Open mike 18/09/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, September 18th, 2011 - 50 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

50 comments on “Open mike 18/09/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. uke 1
    18 September 2011 at 8:29 am

    Interesting story on Stuff about conflicts of interest between the president of the National Party and the fishing industry. Looks like Peter Goodfellow is personally profiting from the slave fishing-boat system:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5643203/National-Party-president-in-fishing-row

    • Draco T Bastard 1.1
      18 September 2011 at 12:29 pm

      Looks like typical National Party corruption to me. He’s investigating wrong doing by the fishing industry while holding shares and being a director of one of the companies being investigated.

  2. tc 2
    18 September 2011 at 8:42 am

    Can anyone enlighten me on a comment someone made regarding the govts ability to enter your property and dictate how and or what you grow on your own property in terms of food.

    Discussion was around heirlooms and your own seed stock and the assertion was in the US in some states they can enter your property and destroy a crop from non approved seed, genetic stock and that we were adopting the same soon.

    Seemed very Orwellian but after seeing Food Inc I wouldn’t pit it past the powers that be.

    • joe90 2.1
      18 September 2011 at 9:21 am

      This?

      Closed-Source Crops

      The four big corporations are Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, and Bayer. Together, they represent that truly rare thing, a visible corner being turned in human history: the rise of the first global, seed-based food oligopoly since the dawn of agriculture.<

      • freedom 2.1.1
        18 September 2011 at 12:07 pm

        It the USA it is known as the Monsanto Bill because they wrote it ! It bans food production basically, unless you use their seed stock. The NZ version goes further with not so subtle attempts to ban the sharing of grown foods, such as veges and even the sharing of privately sourced water. If you would like to know more talk to Kate Wilkinson because she has made a series of statments about the growing and sharing of food pertaining to this bill they hope to pass before October..

        You can read about it here on a recent FB posting from a concerned party.
        http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.238122229573532&type=1
        You will not be reading about this in the Daily Newspapers for obvious reasons.

        The language used , including the claims that these powers will not be employed against vege growers, market gardeners and the like, is identical to claims made regarding the Monsanto Bill in the USA. These claims seem to contradict the actions of heavily armed federal agents who recently ‘raided’ Organic Food Warehouses which have been in operation for decades.

        For some true life reflection on the immediate affects of these steps against community food productin I recommend you watch David vs Monsanto

        • Vicky32 2.1.1.1
          18 September 2011 at 6:51 pm

          My giddy aunt! How is that even possible?

          • Armchair Critic 2.1.1.1.1
            18 September 2011 at 7:14 pm

            I’m stunned too. It’s difficult to believe that we could be sufficiently stupid to consider something like this.

          • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.1.2
            18 September 2011 at 7:32 pm

            The capitalists want control of everything and they already own the politicians.

            • freedom 2.1.1.1.2.1
              18 September 2011 at 8:32 pm

              I have been told they are trying to get it voted on before the House rises in October and it is likely to be done under urgency. I have been told by a friendly voice in the parliamentary wilderness that they want to use CERRA to push it through so they do not have to actually declare what the final contents of the bill will be.
              ==================================================
              ALSO pay attention to the by-law recently passed in AK that is prohibiting the public distribution of political or special interest material. THIS LAW EXISTS NOW!!!!!!
              There is a lot of evil crap being thrown at us this year but banning the sharing of information in a peaceful and well practised format, such as handing out printed flyers? That is a level of control that must not be tolerated.
              ==================================================
              THIS IS HAPPENING PEOPLE. THIS IS REALITY .
              LOOK INTO IT IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE ME.
              If they have done it in Auckland, when is it the turn of your town?

              THEY DO NOT WANT PEOPLE SHARING INFORMATION BEFORE THE ELECTION

              THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS BY-LAW

              THESE ARE NOT THE ACTIONS OF A FREE DEMOCRACY

              • Bill …
                18 September 2011 at 9:01 pm

                So distribute a-political literature, ie not connected to any parliamentary political party.

                • freedom …
                  18 September 2011 at 9:53 pm

                  Bill, that is the exact type of literature that has been banned. They have effectively banned the handing out of any ‘unauthorised’ items. They are banning free speech in a public space. What about that do you not understand. As Vinny Eastwood recently showed during a street action in AK, you are still allowed to talk to people, and of course that is without the use of a megaphone and most agree that is understandable.

                  The printed word has always been the most powerful megaphone we had at our disposal. It is now banned.

                  • Bill …
                    19 September 2011 at 8:34 am

                    Do you have a link to, or can you be bothered to reproduce the actual wording of the by law Freedom?

                    I’d be very interested to read it.

                    • freedom …
                      20 September 2011 at 9:05 am

                      Excuse the tardy reply, been a bit busy

                      http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/council/documents/bylaw/part20.
                      Section 20.3.1 it states:

                      Except with the permission of an authorised officer, or a licence from council, a person shall not, in, on, or over any public place: …

                      q. place or use loud speakers or other devices amplifying and emitting sound, including for advertising any trade, business, entertainment or any other purpose; …

                      x. distribute or sell or offer for donation any document, product, material or service.

                      The inclusion of ‘q’ prevents noise pollution and is a reasonable practicality as long as the current legal and publicly warranted activities of any community are not adversely affected

                      However, the inclusion of ‘x’ is nothing less than a pyre built of your rights

            • aerobubble 2.1.1.1.2.2
              19 September 2011 at 10:17 am

              Ths is why education should be free, the moment students get a loan they
              loose their discretion, they need money, and it plays directly into the
              hands of the greedy. As we can see, people leave these shores to
              get enough money, or they choose lower paid jobs here. I think
              Labour should write off any student loan after ten years, but then of
              course the wealthy would hide their income for the decade…
              Do away with student Loans.

        • rosy 2.1.1.2
          18 September 2011 at 8:59 pm

          “You can read about it here on a recent FB posting from a concerned party.”
          The letter to Kate Wilkinson was very good work.

        • Deadly_NZ 2.1.1.3
          19 September 2011 at 2:08 am

          Any chance you can get the stuff on Farcebook and put somewhere readable like google docs PLease. It wants you to log in, and as I refuse to use the bug ridden POS, I don’t have user details

    • Bill 2.2
      18 September 2011 at 8:49 pm

      It’s only if it is a seed they have altered…or that they reckon is one of ‘theirs’.

      • freedom 2.2.1
        18 September 2011 at 8:59 pm

        believe whatever helps you sleep at night Bill

        but if you seriously believe that is as far as this law will go then i won’t be the one to tell you the bad news about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

        • Bill 2.2.1.1
          18 September 2011 at 9:14 pm

          freedom, this has been as issue for some years now. Monsanto seek to bust people they claim are using their seed for free…even if the seeds have dispersed naturally.

          Look up the shit has been happening in India with the company. (Far worse) Small farmers get hooked in on promises of larger yields, borrow money to buy the seeds and then can’t afford the chemicals needed to go with the seeds….or the next seasons seeds or whatever. They wind up bankrupt and in some cases (large numbers) kill themselves because of debt burdens and the fact they are about to have their land ‘re-possessed’.

          Meanwhile. Can you even buy genetically engineered seeds in NZ? No. (But that would change with a FTA with the US…which is a bloody good reason to oppose it imo)

          And presently I’m not allowed to pick fruit from bushes in my garden, make them into jam (or such like) and sell them. I think that’s crap, but that’s the way it is. (Food/hygene laws unintentionally ring fences food production for big manufacturers when it was meant to safeguard us from their lax practices)

          edit I could see the new bill granting increased powers that will be used to target dak or even poppies. But not your potatoes.

          • freedom 2.2.1.1.1
            18 September 2011 at 10:02 pm

            Yes Bill thanks, i am well aware that parts of India has gone from over 5,000 varieties of rice to a little under 500 in the last twenty years due to the introduction of artificially altered seeds.
            Are you aware that the introduction of foreign and manipulated genes into the foodchain has permanently altered the biodiversity of the planet.

            As for your defense that the inclusion of the offending articles into the bill were a mistake in its compostion, pull the other one it plays jingle bells, oh that’s right you still believe in Santa Claus. . You can beleive the fairy tale or defend yourself with common sense,

            the choice as it is in every election, is yours.

            sweet dreams

            • Bill 2.2.1.1.1.1
              19 September 2011 at 9:04 am

              Yes Freedom, I’m aware that seed diversity has been narrowing for many years. That’s been due (in large part) to industrial agriculture and the main seed suppliers…and predates GE. Wasn’t that why ‘heirloom’ seed banks were set up in the first place?

              And, yes, Im aware that cross fertilization from GE crops is knackering the natural varieties of some plant species.

              As for the ‘offending articles’. Care to point them out…any that aren’t being addressed and altered?

              The legislation is like any attempt to intoduce bureaucratic control measures; clumsy. Like I said in relation to food legislation as it is at present ( and nothing will change on this front), the ability of peoople to produce and sell any prepared produce was caught in the bureaucratic net that attempted to regulate lax standards within industry. So if your hom kitchen doesn’t satisfy hygene regs and you don’t have a certificate (all costing big $), then you can’t sell or barter jam or whatever.

              Tell you what. If your fears are founded, then you can report me and they can come clean out my ‘unauthorised’ oxalis; hunt down my ‘unauthorised’ thistles [both edible] and if I find it edible in any way, deal to the rampant melambecia (sp?)

        • Bill 2.2.1.2
          18 September 2011 at 9:35 pm

          Since you are so het up over this Bored, maybe this will be of interest to you. (Cut and Pasted from a post by Sue Kedgley)

          After taking some time to examine the issues, the Minister has confirmed that it was never the intention of the bill to cover seed saving, the barter or selling of food seeds or seedlings, or the provision of food and accommodation in exchange for labour.

          She has confirmed that she will be amending the bill to make it explicit that it wont include seed or food exchanges, or related issues.

          Here is the letter that Kate Wilkinson sent to me [PDF].

          http://blog.greens.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/Correspondence-Sue-Kedgley.pdf

          So, some poor drafting that would have unintented consequences that is being tidied up.

  3. ropata 3
    18 September 2011 at 9:02 am

    Great morning so far. Coffee in bed, birds jumping about on the roof above, and reading a story to my 3 year old niece.
    Just heard about Aussie vs Ireland result too..

  4. mickysavage 4
    18 September 2011 at 10:07 am

    More stupidity from the Herald today.

    They run a story about a poll about whether or not the election or the RWC is more important and are relieved that the election is rated more important, just.  For me I am embarrassed that so many should think that a corporate takeover of one of our most precious of cultural institutions (rugby) is more important than our democracy and our country’s future.

    And they then run a story about “Labour wife” Julie Fairley who predicts Labour losses in key marginals.  Anyone who knows Julie will realise what an insult to her it is to describe her this way.  She is left, as far as I know not a member of the party, and will speak her mind on issues without fear as she should.

    Her blog post indicated that on current polling Labour would not win Auckland Central or Maungakiekie.  Her assessment was fair.  Unless Labour picks up the polling significantly this will most probably be the result.  Her analysis was done to predict the likely number of women in Labour’s caucus after the election.

    But the story by the Herald is absolutely awful.  Julie did not predict that Labour would lose any marginals, only that Labour would only gain a few marginals back from National.

    And surprisingly there is no mention of Waitakere which Julie did say was too close to call.

    Perhaps Julie should have been restlessly upbeat like a certain PM instead of doing a proper analysis which was conducted to assess likely gender representation.  Why a discussion like this is framed as an admission of failure is beyond me. 

    • tc 4.1
      18 September 2011 at 11:12 am

      MS What do you expect from a paper that gives Holmes and Farrer a national soapbox to put forward their masters views, Holmes has been particularly ‘grumpy old failed nat candidate’ of late climbing on board the spin wagon over the RWC opening night debacle being Browns fault.

      McCarten aside aren’t all their ‘opinionaters’ from the right ?

    • Draco T Bastard 4.2
      18 September 2011 at 12:47 pm

      Why a discussion like this is framed as an admission of failure is beyond me.

      Because the MSM will do everything they can to portray Labour in a negative light. It’s part and parcel of the Capitalists desire to prevent everyone else having a say in society.

    • Julie Fairey 4.3
      18 September 2011 at 10:06 pm

      Thanks mickey, I’ve posted a response here: http://thehandmirror.blogspot.com/2011/09/how-to-lose-your-own-political-identity.html

      I can confirm I am not, and have never been, a member of the Labour party. I imagine I will join one day.

      Analysing the marginals was only needed to work out the projected future caucuses of Labour and National. Labour’s list and electorate selections have shown a clear effort to increase women’s representation in their caucus. National’s list and electorate selections show they don’t much care, and indeed women’s representation in National’s caucus is likely to decrease by the end of the year.

      • r0b 4.3.1
        18 September 2011 at 10:45 pm

        Yeah Julie, that Herald piece had “stitch up” written all over it.  “Labour wife” FFS!  Garbage reporting.

        You still have a log in here – feel free to repost your reply on The Standard. 

      • lprent 4.3.2
        19 September 2011 at 1:00 am

        Saw that, but I haven’t had a moment to castigate the idiot reporter..

    • In Vino Veritas 4.4
      19 September 2011 at 1:42 pm

      “For me I am embarrassed that so many should think that a corporate takeover of one of our most precious of cultural institutions (rugby) is more important than our democracy and our country’s future.”

      mickey, the many think its more important because they believe the country’s future is in good hands. Sorry, that must have escaped you.

  5. joe90 5
    18 September 2011 at 10:36 am

    Andrew Breitbart fantasizes about armed conflict: Bring it on

    He goes on about how he imagines the military is going to rise up and start killing union members and reiterates that he’s talking about actual armed conflict and not elections. The numbers are in our favour

    • Vicky32 5.1
      18 September 2011 at 7:01 pm

      Sorry, I can’t view videos, could you give a precis? 🙂

      • felix 5.1.1
        18 September 2011 at 7:24 pm

        He says the left can only beat them in a rhetorical and propaganda war, but that they (tea party) have the numbers and the guns and he wishes his enemies would “fire the fist shot”.

        He reckons he’s got mates high up in the military who’ve told him they’ve got his back if the shit goes down (touches nose, covers mouth).

        An audience member questions whether they really have the numbers to win an election and Breitbart clarifies that he’s talking about civil war, not electoral battles.

        • Vicky32 5.1.1.1
          18 September 2011 at 7:28 pm

          Thanks, Joe90. Whatever posessed him to say such a thing? (Although the audience seems quite enthused from what you’ve said.)

          • uke 5.1.1.1.1
            19 September 2011 at 11:44 am

            “Whatever posessed him to say such a thing?”

            It’s interesting, Mao Tse Tung said something rather similar about power comes out of the barrel of a gun.

            • In Vino Veritas 5.1.1.1.1.1
              19 September 2011 at 1:46 pm

              Yup, and in the name of the left, Mao killed between 43 and 78 million. Not bad when you add Uncle Joe Stalin at 23 million, the left’s total comes to a lazy 66 to 101 million. I’d imagine the Tea Party’d have to be pretty heavy handed to catch up that lot.

              • HC …
                20 September 2011 at 10:48 am

                In Vino Veritas: There are not many true leftists that would consider Stalin as having been a true socialist or communist! He seized on a movement to follow his own personal goals. So he was not much different to Hitler.

                Re Mao Dse Dong there has always been debate about how many deaths could have been attributed directly to some of his failed policies and persecution during the Cultural Revolution.

                Why do you not look at more recent history and remind us of the hundreds of thousands killed in Afghanistan, the million plus killed in Iraq, which was a result of escalating war, unrest, breakdown and increased terror activities as a RESULT of the intervention by certain “alliances” led by the dominant USA?

                This happened under George W. Bush, who wanted to “finish” the business his father had started in 1991. But that is where your blinkers hide the truth, aye?!

  7. thejackal 7
    18 September 2011 at 1:02 pm

    ETS Fail

    We all know there’s a pressing need to curb pollution. It’s a no brainer really, not only because of climate change but because we want New Zealand to truly become 100% pure clean and green. It’s unfortunate then that National has decided to further undermine the Emission Trading Scheme, in an incomprehensibly stupid move…

    • Pete George 7.1
      18 September 2011 at 2:28 pm

      The best way to encourage businesses to pollute less is through consumer action. You have to get enough people to care about it though.

      • Armchair Critic 7.1.1
        18 September 2011 at 2:56 pm

        No, it’s not.
        Polluters, rather than consumers, are in the best position to know that they are polluting, and how they are doing it. As such they are primarily responsible, and should be the first to take action.

      • Draco T Bastard 7.1.2
        18 September 2011 at 3:49 pm

        PG, all you’re doing is buying into the delusional free-market BS. As I’ve said before, for that to work everyone needs to be omniscient so that they know what’s good for them and if businesses are operating ethically or not.

      • Lanthanide 7.1.3
        18 September 2011 at 8:54 pm

        “The best way to encourage businesses to pollute less is through consumer action.”

        By imposing an ETS, the companies that pollute the most will have the most expensive products. This will encourage that business to pollute less through consumer action – they won’t have any sales.

  8. randal 8
    18 September 2011 at 2:22 pm

    draco you are on to it. the tories believe that they know everything and what they dont know is not worth knowing. they are like children who dont care who has to clean up the mess they leave behind them wherever they go.

  9. ianmac 9
    18 September 2011 at 4:06 pm

    A quiet little piece by Anthony Hubbard in the Dom. Phil down on the farm. “In the Hands of Fate.”
    Good bloke Phil Goff. Somehow more authentic than some others?
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/5644526/In-the-hands-of-fate

  11. HC 11
    19 September 2011 at 12:17 am

    Since we have the option to vote pro or against partial asset sales on 26 Nov. 2011, I think it is worthwhile to have a look at what was said in Parliament during the 2nd reading of the China NZ FTA in 2008:

    http://202.68.89.83/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/3/8/f/48HansD_20080722_00000915-New-Zealand-China-Free-Trade-Agreement-Bill.htm

    Having read about the finalised, agreed and signed text on the following website…

    http://www.chinafta.govt.nz/1-The-agreement/2-Text-of-the-agreement/12-Chapt-11-Investment/index.php

    I have come to the conclusion that we are being seriously misled by the National Party, when John Key (hollow man Nr 1) they say that they will only sell up to 49 per cent of shares in 4 SOEs in the energy sector, which will be topped at 10 per cent per share holder and sold to “mum and dad investors”, who are going to be “first in the queue”.

    The FTA clearly states in chapter 11 (Investment) that Chinese investors cannot be disadvantaged against NZ investors – when investing in NZ, same as NZ investors should not be disadvantaged against Chinese investors when investing in Mainland China.

    So that means the claim, that NZ investors would be “first in the queue” is completely worthless, legally not enforceable and thus misleading.

    I feel that before we may decide who to vote for, we should perhaps reflect and consider, which parties or members may actually show some integrity and honesty in such very important matters!