Open mike 19/06/2011

36 comments on “Open mike 19/06/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Carol 1

   19 June 2011 at 7:03 am

   So while some economists & the government are more inclined to talk positively about where NZ is heading, a significant proportion of Kiwis seem to be more pessimeistic;

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/5163237/Financial-woes-keep-growing

   People’s confidence in their financial prospects has plummeted just five months out from the general election, with a new poll showing people are worried they will lose their jobs and that things will get worse in the next year.

   The Research New Zealand poll is bad news for the government because despite recent surveys showing high levels of business confidence, it appears many New Zealanders do not feel the same way about their own prospects.
   […]

   The poll of 503 people aged 18 and over found that the number of people who felt their financial situation had improved in the past year had dropped to just 14%, down from 27% last year. Just under half said their situation had worsened.

   Only 23% of people thought their finances would improve in the next 12 months, down from 56% last year.

   Workers were worried about their jobs. Last year 76% of respondents felt confident their jobs were secure – this year that had dropped to 65%, described by the researchers as significant.
   […]

   The poll was conducted by telephone between May 20 and 27 and has a margin of error of +/- 4.4 %.

   I’m puzzled by this statement, reported in the above article, by Bryce Edwards:

   Edwards said while there was a significant drop of confidence in National as an economic manager, there seemed to be even less confidence in the ability of the Labour Party, leader Phil Goff and finance spokesman David Cunliffe, to do a better job.

   Especially the bit about Cunliffe, as he comes across as more able to me than Blinglish, Joyce, Shonkey et al.
   • ianmac 1.1

     19 June 2011 at 10:09 am

     All about perception I guess in regard to confidence in Labour/Cunliffe. My guess is that over the next few weeks Labour will launch their assault on the NAct neglect with strategies on how Labour will manage the economy. This will have to be stamped and published before the end of July and if the MSM get on board, the perceptions will change. My guess is that National will be geared up to retalliate, perhaps with the connivance of MSM.
     • Anne 1.1.1

       19 June 2011 at 10:42 am

       Yet it is not planning to start releasing major policy until around the middle of next month

       The above according to John Armstrong: Labour isn’t going to even start releasing policy for another 4 weeks? Okay, normally that would be plenty soon enough but this isn’t a normal election year. By the beginning of August most minds (not mine 🙁 )will be anticipating the start of the RWC and party policy rhetoric will be a very distant second place.

       Who are the faceless people making Labour’s strategic decisions? I despair sometimes.

       Btw, it’s not the first time Bryce Edwards has come to rather curious conclusions – nearly always to the detriment of Labour. I have little confidence in his non-partisan ability.
       • ianmac 1.1.1.1

         19 June 2011 at 11:03 am

         Yes. I did read John Armstrong’s piece yesterday Anne. But a while ago there was a strong call for Labour to release policy and a fair amount of criticism for not doing so. I wrote at the time that it was too soon to say too much. (And I thought that the NActs were seeding the demand for action and they were helped by many on the left.)
         I think that you wait until the disillusion of Government rises, and it is, and the demands for Labour/Green answers also rise. Then you say, “You want to know what we would do? Well here it is….. Bang!”
         A matter of timing but who can be sure of that in an Election year and a popular (?) RWC?
         • Anne 1.1.1.1.1

           19 June 2011 at 12:55 pm

           (And I thought that the NActs were seeding the demand for action and they were helped by many on the left.)

           Indeed they were Ianmac. To wait for the disillusionment to well and truly set in then hit the punters with Labour’s alternative answers is normally a good strategy. But I wonder if that strategy is taking a big risk this time round. Will said punters be listening once the RWC is almost upon us? I suspect not but hopefully I will be proven wrong.
           • Herodotus 1.1.1.1.1.1

             19 June 2011 at 1:16 pm

             A view from an economist
             http://www.bnz.co.nz/static/www/docs/weekly-overview/w2011-06-16.pdf
             There was one bank economist commenting re Mystery Creek that we in NZ had a perfect storm brewing – Every rural sector was booming, increased production and increased world demand, improving prices.
             Also note the forcast for improving employment. Pity those responsable for this will not get the kudos that will go to the next govt !!! (Same was for the improving economy in 99- Just right place right time for the govt of the time)
             We are entering boom times. Pity that, macro wise for NZ there will be distortions with those with and those without widening. Sure the commodity prices may go even higher so we will be able to feed the worlds rich – yet some in NZ may be living a near “2nd” world standard, so to prosper we MUST have policies that maintain the wealthys wealth worldwide so they can afford what we produce. No good having great pinot’s when no one can afford to drink them !!!;-)
   • prism 1.2

     19 June 2011 at 12:04 pm

     Carol – You and those interested in your comments here may be interested (actually don’t miss hearing this on replay radio from your internet site) in the lively and informative discussion noted below about today’s economics, why and how they are and what hope of changing them. There is also mention of the new World Economics Association that wants to break the hold that USA and its dingy Britain, have on economics thinking and decision-making.

     Radionz Sunday 19 June 2011 – 11.05 Ideas: A New Economics
     Last month 141 economists from around the globe launched the World Economics Association. In its first three weeks of existence more 4500 people from 120 countries joined its ranks. The association’s manifesto says it stands for a plurality of thought, method and philosophy, and a commitment to global democracy which will prevent one country or continent from dominating economic debate. Ideas talks to three of the association’s founding members: Ha Joon Chang, the author of 23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism; former World Bank economist and professor of economics at the London School of Economics, expatriate New Zealander Robert Wade; and Steve Keen, the author of Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor of the Social Sciences.
     Presented by Chris Laidlaw Produced by Jeremy Rose
     • ianmac 1.2.1

       19 June 2011 at 2:06 pm

       Prism. Thanks for the heads up. Very interesting. They say you don’t have to be an economist to have an opinion. Good. (Beware of Economists who throw jargon in order to block we mortals.)

       Mr Chang says that one of the things that Governments should not do, is dismantle the Welfare state as it not only affects people’s livelihood, but also distorts the economy of the country. Know any Govt who are doing that?

       I guess that the power of the Lobby groups, Globalisation and the power of the Finance system is far greater than power of politicians , even if there is a political will to upgrade the system.
       Perhaps the Greens talk economic sense?
       http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/ideas/ideas-20110619-1106-ideas_for_19_june_2011_a_new_economics-048.mp3
       Oops. posted the link but it doesn’t show.
       • prism 1.2.1.1

         19 June 2011 at 8:26 pm

         Thanks ianmac – I have to listen again as I was busy at the time and just caught part of it. You have made that easier. I noticed that one speaker did not hope for changes to a more workable and realistic system for quite a time. We may have to take our medicine for such chronic addictions leading to our present financial slather again and ….
     • Carol 1.2.2

       19 June 2011 at 10:06 pm

       Thanks, prism for the tip. I’ll catch up on that RNZ item when I have some time. Been working today.
2. Tigger 2

   19 June 2011 at 8:52 am

   http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.php?c_id=1&objectid=10733166

   Who thought this was a good idea? Harawira is no friend to gay rights or tolerance.
   • Lindsey 2.1

     19 June 2011 at 9:48 am

     Jevon Goulter thought it was a good idea.
     Hone should be careful there, when young Jevon did not get what he wanted from the Labour Party he hopped off to Investigate Mgazine with a load of twaddle which no other part of the MSM would touch with a bargepole.
   • ianmac 2.2

     19 June 2011 at 10:20 am

     It was Hone wasn’t it who insisted on taking a gay friend with him to mingle in the upper floor of the Destiny Church leaders at the “meet the four MPs” show a couple of weeks ago. The destiny Church folk were very polite to him it was reported.
     • Tigger 2.2.1

       19 June 2011 at 8:23 pm

       That’s just provocative bs. I know Destiny church members with gay family members who’ve accepted them. Fuck off Hone, this gay man doesn’t need you pretending now to be gay friendly.
3. Tangled up in blue 3

   19 June 2011 at 10:03 am

   I know it’s whaleoil & he can’t be trusted, but he has produced a couple of damning letters from NZEI and Labour which strongly indicate that Sue Moroney has been using peoples private information (email address) without permission. Not a good look at all.
4. jackal 4

   19 June 2011 at 11:24 am

   You mean Labour sent a few emails to people who had signed and put their email addresses on petitions? How does that compare with Paula Bennett releasing personal details of beneficiaries that made complaints about WINZ to the media? Does it even come close to WINZ giving full contact details of thousands of DPB Mother’s to a private research firm who rang them up at their homes to ask very personal questions? How does it compare to Slater publishing a private email of mine that was sent to David Farrar? Damn hypocrites!
   • Tangled up in blue 4.1

     19 June 2011 at 11:45 am

     The point is that it’s not clear that Labour had permission to use this information.

     The fact that National and the right-bloggers are hypocrites doesn’t make this kind of behaviour ok.
     • chris73 4.1.1

       19 June 2011 at 12:14 pm

       Are you new here? Thats exactly what it means.
       • jackal 4.1.1.1

         19 June 2011 at 12:27 pm

         Two wrongs don’t make a right chris73. The issue is not clear, that is why it’s stupid of Slater to say Labour is in breach of that law. The other problem he has is that he’s obtained private information that he’s gone and published. I wonder how much money Catcus Kate is willing to spend on the bumbling fools legal bills?
   • Blue 4.2

     19 June 2011 at 2:14 pm

     I imagine Farrar provided him with your email, so your beef is with him, not Slater. The point is it was an NZEI petition therefore how did Labour get hold of the email addresses, unless, 1. NZEI provided them without permission (Privacy breach) or 2. Labour stole them (usually illegal) or 3. NZEI are in fact the Labour Party by another name. Interesting and hilariously ironic.
     • jackal 4.2.1

       19 June 2011 at 10:14 pm

       “My beef” is with whoever publishes my private emails. Such a thing is against New Zealand laws, which Slater believes he does not have to abide by because his site is hosted in America.

       Read my post below Blue. It appears that National would not accept the petition. National is therefore in breach of Parliamentary procedures:

       A petition is a document addressed to the House of Representatives and signed by at least one person. It asks the House to act on a matter of public policy or law, or to put right a local or private concern. When a petition has been presented to the House, it is referred to a select committee for consideration and report.

       This is why National doesn’t like petitions:

       The Petitioner approaches a member of Parliament with their petition. In this case a National MP who did not accept it. Whoever that person was is in breach of Parliamentary procedure. Only an MP can deliver the petition to the Clerk of the House of Representatives who then decides if everything is in order.

       Every select committee report that contains recommendations to the Government is referred to the Government. The Government must report on what action, if any, it has taken to implement the recommendations. That report must be made within 90 days of the select committee’s report being presented. The Government’s report on a petition is presented to the House as a parliamentary paper. It is printed and available on the parliamentary website.

       Strangely I couldn’t find any of the Governments reports on previous petitions online.

       There are clear rules as to why a petition cannot be accepted. I would suggest that somebody needs to make a formal complaint to the Ombudsman concerning this matter.

       For his part, Slater is just playing with smoke and mirrors again and I’m frankly sick and tired of giving him attention.
5. Colonial Viper 5

   19 June 2011 at 12:19 pm

   “Cycleway the only way”: Desperation pushing of John Key’s cycleway

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10733061

   lol another 250 cycleway-like projects and we might see an appreciable drop in unemployment!
   • Carol 5.1

     19 June 2011 at 10:11 pm

     And why aren’t they building these cycleways in places that many can use for commuting, and everyday cycling? Around Auckland there seems to be bits of cycleways, lanes and routes in various places that don’t really connect up. And many suggested routes for cyclists seem to be the scenic route, rather than enabling cyclists to get from A to B via the shortest distance.
6. jackal 6

   19 June 2011 at 12:21 pm

   The “email harvesting” crap is entirely Slater speculating again. He says it’s a breach of law but provides none. What is more concerning is that National will not accept the petition

   Tens of thou­sand of the post­cards you signed were pre­sented to Labour’s spokesper­son on early child­hood edu­ca­tion Sue Moroney late last year, for her to present to the Prime Min­is­ter as no Gov­ern­ment MP was pre­pared to receive them. Unfor­tu­nately despite a num­ber of attempts by Sue Moroney, the Prime Min­is­ter has not yet shown a will­ing­ness to receive them.

   Shouldn’t the person given responsibility contact the signers to perhaps inform them that their petition is not being received by the Government? Unsolicited emails are a problem, if you put your email on a petition, you should expect to be contacted.

   The thing with Slater is that he’s an idiot. Labour contacting signatories is not email harvesting.

   The other fact of the matter is that their has been zero replies to the emails indicating that nobody who was contacted by Labour made a complaint. 19 people requested to be unsubscribed, which is only 0.31%. This indicates that Labour is acting within the law in allowing the unsubscribe feature within the emails sent. I wonder who’s rights Slater is trying to protect exactly?
   • Draco T Bastard 6.1

     19 June 2011 at 1:41 pm

     At a guess I’d say that he’s trying to distract from his own private information harvesting that was, prima facie, illegal.
     • mickysavage 6.1.1

       19 June 2011 at 10:25 pm

       I wonder if we are handling the phenomenon known as Slater well.  Right now in blogland we essentially have the Standard, home of light and sense, on the left, Slater in the Fox news part of the spectrum and Farrar being all centrist in the middle.  There are some other very good blogs, handmirror, NRT, tumeke but the first three are the biggies.

       Two possibilities:

       1.  We need the left wing version of Cameron, sort of an insane Bomber without the reasonableness.
       2.  We just ignore him.  He really thrives on the exposure and if we consign him to the sideline on the basis that he is not that pleasant and often wrong then we may be doing ourselves a favour.
       • r0b 6.1.1.1

         19 June 2011 at 11:00 pm

         I think it’s a big mistake to classify Farrar as “centrist”! He’s as true blue a Tory as ever drew breath.

         You’re right on Slater though. Best off ignored, unless there is something significant (like the leak / credit card nonsense) to be countered.
         • mickysavage 6.1.1.1.1

           20 June 2011 at 6:30 am

           I mean “centrist” in that Farrar is to the left of Slater but to the right of you guys …
           • r0b 6.1.1.1.1.1

             20 June 2011 at 6:55 am

             That’s for sure!
7. Anne 7

   19 June 2011 at 1:15 pm

   The slug known as Slater is indulging in factual distortion in an attempt to establish a non-existent ‘breach of law’ by the Labour Party. When signing petitions or similar Labour material, it is made clear to people that if they would like further information from the Labour Party they can include their email address. If they don’t wish to do so they just leave the column blank. It’s possible some people will change their minds, and they get an opportunity to ‘unsubscribe’ each time something is emailed to them.
   • ianmac 7.1

     19 June 2011 at 1:23 pm

     It is amazing (or not), that Whaleoil gets the Herald column inches so easily, helped of course by that chap Fisher. I bet such idle speculation say on Key, would be very hard to get published.
   • Tangled up in blue 7.2

     19 June 2011 at 2:40 pm

     When signing petitions or similar Labour material

     How is an NCEI campaign “Labour material”?

     Copy of the post card here http://www.nzei.org.nz/site/nzeite/files/ECE/Set%20the%20scene_postcard.pdf

     It says nothing at all about it being Labour material.
8. prism 8

   19 June 2011 at 5:29 pm

   I’ve just been LOL at AA Gill on radionz. He will be repeated on Tuesday after the 9pm news when Bryan Crump is on.. Very droll, dry etc. I feel that he is what Oscar Wilde must have been like. He is a food critic, tv critic etc.
   • Carol 8.1

     19 June 2011 at 10:07 pm

     Yes, I heard some of that on the car radio, and some bits of the Helen Clark interview a little later. I must listen to the full Clark interview someime.
9. jackal 9

   19 June 2011 at 5:53 pm

   Bursting the Housing Bubble

   The Sunday Star Times had an article by Gregg Ninness with the header “House buyers in the box seat,” in today’s addition. Ninness cherry picked some “evidence” to support his claims that “there has never been a better time to buy a house.” However the only figures he provides are those showing that the median house price fell in some areas between April and May, totally ignoring many other factors that make his egregious lead in to the story completely ridiculous!
10. Jim Nald 10

    19 June 2011 at 10:29 pm

    A special flight for John Key .. and how many security, etc are in his entourage?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5164763/John-Key-arrives-in-Australia

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS