Open mike 18/11/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:30 am, November 18th, 2014 - 114 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

keep calm and SolidarityOpen mike is your post.

The Standard is not a conspiracy – just a welcome outlet for the expression of views. Leaders that command respect will not be undermined by this.

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

Step up to the mike …

114 comments on “Open mike 18/11/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. ropata:rorschach 1
    18 November 2014 at 6:50 am

    Since our government prefers warmongering and flag mass-debate to feeding hungry kids…

    Is it time to change the “National” anthem as well?
    Parts of “God defend New Zealand” clearly do not follow Nat party policy:


    John of National at Thy feet,
    In the bonds of love we meet,
    Hear our voices, we entreat,
    John defend our free land.
    Guard Pacific’s triple star our nation’s greatest banker
    From the shafts of strife and war, ‘Cos he is a total wanker jokey prankster
    Make his one-liners heard afar,
    John defend NewZ Eee-ar-land.

    Men of every creed and race,
    Rich white dudes with round waists
    Gather here before Thy face,
    Asking Thee to bless this place sell assets to your mates,
    John defend our free cheap land.
    From dissension, envy, hate,
    And corruption Nicky Hager guard our State,
    Make our country good and Crosby Textor spin is great,
    John defend Niu Zillund.

    Peace, not war, “War is Peace” shall be our boast,
    But, should foesEd Snowden assail our coast,
    Make us then a mighty host, Dry his mouth with peanut butter on toast
    John defend our free surveillance land.
    Lord of battles in Thy might Feed the sheeple utter shite,
    Put our enemies to flight, Pretend black is white and left is right,
    Let our cause be just and right us suck up to US might
    John sell off Nuu Zeeeeal and

    Let our love for Thee capital values increase,
    May Thy blessings bullshit never cease,
    Give us plenty, give us peace, don’t give hungry kids a piece!
    God defend our free land. Johnny rules the neo liberal band.
    From dishonour and from shame, Global warming is a shame
    Guard our country’s spotless name, But for Johnny it’s a game
    Having fun on the golfing range,
    Planet Key is very strange

    May our mountains ever be
    Freedom’s ramparts on the sea,
    When you’ve fucked up this country
    Have fun kicking back in Hawaii

  2. swordfish 2
    18 November 2014 at 6:52 am

    No more sleeps to go !!! Today’s the day !!!

    This is too, too exciting. Very much like Christmas morning.

    • Rosie 2.1
      18 November 2014 at 8:41 am

      I just can’t muster the same enthusiasm as you Swordy, despite strong coffee.

      I had a tinge of bitterness this morning as I suddenly remembered what a star David Cunliffe could have been and how his light was snubbed out.

      However! Good luck to all candidates for today’s announcement – may you bring energy and hope to your Party, members and voters and may you inspire us to get behind you to win in 2017

      • ankerawshark 2.1.1
        18 November 2014 at 9:11 am

        Rosie 100+

        Good to see you back Rosie!

      • swordfish 2.1.2
        18 November 2014 at 9:43 am

        It was very much Tongue-in-cheek territory, Rose. You’re spot-on. Interesting to go back and see just how high Cunliffe’s Capable Leader ratings (as opposed to Preferred PM ratings) were at the start of this year and how those ratings took a hit with each new contrived Dirty Politics-fueled “scandal”. Cunliffe has one or two flaws and made some mistakes during the campaign but he had enormous potential and generally handled things with consummate ease.

        Can’t say I’m overly-enthused about the current 4. Meanwhile (see below), the long-awaited MSM attacks begin in earnest…..

        • Chooky 2.1.2.1
          18 November 2014 at 10:12 am

          @ Rosie and Swordfish….I think Cunliffe’s biggest POLITICAL flaw was that he was too nice and decent and a really good Christian

          ….really he had to have everyone in caucus and on the Left behind him as attack dogs for him to have succeeded against the onslaught of John key’s dirty PR tricks brigade , relentless spinning and an apathetic useless right wing msm….

          The next leader of the Labour Party has to be tough as hell and ruthless ….not be afraid of being nasty when required ….have a co-ordinated attack defence team….in addition to a very well oiled PR machine

          There can NOT be any disunity in caucus tolerated !

        • Karen 2.1.2.2
          18 November 2014 at 11:25 am

          I agree swordfish. All four have good points, but none have the same potential to be a great leader that Cunliffe had. Such a pity he was not given three years to prove himself and overcome the “dirty politics” attacks.

          Whoever is elected leader today it is already fairly obvious what the attacks will be, so we need to ready to refute them.

          Assuming it is Little there will be 2 strands – the trade unionist who will owe his leadership win to unions and the guy who can’t even win an electorate.

          My guess is that the Taranaki loss is due to a number of factors:
          1. Boundary changes that favoured National
          2. An area with an economy that depends on dairy and fossil fuels would see a party that will be in a coalition with the Greens as threatening.
          3. The Labour Party did not do well in provincial NZ this election, and Taranaki also had factors 1, 2 and 3 to deal with.
          4. Andrew grew up in New Plymouth but has never worked there, and does not live there.

        • Rosie 2.1.2.3
          18 November 2014 at 1:38 pm

          Oh! Sorry I didn’t pick up on the subtlety of your humour there Swordy 🙂

          You know, I’ve been a little bemused about how far the Dirty Politics themed attacks on Cunliffe influenced the perceptions not only the regular voters but also those on the left that I had conversations with over the period of the election.

          There was buy in to these anti Cunliffe attitudes from those I spoke to. 3 examples of that: “Sorry for being a man”, the uncertainty expressed around the CGT at the CHCH debate (never mind that he did very well against Key in all debates on the whole) and “general smugness”.

          It was disheartening to argue these points and debunk the BS, as I thought those folks I spoke to would be better than that, that they would be able to see through the spin, and be able to see the hiccups for what they were.

          But, sigh, there is no point going over that now. To use corporate speak, one must “move forward”. I guess we’ll be doing that any moment now………..

      • Hami Shearlie 2.1.3
        18 November 2014 at 3:16 pm

        Me too re Cunliffe, Rosie – No-one else offered such excitement and hope to people!

  3. Clean_power 3
    18 November 2014 at 7:00 am

    The day has arrived: Grant Robertson to be named leader this arvo!

    • b waghorn 3.1
      18 November 2014 at 7:11 am

      Stuff obviously think it will be Little judging by the negative/attack piece they’ve put on

      • Paul 3.1.1
        18 November 2014 at 7:20 am

        You mean this framing..
        ‘Unwanted by New Plymouth voters, Andrew Little is a favourite to win the leadership of the Labour Party today.’

        ‘After being soundly beaten by National’s Jonathan Young in New Plymouth, he only just scraped into Parliament on his party’s list after waiting a humiliating two weeks for the special votes to be counted.’

        The media can’t help themselves.
        At least they are predictably biased.

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63293210/Noon-showdown-for-Labour-Party

        • b waghorn 3.1.1.1
          18 November 2014 at 7:30 am

          Labour really does have to move with the times and put there potential leaders in safe seats

        • The lost sheep 3.1.1.2
          18 November 2014 at 7:41 am

          A leading candidate for leader of the Labour Party has never won his electorate seat, and seen a significant drop in his support over the 2 elections he has contested.

          These FACTS seem to me to be highly pertinent.
          You would have the media not report them? On what basis?

          This is evidence of robust straightforward reporting rather than bias?

          • Paul 3.1.1.2.1
            18 November 2014 at 7:42 am

            Does the report mention any positive aspects to Little, though?

          • lprent 3.1.1.2.2
            18 November 2014 at 8:01 am

            It just looks like the reporter just quoted whoever was writing as Cameron Slater on the topic this week.

            It is interesting how the different the various “Cameron Slater” writing styles are. The person doing most of the meme on Little writes like they are used to used to writing speeches. Very tight and clear without that dumbarse blustering style that the real Can uses.

            • Te Reo Putake 3.1.1.2.2.1
              18 November 2014 at 9:16 am

              At least we know well in advance how the right are going to attack Andrew if he becomes leader.

              ie:

              New Labour Leader can’t win Tory Seat Shock!

              Little fails to reverse country wide trend against Labour in two elections in conservative provincial town. Locals bemused that he failed to win the seat despite not being in a party they actually like or vote for. “What’s that all about?” says local man Mike Eboard.

            • Barfly 3.1.1.2.2.2
              18 November 2014 at 9:29 am

              I think Andrew Little would make a great MP for Mount Albert

          • b waghorn 3.1.1.2.3
            18 November 2014 at 8:02 am

            The article was headlined about the leader ship race and was all an attach on Little

          • Tracey 3.1.1.2.4
            18 November 2014 at 10:18 am

            what seat did the pm battle labour hard to win????

          • Murray Rawshark 3.1.1.2.5
            18 November 2014 at 8:56 pm

            Yeah sure. Let’s add some facts to a Herald report about Key:

            The Prime Minister, who has never worked a day on a farm in his life, has defended the New Zealand dairy industry’s record on climate change issues, in spite of the fact that he thinks scientific fact is just a matter of finding an agreeable scientist, in the wake of a landmark agreement between the world’s biggest two polluters. Mr. Key, who takes every chance he can to get his photo taken with President Obama, is the same Prime Minister who promised and failed to deliver on the 29 dead at the Pike River mine. Key never fought for an electorate, but was parachuted into a blue seat due to the obvious lack of talent in the National Party ranks, and was mixed up in some way in the collapse of the Irish economy.

            John Key, the leader who said he would not send combat troops to Iraq, is a guest of the well known extremist lunatic Tony Abbott at the G20 meeting in Brisbane, where leaders of the world’s largest economies have gathered.

            All facts. They should report on them. I agree with you.

  4. Paul 4
    18 November 2014 at 7:17 am

    We are a country with little long term planning, thanks to our negligent government.
    The arrogance of the government is also breathtaking. It simply ignores Science and rersearch , dismissing by the use of anecdotes!
    “Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce dismissed the report, saying the survey did not reflect what he had been seeing in New Zealand.”
    What Joyce sees beats any research, obviously.
    Sad days.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11360078

    • Draco T Bastard 4.1
      18 November 2014 at 10:47 am

      That’s what happens when you leave R&D to the auspices of the rich and greedy. It disappears as they decide they prefer having a larger bank account in the short term.

      We really need to follow the path of the US and have major government research going on. Considering our small size it needs to be at least 10% of the working populace and probably 25%.

      • Ron 4.1.1
        18 November 2014 at 11:44 am

        Once upon a time we did have government research it was called DSIR. Unfortunately a National Government decided to emasculate them into the separate CRI’s which have been a pale imitation. Unfortunately once again Labour lacked the courage to re institute the DSIR. Meanwhile the equivalent of DSIR in Australia the CSIRO has gone from strength to strength

        We really need to follow the path of the US and have major government research going on. Considering our small size it needs to be at least 10% of the working populace and probably 25%.

      • Paul 5.1.1
        18 November 2014 at 7:44 am

        Yes that first report was the BBC reporting on it.
        The world still hasn’t fixed the structural problems evident at the time of the GFC. There’s going to be another meltdown.
        Wonder what the banks will get this time?

        • Ad 5.1.1.1
          18 November 2014 at 7:54 am

          Our international economic risks for 2015:

          China: sustained growth around 7% Green light

          Australia: 2-3% Green

          India: 5-7% Green

          US: in full recovery Green

          Japan: possible contraction Red

          Britain: high EU exposure Amber

          NZ: housing, construction and commodity reliance: Amber

          Our main trading partners are ok overall. NZ needs to sort itself out.

          • Colonial Rawshark 5.1.1.1.1
            18 November 2014 at 8:57 am

            Until you see industrial materials consumption, mining and retail sales activity increasing, those “green lights” you speak of are likely to be nothing more than the result of goal seeked spreadsheeting and financial manipulation. For instance, in the US you might say that their unemployment rate has been falling. Yes it has – but that is largely a result of millions dropping out of workforce participation and hence disappearing from the statistic altogether. And those who have found jobs find that their pay is anywhere from 30% to 40% less than they used to get.

            Any true economic rise is associated with a direct rise in energy consumption.

            • Ad 5.1.1.1.1.1
              18 November 2014 at 9:38 am

              Our trade forecasts look good, all the countries’ Reserve Bank forecasts seem consistent, oil price v stable.

              My internal favourite is the “truckometer”.

              Labour isn’t going to win 2017 on an economic crisis theme.

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                18 November 2014 at 10:53 am

                Our trade forecasts look good, all the countries’ Reserve Bank forecasts seem consistent, oil price v stable.

                1) 2006-2007 all world economic forecasts were rosy. And just 12 months later the financial world was imploding and 7 years later maybe economic life has turned better (but not for the bottom 50% in western countries who are still as screwed as ever).

                2) Oil price stability? Kunstler has a few things to say about that, today. “All aboard the instability express.”

                http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-17/all-aboard-instability-express

        • joe90 5.1.1.2
          18 November 2014 at 7:58 am

          note to self – must. read. before. replying.

        • Ron 5.1.1.3
          18 November 2014 at 11:46 am

          more knighthoods for bankers

    • miravox 5.2
      18 November 2014 at 8:12 am

      David Cameron’s piece is just so self-serving… getting in there to pretend he’s done something. Precarious work, housing bubbles, banking structures, high incomes and bonuses and and concentration of wealth are worse than before the GFC. Trying create the narrative before the whole economic structure topples again.

      All he’s done is business as usual – increasing disparities and not addressing any of the systemic problems in his own backyard never mind the rest of the world. Short-term gratification, these Tories.

  6. Paul 6
    18 November 2014 at 7:24 am

    I am waiting to hear the same from the Labour Party, the Green Party and the Maori Party. It is called some moral leadership.

    ‘New Zealand First is boycotting a committee which will decide how the public votes on the national flag, saying the referendum was an expensive exercise which took attention away from greater priorities.

    Leader Winston Peters said debating a flag change would “cost us dearly” and take the public’s eye off more pressing social and economic challenges.

    “A change of flag might need to be considered but now is not the time. Poverty and housing are at crisis level, it’s no time for a government to be raising a distraction,” Mr Peters said.’

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11360114

    • lprent 6.1
      18 November 2014 at 7:53 am

      It is just irrelevant. Who cares about what a flag looks like?

      It is like arguing about the shape of a corporate logo.

      • Paul 6.1.1
        18 November 2014 at 7:55 am

        So boycott the committee.

      • swordfish 6.1.2
        18 November 2014 at 8:03 am

        A series of polls on the issue over the last 12 months show a consistent majority opposed to a change of flag. Age breakdowns suggest that, despite widespread assumptions to the contrary, it is, in fact, younger New Zealanders who express greatest opposition.

        I personally prefer an eventual change of flag (and, as someone who almost chose graphic design as a career, I’d be quite interested in developing a few designs myself), but now is not the right time – certainly not when it’s clearly against the will of the majority.

        • Tracey 6.1.2.1
          18 November 2014 at 10:21 am

          me too but not for 27m

        • Paul 6.1.2.2
          18 November 2014 at 8:45 pm

          Yes and the poll doesn’t ask if parliament should prioritise this above inequality, housing, jobs, education, health, Christchurch.
          It does not because Fairfax’s job is to entertain and distract not reflect the popular will.
          Owned by Reinhard and international merchant banks.
          Don’t think they really care about actions that would really make NZ more independent.
          Like not signing the TPPA.

      • mac1 6.1.3
        18 November 2014 at 8:47 am

        Flags have a strange fascination for the right. With a recent programme on (with apologies to M. Godwin) Hitler Youth, I couldn’t be any thing but taken by the amount of flags flown, carried and sung to by the participants.

        There may also be a wee bit of top management behaviour in changing logos etc, renaming buildings etc in order to preserve a legacy and have history record their deeds- “He was the PM in whose term the flag was changed.”

        Historical narcissism.

        • Anne 6.1.3.1
          18 November 2014 at 9:17 am

          This flag debate is one dirty great con job! Glad to hear NZ First is standing up to be counted on the issue. Now how about Labour and the Greens doing the same?

          An en masse walk-out would be a great way to ‘stick it up em’ in a big way. The ensuing publicity would give exposure to the Nat govt’s real reason for bringing it to the fore-front. That is, a massive distraction away from the issues facing the country – poverty, inequality, unemployment, deteriorating public services, resultant rising serious crime rates and corrupt political practices.

          The oppo. parties would do all of us a favour if they spent the next three years concentrating on the above issues and completely ignoring the flag crap for the nonsense it really is.

          • Clemgeopin 6.1.3.1.1
            18 November 2014 at 10:38 am

            First of all, key should have conducted some polls/survey to see if there WAS support for change of flag at this time in the first place!

            In my opinion, this expensive distracting referendum for change of flag should be canned immediately. The better time would be when and if we decide to become a republic. Until then, don’t waste time, effort and money trying to change the flag as it will simply cause distraction, division and an unnecessary waste of money.

            Having the second referendum would not have been necessary if the first referendum had an additional question. ‘Do you agree that we should change our flag at this time?’ YES? or NO? If most said, NO, then referendum two wouldn’t be necessary.

          • Ron 6.1.3.1.2
            18 November 2014 at 12:04 pm

            Come on have you had a look at who is Labour’s representative on the Flag committee. I cannot imagine him doing anything that would be beneficial to Labour.

            An en masse walk-out would be a great way to ‘stick it up em’ in a big way.

        • McFlock 6.1.3.2
          18 November 2014 at 12:27 pm

          yeah, but that was part ofthe pageantry rather than a particular right wing jobby – the sovs jumped on it too.

      • adam 6.1.4
        18 November 2014 at 9:08 am

        And here me thinking that is just what it was Iprent, a discussion on our new corporate logo.

    • Janice 6.2
      18 November 2014 at 8:52 am

      What John Oliver thinks of Key changing the flag. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz29_bFxBZA

  7. Paul 7
    18 November 2014 at 7:34 am

    It’s always a concern when Fairfax start to poll about issues.
    It’s as if they’re testing the water for the government.

    Here’s their one today.

    Should NZ be involved in the fight against Islamic State?

    Results at the moment.
    Yes. 1385 votes, 43.6%
    No 1791 votes, 56.4%

    That over 40% have voted yes shows how the scare tactics have worked over the past month.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63257141/government-could-send-sas-to-iraq

  8. joe90 8
    18 November 2014 at 8:14 am

    Dear Labour leader, you’re the new captain so can you please pick up the fucking ball and run.

    Love, J 90.

    Today’s Democratic Party, with its finely calibrated, top-down fixes, does not offer anything so transformative. It seems scared of its own shadow, which is probably why it keeps reassuring itself that its triumph is inevitable. It needs instead to fully acknowledge just how devastating the recession was for working people everywhere in America, and what a generation of largely flat wages did to their aspirations even before that. It needs to take on hard fights, even against powerful forces, like pharmaceutical and insurance companies that presume to tell us the limits of what our health care can be or energy companies that would tell us what the world’s climate can endure. It means carving out a place of respect for working men and women in our globalized, finance-driven world.

    Invite us to dream a little. You don’t build an enduring coalition out of who Americans are. You do it out of what we can be.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/opinion/sunday/delusions-of-the-democrats.html

    • Ad 8.1
      18 November 2014 at 9:44 am

      2012 redux

      2013 redux

      • greywarshark 8.1.1
        18 November 2014 at 10:08 am

        Jack Hitt says that it is possible that in two years the Democrats will be a spent force, outmaneouvred with changes to political system that favour Republicans, and lacking an image or policies that give Democrats a recognisable difference, and he says instead they present themselves as being like Republicans only less so.
        Radionz http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/20157666
        09:45 US Correspondent, Jack Hitt
        Jack Hitt reports on the end of the US election season – which finishes with a runoff in New Orleans. And marijuana is emerging in the States from an illegal market to a legal one.

        • joe90 8.1.1.1
          18 November 2014 at 11:33 am

          There’s always the forlorn hope history repeats.

          But victory can be a fleeting thing. In 1928, Republicans won 270 seats in the House. They were on top of the world. Two years later, they narrowly lost their majority. Two years after that, in 1932, their caucus shrunk to 117 members and the number of Republican-held seats in the Senate fell to just 36. To borrow the title of a popular 1929 novel (which had nothing whatsoever to do with American politics): Goodbye to all that.

          A surface explanation for the quick rise and fall of the GOP House majority of 1928 is the Great Depression. As the party in power, Republicans owned the economy, and voters punished them for it. In this sense, today’s Republicans have no historical parallel to fear. Voters—at least a working majority of the minority who turned out last week—clearly blame Barack Obama for the lingering aftershocks of the recent economic crash,

          http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/11/1928-congress-last-time-republicans-had-a-majority-this-huge-112913.html#.VGpA1Gc6zxE

          • greywarshark 8.1.1.1.1
            18 November 2014 at 4:32 pm

            @ joe90
            I am a book hoarder – and found I have a copy of Robert Graves Goodbye to all That which I am going to read!
            Obama sure got a poisoned chalice.

            Note from the Prologue to the book.
            I partly wrote, partly dictated, this book 28 years ago during a complicated domestic crisis, and with very little time for revision. It was my bitter leave-taking of England where I had recently broken a good many conventions; quarrelled with, or been disowned by, most of my friends; been grilled by the police on a suspicion of attempted murder; and ceased to care what anyone thought of me.

            So life goes on being complex, always something to stand up to.
            edited

      • joe90 8.1.2
        18 November 2014 at 11:26 am

        Watching Labour blunder about during the past few years has been like watching a gang who’ve lost their way, they all know what they’re supposed to be doing but can never quite get things going at the mud end.

        When the whole crew should be putting in hard yards in the mud half are fiddling about with whatever shiny bits and bobs they fancy, some are arguing about who gets to do what, the experts shrug their shoulders, it’s not my job to organise, and stay out of sight whiling away the hours between cook-ups and knock off, the lazy shits stand around feeding their shovels and, while plotters plot, the poor sod who’s supposed to be running the shop can’t get anybody to do anything spends their time running around in circles.

        The way forward – demote the poor sod, arse the plotters, saddle experts and lazy shits with responsibility, promote the cleverest fiddler and the rest will follow.

        • greywarshark 8.1.2.1
          18 November 2014 at 1:00 pm

          @ joe 90
          Very good analogy. I put up a comment about Jack Hitt from USA saying that Democrats might be AWOL in 2 years.

          Radionz news headlines – In a short time the result of voting for the new Labour leader will be announced – Police are searching….
          Aren’t we all.

  9. adam 9
    18 November 2014 at 9:10 am

    Is this the finger giving people wrote about Putin yesterday. I have to say it is a rather interesting speech Putin gave, no wonder the western elites won’t eat with him.

    http://www.theeventchronicle.com/news/europe/putin-western-elites-play-time/

    • Anne 9.1
      18 November 2014 at 10:41 am

      I had the impression during the brief TV clip showing Putin eating by himself that he was looking ‘very comfortable’ and inwardly chuckling. As well he might…

  10. adam 10
    18 November 2014 at 9:14 am

    Last in the series and it’s on Food production – some sound economic arguments on why people go hungry.

    http://libcom.org/blog/political-economy-hunger-17112014

  11. Tracey 11
    18 November 2014 at 10:23 am

    is phils ban over today?

    for you phil

    My Favorite Animal

    Our teacher asked what my favorite animal was, and I said, “Fried chicken.”
    She said I wasn’t funny, but she couldn’t have been right, because everyone else laughed.

    My parents told me to always tell the truth. I did. Fried chicken is my favorite animal.
    I told my dad what happened, and he said my teacher was probably a member of PETA.
    He said they love animals very much.

    I do, too. Especially chicken, pork and beef. Anyway, my teacher sent me to the principal’s office.
    I told him what happened, and he laughed, too. Then he told me not to do it again.

    The next day in class my teacher asked me what my favorite live animal was.
    I told her it was chicken. She asked me why, so I told her it was because you could make them into fried chicken.

    She sent me back to the principal’s office. He laughed, and told me not to do it again.

    I don’t understand. My parents taught me to be honest, but my teacher doesn’t like it when I am.

    Today, my teacher asked me to tell her what famous person I admired most. I told her, “Colonel Sanders.”

    Guess where the f… I am now??!!

  12. Barfly 12
    18 November 2014 at 10:48 am

    Household rates increases

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11360045

    Albert – Eden 11.74% ouch!! Thank you Rodney bleeping Hide

  13. greywarshark 13
    18 November 2014 at 12:53 pm

    A niche cheesemaker of NZ has won top prize for her product made from four cows.
    However she is submitted to a review of her workplace costing $4000 which she says is the same that Fonterra pays. Six other small makers are deciding to close because of the cost of these audits which are seen as bureaucratic overkill.

    This tends to happen in NZ – a lack of encouragement and support for small initiatives. Only support business that is big. Fish quotas were sold to big companies and that seriously limited the ability of small fishers to make a good living.

    • RedLogix 13.1
      18 November 2014 at 1:14 pm

      Six other small makers are deciding to close because of the cost of these audits which are seen as bureaucratic overkill.

      So what alternative do you propose? Bureaucracies are fundamentally rule-driven creatures. They implement the policies determined by government. They must do this as fairly and even-handedly as practical.

      The problem here is not the bureaucracy itself – but the fact that the politicians had not allowed for different rules to apply a small four-cow operator than to Fonterra. If Fonterra fucks up there are global repercussions – the question is how to handle niche players without compromising the reputation of the industry as a whole?

      After all if a slightly larger say 40-cow operation managed to get several dozen people ill – especially tourists – the overseas media would have no scruples about smearing NZ food industry with a big fat spatula.

      • Draco T Bastard 13.1.1
        18 November 2014 at 3:37 pm

        So what alternative do you propose?

        Well, on this one the bureaucracy should be charging on a per cow basis.

        The problem here is not the bureaucracy itself – but the fact that the politicians had not allowed for different rules to apply a small four-cow operator than to Fonterra.

        True but I suspect that the politicians did think about the small operators. The question is how much were they persuaded by lobbyists to use a single charge rather than a proportional charge.

      • greywarshark 13.1.2
        18 November 2014 at 3:46 pm

        @ RedLogix
        I am surprised that you can’t think of anything to do except shrug your shoulders. It doesn’t sound like you. I’m sure it is within the wit of man and woman to devise a suitable inspection and quality regime.

  14. paddy 14
    18 November 2014 at 12:59 pm

    Ipredict price of Grant Robertson as leader has jumped 60% in the last few minutes. Loose lips at HQ. Bugger.
    Feck the price is going up and down like a whoor’s drawers.

  15. Skinny 15
    18 November 2014 at 1:23 pm

    Anyone else hearing the majority of the Labour caucus has got behind Robertson and he has got home narrowly?

  17. Paul 17
    18 November 2014 at 8:41 pm

    There are people of all political hues across all generations.

    However anyone born after 1971 would never have experienced NZ as anything other than a neoliberal country. There is no point of reference or way of comparing to previous NZ society.

    And up to kids say born in 1990, many would have seen the possibility of this new world benefiting them. They became aspirational, atomised creatures (acknowledgements to Adam Curtis’s excellent series of docos) who thought they could see a route to neoliberalism’s promised land.

    But the GFC struck in 2008. And the realities of climate change sunk in around the time for sentient members of society.

    And people under 25/30 can see no pathway however hard they scrabble on the rat race. Only the children of the elite can see a way forward.

    That is why we have Occupy, the Arab Spring, Brand, Scotland, The Greek and Spanish new leftist parties.

    All generations have people of all political hues but all generations are affected by the environment they grew up in.

    (Chris73 was born in 73)

    • Murray Rawshark 17.1
      18 November 2014 at 11:42 pm

      I started university in 1988, at 32. I was shocked at how the “intellectual elite” of our youth accepted neoliberalism and TINA. I realised that, ever since they’d turned into teenagers, they hadn’t experienced anything else. Today I really get the shits when people like Bradbury wank on about baby boomers. He hasn’t got a bloody clue.

      • miravox 17.1.1
        19 November 2014 at 12:02 am

        Yep, I noted the same thing when I started university as an older student. It’s interesting when I talk to my kids and they see the ‘history’ that was pre 1980s. I think they understand a little more when it’s couched in terms of social battles that were won back then, rather than benefits from them (like free tertiary education). that just makes them resentful.

        “Today I really get the shits when people like Bradbury wank on about baby boomers. “

        Bomber needs to get out an see how many Chris73s there are and lose the generational division. Grant Robertson fell for that as well.

  18. joe90 18
    18 November 2014 at 9:45 pm

    Abbott’s doing everything he can to poke a stick in the spokes.

    Flannery, a former Australian of the Year and a scientist himself, was once described by Sir David Attenborough as “in the league of the all-time great explorers” because of his discovery of new mammal species. When asked about the relationship between the scientific community and the government, he said: “It’s the equivalent of if Sarah Palin won the US presidency. This is the first Australian government since 1938 to not have a science minister. Science is not on the list of priorities.”

    https://news.vice.com/article/trench-warfare-how-australia-tried-to-stop-climate-change-discussion-at-the-g20-summit?

    • McFlock 18.1
      18 November 2014 at 11:56 pm

      fascinating differences between Abbot’s list of ministers and Rudd’s second bunch of ministers.

      for example, Rudd’s “Minister for Immigration, Multiculturalism and Citizenship” is now Abbot’s “Minister for Immigration and Border Protection”.

      Several other similar examples. A definite shift, and it’s not like Rudd was exceptionally peace_and_mung_beans in the first place.

      • srylands 18.1.1
        19 November 2014 at 1:19 pm

        “for example, Rudd’s “Minister for Immigration, Multiculturalism and Citizenship” is now Abbot’s [sic] “Minister for Immigration and Border Protection”.”

        How is this “fascinating”? It is totally unsurprising given the priorities of the Abbott Government.

        • McFlock 18.1.1.1
          19 November 2014 at 2:49 pm

          Well, personally I found that what was to be a quick glance at the differences attracted and retained my attention as if by an irresistable influence, so in that way it was “fascinating” to me. Not overly surprising, but interesting nonetheless.

          Feel free to ask about any other hu-mon concepts with which you find difficulty. The replacement of your fuzzy-logic chip has been somewhat delayed, but every so often I’m happy to pitch in and help.

    • Draco T Bastard 18.2
      19 November 2014 at 12:03 am

      “It’s the equivalent of if Sarah Palin won the US presidency. This is the first Australian government since 1938 to not have a science minister. Science is not on the list of priorities.”

      Science and reality inevitably prove RWNJs wrong and so they really, really don’t like it.

      • srylands 18.2.1
        19 November 2014 at 8:15 am

        I have no idea what a “RWNJ” is.

        But people of all political hues don’t like science if they are irrational and fearful.

        Vaccine deniers are a good example – Chooky – a regular contributor to this site is a vaccine denier. He is no different in his hatred of science than a Tea Party climate change denier. And he is far from alone. Many of the vaccine deniers/homeopathy defenders are from the Left.

        • McFlock 18.2.1.1
          19 November 2014 at 12:46 pm

          Economists are another example of folks who hate science.

          By the way, “RWNJs” are basically tories. You’re one, for example, and nuttier than most.