Open mike 22/06/2016

93 comments on “Open mike 22/06/2016 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Paul 1

   22 June 2016 at 6:10 am

   Another day in John Key’s neo-liberal nightmare.
   We have become a cruel, greedy, uncaring and selfish nation under his wretched leadership.

   Cruel.
   New Zealand prisons.

   A lawyer is accusing the Corrections Department of breaking the law in submitting inmates to 100,000 strip searches a year.
   Human rights lawyer Michael Bott said the Corrections Act Section 98 was clear that guards may strip search prisoners who were being moved around, but that it was discretionary.
   Mr Bott said “The Department of Corrections is breaking the law, it’s not acting in accordance with the Act, it’s a discretion, an officer ‘may’. Since when in the English dictionary does the word ‘may’ mean ‘must’. It does become degrading because what they’re doing is, without cause, they’re making prisoners take their clothes off, squat, lift up their genitals, their breasts, parting their buttocks etcetera.
   In 2006 the Court of Appeal said routine use of strip searches came close to degrading treatment under the Bill of Rights. The Law Society has said that strip searching is universally acknowledged, including in case law, to be “degrading and humiliating”.
   A total 434,304 strip searches were carried out in the four years to mid 2015 and netted 675 items, or 0.15 percent. In the least successful month 11,863 searches discovered just one item of contraband.’
   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/306970/corrections-strip-searches-'degrading'-lawyer

   ‘Overcrowding appears to have been behind a protest that resulted in this afternoon’s lockdown at Mt Eden Prison.
   “With national prison numbers at a record high, the department was having to move prisoners regularly, she said.
   “[The prisoners] were just objecting to the amount of movements that have been happening.”’
   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/306936/'disorder-event'-at-mt-eden-prison

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwkbmy_NcWU

   By contrast, Norwegian prisons…….
   • ianmac 1.1

     22 June 2016 at 1:11 pm

     Norway should be our model, and we must strenuously avoid the USA form of Democracy and Education and Security. Good stuff Paul.
2. Paul 2

   22 June 2016 at 6:11 am

   Another day in John Key’s neo-liberal nightmare.
   We have become a cruel, greedy, uncaring and selfish nation under his wretched leadership.

   Uncaring.
   New Zealand housing.

   ‘Mum shares state house garage in Manurewa with teen daughter.
   Carla Peebles-Waara needs to find somewhere for her and her children to live and fast.
   She’s staying in the garage of a relative’s Housing New Zealand property in Manurewa, south Auckland, while her application for a state house is processed.
   Peebles-Waara sleeps in the garage with her 13-year-old daughter while her two youngest children, aged 12 and 10, use one of the bedrooms.
   “We share the bed or pull out a mattress,” she says.
   Peebles-Waara is originally from Coromandel but left the area due to conflict with extended family. She arrived with her children in Auckland 10 months ago.
   The relative she’s staying with faces eviction unless Peebles-Waara and her children have moved out by June 24, she says.
   “We have to stay here but if Housing NZ says my niece is going to be evicted then we will leave.
   “I can’t take my kids and live in a car.
   “I’ve thought about going to Bruce Pulman Park [in Takanini] and putting up a gazebo with everyone else but it’s not feasible.”
   Peebles-Waara says it’s impossible to afford a private rental house in Auckland on her benefit.
   Her first application to the Ministry of Social Development for a state house, made late last year, was declined. Her second was lost and she’s now waiting to hear back about the third.
   Peebles-Waara says the hardest thing about sharing a home is the stress.
   “The strain it puts on the family is tough. I do everything I can so we aren’t a burden.”
   It’s been hard to find out what’s happening with her application and she plans to contact the ministry this week.
   “I go to Housing NZ and they tell me to go to the ministry but then they say it’s up to Housing NZ. I can’t talk to anyone and no-one is in charge of my case. I don’t have time for that.”

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/manukau-courier/81289547/mum-shares-state-house-garage-in-manurewa-with-teen-daughter

   By contrast, German housing…….
   http://qz.com/167887/germany-has-one-of-the-worlds-lowest-homeownership-rates/
   By contrast, Austrian and Singapore’s public housing systems…….
   http://www.shareable.net/blog/public-housing-works-lessons-from-vienna-and-singapore
   • vto 2.1

     22 June 2016 at 7:18 am

     These people have to start squatting

     very publicly
     • riffer 2.1.1

       22 June 2016 at 1:15 pm

       Pretty sure we don’t have squatters rights in our country – they call that Breaking and Entering.
   • reason 2.2

     22 June 2016 at 1:09 pm

     Good post Paul ……………… wouldn’t it be great if we had a Government who actually looked around the world for things that actually work…….

     Because we have the opposite. at the moment
3. Paul 3

   22 June 2016 at 6:12 am

   Another day in John Key’s neo-liberal nightmare.
   We have become a cruel, greedy, uncaring and selfish nation under his wretched leadership.

   Greedy.
   Companies that pay workers too little.
   Power companies that charge too much.

   ‘Invercargill work hours dire for many who struggle in silence, says father.
   Southland people are staunch and walk tall, but will struggle financially without speaking up, an Invercargill father says.
   Invercargill residents Nathaniel and Kathrine Barrett, who work as chefs, are one of the reportedly increasing ‘middle-class poor’ families in Southland.
   They are looking to relocate to Christchurch or Dunedin for better hours and pay.
   Invercargill Salvation Army Invercargill Corps officer Annette Bray said the organisation was seeing a growing number of people coming to them for help.
   “There’s a working class poor. More and more people are coming through.”
   It could be that there were two family members working but together they didn’t have a full time job, Bray said.
   “Twenty-five percent of people who come to us for help, somebody is working in the family.
   “Probably in days gone by, if someone was working in the family they were doing pretty well. But these days it’s not enough.”
   Nathaniel works about 20-25 hours a week, and Kathrine 30, but with restaurant clientele dwindling in the cold Invercargill winter they had fewer work hours.
   In a typical week, Kathrine would earn about $400 and Nathaniel about $360.
   Nathaniel said the Work and Income benefit had a $600 gross income cut-off point, which they earn above.
   However, their weekly expenses topped $800………

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/80772395/invercargill-work-hours-dire-for-many-who-struggle-in-silence-says-father

   By contrast, this is how Italian workers are treated.
   
   • vto 3.1

     22 June 2016 at 7:13 am

     Yep.
     In NZ it is still cheaper for employers to pay the minimum wage than to keep slaves…

     …. people should think on that
4. Jenny 4

   22 June 2016 at 6:42 am

   A Mayor who has the guts to admit that climate change is real, is vilified by residents of South Dunedin, who refuse to accept that the flooding events they have experienced will be repeated and worsen no matter what the council does.

   Thinking that it will make a difference to their future, some of these residents have vowed to depose the Mayor because of his belief in climate change.

   http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/387568/anger-about-south-dunedins-future

   South Dunedinites might just be joining the list

   http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/bring-climate-change-back-from-the-future/

   But this sort of denial of reality is dwarfed by the New Zealand Green Party co-leaders, one who barely mentioned climate change in her Centrepiece Environmental Campaign Launch, and in fact has rarely ever spoken of it in her entire political career. And the other co-leader who in his speech imagined a future where New Zealanders holiday at beaches where the sea level remains unchanged. But doesn’t proposes one single concrete policy or program of how we get from the reality of sea level rise happening now, to his imagined world where it is, ‘not a problem’.

   And who seem determined to maintain their policy of keeping debate about climate change out of the election campaign for a third straight election.

   Despite this being the government’s worst performing portfolio* where the government could take some real hits.

   Why?

   I have been told by senior Green Party executive members that the reason is that the Green Party don’t want to raise contentious issues like climate change, is in case it imperils their newly signed MoU with the Labour Party.

   And as we should all know by now, the Labour Party’s policy on climate change to all intents and purposes is little different to the government’s.

   So what will be the result?

   Climate change will not be addressed, again. No incoming government will have a mandate to act on it. And the residents of South Dunedin will be left, until they are literally wading in it.

   But I suppose the good thing is that at least the issue of climate change may get a good thrashing in South Dunedin instead of being ignored everywhere else.

   *(with the possible exception of housing).
   • Paul 4.1

     22 June 2016 at 6:49 am

     Neoliberalism has destroyed democracy – by design.
     We just get to pick the least bad option.
   • ttd 4.2

     22 June 2016 at 7:08 am

     “I have been told by senior Green Party executive members that the reason is that the Green Party don’t want to raise contentious issues like climate change, is in case it imperils their newly signed MoU with the Labour Party.”

     I happen to know that the statement above is complete and utter bullshit.
     • Jenny 4.2.1

       22 June 2016 at 7:10 am

       Really?

       How so?

       And might I also ask how you account for the Green Party’s ignoring of climate change as their leading environmental campaign, in favour of “Swimmable Rivers”?

       Because believe me finding somewhere nice to have a swim will be the least of our problems.
       • Sacha 4.2.1.1

         22 June 2016 at 12:32 pm

         Jenny, we had this same discussion with you day after day before the last election. If the Greens decide strategically that voters are more likely to engage with ‘swimmable rivers’ than something as huge (and still lied about) as ‘climate change’, then they are smart in their focus.

         If you are that keen on only the one topic, by all means start your own single-issue party and contest the election. But please don’t waste oxygen in places like this.
         • weka 4.2.1.1.1

           22 June 2016 at 10:43 pm

           +1

           It’s also a lie that Jenny is telling that the GP are ignoring CC to focus instead on rivers (and as if those things are’t related anyway).
         • Jenny 4.2.1.1.2

           23 June 2016 at 11:04 pm

           “If you are that keen on only the one topic, by all means start your own single-issue party and contest the election….”
           Sacha

           In fact I have done exactly this.

           http://www.climate.org.nz/our-vision/

           The Climate Party don’t want to win seats or get into parliament the purpose of the Climate Party is to raise the issue of climate change, when no one else will, to hold the other parties to account when they refuse to address the looming threat posed by climate change.

           Strangely, (or maybe not so strangely) the majority of the members of the Climate Party are also current Green Party members frustrated at their own party’s unwillingness to front up on climate change.

           For instance the Climate Party stood in the Northland by-election when the Greens refused to put up a candidate to challenge the Nats, Labour and NZ First over their support for climate destroying extreme fossil fuel technologies like deep sea oil drilling when the Green Party refused to.

           http://www.climate.org.nz/

           As well as standing in the upcoming local body elections, the Climate Party is also considering standing in any resulting Roskill by-election particularly if the Green Party again decide to go light on the contenders, all of whom support deep sea oil drilling BAU and all the rest of it.

           But this is only one of the levers I am jumping up and down on.

           To get them to move I am jumping up and down on all of them.

           Anyone who knows the true portent of climate change and who is appalled at the lack of political will from our leaders to face up to it, could do no less.

           “…..But please don’t waste oxygen in places like this.”
           Sacha

           Sascha I am sorry if you feel I am stealing your oxygen.

           That suffocating feeling you are experiencing, might be from having to face up to some harsh truths that you would rather not.
           • Sacha 4.2.1.1.2.1

             24 June 2016 at 10:33 am

             Good on you.
     • weka 4.2.2

       22 June 2016 at 9:28 am

       While I think it is possible that Jenny has spoken to more than one senior GP exec, I tend to agree that she is misrepresenting the GP in that statement, not least because she’s been doing that for some time now.

       Google tells me that in the past month alone the GP have said and done these things in relation to Climate Change,

       James Shaw’s budget speech has a whole section on CC,

       http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1605/S00555/green-party-co-leader-james-shaws-2016-budget-speech.htm

       A picture of Shaw and Little together at a Climate March in Auckland used in an article about the MoU,

       http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/305770/greens-and-labour-cement-plan-to-oust-national

       Julie-Anne Genter on National’s roading plan and Climate Change,

       http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/305849/no-thought-given-to-pollution-in-new-road-plans-greens

       Press Release on transport including climate,

       http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1606/S00142/national-spends-billions-driving-up-transport-pollution.htm

       Transport policy coverage (climate change!),

       http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/80317784/Green-Party-transport-policy-Get-rid-of-trucks-move-freight-to-rail-and-sea

       Greens on trade deals including climate,

       http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/5/254665

       Andrew Little at GP AGM saying that a govt he led would be “world-leading” on climate change,

       http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/80751030/labourgreens-say-theyll-take-on-nationals-formidable-political-machine-at-greens-conference

       Hague on CC and impacts on health,

       http://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/blogs/2016/june-2016/01/minister-no-boy-scout-in-dealing-to-wide-ranging-health-effects-of-coming-climate-change.aspx

       Press Release on ETS,

       http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1605/S00387/scrapping-two-for-one-in-ets-not-enough-to-save-our-climate.htm

       Press Relsease on GHG inventory,

       http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1605/S00406/time-for-the-government-to-do-the-right-thing.htm

       And so on. It’s ridiculous to claim that the GP have put CC on the back burner. Here’s the google list just for the past month (news in NZ on Green Party +climate)

       https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=green+party+climate&num=100&cr=countryNZ&client=firefox-b&biw=1231&bih=695&tbs=ctr:countryNZ,qdr:m&tbm=nws&source=lnt&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjMwtKKg7rNAhUEFpQKHWoxDxoQpwUIEw&dpr=1.33

       Jenny like many of us you have a lot of passion about climate change, but you are basically telling lies about the GP. There are things they can be criticised for, but making out they are avoiding climate change is just plain wrong.
       • Colonial Viper 4.2.2.1

         22 June 2016 at 9:51 am

         Anything about a timeframe phasing out the imports of petrol, diesel or gas.
         • weka 4.2.2.1.1

           22 June 2016 at 10:31 am

           You’d have to do that research yourself CV.
           • Colonial Viper 4.2.2.1.1.1

             22 June 2016 at 10:59 am

             As far as I can tell we have ten or so years to avoid 3+ deg C global warming from becoming inevitable (2+ deg C being a done deal now), which at 430ppm can be considered a dead certainty a couple of decades down the track.

             This means in the next couple of years, slashing the numbers of commercial flights, slashing numbers of cars on the road, slashing back livestock herd numbers, slashing imports of energy, slashing the use of road freight.

             So I am looking for concrete steps, not just market mechanisms, or just measuring how deep in the hole we are.
             • weka …

               22 June 2016 at 11:02 am

               I look forward to hearing your proposals and strategy CV.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 22 June 2016 at 11:11 am

                 There are a bunch of proposals right there in my comment.
                 • McFlock …

                   22 June 2016 at 11:48 am

                   That’s all they need to propose to get your vote, eh?

                   Good-oh.

                   Some days you want parties on the Left to try to get elected, other days you want them to promise bringing about a two-year energy, regional, and transport collapse.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     22 June 2016 at 11:54 am

                     Who said about getting any votes. I’m just talking about what steps are required to save the nation from sinking under multi metre sea level rise by the time today’s school kids retire.
                   • Peter Swift …

                     22 June 2016 at 11:56 am

                     With an eye to getting elected, are you suggesting political pragmatism by a vocal minority on the left is being substituted by throwaway, lack of substance, la la land, that’ll show the other 99% who means business, wishful thinking rhetoric? lol
                   • McFlock …

                     22 June 2016 at 12:04 pm

                     Yes. that’s your topic for today.
                 • weka …

                   22 June 2016 at 11:48 am

                   I was meaning in terms of things getting done e.g. the concrete steps. They’re good ideas, and now we need to work on the how.

                   For instance, I think one good way to get dairying reigned in is to get the Greens with more MPs and in govt. It’s a reasonably high priority for them (reducing dairying), and it has a lot of support nationally. In addition to that, and more difficult, is getting good people standing for regional councils and then getting people to vote for them. Lots of other things that can be done too, and IMO need to be done alongside the general changing of the culture.

                   etc. We know what needs to be done. We’re not so clear on how to proceed.
                   • Lanthanide …

                     22 June 2016 at 1:31 pm

                     To be fair, I don’t think “get the Greens elected” is really any more of a concrete step than what CV said to begin with.
                   • weka …

                     22 June 2016 at 2:55 pm

                     But if asked I can say here are the things we can do, x, y, z that help the GP get more MPs in parliament.

                     I see a lot of people saying a, b, c is what should happen without thinking past that point. Which is fine, we need people who can recognise what should happen. But we also need people who can actually makes things happen and the GP happen to be some of them. Jenny telling lies about the GP, I just don’t see the use in that, or the strategy or what she hopes to achieve.
             • Richardrawshark …

               22 June 2016 at 11:54 am

               Really think we can get the greater population to take any action on climate change CV, when they are all so wound up making a dollar ignoring it.

               I think it’s banging our head against a brick wall to get all those self absorbed people to take action themselves, there is probably an acronym for everyone expecting either the government to save their asses or the neighbour doing it for them.

               The land of Apathy.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 22 June 2016 at 2:11 pm

                 I have a suspicion that 10% to 15% of the population is at least partly open to Major Change.
               • b waghorn …

                 22 June 2016 at 6:22 pm

                 “The land of Apathy.”
                 It may of been different if we hadn’t had 7 years the of useless spinless kind of government we’ve had.
                 Keys greatest legacy is the fact he didn’t use his incredible popularity to lead this country down a sustainable path. Shame on him.
                 • Richardrawshark …

                   22 June 2016 at 7:34 pm

                   Well the point I was making is it has been the worst time ever, with crap that wasn’t near tolerated before, and not a decent protest in sight.

                   To Me Minto was the activist side of politics, and a bloody good protest organizer.

                   Where is he now, oh Mana
       • Rosie 4.2.2.2

         22 June 2016 at 12:37 pm

         Thanks for the comprehensive list weka.

         There are number of things I’ve heard lately that give me some new found confidence that Lab/Green together are serious about CC. Little’s speech at the Green Party conf for one – that was a no nonsense reference to CC action and the first time I’ve been reassured about the Labour view to CC.

         Then quite some time ago Julie Anne Genter and Grant Roberston were on the panel of Backbenchers. Can’t remember the National MP, it was a male. He was useless on all the CC questions, as you could expect but GR and JAG were on fire. It was some before the announcement of MoU but GR and JAG were clearly on the same page about working on CC action if they were in the next govt together.

         This is clearly something they have discussed and have agreed upon.

         We may not always get the messages that fit exactly with our unique views and may not always get the answers we want to satisfy our own particular questions, but looking at the bigger picture, it looks like we’re on the right track if we are to do anything about CC mitigation.

         All we need to do if change the government and not get hung up about the little things.
         • weka 4.2.2.2.1

           22 June 2016 at 3:04 pm

           Good to hear about JAG and GR! I have the sense that good things are happening and that we need to allow them time to build this. I agree about not getting hung up on our individual views and what we think should happen, but to focus on supporting the stuff that is working in the right direction.

           I find it interesting that some people don’t see the advantage in having a L/G govt, as if the only good solution is the revolution. I’m not waiting for the revolution, I want us to do everything we can now.

           I’m expecting that people will be going through various levels of pretty uncomfortable emotions e.g. fear about climate change. That will make us at times act in ways that are contrary to our best interests.
           • Rosie 4.2.2.2.1.1

             22 June 2016 at 3:24 pm

             I thought the revolution was going to arrive in 2011 on the back of the Occupy Movement. Ha ha! Hindsight and all that……………..

             Since then I see revolution in every day achievements, like encouraging your neighbour to see the environmental benefit and convenience on catching the bus to work and leaving their gas guzzler SUV at home in the garage.

             Sounds corny, be WE can be and are the revolution – don’t leave that to the Politicians, god knows where that would leave us.(Rogernomics was a revolution) Instead encourage and support our parties that have a vision and progressive ideas and help them get us all there.
             • weka …

               22 June 2016 at 6:14 pm

               I agree. And Occupy was revolutionary. Because now there is a whole new swathe of people in the US politicised around what’s really going on. That’s invaluable. We’re just looking at it in too short a time frame. If Rogernomics took a decade and they had all that power and resource available to them, I think we can allow that it might take grassroots longer.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               22 June 2016 at 7:08 pm

               Sounds corny, be WE can be and are the revolution – don’t leave that to the Politicians, god knows where that would leave us.

               QFT
         • Jenny 4.2.2.2.2

           23 June 2016 at 3:45 am

           “Then quite some time ago Julie Anne Genter and Grant Roberston were on the panel of Backbenchers. Can’t remember the National MP, it was a male. He was useless on all the CC questions, as you could expect but GR and JAG were on fire.”
           Rosie

           The thing is Rosie, that the political pressure not to raise climate change in the elections is starting to come on now, and will get even stronger as we get towards the electioneering period.

           Voices inside the Green Party very strong on climate change like Gareth Hughes for instance were sidelined and pretty much effectively silenced at the last elections.

           It will happen again with Julian Genter in the GP, and Grant Robertson in the LP.

           Will these two if they are “on fire” as you say, have the courage and determination push past this suffocating influence?

           I expect that to do so, they will both have to be more than outspoken, to be able to take on their party machines which are intent on playing down this issue.

           In fact they will have to do a Winston Churchill.

           Churchill was a backbench Independent MP ignored and villified for his constant harping on about the nazis threat, but who refused to shut up and sit down, and take his place and wait his turn.

           To get climate change a hearing in 2017 GR and Jag (as you call them) will need that same determined pugnacious bulldog spirit on climate change, that is if they want to achieve a breakthrough on climate change.

           They will need to defy the conservative voices in their own parties, terrified of offending the establishment and the keepers of “accepted political wisdom”.

           The first thing both need to do if they are serious, is to get climate change debated in the house. If they are really serious about climate change they need to putup some private members bills on climate change to go into the ballot. Though this is their legal right, they will need to oppose their party hierarchies to do so.

           For instance:

           The Green Party say, that they are opposed to the pollution trading scheme known as the ETS, and want it scrapped. A bill to repeal the ETS, if it was drawn from the ballot, would be a good start in getting the ball rolling in starting a national debate on climate change. And for the burning need to take proper serious action.

           Who knows? it may even pass. On the Right, both NZ First and the ACT Party say they want the ETS scrapped.
           The only defenders of pollution trading in parliament are the National and Labour Parties.
           If Grant Robertson is genuine in his concern about climate change, just like Churchill, he would be loudly demanding and lobbying inside the Labour for Labour to join the rest of the opposition to carry a members bill to repeal the ETS.

           Without the fig leaf of this provenly fraudulent pollution trading scheme, the National government would be left naked in front of the world community for not meeting their international obligations that they signed up to in Paris to do something about climate change. And might even be forced to take some proper more effective action.

           Would Genter and Robertson be prepared to rock the boat in such a manner?

           Time will tell.

           My guess is no, and that like many before them, they will buckle under the pressure and shut up. And sit down and do what they are told.

           The above strategy is only a suggestion, there are a number of other bills around the issue of climate change that could start the debate on climate change in the House and nationally.

           (To keep the political silence, I have been assured that no Private Members bills on climate change by MPs from either party will be allowed to be put in the ballot leading up to the election.)
       • Jenny 4.2.2.3

         22 June 2016 at 10:24 pm

         @ weka 4.2.2

         My that is an impressive list of links. You almost had me convinced. Except for one thing. There is a big difference about talking about climate change and actually doing something about it.

         The most interesting link from your list, was from the Green Party AGM. And that link was to a speech given by…. wait for it…..

         Andrew Little the leader of the Labour Party.

         And it was indeed far and away the best speech of the Green Party AGM, and Little actually said that he was going to do something about climate change, make this country a world leader on climate change.

         This would have been the perfect opportunity for the Green Party to take Andrew Little at his word and put up some policy for addressing climate change.
         The Green Party instead announced that they will be campaigning about making our rivers swimmable again. And that this will be their “Centrepiece Environmental Campaign”. Overall Andrew LIttle mentioned climate change more times than both the Green Party co-leaders combined.

         ‘Swimmable Rivers’ is nice but not much use without a ‘Survivable Climate’

         Warm air holds more moisture, climate fuelled super storms and unprecedented rain events will turn any sizeable river into a deadly muddy torrents that will destroy any water treatment infrastructure on their banks.

         Andrew Little must be wondering whether he made the right decision to talk about climate change so much, when the Green Party seem determined not to campaign on it.
         • Jenny 4.2.2.3.1

           23 June 2016 at 2:42 am

           The intent and direction is clear.
           • Jenny 4.2.2.3.1.1

             23 June 2016 at 2:56 am

             At the last election the political parties had to be dragged kicking and screaming to discuss climate change.

             Greenpeace, (in a departure from their usual policy to not become involved in politics), had to run a “Climate Voter” petition to force the political parties to debate climate change.

             http://www.climatevoter.org.nz/

             The “Climate Voter” petition collected over 63 thousand names before the political parties agreed to discuss climate change.

             It will be interesting to see whether under the leadership of Russell Norman, Greenpeace will again run another “Climate Voter” petition.
             • Jenny …

               23 June 2016 at 3:59 am

               Unfortunately despite their success in getting the political parties to debate climate change, the Greenpeace initiated debate was not carried on any MSM channel and could only be viewed on the internet. And only by those aware of it.

               Maybe this time climate change might be one of the topics of the MSM televised debates.

               But, I don’t think so.

               But, I could be wrong. The affects are becoming more apparent. And it is becoming harder to maintain the silence.
             • weka …

               23 June 2016 at 9:44 am

               “Greenpeace, (in a departure from their usual policy to not become involved in politics), had to run a “Climate Voter” petition to force the political parties to debate climate change.”

               Citation needed for the claim that all parties were refusing to talk about climate change before the Greenpeace initiative and had to be forced to debate the topic. Better be good Jenny or I’ll be calling you a liar from now on.
               • Jenny …

                 23 June 2016 at 7:38 pm

                 Is this a joke?

                 As well as insulting all those who fought to get climate change debated in the last election.

                 Weka asks me to provide a citation for something that didn’t happen, or he will call me a liar from now on.

                 How can I provide a citation for something that didn’t happen?

                 I may be good, but I am not that good.

                 Maybe Weka might like to explain how I could possibly do that.

                 Maybe his next challenge will be for me to find some unicorn horn, or rocking horse shit.

                 I’ll tell you what, instead of me trying to prove a nullity,

                 How about this. Weka, instead of me trying to find evidence of things that don’t exist, I challenge you to name something you claim does exist.

                 Can you name just one other debate on climate change, between the political parties at the last election?

                 I’ll make it easy for you, I won’t even demand that you provide a citation.

                 P.S.

                 Weka, for you to label me “a liar from now on”, for not being able to do the impossible, in my humble opinion, says more about you, than me.

                 If you try it, I will definitely be asking you for a citation with evidence to prove your accusation that I am a liar. Needless for me to say, what people will think of you if you can’t provide such proof.
                 • Jenny …

                   23 June 2016 at 7:54 pm

                   Maybe I am being a bit harsh, and people really are starting to create citations for things that don’t happen.

                   Nothing happened today. Here is the citation. ( ……… )
                 • weka …

                   23 June 2016 at 8:12 pm

                   “If you try it, I will definitely be asking you for a citation with evidence to prove your accusation that I am a liar. Needless for me to say, what people will think of you if you can’t provide such proof.”

                   You said,

                   At the last election the political parties had to be dragged kicking and screaming to discuss climate change.

                   Greenpeace, (in a departure from their usual policy to not become involved in politics), had to run a “Climate Voter” petition to force the political parties to debate climate change.

                   That in context above is a statement that political parties were not willing to debate climate change until Greenpeace forced them to. It’s a lie (I looked, the Greens announced their climate change policy before the Climate Voter thing), so yes I call you a liar.

                   I will do this each time you spam the site with misleading statements about the Greens (and probably Labour if I see those too) that you can’t back up with evidence. If you don’t want this to happen I suggest that you think about how you present your ideas and start expressing your opinions as opinions instead of statements of fact.

                   edit,

                   GP climate policy launch 1/6/14

                   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10108920/Greens-launch-climate-change-policy

                   Greenpeace Climate debate 3/9/14

                   http://www.climatevoter.org.nz/debate/
                   • Jenny …

                     23 June 2016 at 8:53 pm

                     Weka asks me to prove something that didn’t happen, ie that the political parties didn’t have any other debates about climate change. This demand to provide evidence that these debates didn’t happen is accompanied with a threat to slander me if I can’t provide evidence of something that didn’t happen. I pondered this illogical demand, and asked instead that Weka give evidence of these other election debates on climate change.
                     Weka doesn’t do this, instead offers up something else entirely.

                     Jenny said: “Greenpeace, (in a departure from their usual policy to not become involved in politics), had to run a “Climate Voter” petition to force the political parties to debate climate change.”

                     And provided a link.

                     http://www.climatevoter.org.nz/

                     Weka said: “(I looked, the Greens announced their climate change policy before the Climate Voter thing), so yes I call you a liar.”

                     I am sure that all the political parties released their climate change policy, somewhere before, or during the election, in some form or other. This is not the same as being willing to debate the topic. Or be willing to make climate change an election issue.

                     And we are again seeing early signs of this, with the Greens announcing that their “Centrepiece Environmental Campaign”, Will be “Swimmable Rivers” and barely mentioned climate change.

                     The early signs are that 2017 will be a rerun of 2014 as far as the climate goes. And that the political parties will be just as reluctant to debate this issue, unless they are forced to.

                     And that climate change will again not be an election issue.

                     Despite it being one of the Government’s weakest performing portfolios, where they could take some real hits.

                     Despite climate change being one of the greatest catastrophes ever faced by humanity.

                     Instead for the second time, it again looks as if the government will be given a free pass on this issue by the opposition parties.

                     And Business As Usual will continue untroubled for another three years. Three years we haven’t got to waste.
                   • weka …

                     23 June 2016 at 9:33 pm

                     “Weka asks me to prove something that didn’t happen, ie that the political parties didn’t have any other debates about climate change.”

                     You didn’t say that Jenny. You said,

                     At the last election the political parties had to be dragged kicking and screaming to discuss climate change.

                     Greenpeace, (in a departure from their usual policy to not become involved in politics), had to run a “Climate Voter” petition to force the political parties to debate climate change.

                     “Parties had to be dragged kicking and screaming to discuss CC”

                     “Parties didn’t have any other debates about CC”

                     They’re not the same thing. You lied before and now you are lying again about what you said.

                     I am sure that all the political parties released their climate change policy, somewhere before, or during the election, in some form or other. This is not the same as being willing to debate the topic. Or be willing to make climate change an election issue.

                     Actually it is. It’s what political parties do. On the other hand, if you have evidence that say the Greens deliberately avoided talking about CC and refused to debate either formally or generally, by all means post it. Otherwise I will call you a liar again.

                     July 28: The Politics of Climate Change. An Election Debate

                     Hon. Dr. David Clark (Labour Party) and Hon. Metiria Turei (Green Party) will be discussing their parties’ stance on climate change, and their strategies and policies to mitigate and adapt to climate change in New Zealand.

                     http://www.otago.ac.nz/occnet/news/seminars/

                     Stop telling lies Jenny. Tell the GP and everyone here that you want them to speak louder and stronger and take more action on CC, but stop telling lies about them, it’s not necessary.
                   • Jenny …

                     23 June 2016 at 10:23 pm

                     Hi Weka from the link you gave; The climate policy launch was on the 1st of July, and not during the election campaign.

                     20 August 2014 (Wednesday)
                     Writ Day – Governor General issues formal direction to the Electoral Commission to hold the election.[24]

                     Electoral roll closes for printing (all people enrolling after this date must cast special declaration votes)

                     Official campaigning begins; radio and television advertising begins

                     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_general_election,_2014#Dates

                     Weka can you provide anything, about climate change (outside of the “Climate Voter” debate) from any of the parties during the election period itself?

                     Weka you may argue that I am being pedantic about the dates; But there was a reason that the “Climate Voter Campaign” became necessary during the election itself.

                     Of particular note from the article you linked to, was the attached poll on whether people supported the Green Party idea of a carbon tax, or not.

                     Interestingly, if the people who supported the carbon tax, were added to the people who wanted more information, in effect if the Green Party had given a further lead, they could have won this debate.

                     But this was never followed up during the election campaign proper. Why not?

                     
                     What do you think of the Greens carbon tax proposal?

                     Fully support it
                     496 votes, 40.9%

                     Sounds interesting, need to know more about it
                     153 votes, 12.6%

                     Not a fan at all
                     563 votes, 46.5%

                     Total 1212 votes

                     But they never heard about it again.

                     It is my contention that it is leadership on climate change that was missing during the election campaign itself.

                     Weka do you still deny this?

                     Will there be another climate policy launch by the Green Party before the 2017 election?

                     Will it be followed up during the election?

                     Weka will the “Swimmable Rivers” Centrepiece Campaign launch be followed by a Climate Policy Campaign Launch?

                     By the tone and language of your attacks, I am guessing not.

                     But it is still early days, and a lot of water has to go under the bridge yet.

                     And hopefully I will be proved wrong. Time, as they say, will tell.
                   • Jenny …

                     23 June 2016 at 11:33 pm

                     Jenny is a lying liar who lies. Don’t let up now Weka your hysteria is starting to show.

                     Instead of digging a deeper hole for yourself, how about answering the question.

                     “Can you name just one other debate on climate change, between the political parties at the last election?”
                   • weka …

                     23 June 2016 at 11:49 pm

                     Jenny you claimed that all the political parties had to be dragged kicking and screaming to a debate about climate change. It was a lie.

                     I can keep putting up links that demonstrate that the GP was working on CC issues during the campaign, even though they weren’t working on that in the way you thought was necessary. But it won’t change the basic facts that you actively tell lies about the GP (and others) in your attempt to make CC more visible and to get more people to act. I think your strategy is counter-productive, so I will just keep naming the lies as I see them. I’m more than happy for people to look at our respective arguments and reach their own conclusions accordingly.
                   • Jenny …

                     24 June 2016 at 12:21 am

                     I look forward to seeing these links.
                   • weka …

                     24 June 2016 at 12:36 am

                     You can deflect and avoid all you like Jenny, but I’ve called you out as a liar and provided evidence.
           • Jenny 4.2.2.3.1.2

             24 June 2016 at 6:55 am

             The intent and direction is clear.

             And is part of a repeated pattern.
             • Jenny …

               1 July 2016 at 4:30 am

               Rather than debate the reasons why “Swimmable Rivers” has been made a “Centrepiece Campaign” and climate change has not.

               weka deliberately chooses to deny the reality, that “Swimmable Rivers” has been favoured over climate change as the Green Party “Centrepiece Campaign”.

               Instead of trying to explain the reasons behind this decision

               Hysterical abuse and slander by weka, on no evidence, only highlights weka’s inability to defend the Green Party’s decision.
               • Jenny …

                 1 July 2016 at 4:34 am

                 “I can keep putting up links that demonstrate that the GP was working on CC issues during the campaign,…”
                 weka

                 Still waiting…..
                 • Jenny …

                   1 July 2016 at 4:36 am

                   My fear weka is that the perverse climate change ignoring that I noted by the Green Party at the last election, in light of the obvious worsening of the problem, will be even more grotesque than last time.
5. Jenny 5

   22 June 2016 at 7:05 am

   Death by climate change

   http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deadly-degrees-why-heat-waves-kill-so-quickly/
   • Chooky 5.1

     22 June 2016 at 12:42 pm

     +100 …lovely thanks…well worth reading…personally I would prefer death by freezing or ICE AGE..but I guess we are not going to get the choice…

     …however on a brighter note…maybe viruses and antibiotic resistant bacteria will get most of us first and call a halt to global warming …could even end laissez faire neolib capitalism

     https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/mar/11/antibiotics-drug-resistance-is-not-theoretical-threat-real-immediate

     http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/antibiotic-resistant-bacteria-is-medicines-global-warming

     http://www.salon.com/2014/05/22/scientists_antibiotic_resistant_superbugs_are_as_big_a_threat_as_climate_change/
6. Jenny 6

   22 June 2016 at 7:08 am

   South Florida and South Dunedin united in denial.

   http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/seas-rising-but-florida-keeps-building-on-the-coast/
7. Greg 7

   22 June 2016 at 7:19 am

   A Key inspired Toll on Auckland highways is a fantastic idea, and will remind Auckland drivers every day to vote Key out ext year.
   It will save Labour a fortune in election advertising.
   • Paul 7.1

     22 June 2016 at 7:38 am

     The wealthy live in the inner city suburbs and will pay less.
     The middle and working class, commuting from west and South Auckland, will pay most of this tax.

     Simpler and fairer:
     Make public transport free.
     Build more buses and trains and railtracks.
     Build more quality high density housing on onner city suburbs.
     Build them in New Zealand.
     Start apprenticeships in the relevant industries.
8. M. Gray 8

   22 June 2016 at 8:55 am

   Tolled roads In Auckland will add more inequalities to our already inequitable country. Tolls are not fair to the poor especially the working poor. If they do toll the roads there needs to be alternative options other wise we will see more NZ families/people living in cars.
9. Jenny Kirk 9

   22 June 2016 at 9:04 am

   “And as we should all know by now, the Labour Party’s policy on climate change to all intents and purposes is little different to the government’s.”

   This comment by Jenny @ 4 above is also utter bullshit.

   In fact, Jenny (whoever you are), you are constantly misquoting Labour, and its about time you had a good look through Labour’s policies that have been announced, the Future of Work commission, and the Policy Platform before you start mouthing off about Labour’s inadequacies.

   For the record :
   1. The Government must act urgently on climate change in the wake of the Royal Society’s report released today, says Labour’s Climate Change Spokesperson Megan Woods. Media Release 19 April 2016
   “Amongst other climate related threats, New Zealand is facing a rise in sea levels of between 30 centimetres and 1.1 metres in the next 100 years while the Government continues to sit on its hands….”
   2.Labour’s ‘Future of Work’ programme is part of the answer to a transition into such an economy.
   ☐ Supporting the creation of cooperatives that would help build a more sustainable economy
   ☐ Investing in low carbon and environmentally sustaining projects
   • Colonial Viper 9.1

     22 June 2016 at 9:43 am

     We have ten to fifteen years to cut our GHG emissions to near zero Jenny. We have already guaranteed ourselves a 2 deg C to 3 deg C global temp rise in the next 20 years, and we are on track for a 5+ deg C rise this century.

     Which means sea level rise could be 6m this century (half from the West Antarctic and half from Greenland).
   • Colonial Viper 9.2

     22 June 2016 at 9:48 am

     I should say that Labour’s future of work programme is looking like nothing more than another effort at pretend and extend. It will pretend that economic growth is just around the corner, and it will extend the economic status quo wherever possible.
   • weka 9.3

     22 June 2016 at 10:35 am

     “This comment by Jenny @ 4 above is also utter bullshit.”

     She’s been telling lies about the GP as well. I guess she is expressing her opinion (that there is not enough difference between L and N on CC), but she does then tend to use some pretty long winded ways to express that that too often are misleading. I have no idea what her strategy is given that Labour are moving slowly in the right direction and are more likely to move faster if encouraged. As is often the case, people who want to knock allies down don’t usually have anything better to put in place.
     • Ad 9.3.1

       23 June 2016 at 8:14 am

       I can think of about ten regular commenters here who are so extreme they don’t fit into any political party in Parliament now or last time.

       They are entitled to speak, and entitled to be schooled.
       • weka 9.3.1.1

         23 June 2016 at 8:21 am

         I’d have less of a problem with Jenny’s comments if they were expressed as opinion. The deceitful stuff takes time to address, time I’d rather spend on other things.
10. Bearded Git 10

    22 June 2016 at 10:22 am

    This really is a u-turn government:

    Mining in the National Parks
    Raising GST
    Tolls on Auckland roads

    I know there are many more that don’t come to mind-anyone like to add to the list?
11. Jack Ramaka 11

    22 June 2016 at 10:40 am

    Still the most popular PM in NZ History, either the polls are rigged or we really are not thinking straight, his forex trading and profit making ability in the merchant banking industry haven’t been transferred over into the performance of the NZ Economy which most voters thought would be the case.
    • Bearded Git 11.1

      22 June 2016 at 10:52 am

      Nats 43% and falling in that last Roy Morgan-they are gone Jack.
      • Colonial Viper 11.1.1

        22 June 2016 at 11:30 am

        NZF and Winston are in charge now, as the king makers.
        • Chooky 11.1.1.1

          22 June 2016 at 12:29 pm

          +100 CV
          • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.1.1

            22 June 2016 at 2:08 pm

            If I were Winston I would entrench the power of the minor parties by insisting on a Fixed Term Parliaments Act.
            • Chooky 11.1.1.1.1.1

              22 June 2016 at 11:21 pm

              what is that?
              • Draco T Bastard …

                22 June 2016 at 11:43 pm

                http://thestandard.org.nz/welsh-assembly/
                • Chooky …

                  23 June 2016 at 1:18 pm

                  thanx for the link and conclusion

                  …”In terms of NZ, our parliamentarians need to stop playing silly buggers; trying to shove the round peg of mmp into the square hole of fpp is an exercise of frustrating stupidity that’s delivering something far less democratic than NZ deserves.

                  ( the Labour Party seems to be a slow learner…they will never win a FPP Election again)
12. Chooky 12

    22 June 2016 at 12:29 pm

    Now about Hillary…Hillary Clinton exposed…and Hillary in foreign affairs aint pretty ( in fact it is pretty awful!)

    ‘Hacker ‘Guccifer 2.0′ publishes DNC campaign docs with strategies for defending Clinton’

    https://www.rt.com/usa/347681-guccifer-clinton-dnc-defense/
    • joe90 12.1

      22 June 2016 at 6:48 pm

      Would you be so positively gleeful had the NSA led an assault on the Green party?.
      /

      http://www.neowin.net/news/the-russian-government-hacked-the-dnc-after-all
      • Chooky 12.1.1

        22 June 2016 at 8:22 pm

        ?
        • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1

          23 June 2016 at 8:03 am

          Joe90 is losing the plot. He thinks the powerful elite deserve to be able to hide the truth from us.
          • Chooky 12.1.1.1.1

            23 June 2016 at 1:27 pm

            +100…have to agree…yup and it is more about what Hillary’s emails reveal about her and her friends war crimes foreign affairs …than about the actual hacking itself…

            …and absolutely no one can even remotely accuse the Greens of indulging in this sort of disgraceful invasion and destruction of sovereign nations in the Middle East…so the analogy is totally misleading

            btw doesnt NSA spy/hack everything anyway with this jonkey nacts government’s conivance and the Labour Party’s agreement….Foreign Spy Bill and all that …so NSA is probably spying on the Greens anyway!
13. katipo 13

    22 June 2016 at 12:31 pm

    I note the ‘Get Rid of Hosking’ petition now has 15,500 signatures
    https://www.change.org/p/tvnz-get-rid-of-hosking-1347aa6d-8044-4a33-ba59-7fe0a5dba42b

    To paraphrase Nick Smith’s rational for sacking the elected ECAN board….
    the State funded Hosking has now become a “dysfunctional mess”.
    Perhaps he could be replaced by a commissioner.
14. Draco T Bastard 14

    22 June 2016 at 12:51 pm

    Stop showering so damn much

    In his latest episode, Hamblin takes on showers. The question is, do we really need them? Or do they do more harm than good? As Hamblin points out, some scientists theorize that washing off the helpful bacteria on our bodies actually makes us less clean by disturbing our own delicate ecosystem.

    It appears washing and using soap extensively may actually be the cause of bad BO.
    • Andre 14.1

      22 June 2016 at 1:02 pm

      The complete rebuttal in two words: teenage boys.
      • McFlock 14.1.1

        22 June 2016 at 1:42 pm

        lol
    • ianmac 14.2

      22 June 2016 at 1:18 pm

      Read somewhere that ocean sailors limited in fresh water, seldom washed and after a while the bacteria settled down and the sailors became odorless.
      In swimming pools the smell of chlorine is because there is too little and the bacteria are only partly broken down. Therefore extra chlorine is needed to break through.
      Not the same thing but misunderstanding occurs with both scenarios.
      • McFlock 14.2.1

        22 June 2016 at 3:49 pm

        Sailors can wash with salt water.

        And apparently submarines got pretty stinky in the old days…
15. AsleepWhileWalking 15

    22 June 2016 at 12:55 pm

    This is pretty annoying. If you want donations then at least put up a givealittle page and ask the reporter to link to it.

    Article is from a month back (so a month has been wasted). New article in stuff today. They only need $14K.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/79817574/medical-equipment-donated-from-nelson-to-help-diabe
16. mac1 16

    22 June 2016 at 2:04 pm

    New immigrants. I hope that they do the job without unforeseen consequences. WASPs I might tolerate- a not psyllid idea.

    https://nz.news.yahoo.com/top-stories/a/31889069/wasp-brought-in-to-curb-plant-pests/#page1
17. Chooky 17

    22 June 2016 at 11:20 pm

    ‘Trump backs Brexit, urges Europeans to ‘reconsider’ EU membership’

    https://www.rt.com/uk/347726-trump-brexit-referendum-eu/

    “A Trump spokesperson has reaffirmed the presumptive Republican nominee’s support for a Brexit, claiming he is “very much in favor of countries doing what is best for them and their people…

    …”Trump is one of the few voices in US politics on either side of the aisle who has spoken out in favor of a Brexit. His Democratic rival Hillary Clinton has voiced support for the Remain campaign. Clinton’s top policy adviser told the Observer in April: “She has always valued a strong United Kingdom in a strong EU. And she values a strong British voice in the EU.”

    READ MORE: Obama’s ‘misguided’ EU referendum intervention threatens UK sovereignty, say US lawmakers

    https://www.rt.com/uk/347463-republican-congressmen-brexit-obama/

    Three republican senators have condemned President Barack Obama’s intervention in the Brexit debate.

    During a visit timed to coincide with Queen Elizabeth II’s 90th birthday earlier this year, Obama warned the United States would be in no hurry to agree a bilateral trade deal if Britain was no longer in the EU…

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS