Open Mike 21/03/2018

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, March 21st, 2018 - 214 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 Policy).

Step up to the mike …

214 comments on “Open Mike 21/03/2018”

  1. Sacha 1

    RNZ’s Todd Niall takes Auckland Council to task for not handling official information requests properly: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/352910/lgoima-when-old-news-grows-ripe

    Now if only a local activist was aiming at the right target ..

  2. Pete 2

    According to Hosking in his column we’re travelling down an introspective, small-minded, closed shop road in stopping foreigners buying land here.

    Apparently selling foreign land to rich Americans who want to escape their not introspective, small-minded, closed shop country will be great for us.

    Don’t panic Mike , we’ve got you and the riches from that enhance our lives more than Julian Robertson, Peter Thiel, Barak Obama or a thousand American billionaires could ever do.

    • savenz 2.1

      It also keep luxury house prices up, they might fall or sell less like hot cakes if the foreign sales are stopped.

      As for US, I think soon it will be billionaires from Asian and Middle East vying for our bolt holes to join the American’s and keep the McMansions getting bigger and our best builders employed for years, in a building shortage.

      Personally don’t mind a few foreign sales but clearly many in the world have WAY too much money to spend and countries to influence, and like UK, it just gets out of control.

      That has now happened to NZ and places like Queenstown for example are being built for people who don’t live there and no accomodation for people who do.

      Not exactly sustainable.

      It has to stop and now.

  3. Sanctuary 3

    Listening to that ridiculous stuffed shirt Grant Robertson dissemble and divert on RNZ over the issue of Air New Zealand’s abandonment of the provinces made my blood boil this morning. For Christ’s sake man, this should be a BREAD AND BUTTER issue for a left wing politician.

    Robertson clearly has no interest in holding the Air NZ board to account. From that, i doubt he has any real intentions beyond what is in the coalition deal of helping Shane Jones and NZ First in their plan for regional renewal.

    Robertson might as well fuck off to the National party for all the difference he plans to make as finance minister.

    Robertson must go.

    • Ad 3.1

      Any government strategy about government businesses would be good.

      Any time you’re ready Grant.

    • weka 3.2

      Sorry to restate the obvious but Roberston isn’t a left wing politician. It’s the same old dilemma for Labour (and Labour members and Labour voters). What can they do?

      • Sacha 3.2.1

        ‘broad church’ etc

        • weka 3.2.1.1

          In which case we should definitely stop calling Labour a left wing party (I don’t, to me they are centre-left neoliberals).

          • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1.1.1

            Labour are centre-right.

            • JohnSelway 3.2.1.1.1.1

              Draco – this has already been pointed out to you. The political compass is not evidence of anything.

              It is the same as using an anonymous Stuff survey. There is no way to no who did it and how they answered. Basing anything on that is stupid and you should feel stupid

              • Draco T Bastard

                The political compass is not evidence of anything.

                The political compass gives a indication of relative positioning between parties from a reasonably stable view point.

                There is no way to no who did it and how they answered.

                And that’s calling up the typical authoritarian fallacy.

                They do it based upon the political parties policies.

                Basing anything on that is stupid and you should feel stupid

                Actually, that would be you as you continue to fail to address your ignorance – as all RWNJs do.

                • JohnSelway

                  Draco – you can’t use an anonymous survey (because that is essentially what it is – an anonymous survey) which doesn’t state it’s methodology or who completed it, what they know about party policy or how they answered the question.

                  The overwhelming majority of political scientists, commentators and anyone else who puts their name to anything agree Labour is centre-left so how you can argue against that with an anonymous website which doesn’t disclose the methodology behind its results is an extremely poor argument indeed.
                  It’s like using a Stuff poll which asks “Is the government heading in the right direction” as evidence the government is/isn’t heading in the right direction.

                  And knock it off with the RW bullshit. I have told you several times I am not RW, never have been and can’t see any reason why I would. Pointing out your poor argument does not make one a RWinger

                  • Draco T Bastard

                    which doesn’t state it’s methodology or who completed it, what they know about party policy or how they answered the question.

                    Except that they do state their methodology and who completes it isn’t important. The latter is just an Appeal to Authority which is a logical fallacy.

                    The overwhelming majority of political scientists, commentators and anyone else who puts their name to anything agree Labour is centre-left so how you can argue against that with an anonymous website which doesn’t disclose the methodology behind its results is an extremely poor argument indeed.

                    [Citation Needed]

                    But that rings of another logical fallacy: Bandwagon

                    And knock it off with the RW bullshit. I have told you several times I am not RW, never have been and can’t see any reason why I would. Pointing out your poor argument does not make one a RWinger

                    Then I suggest you stop acting like one.

                    • JohnSelway

                      “Except that they do state their methodology”
                      Not really no – they doesn’t really give us anymore information at all as to how they got the result they did.

                      And it isn’t an appeal to authority – it’s the exact opposite because I’m not appealing to any authority – I’m actually asking you where the Political Compass gets the authority to make the claims they are.

                      Do you really need a citation as to who thinks Labour is centre-left? Given is the leading paradigm I wouldn’t have thought it needed a citation. But fine – I can’t provide you with a list.

                      I’m not acting like a right-winger – I’m explaining to you why this Political Compass as evidence of Labour being centre-right is extremely poor scholarship for reason listed. Calling you out on that isn’t being right-wing

            • weka 3.2.1.1.1.2

              “Labour are centre-right.”

              Relative to what? If we’re talking the Overton Window, then yes Robertson would be too far to the right of traditional left wingness. But in NZ today, on our own spectrum, centre left neoliberalism is a useful way to understand where we are at.

              Btw, the political compass you linked to, how come the Greens have been moved to the right?

              • JohnSelway

                “Btw, the political compass you linked to, how come the Greens have been moved to the right?”

                because this political compass is flawed as evidence and is evidence for nothing

              • Draco T Bastard

                Btw, the political compass you linked to, how come the Greens have been moved to the right?

                Because their policies have moved to the right. And they actually have done to some degree as they’ve become more ‘business friendly’ over the last few years.

                • weka

                  Which policies?

                  Their pre-election welfare policy put them well to the left.

                  • Draco T Bastard

                    Generally statements and policies for supporting business.

                    • weka

                      I’ll take that to be some vague impression that the GP have moved right, but it’s not actual evidence of such.

                      The Greens building relationships with business has easily been counter balanced by them also building relationships with Māori and the underclasses. It’s also a way of moving business leftwards.

                      This is why the Greens don’t readily fit into classic L/R framing, but I’m not seeing anything obvious about their policies that account for them having been moved right on that particular compass.

                      The main one might be the BRR, but that appears to have been a compromise in order to work with Labour rather than an ideological or policy shift. Am open to some actual examples that show different.

        • cleangreen 3.2.1.2

          Yes labour are a disappointment so far, but a negative poll may spur their lazy ways to actually get up and do the right thing they promised us all before the election or they may need to “waka jump”.

      • Pat 3.2.2

        Robertson is a product of his time…he studied politics in the mid nineties and then worked for Foreign Affairs and Trade upon graduation….the height of the neolib era ….Overton window and all that.

        • weka 3.2.2.1

          Yep. And this isn’t just Labour’s issue, it’s an issue for the whole left.

          • Incognito 3.2.2.1.1

            But Labour is the only party in Parliament that is leaning left!?

            • Sacha 3.2.2.1.1.1

              You seriously believe the Greens are not?

              • Incognito

                The operative word is in italics 😉

                • weka

                  as in the Greens are already left.

                  Labour leaning left but hanging onto the centrist Overton windowsill for all their worth. Leaning left, but not actually moving left.

                  • Incognito

                    Yep as far as Labour goes.

                    I don’t think the Greens really fit or suit the label “left” for the same reason I have difficulties labelling myself “left”. But this is just my personal pedantry 😉

                    • weka

                      True. I think calling them left in this kind of conversation is useful but then it does cause a bit of confusion when we have the neither left nor right conversations.

                      Also, they’re not traditional left, which is what many people are still expecting Labour to be. Which begs the question of what the left does now given neither Labour nor the Greens are in that role.

                    • adam

                      To answer your question weka.

                      Anyone who is a socialist, does not vote.

                      Because there is no socialists to vote for. Especially party vote, the greens have made it abundantly clear they are not socialist. And the labour party threw out any pretence to social democracy in the 1980’s, and have never looked like taking it up again.

                    • weka

                      I’m broadly socialist and I vote. I party vote Green because I can see that if they have more power, they will take us in the direction of socialism. That’s what that whole movement wanted and had it been supported more by socialists and left wingers in the past 30 years we might be actually getting somewhere by now. Instead, the only way the Greens have been able to gain ground was by playing the long game and finding the balance point between influencing the mainstream and becoming more mainstream in order to do so.

                      Not voting doesn’t answer my question, it just cedes the power and the discussion to the Robertsons of the world.

                    • David Mac

                      I don’t think Labour/Greens will ever be left enough for many of the regular commenters at The Standard. They would need to abandon middle NZ to do so and struggle to secure 5% of the vote.

                      They have the votes of the regulars here in the bag. Growing their share of the votes requires being seen to move right, not left.

                      The Green’s greatest supporter/critics eg: The Chairman, every day he was taking a swipe at their lack of sliding left. It may well be with reluctance but I do feel that those that share his sentiment would never vote Nat/ACT.

                    • McFlock

                      @David Mac

                      I agree that there are those here for whom nothing short of revolution would be regarded as “right wing neoliberalism”, but there are also no shortage of tories who like to encourage those divisions with concern-trolling about whether party A or person B is “left wing enough”.

                      As for moving right to get votes, I’m not so sure. Arguing that there’s a pool of voters betwixt lab and nat is the same trap as others who attribute votes to policy or simple photogenic leadership.

                      People vote for complex reasons, and pivoting a party to chase that one thing which will work kind of leaves your dick on the anvil if that one thing turns out to have been a pipe dream.

                    • David Mac

                      Hi McFlock, They appear to be aiming for concerns that sit where the left/right Venn diagram overlaps.

                      The environment, kids’ well-being and education etc.

                      I think it’s a strategy that makes sense if they don’t want to swap chairs again come 2020.

                      Leaves us wondering ‘So are they doing this to win the next election or because it’s whats best for NZ?’

                    • Bill

                      Anyone who is a socialist, does not vote.

                      Putting aside “purity”, still not strictly true. I believe the World Socialist Party (affiliated with the SPGB) has an electoral presence in NZ. 😉

                      They stand candidates, have no platform, and would not enter parliament.

                      The idea is that a vote for such a candidate is a vote for oneself.

                      I guess there was a time when the thought was that a critical mass could be achieved and representative parliamentary democracy side-lined.

                    • McFlock

                      At the risk of sounding like a damned hippy, the analogy of the Venn diagram constrains the discussion into the right/left/intersect argument you’re making, rather than simply illustrating it.

                      For example, the Greens are doing their thing, following through on their commitments as much as they can. Labour are doing their thing, following through on their commitments as much as they can. Actually having honest politicians will increase the pool of voters on the leftish side, not just suck some voters from the nat side. Having tories look like losers will disincentivise some tories from voting, lowering their pool of voters. So labgrn might increase their proportion of votes without ever approaching the middle ground with the tories.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.3

      Robertson might as well fuck off to the National party for all the difference he plans to make as finance minister.

      That’s been obvious for awhile. He’s a solid neo-liberal following the same failed policies that has always destroyed economies and societies.

      • David Mac 3.3.1

        Like most of us, his contribution stands testament to the life he has led. Grant has never been unplugged from the Mother Ship. I think he’d struggle to run a successful lemonade stall at the bottom of his drive.

        • Sumsuch 3.3.1.1

          stand

        • tracey 3.3.1.2

          Similar to English. He was never really a “farmer” (grew up on one but then I have a pool but am not thereby an olympic swimmer) but was a career bureaucrat and then politician but nary a peep from Nats about his lack of real world experience. Then there is the woodwork teacher turned politician who fucked over the people of Christchurch and then EQC and then giving Fletchers immunity from any poor repair work.

    • McFlock 3.4

      Aren’t there restrictions on the directions he can give the board because the govt isn’t sole shareholder? It has to run for profit unless we renationalise.

  4. JohnSelway 4

    As much as I like Obama I hate seeing the NZ media fawn over the trip. It is embarrassing

  5. Reality 5

    The James Shaw Show of giving National the Greens’ questions has now reached Talkback Land and not in a complimentary way. Greens’ members not happy.

    • NewsFlash 5.1

      For a party that believes in democratic process, they FAILED miserably here just to gain a little notoriety, just hope they don’t go the same way the Aus Greens have, supporting conservative agendas, their polling is already fairly low.

      • weka 5.1.1

        How did they fail in democratic process here?

        • NewsFlash 5.1.1.1

          Did Shaw ASK you if you thought it was a good idea to gift National their questions, my take is that it’s members only heard about this through the media, the strong Green supporters here defended the hell out of it, even though the reality is it is likely to see supporters drift away from an already diminishing base.

          I hoped to see the Greens be very successful at promoting the core issues they stand for and put forward policies and ideas that all Kiwis can be proud of, instead they’ve poked a lot of supporters in the eye with a blunt stick to gain a few NEWs headlines.

          For me, James Shaw has made some serious mistakes trying to be more relevant, some of the statements he has made in the past just don’t really support the true Values of the Green movement.

          • weka 5.1.1.1.1

            1. Shaw didn’t ask each individual member because that is not how the GP works democratically. They have tried and true processes that balance democracy with functionality. The caucus is empowered to make decisions without having to go to the membership each time. Think that through. The amount of work of running a democratic process with the membership on every decision, or even just this one, would be massive.

            2. The GP didn’t give their questions to National, they gave them to the Opposition. Think about that.

            3. Shaw didn’t do this, the Green Party did. But he fronted it and the rationales I have heard from him fit very well with the principles of the GP. That’s the whole point (which is being missed by many people). If you think that is wrong, please point to the specific values that have been undermined here and explain how they’ve been undermined.

            • NewsFlash 5.1.1.1.1.1

              Weka

              So the caucus was well informed and approved about his intentions then?

              OK, the opposition parties comprise of National and ACT, splitting hairs I think, are there any common policies between these two parties and the Greens?

              So you’re still arguing that the Green Party did this but with out informing any of the members of the Green party that this is what they will do.

              Weka, I read all the threads on the topic the other day and TBH, could see the search for a suitable reason to justify it (the announcement), and when one was found you all clapped your hands and said Yeah. I understand that improving democratic process is a good thing in a world where everything is skewed by vested interests, but as pointed out, there are many other things that could have been done to achieve a much better and enduring outcome without alienating members of the party.

              I want the Greens to successful, but they need to recognize that their base is now only 5%, they need smart policies that the general public will support for the right reasons, staunch Green supporters do not like National, either do I, stop pandering to them, the public aren’t as stupid as some may think.

              • weka

                “So the caucus was well informed and approved about his intentions then?”

                I think you really have no idea how the GP works. Shaw didn’t make this decision, the GP did. Which means that the caucus both discussed and made a decision about it.

                “OK, the opposition parties comprise of National and ACT, splitting hairs I think, are there any common policies between these two parties and the Greens”

                You miss the point. The Greens are offering it to the Opposition, because of the principle that the Opposition should be the ones holding the govt to account. That would apply to whoever was in Opposition including Labour.

                “So you’re still arguing that the Green Party did this but with out informing any of the members of the Green party that this is what they will do.”

                I’m not arguing that, it’s simply a fact. That’s how the party works, and it has processes built into to increase democracy without having to run extremely time consuming processes around involving the whole membership each time. Do you have much experience with consensus decision making? Or there other processes the Greens use?

                “there are many other things that could have been done to achieve a much better and enduring outcome without alienating members of the party.”

                Such as? You get that the GP has done some other things too, and has active plans for more in the future right?

                “I want the Greens to successful, but they need to recognize that their base is now only 5%, they need smart policies that the general public will support for the right reasons, staunch Green supporters do not like National, either do I, stop pandering to them, the public aren’t as stupid as some may think.”

                If you can’t see that this isn’t pandering to National, then I can’t help you. The Greens have a culture and a specific mandate based on core principles. They also have a problem with expressing that (and I’m critical of their comms generally and in this specific instance), but that’s also because of the general misunderstandings in the public about who they are and what they do. So I get that for many people, hating on National is core to the politics. That’s just not how it is for the GP, and for very good reasons.

                • NewsFlash

                  Weka

                  I know what question time is like, but everyone seems to think that it’s just the Govt that needs to be held to account, all parties need to be held to account for their actions and statements, opposition parties should be held to the same high standard as the Govt otherwise it’s just a farce.

                  There are a lot of Green supporters who are a little dismayed at the policy, which is where this thread originated.

                  I don’t deny the Greens have a robust democratic process, but it still doesn’t mean the policies are palatable for all their members.

                  I think if you were go back and read ALL the threads on this topic from a few days ago, you might just see the bigger picture that emerged.

                  I’m going to leave at that, I just don’t see the Greens as a movement benefiting from this policy, either from a membership perspective or popularity.

                  • weka

                    I know what question time is like, but everyone seems to think that it’s just the Govt that needs to be held to account, all parties need to be held to account for their actions and statements, opposition parties should be held to the same high standard as the Govt otherwise it’s just a farce.

                    I agree, but how does that apply to QT? Are you saying that the Greens could have used their questions to hold National to account? I don’t think they are allowed to do that. There are other ways to hold the Opposition parties to account though.

                    “There are a lot of Green supporters who are a little dismayed at the policy,”

                    Yes. But that has happened before when they do something that lots of people don’t understand and where the MSM do a poor job of explaining it.

                    “I think if you were go back and read ALL the threads on this topic from a few days ago, you might just see the bigger picture that emerged.”

                    I haven’t read every comment, but I’ve read most of them, and lots on twitter too. So I have a pretty good idea of the range of response, and the range of arguments for and against. I’m still trying to decide whether to write a post on this, but have been researching a lot in the past few days.

                    I’m going to leave at that, I just don’t see the Greens as a movement benefiting from this policy, either from a membership perspective or popularity.

                    I know this still comes as a surprise but the GP operate from principles first. This doesn’t mean they don’t take feedback or notice of dissent, they do. But that alone isn’t a good enough reason to recant on a policy let alone a principle. In this case I expect the party first and foremost to be listening to its active members but also people generally. I hope they take the time to see where the change leads and if people change their minds on it, but I am not supportive of the Greens informing their policies and actions from a ‘we hate National’ position.

                    • Incognito

                      Yes. But that has happened before when they do something that lots of people don’t understand and where the MSM do a poor job of explaining it.

                      I don’t think anybody can ‘delegate’ this to or rely on MSM least of all the Greens.

                      I’m thinking about a Guest Post on this too if only I find the time 🙁

                    • weka

                      true. This is why I suggest that to understand the Greens one needs to listen to them directly. One can still disagree but one is then disagreeing from an informed place.

                      A Guest Post would be welcome! (when the time is right)

                  • tracey

                    I am a Green Party voter and I am not dismayed.

              • tracey

                Ah the threshold chestnut again. Go look at their record in every election and except when Labour was imploding they have always been around the threshold. Therefore being around the threshold is evidence of nothing other than that for nearly 20 years it has been enough to get Greens into parliament.

          • alwyn 5.1.1.1.2

            Why don’t you have a look at Question number 6 on March 1, 2018.
            This is the last question asked by a Green MP. It is absolutely typical of questions asked by Government MPs of any party. It was not specifically chosen to attempt to embarrass the Green Party.
            https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/document/HansS_20180301_052350000/6-question-no-6-statistics

            Read it right through and then think about whether it served any purpose at all.
            If you were Golriz Ghahraman wouldn’t you be totally embarrassed by being required to ask these stupid questions? Wouldn’t you like to be able to refuse to do so?
            Actually I quite admire the way she asked the last supplementary.

            • veutoviper 5.1.1.1.2.1

              alwyn, re our earlier conversations, yesterday I re-found this handy little tool on the Parliament website and posted in a reply to someone else.

              https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/52SCBUDeterminations201711081/8711510daa40c86a56295e2b6e5cbece93abf7da

              In case you haven’t seen this tool, it is the Oral Question Roster for the 52nd Parliament drawn up and approved by the Business Committee last Nov 2017 which sets out by sitting day, the number of primary Oral Questions allocated to each party making up the 12 Questions for the day.

              The actual sequence of the 12 questions often changes but the numbers don’t. I doubt that this will be rejigged in light of the Greens decision as this is in essence an informal decision by the Greens and their arrangement with National is outside (but not contrary to) the current formal procedures and rules of the House.

              Today is Sitting Day 31. This day number is always at the top of the Order Paper for each sitting day – helpful if you lose count as the allocation roster doesn’t state the date of each numbered day.

              Today was to have been the only day this week that the Greens had an allocated question (#12) but this allocation seems to have been given to ACT today – whether by the Greens is not clear …

              • alwyn

                That is certainly a great deal easier than the way I found the questions.

                I think you are wrong about being able to find the day on the list from the day on the order paper though.
                As you say the day on the order paper is 31. The questions for today are however the ones for day 29 on the table you have linked to.
                The questions for day 29 go L,N,A,L,N,N,L,N …….(L=Labour etc) The Greens were not going to have a question.
                If you look at the list of questions for today you will see that they are in that same order as day 29. ACT has got question 3.
                https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/order-paper-questions/list-of-oral-questions/oral-questions-21-march-2018/
                I hope what I am saying is clear enough to follow.

                Thus the day number on the table you provide is only the days on which there is a Question Time. The difference between 29 and 31 caters, of course, for the fact that there was no Question Time on the first 2 days of the term. I guess keeping track would be like using one of those old desk diaries where you tear off and throw away the sheet for each day.
                It would be embarrassing if a party got out of step with the right day wouldn’t it?

                • veutoviper

                  You’re right – good spotting. Your explanation makes sense and I should have spotted it.

                  The value of peer review, yet again. Thanks. Brain has had a bit of a workout this week. Will correct my post of last night on this for the record.

                  So in fact the Greens were allocated Q10 today and this was used by Nick Smith,Nat. Bit of a hot one today, that one! *

                  Did you go through Hansard to find those four questions? Do you ever use the Watch On Demand section? It was upgraded over the election break and IMHO is the quickest place to find who has asked questions, spoken on Bills etc as it now has a good filter system whereby you can filter by individual MP, subject, date period, Questions, Bill Debates etc
                  https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parliament/ondemand

                  For example, if you select Oral questions (rather than All) and then click on the MP box, the drop down box lists them by name, you select who you want, and then press the apply filters box and it will bring up all the questions (with videos) that MP has asked or been involved in with the latest first. Have only had one missed to date so not quite 100%.

                  Videos are now up very promptly – usually up in about 15 – 20 mins except after about 5pm when they slow, but then quicker again in the evening.

                  Today was a General Debate day and I have now located a Roster for the General Debates as well.
                  https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/52SCBUDeterminations201711081/c6b688140efe9f486c64112523d39c2f4b40bf12

                  By my reckoning, today’s roster was No. 7 – would welcome you checking this for me. Based mine on the sequence of the videos using the Watch On Demand link above.

                  Cheers – just shows that people of different pol leanings can work well together when we have other shared interests and respect one another’s differences!

                  * From the videos on On Demand, I now see that Q10 was so hot that Smith came back later and made a Personal Explanation.

                  • alwyn

                    I would agree that it is Roster number7.
                    At least it has Seymour at position 7 of the 12 which is right. He only gets 3 turns in the 30 week cycle and the others are at 11 (in week 17) and 4 (in week 24).
                    That certainly makes him a pretty easy marker.

                    “Did you go through Hansard to find those four questions”.
                    I just looked at each day of the last 2 weeks of the questions that were going to be asked. The reference is in my comment above minus the specific date (here 21 March).
                    I was only looking for some samples and I wasn’t actually interested in the replies or the supplementary questions so it is only a single page per day. I just went until I had 4 from 2 weeks so it seemed a fair sample. It was only later that I bothered to look at the full debate for the last, Census, one.
                    Actually, while trying to edit it to be more readable I left in an erroneous statement. I said after the bit about the order that the Greens weren’t getting a question. They of course got Q10 as you say.. I left that comment in by accident after changing around chunks of the material.

                    Poor old Nick. “a” instead of “other”. Good on the Minister for spotting the chance and taking advantage of it. It was a great response. Pity Kelvin Davis isn’t as quick.

                    I shall have to have a look at some of the things you have suggested. I am just old fashioned and have to date stuck happily to the transcripts.

                    “people of different pol leanings”
                    My political leanings are generally right in the centre. I do not think that a Government should last more than 3 terms though, as long as there is someone else prepared to take over. Unfortunately I don’t think Labour were in that position last election which annoyed me greatly. Haven’t changed my mind about it either.
                    Since 1981 I have voted 7 times National, 5 times Labour and once did not vote. Pretty close to a swinging voter. Could have easily been 6,6,1 if Labour hadn’t, at least in my view, wasted 9 years of opposition.

          • veutoviper 5.1.1.1.3

            Newsflash

            I note that alwyn has given you the link to Hansard for the transcript of Question 6 on 1 March 2018 – but not the link to the video.

            Here is the link to the video as this gives a much better feel for the demeanour of both Golriz Ghahraman and James Shaw in asking and answering both the primary question and the string of supplementary questions on the Census – and the attitude and reaction of the National Party MPs.

            https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parliament/ondemand?itemId=198774

            Do you see any embarrassment on the part of Golriz Ghahraman in asking the primary questions and her first supplementary questions?

            I don’t. Nor do I see any embarrassment on Shaw’s part in answering them – initially.

            IMO both seem quite eager and to be enjoying themselves. Golriz laughs at about supplementary question 2 and 3, and uses eye and facial expressions to emphasize parts of her questions. She is obviously a little taken aback that she has to wait for Brownlee to ask a question and also raise a Point of Order before she asks her final supplementary which she prefaces with “This is a good one.”

            Shaw’s initial enthusiasm dwindles as the barracking from the National Party MPs increases with each question and answer, and he appears quite feed up at the end. Ghahraman’s laughter in the final moments could also be embarrassment.

            I can understand that Shaw could well feel p. off that he was being landed with criticism of the Census system and processes set up under the previous National Govt well before he became Minister – and the problems with the process being experienced at the time. This would have been particularly galling coming from the very same National MPs that were previously involved in the setting up of the revised Census procedures etc.

            BUT did anyone else make Shaw as Minister of Statistics and Ghahraman choose to use the Green Party Parliamentary Oral Question allocation to attempt to clarify the situation on the Census processes ?
            No. That was entirely their decision.

            And now they have decided to give some of their primary Oral questions to these very same people – ????

    • Sumsuch 5.2

      It impressed me.

  6. JohnSelway 6

    Here’s a message to the community I just wanted to share….

    I’m really enjoying The Standard and engaging with everyone here. While we all have differences in opinion I am enjoying having some robust discussions and interesting conversations with everyone. While I have butted heads with some of the more… colourful individuals (Draco can never back down even when wrong; CV has gone completely round the bend and the less said about LPrent the better) I have also enjoyed these back and forths.
    McFlock, Carolyn_nth, Tracey, Weka and Pyscho Milt – you guys are some of my favourite people to talk with and enjoy your contributions.

    Keep up the good work!

    JS out…

    • Anne 6.1

      In due course I think you will change your mind about Draco and lprent. Their individual styles take a bit of getting used to, but they both have brilliant brains even if one doesn’t always agree with them.

      Their barks are worse than their bites.

      • JohnSelway 6.1.1

        Draco just comes out with some pretty easily disproven shit at times and LPrent is just very much in love with himself (yes I know he is the site owner – I’m just calling it like I see it). Also when he thinks he is being clever by insulting people it comes across very poorly.

        I don’t think either of them are dumb however and don’t want nor expect them – or anyone for that matter – to change. It all makes up the rich tapestry of life….

        • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1

          Draco just comes out with some pretty easily disproven shit at times

          No I don’t else you would have been able to disprove it.

          • JohnSelway 6.1.1.1.1

            Just yesterday you claimed the Great Britain wasn’t a trading nation when in fact they were the largest trading nation of their time.

            That one was pretty easy to disprove.

            • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1.1.1

              But they weren’t always and their trade was more theft than trade.

              Perhaps those centuries of theft is what makes people think that trade makes people wealthy.

              • JohnSelway

                Great Britain became great through trade – the whole fucking American Revolution started because of Britain’s trading practices and they owned well over half the worlds trade at one point.

                • DoublePlusGood

                  No, they owned well over half the world’s theft at one point. They were wealthy because of stealing resources, not because they were trading fairly for their resources.

                • Andrew Murray

                  John where have you come from and would you consider going back there…you don’t appear to be bringing much of any worth to this site

                • Draco T Bastard

                  Great Britain became great through trade

                  No, they became ‘great’ because they built up their local manufacturing and their war machine so that they could conquer other territories and steal the resources of those conquered territories.

                  I’m saying that we should do the first bit and build up our manufacturing capabilities, knowledge and skills so that we can support ourselves from our own resources rather than being dependent upon trade which actually leaves us poorer.

                  • JohnSelway

                    And to build the war machine they needed….trade! with the baltic states to get the wood needed for their ships.

                    This isn’t hard – the owned nearly every trade route in the world and traded extensively. It isn’t even disputed.

                    Your statement at the very beginning said they didn’t need trade when in fact they were the biggest trading nation the world have even seen and one British company, on it’s own, controlled half the worlds trade. These are facts.

                    More info:
                    http://www.the-map-as-history.com/demos/tome05/Map-of-the-British-Empire-european-colonization.php

                    • NewsFlash

                      John, you bring a new view point to this site and it is refreshing, so much of the commenting here is SO predictable.

                  • JohnSelway

                    But you know what – fuck it.

                    If you want to believe Great Britain wasn’t a trading nation (the biggest trading nation of its time) despite everything to the contrary then fine. You’ll note I have provided about 5 – 6 different citations that disagree with your premise while you have provided none – just your opinion.

                    So despite owning over the half the worlds, opening trading posts all over the world, trading extensively with China, the baltics, the West indies, India and the Orient in general you still hold the position that they did it all themselves without the need for trade.

                    I stand by my original post – you can’t admit when you got something just plain wrong.

                    Good day sir

                    • alwyn

                      You don’t understand John.
                      You are arguing from just a small, say one thousand years of history. To disprove DTB’s credo you have to prove that Britain was the leading trading nation at all times and with all other countries.
                      They weren’t between 1121 and 1123 AD with Inner Mongolia.
                      Therefore you are totally wrong and you should bow down before the superior knowledge of DTB.
                      Know your place villein and don’t question the wisdom of your Lord, Baron Draco of Bastard.

                    • ropata

                      Initially the British Empire grew from mercantilism within its borders but from the Industrial Revolution onwards “British control of the oceans proved optimal in creating a liberal free-trade global economy, and helped Britain gain the lion’s share of the world’s carrying trade and financial support services.”

                      The Poms basically invented international trade…

                    • SpaceMonkey

                      @Ropata “The Poms basically invented international trade”.

                      Huh? What was the Silk Road then? Pretty sure that could be defined as international trade.

                    • Macro

                      Solomon and the Queen of Sheba had a good thing going on –
                      http://bibleandarchaeology.blogspot.co.nz/2011/09/sheba-connected-to-israel.html

                • mikesh

                  I thought the American revolution started because the colonists resented the tax that they had to pay.

      • Sumsuch 6.1.2

        As long as I don’t cower I’m for them.

  7. Colonial Viper 7

    Winter is coming.

  8. Colonial Viper 8

    Closing the Gaps was longer than 10 years ago.

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

  9. savenz 9

    Fonterra CEO Theo Spierings resigns

    Thanks (sarcasm) for screwing up Fonterra, cumulating a loss of $348 million.

    Maybe next time they cap the salary at 1 million instead of 8 million plus – Fonterra might actually get someone who is less greedy and more interested in the company than screwing it up. Of course they are also giving him a consultancy role so he can keeping milking it…

    Maybe think about a Kiwi at the helm too as we keep hearing how important Fonterra is for NZ and therefore needs TPPA, more environmental degradation and the country has to suck it up so they can post loses and pay execs 8 million.

    Funny Fonterra is always a Kiwi company when it suits them, but an international one, when it comes to management and their decisions and salaries.

    At least if they bother to appoint a Kiwi at the helm, they have to live with their decisions and hopefully have a more long term approach, than make cash and deliver losses… for the 8 million salary and then off to do it again, no doubt somewhere else in the world.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money/2018/03/ceo-of-fonterra-theo-spierings-resigns.html

    • ropata 9.1

      Fucking hell. The dairy industry has destroyed NZ’s rivers and sold off half of our farmland to foreign powers, for this.

      Dairy farming is toxic, unsustainable, and has way too much political clout for no net benefit to NZ

      • savenz 9.1.1

        Dairy farming does not have to be toxic! Clearly getting someone in from Holland which intensively farms animals in barns and specialises in mergers was never a good fit with NZ farming practises. Has not worked out financially either.

        Whose bright idea was it to hire him in the first place?

      • rightly or wrongly 9.1.2

        No net benefit? Tell that to the tens of thousands of farmers, farm staff, ancillary industries, and contractual staff who derive an income from the dairy industry.

        Not to mention billions into the government’s coffers from the associated income and gst tax.

        Local councils love rates income from dairy farms.

        You can grizzle about farming and pollution but net benefit….hole in your head with that comment.

  10. savenz 10

    Yep, clearly Fonterra team are financial and overseas planning wizards.. (sarcasm)

    “But in its interim results on Wednesday, Fonterra said net normalised profit after tax had fallen 36 per cent from its 2017 result, to $248 million.

    While revenue was up 6 per cent, the company’s earnings before interest and taxes were down 25 per cent from 2017.

    With the one-off payments to Danone, over the botulism contamination scare, and the Beingmate write-off factored in, the cooperative made a loss of $348m, a 183 per cent drop in net profit after tax from the 2017 interim result.”

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money/2018/03/fonterra-raises-milk-prices.html

  11. Ad 11

    With CEO Theo Spierings resigned, I sure hope Fonterra use this as an opportunity to get their shit together, stop losing money, and emphasise the Value over their Volume and Velocity drivers.

    • adam 11.1

      Pure comedy gold Ad, pure.

      Like cleaner waterways, it’s all just about the PR.

      • Ad 11.1.1

        I knew you would get the shit reference.

        Can anyone tell me where the big election push for cleaner waterways went, now that they are in power?

        Currently, other than through an oblique regulatory lens enabled through a change of legislation, I don’t see any government strategy for engaging with the dairy industry as a whole, let alone Fonterra as our largest locally-owned business.

        • adam 11.1.1.1

          Do a post, you know you’ll get a smart ass response from me at least. 🙂

        • tracey 11.1.1.2

          Yup. I bet if the Govt just implemented something we would suddenly hear the Rightcsquealing “what? No consultation? No Review? No Working group

  12. savenz 12

    Fonterra knew Beingmate sales were declining when they bought them due to on line sales increasing at a rapid pace. They overpaid because it was tipped they were buying them and also they were over valued in the first place, because on line sales were taking the business.

    Mistake after mistake.

    Fonterra management are dinosaurs and out of touch with modern business.

    Surely they could work out, that in a country of billions it is easier to order on line than go through traffic and have to travel in an enormous country to a few retail stores, to get your milk powder?

    Surely????

    When the evidence was before their eyes at the time in China, retail declining, on line sales increasing?

    • Johnr 12.1

      One would expect the chairman to resign also given that the CEO is presumably carrying out the boards wishes. The board and upper management need an extensive clean out.

      Am I qualified to comment, yep, got family who work for them.

      • savenz 12.1.1

        If they lower the salaries under 1 million with benefits for CEO under $500k for anyone else and set the board salary at NZ levels, hopefully clean out of the worst Greedies and certainly the board and upper management set the strategy and make the bad decisions so heads should roll.

        The reality is that like in the famous add for pineapple lumps the world sees many Kiwis as yokels in business, with good reason and our ability to attract B and C grade overseas executives while thinking we have hit the jackpot seems to have become the new norm.

        Fonterra were probably fed fake facts about Bestmate from the Chinese or someone got a backhander to make such a bad error in the first place and over pay. Unless it is just out and out stupidity and laziness?

        Similar to treasury apparently blaming a 25% error on their child poverty on the IT guy.

        Time also to actually improve the Kiwi business with Kiwi residents who actually understand the culture here and work for NZ and company interests.

        Kiwi’s used to be renewed for their ideas and quality not the pen pushing lazies that expect the government to wipe their asses with policy friendly laissez-faire deregulation for short term profits and have an expensive board of ‘names’ to show they are part of the greedy club and have the appropriate nepotism and networking in place.

        It’s kinda the opposite of what to expect from a functioning rural co operative in this country.

  13. savenz 13

    Now even the holiday makers feel the need for a side line, to import drugs into NZ.

    Canadian jailed for smuggling $8m meth into New Zealand

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/03/canadian-jailed-for-smuggling-8m-meth-into-new-zealand.html

  14. adam 14

    Gotta love this day and age – In the USA they get to elect the aristocracy, and what charmers they are.

    https://www.icij.org/investigations/paradise-papers/paradise-papers-help-reveal-jb-pritzkers-offshore-connections/

  15. adam 15

    Ah factory life, still utter rubbish. Big tanks to Meena for her story. Interesting how employers are getting around equal pay laws – the same in NZ?

    https://libcom.org/blog/series-interviews-working-class-women-west-london-part-4-19032018

  16. Colonial Viper 16

    Armed school resource officer stops Maryland High School Shooting

    A highly trained sherriffs deputy and school resource officer interrupts and stops a high school shooting.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-20/armed-resource-officer-stops-maryland-high-school-gunman

    • JohnSelway 16.1

      How did you turn from a left winger to a right winger?

      Genuine question

      • Colonial Viper 16.1.1

        Hi John, given the incorrect assumptions embedded in your question, I can’t provide you with any answer to it.

        • JohnSelway 16.1.1.1

          Well, you don’t seem to support the left and seem to get your information from sources like foxnews as well as supporting a right wing US political candidate.

          I’m sorry if I have misinterpreted you – I am asking for genuine reasons and not to offend

          • Ad 16.1.1.1.1

            John, CV works pretty hard at sustaining nuanced and well researched positions.

            You will find plenty on here who don’t change their minds, are spectacularly narrow-minded, and spend most of their times in tiresome purity contests with each about how ultra-left and ultra-good they are.

            CV is not one of those.

          • Colonial Viper 16.1.1.1.2

            What “Left” is there to support? The Greens? Labour?

            Socialism (or perhaps Communism) as a political economic model?

            Post-modern identity politics or perhaps a radical social liberalism which promotes the inversion/destruction of traditional social boundaries and social structures?

            Or the Clinton Left which seems to believe that escalating tensions with Russia and proclaiming the sanctity of the FBI/CIA/New York Times as guardians of freedom and democracy is now “Left”?

            Or maybe the environmental left which has spent the last week proclaiming that Climate Change is bringing on a global catastrophe of civilisation ending proportions – but the furthest we can possibly go is (an ineffective) ban on oil exploration, but not a ban on actual fossil fuel importation?

            Or perhaps the Left which is breathless at the prospects of Hillary and Obama visiting NZ along with their congratulations that NZ Labour carried on with the implementation of the TPP that they championed while in office?

            • JohnSelway 16.1.1.1.2.1

              I’m not sure which left. I’m left in that I oppose right wing/social conservatism. Not having a party to always support doesn’t mean I don’t strife against it the right.

              Does this mean you have given up on the left as being able to get their shit together rather than “joining the right” as it were?

              • Colonial Viper

                I decided that a degree of social conservatism and also long standing cultural values have an important place in the every day running of society that too many people have taken for granted.

                Arabs, Asians, Indians, Russians, Chinese, Persians, etc. place far, far more value on their own cultures and traditions than Anglo-Saxons do on theirs.

                I also decided that both elements on the Left and the Right were far too busy trying to invert morality and present crappy BS as virtuous goods.

                The left can’t get its shit together because with the exception of just a few, it doesn’t understand what fitness for the current age is, and it doesn’t understand that because it doesn’t understand the broader operating environment of the current age.

                • JohnSelway

                  Ok – interesting.

                  I genuinely wanted to know your position without getting into a shitfight about Russia/trump/Putin so I think that answers it

                  Now…. back to the shit fights 😉

                • RedLogix

                  And to tack a footnote on that sentiment CV, I’m most interested in building trust across the whole range of people and communities in our society. Not just within New Zealand, but globally.

                  I understand this is a forbidding goal, but I’d sooner be moving towards a sense of human unity than away from it.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    Very forboding especially when some people in some cultures have no concept of or buy in to this kind of openness, and indeed would take the degrees of freedom presented to them in such an open system to throw a spanner in the works for their own short term gain.

                    As a concrete example, Chinese nationals obtaining NZ citizenship for their elderly parents on family grounds then dumping them here for the Crown to pay for their care and healthcare as they themselves head back to do business overseas is only one example.

                    • RedLogix

                      And the only answer to that is exactly as you outlined above; we need to value our own cultural values more, and be willing to defend them when we see them betrayed like that.

                      But of course every modest attempt to do so gets screamed down by someone frantically waving the ‘racist’ card. Depressing.

                      Unity isn’t about some beige, insipid ‘tolerance’; it’s about understanding who you are, what is important to you, and engaging the world constructively on that basis.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      If we want something recognisable left to pass on to our kids and grandkids, we better get the idea real quick.

                  • tracey

                    Must be worth some purity points RL.

                    If only people saw and did the things you and CV and Ad think they should do what a wonderful world it would be.

                • Arabs, Asians, Indians, Russians, Chinese, Persians, etc. place far, far more value on their own cultures and traditions than Anglo-Saxons do on theirs.

                  I also decided that both elements on the Left and the Right were far too busy trying to invert morality and present crappy BS as virtuous goods.

                  Or to put it more simply, you became an authoritarian nationalist. Thank you though, that explains the right-wing opinions and the support for Trump and Putin nicely.

                  [RL: 12 month ban for starting a flame war and wasting moderators time.]

                  [this moderation is being reviewed]

                  • Colonial Viper

                    I can’t help your delusional interpretations and poor reading comprehension.

                    [Read the first and second paragraphs of the Policy. I’m done with trying to explain this to a commenter who now has a 2 year history of causing multiple and serious problems on this site. I spent a lot of effort in the last week dampening down flame wars. Given how much moderation work you have taken up in recent years I am now done with spending any more time on you when, in returning from the past few short bans, you just revert back to the same behaviour and on and on it goes. I see no point in letting this escalate and cause problems in the commentariat. 12 month ban. – weka]

                    • Sacha

                      Thank you, Weka.

                    • One Two []

                      Sacha…Again…

                      Expressing your appreciation at the demise of another commentator…is weak and purile…

                      Perhaps you believe you’re a good person adding value in this life…

                      However with expressions such as that…in likelihood you’re calling out for a response on some level…

                      And I’m not referring to my comment..

                      Raise the bar…

                    • Sacha

                      Interesting what you choose to see. I am happy that a moderator has acted decisively before yet another post deteriorates into unreadability.

                  • bwaghorn

                    fuck that sucks , pm is one of the best here

                • tracey

                  ” I also decided that both elements on the Left and the Right were far too busy trying to invert morality and present crappy BS as virtuous goods. ”

                  This is why people get confused by you CV. You adopt the Rights memes designed to silence dissent and preserve the status quo…

                  Virtue signalling and identity politics and PC are just that and when you sneer them out as a substitute for counter argument and then bask in your superiority that you and some select others are the only ones who see the world for what it is and have all the answers you attract challenge. By all means have your worldview and champion it but it is still just an opinion no matter how fervently and firmly you hold onto it

                • mikes

                  “I decided that a degree of social conservatism and also long standing cultural values have an important place in the every day running of society that too many people have taken for granted.”

                  Totally agree with this statement.

                  Also, It still amazes me how many commenters on this and other sites, as well as within the MSM, believe that conservative = right wing. This is not the case. For example the working class are generally conservative and are (traditionally) mostly left wing leaning

                  This is why there is a massive disconnect between say the Green Party and the working class. The working class are too busy working to feed their families and trying to get their kids well educated to worry excessively about less important (to them) things.

                  Yet all they hear from the supposed left is post modernist, intersectionalist, non binary cis gender, virtue signalling, victim claiming, unscientific, fantasyland claptrap. They are looked down upon, discriminated against (in the name of getting rid of discrimination) , told they must feel guilty about their so called mythical white privilege, accept the ‘fact’ that their masculinity is toxic and they’re part of this massive conspiracy called the patriarchy which exists to dis-empower and discriminate against women.

                  Wonder why Trump won.

                  I could rant on and on, but I’ve got a family to feed.

                  • Carolyn_Nth

                    How do you know many Green Party members/voters haven’t come from working class backgrounds?

                    I have certainly come across GP members who are women from working class backgrounds who went to Uni – probably the first in their family.

                    And I have known a few working class women, strong on class politics who are also explicitly feminists – while perhaps being critical of some middle class feminists.

                    There are also quite a few working class LGBTI people.

                    Sarah Smarsh comes from a poor US family – was the first in her family to go to uni, and writes a lot about class, and also feminism.

                    This article by her from last June last year: “Working-class women are too busy for gender theory – but they’re still feminists “.

                    Working-class women might not be fighting for a cause with words, time and money they don’t have, but they possess an unsurpassed wisdom about the way gender works in the world.

                    Take, for example, the concept of intersectionality. The poor white women who raised me don’t know that term, but they readily acknowledge that the dark-skinned women they know face harder battles than they do, in many ways. They know this from working on factory floors and in retail stock rooms alongside women of color who they have watched endure both sexism and racism along with their poverty.

                  • tracey

                    I wonder how many working class are Left voting though. Given the presence of Nat ACT and NZF it seems as though either the percentage in the working class has dropped or they are voting Right.

                    We constantly have a Nat Government because kwis vote conservatively. And while we have some social liberalism Nats last 2 leaders have been Christian and socially conservative

                  • tracey

                    Trump was elected by Americans.

                    Equality can feel like Oppression to those who have benefitted from inequality mikes.

            • Bill 16.1.1.1.2.2

              That mostly reads to me as a fairly reasonable exposition of, not the left, but liberalism.

              That said, I’m not sure I understand what you mean by a socialist or communist political economic model, unless you’re referring to forms of authoritarianism that hi-jacked the terms “socialist” and “communist” for cynical (and somewhat successful) political gain.

              Many disenchanted liberals are going to fall to the left or the right in coming years, where “left” is the non-authoritarian counter to various forms of authoritarianism (including some that will masquerade as being left) that will undoubtedly seek ascendancy.

              Tradition is a tricky one in my mind. Some traditions are valuable and definitely worth defending and/or fighting for. Some have been forgotten or suppressed. Others simply aren’t worth shit, insofar as they run against our best interests and can easily be used to excuse and/or condone some fairly horrific political machinations. (eg – particularly useful in pushing some forms of authoritarianism).

              I’d have liked to have carried on this conversation on the basis of “my reckons” – ie, that you tend to confound the liberalism you’ve become disenchanted with as “left” and so, seeing no space to maneuver, kind of default to the less compassionate side of liberalism.

              Maybe in another space…

              • mikes

                “where “left” is the non-authoritarian…”

                Which planet is your ‘left’ on? Because it seems that the left these days is always authoritarian.

                • Bill

                  “Left” and “authoritarian” are two mutually exclusive concepts.

                  “Liberal” and “authoritarian” aren’t.

                  And liberalism has this dirty habit of claiming to be of the left. Which it can never be in light of the fact it’s synonymous with capitalism – which as economic systems go, is the antithesis of anything “left” (whether in it’s state or command economy setting, it’s liberal market setting, or any point between those poles)

            • Sumsuch 16.1.1.1.2.3

              Or perhaps the Left who aren’t the strong?

      • McFlock 16.1.2

        Got pissed off his revolution failed and nobody noticed.

    • adam 16.2

      How do you see what you posted advance the interest of the labour movement?

      There is no evidence from what you posted that it stopped them before they had actually shot someone. So the reality is a stopping took place. Indeed a school shooting did in fact take place, again.

      Sad attempt at spin man, sad.

      • Colonial Viper 16.2.1

        There is no “labour movement” and even if there were, its not my job to advance its interests and agendas.

        Yes, people were shot. Yes it was a school shooting. But the shooter was interrupted in his crime by an armed school resource officer before he could continue further.

        So the reality is a stopping took place. Indeed a school shooting did in fact take place, again.
        Sad attempt at spin man, sad.

        You have a better idea for how this particular school shooting could have been prevented?

        • adam 16.2.1.1

          Then you have no interest in this site then? If you have no interest in advancing the interests of the labour movement.

          So your comment “Armed school resource officer stops Maryland High School Shooting” is an outright lie then

          Feel free to try another Gosman.

          • Colonial Viper 16.2.1.1.1

            Hi adam, firstly I’d ask you to cease your attempts at putting words in my mouth.

            Secondly, the armed school resource officer successfully stopped the continuation of the shooting and successfully stopped the perp continuing the shooting incident and his shooting.

            I’m sorry that my original comment did not pass your requirements for pedantry.

            • adam 16.2.1.1.1.1

              So you don’t think this site is to improve the interests the labour movement and to question you on that is a pedantry argument. Interesting.

              As for words in your mouth, “Armed school resource officer stops Maryland High School Shooting” just quoted you buddy. If that not what you said, I’m all ears.

              As for a shooting, one happened. So not really a good propaganda piece for you is it.

              • Colonial Viper

                How is it my problem if you don’t understand that “a shooting” can be both a noun and a verb, and can have meanings both in a present tense and a past tense?

                So you don’t think this site is to improve the interests the labour movement and to question you on that is a pedantry argument. Interesting.

                I have said zero about what I believe the purpose of this site is. Again I ask you to stop putting words into my mouth.

                • adam

                  You have to realise your piece, is a piece of crap. People died and you want to claim a victory for violence and stupidity. Can’t put a price on people lives when people want to score political points on it can you. Oh wait, you already did.

                  • McFlock

                    You write as if CV has any shame left.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    Hi adam, every parent of that Maryland school will be sending gifts, cards and gratitutide to the armed school resource officer which stopped the shooter.

                    I can understand that even if you cannot.

                • McFlock

                  the verb would be “Y’all, I’m off a-shooting”.

            • McFlock 16.2.1.1.1.2

              Yay, only two innocent kids and the kid who opened fire got shot, the gun violence problem in the US has been solved!

    • McFlock 16.3

      pistol vs pistol.

      Better odds than pistol vs AR15.

      Maybe teachers should carry AR15s?

    • AB 16.4

      Yep – if society allows a situation where a very disturbed person can easily get a bunch of weapons and wander into a place where unarmed people are confined in classrooms and then shoot them up – then it might on average reduce the volume of carnage if there were well-trained sharpshooters in the school to take out the said disturbed person.

      Probably lots of people killed still, probably a few innocent people taken out by mistake because the sharpshooter thought they had a gun (or maybe they were black and looked kinda suspicious?) when they didn’t have a gun at all. But it is entirely conceivable that the total body count over a long period of time would be less. Will they trial it and find out do you think?

      And you know what? If Americans are still convinced that ease of access to guns is some sort of divinely-conferred right, maybe that’s exactly what they should do? The more the merrier really. I still think it’s nuts, but given that belief system it is possibly quite rational.

      • Colonial Viper 16.4.1

        There’s lots nuts with their approach to this I agree, the question is as you pointed out what is rational given an irrational environment.

        • SpaceMonkey 16.4.1.1

          Rationality in an irrational environment appears as irrational. It’s akin to how do you know you’re in a bubble when you’re in a bubble. But it might just work… Clockwork Orange-like. Enough guns and carnage until everyone is just sick of it.

  17. joe90 17

    The concept of “Crooked Hillary”

    • Colonial Viper 17.1

      I guess the “Russia Russia Russia” meme was falling down so Hillary needed a new scapegoat.

    • adam 17.2

      h.r.c had enough dirt that it stuck. Rightly or wrongly.

      • Macro 17.2.1

        “A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth”
        Now who said that??

        • adam 17.2.1.1

          A kernel of truth, always help sell a lie.

          • Macro 17.2.1.1.1

            But the lie was told 30,000,000 times (so we are now informed). It was always a lie, but now it is a “truth”

            • adam 17.2.1.1.1.1

              Are you trying to say h.r.c. is pure and innocent?

              Good luck selling that lie.

              • Macro

                Now adam – where did I say Hillary Clinton was pure and innocent? Show me anyone who is pure and innocent (apart from the new born) and I will show you Christ. She is however, far more pure and innocent than the men who smeared her.
                If you are to tell me that she is far more corrupt than Trump, (and pizza gate has been shown to be a straight out fabrication) then you are a living example of just how effective the propaganda machine was!

                • adam

                  For starters I never said that, all I said and let it sink in a second time.

                  “h.r.c had enough dirt that it stuck. Rightly or wrongly.”

                  I also said a long time ago h.r.c. was stupid choice becasue she came with a lot of baggage, and a history which could be used against her. I’m not sure if your one of the people who poo pooed me over that. But I was right, and h.r.c. was a bloody awful candidate on that, and on so many other levels.

                  trump is the twitter and chief, corrupt, self absorbed, making a village short of their idiot, and as close to a nightmare walking as humanly possible.

                  The elites lie, they lie with impunity and if you want them gone. Well supporting one faction of the elites over the other will never make that happen. That my take from the last USA election, what was yours?

                  • Macro

                    I think you need to have a look at how strong female candidates from the centre left are treated adam. Not just in the US but almost universally world wide in the western world. Take for instance Julia Gillard in Australia or our own Helen Clark (“Aunty Helen” ring any bells?) – It’s happening now with Jacinda. In the US right now the Democrats Nancy Pelosi is under attack,

                    The first female speaker of the House has become the most effec­tive congressional leader of modern times—and, not coinciden­tally, the most vilified.

                    yet she has been responsible for helping to advance many of the more progressive legislation in what was a Republican dominated Congress. Elizabeth Warren also – another case in point. Trump insulting her by calling her names because she dares to identify with a native American ancestor.
                    From the above link:

                    For a 2010 paper in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, the Yale researchers Victoria Brescoll and Tyler Okimoto showed study participants the fictional biographies of two state senators, identical except that one was named John Burr and the other Ann Burr. (I referred to this study in an October 2016 article for this magazine called “Fear of a Female President.”) When quotations were added that described the state senators as “ambitious” and possessing “a strong will to power,” John Burr became more popular. But the changes provoked “moral outrage” toward Ann Burr, whom both men and women became less willing to support.

                    and

                    As the management professors Ekaterina Netchaeva, Maryam Kouchaki, and Leah Sheppard noted in a 2015 paper, Americans generally believe “that leaders must necessarily possess attributes such as competitiveness, self-confidence, objectiveness, aggressiveness, and ambitiousness.” But “these leader attributes, though welcomed in a male, are inconsistent with prescriptive female stereotypes of warmth and communality.” In fact, “the mere indication that a female leader is successful in her position leads to increased ratings of her selfishness, deceitfulness, and coldness.”

                    Hillary Clinton may not have been as left as you would have liked – nor was she a Bernie – whom I’m sure many here (including myself) would have preferred – however, when all is said and done, the present daily train wreck that is the current White House administration would never be happening under Hillary. The USA would still be active in the Paris Agreement, along with the rest of the world. Scott Pruitt would not be dismantling the EPA as fast he can rip up every piece of environmental regulation he can, and there would still be essential scientific work studying climate change progressing in the US instead of scientists having to up root and travel to France.
                    Women would be more safe and the poor would not be enriching the rich as much as the last “Tax reform” has done.

                    • adam

                      Look how Jill Stein was treated during the election. Some of the male democrats were the absolute worst.

                      Jill Stein is still being treated like crap in the press and by male democrats. Ask most people, and they will say Stein is crazy and emotional. Seen it here often enough.

                      As for h.r.c, I’d say the males around here were her biggest problem. Especially her husband with his rape allegations and sexual assaults.

                      As for her being better, a possum on acid would do better than trump. Not much of an upgrade, and the russio-phobia coming from the democrats is frightening. It’s like some of them have a thing for war, and killing of civilians. Oh wait, they voted to increase the military budget and increase spying powers.

                      Me I’m over these stupid elites, no matter what side they pretend to be on. I’m really not sure why your backing them.

  18. joe90 19

    When you don’t listen your baby sitters, they’re going to tell on you.

    "DO NOT CONGRATULATE," national security advisers wrote in Trump's written briefing ahead of call with Vladimir Putin. Trump congratulated. The notes said to condemn the attack of an ex-Russian spy in London with a nerve agent. He did not. https://t.co/HjCkbdkbb4— Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) March 20, 2018

    • JohnSelway 19.1

      Of course he ignored it. The Russian election was beset with ballot stuffing, delegitimising the opposition and weird balloons and the like getting in the way of the cameras. For a person (Trump) to congratulate Putin on one hand while screaming about election fraud in his own country (remember he set up the special commission, which has since disbanded, to investigate electoral fraud) is hypocritical in the extreme

      • tracey 19.1.1

        How many democracies have results of 70% ?

        My guess is none. These kinds of figures are more common in regimes of oppressed opposition and silenced dissent.

  19. weka 20

    Stuff have an opinion piece calling Jacinda Ardern the Helen Key of NZ politics.

    To which Barnaby Bennett tweeted,

    “If only she was the John Clark…”

    https://twitter.com/mrbarnabyb/status/975985411817222144

    😆

  20. News Hub some people don’t like a common brown man having influence I see it all Mike
    The humanity star is a major achivement by Peter Beck and his Team at Rocket lab Kia kaha .
    There is hope that Fonterra hires a CEO that understands the local cultures and people of our major trading partners .
    Many thanks to DOC and all there staff for doing a great job in releaseing the Takahe into Kahururangi National park + all the other creaters they are bring back from the brink of extinction .Ka kite ano P.S Paddy looks happy
    There you go News Hub another tragedy cause by alcohol the Australian punched and in a comer for months is happy to be a live

    • eco maori 21.1

      Many thanks to NZRU for including the Black ferns 7 lady’s rugby team in the Commonwealth Games Kia Kaha ladys .
      Congradulations to the NZ Paralympics team Kia kaha people ka kite ano

      • eco maori 21.1.1

        The Project Mark when I had to take away a service from some people I set them up with another service provider . Eco Maori says Air New Zealand should work with other air lines to keep the flights going to Kapiti this is the way a national airline should behave ka kite ano

      • tracey 21.1.2

        Just as the Olympics the NZU has to have a womens team to get their mens team in the competition.

  21. fender 22

    It’s disgraceful that moderation has become emotionally charged. Decisions to ban people for long periods could maybe be decided by all moderators having a back-end vote or something, because today’s fiasco reflects very poorly on moderators and TS IMO.

  22. Good Morning the AM Show I use to read Andrew Horggards post years ago on Fencepost Fonterra web site hes cool.Theo was cool to he did a lot of good things for the Fonterra farmers but his main job is to deliver the best payout he can to farmers .
    Farmers are still trying to get over the years of the low pay out they still have dept because of that I recon all councils could make money with a cut and carry system mowing the side of suitable roads they could unload the fresh grass straight into feed bins on farm this would create jobs and could be a ALTERNATIVE to Plam kernal as this is one solution to get our import budget down and there are other reasons but I don’t want to stir the pot we would be able to stack this valuable resource grass for times of drought it can keep for years in a good silage stack this would improve The Dairy Image and keep the bad publicist away. kia kaha Farmers Ka kite ano P.S Paddy good on you m8 the Cicadas sing the beautiful song of mother nature

    • eco maori 23.1

      Kai pai Duncan for promoting the Northen white Rino subspecies that is close to extinction and lets ban set-net fishing in those locations of the Hector and Maui Dolphin ban new oil drilling in those locations we have a objurgation to save OUR wild live just by changing the way we do things .It will be written in our history books as a big win when we save the Maui Dolphin and who ever makes the right choice to save these precious creaters will go into the history books as a Great person. ka kite ano P.S Efeso Colins is right if you can save a dollar its like saveing 2 dollars so every state or council employee should have this in mine taking Economy instead of business is not much to ask to save there people money and this teaches them not to waste anything Ka pai Efeso

      • eco maori 23.1.1

        The AM Show is it a coincident that the internet cable into Australia is cut broken when we have Obama here . We have to go to the Australian libraries to find the correct story’s on Ngati Porou .There have been some suspicious things going on with some of OUR major infrastructure there are some real raciest people around at the minute . Then there was the O missing in the Countdown sign at the Auckland Air port I won’t say to much except we are ONE RACE THE HUMAN RACE.
        Kia Kaha

        • eco maori 23.1.1.1

          The Cafe the live below the line challange is a good way to show kiwis that we have it good Mike in Aotearoa compared to many other poor soles in poor countrys this should not be happening in OUR World this day and age .
          Brett McGregor trying to feed himself on$280 a day also tells you that we need meat to raise healthy mokopunas full stop kia kaha

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Andrew Little – Speech to Amnesty International event to mark the 70th Anniversary of the Univ...
    ANDREW LITTLE - SPEECH TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL EVENT TO MARK THE 70TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ON WORLD HUMAN RIGHTS DAY, PARLIAMENT, WELLINGTON ...
    20 hours ago
  • Tax reforms focus on fairness
    New tax legislation has been introduced to Parliament to ensure greater fairness in the way the tax system shapes commerce, investment decisions and social policies. Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has introduced the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2019-20, GST Offshore Supplier ...
    6 days ago
  • Preventing death and injury on our roads
    Police Minister Stuart Nash and Associate Minister of Transport Julie Anne Genter are encouraging road users to be alert to a new safety campaign launched today by Police and the NZ Transport Agency in the lead up to the Christmas. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • New comms centre improves public services
    A new digital services and communications centre opened on the Kapiti Coast will help transform the way Police connect with the public and work to make communities safe. Police Minister Stuart Nash has officially opened the Police Digital Services Centre, ...
    2 weeks ago