHY: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    MORA: Very good, Jo! Noelle McCarthy, thank you very much!

    Incredibly, the show got even more puerile after the 4 o’clock news. But more on that in Part Two.….

  30. Rogue Trooper 30
    17 December 2013 at 4:27 pm

    A ‘Real’ Rabbi ; God save us from the inane.

  31. Saarbo 31
    17 December 2013 at 4:29 pm

    Did Bill English really say this prior to the sale of Genisis…as if the asset sales haven’t already been a flop…

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11173948

    “Finance Minister Bill English said the Government didn’t regard estimates of foregone profits as reliable given the risk profile of businesses like those in the asset sales progamme.

    He said the Government was happy to have reduced its exposure to risky commercial assets like the companies in the asset sales programme.”

    What an amazing thing to say prior to the Genesis sale, so potential purchasers of Genesis will read this and think what???This is a fucken useless government and the amazing thing is that approx. 46% of voters still support these incompetent fools.

    • Tracey 31.1
      17 December 2013 at 4:39 pm

      Yes he did, but he won’t remember if you ask him today

    • Naturesong 31.2
      17 December 2013 at 5:06 pm

      “He said the Government was happy to have reduced its exposure to risky commercial assets like the companies in the asset sales programme.”

      The risk profile of critical national infrastructure and public utilities?

      I used to laugh at America when they first elected(ish) Bush Jnr (well, until the whole Iraq thing) because he’s a complete moron.
      I used to say to myself, we’d never do that. We’re smarter in New Zealand.
      God, I’m so embarrassed.

      Thankfully, Australia stepped up to the challenge and this year knocked us off the “stupidest electorate on the planet” spot that we’ve held since January 20, 2009.

      • Tracey 31.2.1
        17 December 2013 at 5:09 pm

        electricity companies are notoriously risky, we are well rid of them. We are better off spending money to entice tourists to NZ who watch movies.

    • Draco T Bastard 31.3
      17 December 2013 at 5:27 pm

      He said the Government was happy to have reduced its exposure to risky commercial assets like the companies in the asset sales programme.

      Except that there was no risk in owning power generators because it’s something everyone needs.

  32. ghostrider888 32
    17 December 2013 at 4:36 pm

    some DP ; open the channels through those membranes.

  33. Tracey 33
    17 December 2013 at 4:55 pm

    You could never accuse the maori party of being the tail wagging the dog.

    ” New Zealand is unlikely to introduce plain packaging on cigarettes before trade challenges to Australian legislation are settled, Prime Minister John Key says.

    Associate Health Minister Tariana Turia said today that the Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Products and Packaging) Amendment Bill had been lodged with the Clerk of the House.

    The legislation was expected to have its first reading in the House early next year before being sent to a parliamentary select committee

    Key said that while the legislation would be introduced next year, it would almost certainly not be passed until the outcome of the challenge to Australia was known.

    “It will almost certainly be introduced, have its first reading, then go off to the select committee,” he said.

    “But it’s very, very unlikely it will be passed. In fact, in my view it shouldn’t be passed until we’ve actually had a ruling out of Australia.

    “We think it’s prudent to wait till we see a ruling out of Australia. If there’s a successful legal challenge out of Australia, that would guide us how legislation might be drafted in New Zealand.

    “So we’re not going to rush that through, but also equally it’s the type of topic that’s worthy of a significant public debate and we can do that through the select committee process.”

  34. rich the other 34
    17 December 2013 at 6:51 pm

    Colin Craig seems to have had victory.
    Clearly he’s not so silly after all , 7 Sharp has a vacancy, coincidence ?? I doubt it.

    • karol 34.1
      17 December 2013 at 7:02 pm

      LOL. I really doubt it. 7 sharp got a slap on the wrist for something mostly coming from someone else on the show. Mau would have made her decision a while ago. There are plenty of good reasons for her to leave….. the show’s a dud.

      • rich the other 34.1.1
        17 December 2013 at 7:48 pm

        Won’t be a dud when Hoskings arrives.

        • Pascal's bookie 34.1.1.1
          17 December 2013 at 8:09 pm

          Yeah, with him on TV1 and that other goofy clown TV3 are putting on nightline, the right will need to be careful. All that recycling and their munters might vote Green by accident.

  35. Grumpy 35
    17 December 2013 at 9:15 pm

    All we need is Paul Henry with Mike Hosking, now that would be a show!

  36. Blue 36
    17 December 2013 at 9:24 pm

    Fun with the MSM:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11174017

    The headline says ‘Further 350,000 votes included in asset sales referendum’

    That caught my eye – a further 350,000? That’s a lot of last minute votes…

    The article says “A further 350,000 votes cast in the Citizen’s Initiated Referendum on asset sales have been included in the official count released this afternoon…”

    But wait: “The extra votes take the turnout to 1,367,340.” Huh?

    Then: “Of the additional votes counted, 24,866 were against the asset sales while 10,035 were in favour.”

    Hmmm…seems like they mean 35,000 then. Or nearly 35,000, since that only adds up to 34,901.

    But wait there’s more:

    “The result went strongly against the Government, but the relatively low turnout is seen as indicating the public largely doesn’t feel strongly about the issue or saw little point in opposing a programme that is now largely complete, other than the sale of Genesis Energy earmarked for the first half of next year.”

    Can’t resist a wee bit of editorialising in what should be a straight news report now can we?

    Sigh.

  37. tricledrown 37
    17 December 2013 at 11:48 pm

    Colon craig has proven he’s bigger idiot