Open mike 18/08/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, August 18th, 2015 - 44 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

44 comments on “Open mike 18/08/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    18 August 2015 at 7:12 am

    It was great to see Hosking shown up for the Tory puppet he is yesterday.

  2. Lanthanide 2
    18 August 2015 at 8:39 am

    Another poor line of questioning by Susie Ferguson on Morning Report this morning.

    Their normal Tuesday interview with Andrew Little, they were talking about the report about overseas buyers of agricultural land having a plurality of Canadians, rather than Chinese.

    Susie asked if Labour would be trying to compile a list of Canadian surnames to see if they show up in the house buying figures. A crap question, since Labour’s analysis was of private housing sales in Auckland, not large (notified) productive agricultural sales that the report was about. Andrew handled it well and explained the different data sets. I don’t fault Susie for asking this particular question, because it is something that a journalist should ask on behalf of the average Joe Blow at home, and it did provide valuable information in clarifying the difference between Labour’s press release and the one released yesterday.

    Then, however, she went on to ask (something like) “what about the surnames of Chinese-Canadians? are you going to look at them?”, proving that she hadn’t actually listened to Andrew’s answer and was just trying to play ‘gotcha’ interview stylez yet again – but she’s just not smart enough for it. In his answer, Andrew maintained composed but did say she was ‘trying to be cute about it’, which was the right way to handle it.

    • Morrissey 2.1
      18 August 2015 at 9:06 am

      Susie Ferguson is not up to the job. She has been the subject of considerable comment on this forum in the past. Click on this, and you’ll see some bewildered comments by someone else who is not quite up to the job (using emojis is almost always the last refuge of the outwitted)….

      http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-19102013/#comment-712981

    • Ad 2.2
      18 August 2015 at 9:24 am

      Load of arse.

      All Little had to say was: “Where is the added value to New Zealand of any of those foreign buyers? Who would know?”

      Just like Nash did yesterday. More competently.

      How Annette King can get decent traction about obscure health stories when Little has had 3 months to rehearse this story since it first came out, beggars belief.

      Suzie was soft on him compared to any other station in New Zealand.

      Hell I would have put Twyford up – at least he has the physical capacity to open his mouth when he speaks.

      • Lanthanide 2.2.1
        18 August 2015 at 10:20 am

        Well later in the interview he said that the OIO doesn’t actually go back and check if the foreign investors added value like they claimed.

        So he did make the point, although not in the clear and direct way you’re suggesting he should have, and I agree your answer is better.

        But my comment was focussing on Susie’s lame interviewing – and I agree if she is giving softer interviews than other stations, that’s another black mark against her. I want all politicians credibly held to account, not just the government.

    • ianmac 2.3
      18 August 2015 at 11:01 am

      I thought that Suzie was sneering during her questioning especially when the Indian/Chinese term came up.

    • The Chairman 2.4
      19 August 2015 at 10:16 am

      It’s disappointing seeing the media attempt to mislead the public by failing to distinguish or acknowledge the difference between the two data sets.

      And worse when they attempt to take potshots and score points against Labour using a completely different data set.

      Susie Ferguson should be ashamed of herself.

  3. Morrissey 3
    18 August 2015 at 8:59 am

    British Poodle on the attack!
    Sadly for its masters, however, it fails to intimidate those campesinos condenables.

    Foreign Office minister Hugo Swire has blamed Ecuador for “preventing the proper course of justice” in connection with dissident journalist Julian Assange and the dropping of some politically motivated charges against him because of statutory time limitations. But Ecuador, the modern equivalent of nineteenth century Switzerland or Paris, will not take lessons on political asylum from the persecutors….

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/16/ecuador-hits-back-uk-criticism-julian-assange

  4. Northsider 4
    18 August 2015 at 10:34 am

    The possibility of radical change.

    “Inspiring” is the term most used by the tens of thousands who have newly enrolled on the English Labour Party to describe the effect of Jeremy Corbyn in the leadership debate over there. Even in Scotland Corbyn has attracted passionate Labour supporters who have packed halls to hear him speak.

    “We can see from Mr Corbyn’s packed meetings that people are interested in Labour policies. But a party that cannot speak up for itself is a party that will never win votes. And a party that rejects new blood is a party on its way to the graveyard.” Iain McWhirter in The Herald

    The “establishment” Labour in London has pulled out all the stops to stop him becoming leader: ABC stands for Anyone but Corbyn.

    “The are many similarities between Corbynmania and the success of Nicola Sturgeon, and not just because they can both fill stadiums. The SNP’s manifesto in the General Election offered essentially the same social democratic vision Mr Corbyn has been offering now.” McWhirter again.
    http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/13593437.No_time_for_business_as_usual_when_political_extinction_is_staring_you_in_the_face/?ref=fetp

    “After months of English voters asking to join the SNP, it was only a matter of time before a viable English alternative emerged. And with his knife-edge admission to the Labour leadership contest, Jeremy Corbyn has become the beneficiary of SNP-generated optimism about the possibility of radical parliamentary change.” Lesley Riddoch in The Scotsman writes.
    http://www.scotsman.com/news/lesley-riddoch-gordon-brown-doesn-t-get-it-1-3860343

    Wellington’s Annette King stands down in November as planned. Andrew Little should take inspiration from the Corbyn effect, and from the success of the SNP, when shaping his leadership team. We don’t want any of London’s ABC antics here.

    • Ad 4.1
      18 August 2015 at 11:09 am

      I don’t see any sign of King retiring at all.
      She’s on fire and ready for 2017.

      As for “radical change”, if they can’t do it in Greece, Spain or Ireland after their economic and social catastrophes in 2007-2015, it can’t be currently done.

      Put radical change out of your mind. Won’t happen, and not helpful.

      • Colonial Viper 4.1.1
        18 August 2015 at 5:16 pm

        There’s plenty of radical change happening Ad; what do you call the replacement of democratically elected heads of state with unelected banking technocrats if not “radical change”?

        So now we have a system where radical change favouring the financial powers = the norm.

        Put radical change out of your mind. Won’t happen, and not helpful.

        You have to resist, and resist hard, to minimise the damage that they can do to your society and community.

        And I don’t mean just letters to the editor.

        • Ad 4.1.1.1
          18 August 2015 at 10:20 pm

          Nope, there is no evidence for this being the era for leftist radicalism of any sort.
          As for bankers running countries, certainly no change there.

          • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.1.1
            18 August 2015 at 10:36 pm

            you dont look for evidence; you make the evidence.

            Regardless, radical change is coming in our lifetimes, and we should make it something better, not worse, for us.

  5. Draco T Bastard 5
    18 August 2015 at 11:19 am

    The Teflon Toxin
    The Case Against DuPont

    We know, too, from internal DuPont documents that emerged through the lawsuit, that Wamsley’s fears of being lied to are well-founded. DuPont scientists had closely studied the chemical for decades and through their own research knew about some of the dangers it posed. Yet rather than inform workers, people living near the plant, the general public, or government agencies responsible for regulating chemicals, DuPont repeatedly kept its knowledge secret.

    It’s not science that’s the problem but the businesses and the fact that scientists are beholden to those businesses for their livelihood. And as for the businesses we’ve been told that regulations aren’t needed and that they’ll just do the right thing. This proves, quite conclusively, that that is a load of bollocks. We need regulations and we need heavy enforcement of those regulations. It doesn’t matter if it costs more as that is part of the market. If it costs too much to sell then don’t make it.

    Part Two

    • McFlock 5.1
      18 August 2015 at 11:41 am

      Exactly.
      The common thread from things like dangerous cars, asbestos, smoking, lead paint, chemical spills, workplace deaths, and so on is a system that removes personal culpability iwhile making the sole priority corporate profits.

      • weka 5.1.1
        18 August 2015 at 11:00 pm

        The Dupont scientists were only following orders I guess.

        • McFlock 5.1.1.1
          18 August 2015 at 11:16 pm

          Scientists did the research and reported it to their bosses.
          Managers minimised costs.
          Legal advisors did their job by having Dupont work as closely within the bounds of the law as they could get.
          Transporters transported.
          Guards escorted any uncooperative staff members off site.

          Standard rule of organisational guilt: culpability divided leads to a logarithmic reduction in personal moral qualms.

    • Charles 6.1
      18 August 2015 at 12:00 pm

      National expects success from their MPs. If they don’t perform they ditch them.

      And Left politicians aren’t very “good” because they aren’t classically educated in politics? National gets rid of their failures? Nah, they get rid of those who don’t know where enough bodies are buried, or who become cold-product owing to behavioural issues that can’t be reconciled inside a conservative cultural outlook. Salient means “important”, of a kind, or “jutting outwards”. In this instance I think the second definition applies, because Andrea Vance is interviewing her own opinion and Dimpost is not talking from first hand experience. Which makes both opinons a load of old jutting cock trying to conceal their bias (and motivation) and preference – and failing.

      For better or worse, what both media twits miss is that NZ doesn’t do constructive strategic politics. The voting population are a collection of people infected with local contagion trends and preferences – both social and personal – and then they attach those to whoever makes similar or complimentary noises. In theory, someone could come along and apply a wider strategy and direct that situation, but no one has yet. It’s all ad-hoc, and further confused by existing vested interests coming for their promised “pay-offs.”

      The second thing they miss, is that under that scenario, no one from the imaginary left support gives a shit whether someone is a good strategic politician or not. That they say they’re of the left is all that matters. If this site is anything to go by, people closer to the mainstream “centre” leftist view (or pro-social initiatives) will eat some really big contradictions, flip-flops, and inadequacies just to get rid of National etc. Those further to the fringe will be less inclinded to tolerate the middle, but their choices are far less strategic and they’ll be forced to vote for polticians (activists) who aren’t “all that good” in a mainstream sense. Being a “good” or persuasive politician makes no difference at all. You cannot persuade people against their inherent inclinations and closely held beliefs – or realities. In NZ’s current environment, “good” must also mean getting elected and doing what you want without being stopped before you get it.

      And that is my load of old cock for today. Please send a cheque for the combined amount Vance recieved, including the amount Dimpost wish they recieved, to PO Box 45234 Auckland.

      • Puckish Rogue 6.1.1
        18 August 2015 at 2:37 pm

        I’m sure border control can come up with its own ways of raising money 🙂

  7. adam 7
    18 August 2015 at 1:03 pm

    Great interview with Max Blumenthal. I’ll just link the first part.

    • vto 8.1
      18 August 2015 at 4:43 pm

      All Bill English can think of is selling the farm ….

      It is the most very basic of errors in financial management taught in Primary School

      Bill English is an abject failure

    • Thom Pietersen 8.2
      18 August 2015 at 11:35 pm

      I really don’t understand what is trying to be achieved – it starting to border on bloody treason. The money made will be but a drop in the debt bucket.

      If we have to consider this things we must be truly financially fucked.

    • greywarshark 8.3
      19 August 2015 at 11:17 am

      I couldn’t believe that the National pollies were getting into Landcorp. Solid Energy was bad enough, but how can Landcorp be in financial trouble. What a pisspoor excuse for carving up more of Maui’s taonga and selling it to the barbarians from within or without NZ.

      • b waghorn 8.3.1
        19 August 2015 at 11:36 am

        The best nz can hope for IMO is for the Maori farming trusts keep growing in strength as they are the only socially minded corporates that I am aware of that are going to have the financial clout to compete against the foreign raiders. And they will never sell

        • greywarshark 8.3.1.1
          19 August 2015 at 1:04 pm

          @bwaghorn
          I think that too. Thank goodness they have managed to get a good amount of their capital taonga out of the government before the country collapses. Though some Maori have been infected by the neo lib idea, there are probably enough fine people to guide the waka in the right direction. They do have to watch out for nepotism and a bit of sleight of hand from their own on the make, but they have enough kaumatua to protect them from the worst.