- Date published:
6:00 am, July 23rd, 2017 - 226 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 …
Ever since hominids discovered the intoxicating effect of fermented fruit mankind has been hard at work refining the chemicals and processes that generate shifts in consciousness, -synthetic cannabis being the new ‘bad boy’ on the block.
For millions the way things are is not enough. Unable to nail joy at will we resort to substance ingestion, injection or inhalation to effect measures of transient peace, upliftment or ecstasy. The consummately lucrative drug industry underlines the urgency with which we continue to modify the boredom of our habitual cognitive routines.
Yet many sense an aspect of the mind that can be uncovered through ancient disciplines of pure living, meditation, chanting, mindfulness and yoga. Transcendence, simply defined as ‘lying beyond the limits of ordinary experience’ (Merriam Webster), when attained, (no matter how briefly), eclipses the persistent pattern of self-referencing perceptions we find so stale.
What seems to happen is the termination of duality; the perceived boundaries of the experiencer’s world become transparent to uncover a sense of profound kinship with all that exists, along with a measure of peace not believed possible. It is also a shocking thing to discover that one’s rational mind is not necessarily king but the agent of a more abstract version of itself.
Written off by sceptics as ‘delusional‘, these experiences hold much in common with the perceptions of mystics of all religions. Despite his anti-religion sentiments, atheist Sam Harris holds that there is “nothing irrational about seeking the states of mind that lie at the core of many religions. Compassion, awe, devotion and feelings of oneness are surely among the most valuable experiences a person can have.”
It seems impossible to put to bed the notion that there exists an expanded version of ourselves which, coming forward through a range of disciplines (rather than drugs), affords a measure of peace and refreshment of purpose not readily accessible via contemporary living. What we are seeing is the widespread revival of ancient traditions (Vedanta, Advaita, Buddhism) through the lens of modern interpretation (non-dualism, spiritual atheism, transcendentalism).
It is possible that the much loved scriptural quote “peace that passeth all understanding” has a more literal meaning than formerly surmised. And now with even atheists on board a new world religion may be forming in our midst.
A poorly quoted Sunday morning doper rant.
You really think New Zealand is doing great with recreational drug with all this “nailing joy” and “uplifting”, you might want to pop up north and have a chat with Kelvin Davis.
Entirely misinterpreted. You may want to have another read.
“there exists an expanded version of ourselves which, coming forward through a range of disciplines (RATHER THAN DRUGS), affords a measure of peace and refreshment of purpose not readily accessible via contemporary living.”
Not that hard to misinterpret, if that’s what I did.
Much more interesting to inquire why New Zealand remains so resiliently non-religious, but of those that are by far and away the largest religion is Christianity. Certainly also the most effective religion when it comes to political engagement. As you saw from the Catholic Bishops this week.
Wake me when the vedantic masters do the same.
The closest to any revival I can see is some “mindfulness” wank, which is about as close to Buddhism as pulling turnips.
“Right mindfulness” No. 7 of Buddha’s 8-fold path.
Maybe the religion of Christianity isn’t as well loved as you would like – personally i dislike a lot of christianity – often too sanctimonious, hypocritical and delusional. I wish Christianity had never come here as the vanguard of colonisation. Ruined so much imo. Nevertheless I also count some Christians as people I love and care about and thus I care about their beliefs.
As I get older and death feels closer (which is bizarre when you think about it because it’s as close as it ever was) I have found my beliefs changing – I can’t judge that, just note it as an interesting phenomenon.
I am not a Christian, but (like you) have close friends within that community.
Many Christians have stepped beyond the dogmatic sanctimonious aspect, which I agree is abhorrent.
The “interesting phenomenon” you mention is common to many (old and young) at this time. One model I find appealing is Teilhard de Chardin’s “noosphere”, a thinking layer encircling the earth, – now much intensified by the myriad social media in which perspectives are shared and aired in ever-increasing intensity. Certain ideas gain greater coherency and when ‘weighted’ sufficiently create a tipping point (“peduncle” in de Chardin’s terminology) from which a new philosophy or religion or global attitude or level of consciousness comes to birth.
Have you had a go at Atul Gawande’s “Being Mortal”?
A good tough read if you feel the horizon of death.
Much more interesting to inquire why New Zealand remains so resiliently non-religious, but of those that are by far and away the largest religion is Christianity.
There’s no great mystery there. Religion is an artifact of culture, and the majority of people in NZ are from a culture for which the religious artifact is Christianity.
Clearly you haven’t been to a Catholic church recently.
There you will find an amalgam of cultures far beyond your narrow mind.
These two facts are not mutually exclusive:
1. Christianity is the religion of NZ’s dominant culture.
2. If I go to a Christian church, I will also see people from other cultures.
Your claim would have worked prior to World War 1 when the Protestant denominations held societal sway. It’s a minority sport, and that’s good for it.
Hasn’t been part of the “dominant culture” for a long time. That’s its artifactual state.
It’s not just the use of exogenous agents that have mood-altering properties but also many of our habits that only serve to release endogenous neuro-transmitters that (positively, in the first instance) affect our moods.
Homo economicus is not as rational as he/she likes to think. Consumerism, retail therapy, etc., are all aimed at getting an instant but short-lived ‘fix’.
The aim of the entertainment (and gaming) industry is for people to lose themselves in a fake world (Avatar) and experience a spectrum of emotions that we severely lack in our daily modern lives.
Billions of dollars are spent and billions of human hours are frittered away chasing short-lived spikes of pleasure and happiness.
Besides being trapped in a futile cycle (Groundhog Day), which is more like a roller-coaster with ups & downs, the issue is that we’re largely unaware of it, living it, being it.
When you turn off the ‘noise’ in your head and allow silence enter it changes everything and the shadows (paradigmata) start to disappear too.
The problem is when you start to become aware; it’s profoundly confusing and you’re faced with a new choice, of a different kind. Nine out of ten times you revert back to your old habits (the Devil you know) …
Thank you for the post @ 1.
Agreed about the endogenous neurotransmitters. The endless round of quick fix gaming, powerfully driven by commercial enterprise keeps millions captive in horizontal layering of fantasy.
Those who generate change from within through disciplined practice discover pathways of exquisite subtlety; sensory input from the natural world is enhanced and many things formerly regarded as ‘humdrum’ take on heightened meaning.
The “Cat Killer” putting his name in the hat for the Epsom Electorate should make it interesting for “See More” and the “Natzis” ?
Calling Gareth a “cat killer” is unfair. Why not call him “Native Bird Protector?”
The fur assassin?
Leader of the feline death squad?
Fluffy’s greatest enemy?
I get that native birds are worth protecting, I’m just very skeptical that removing cats will do that given that they also prey extensively on rodents and the like.
“I get that native birds are worth protecting, I’m just very skeptical that removing cats will do that given that they also prey extensively on rodents and the like.”
Good point, not sure of my facts so it could be a bit of bullshit but didn’t they have a problem just like that in Melbourne when they tried to control the cats because of the Lyrebird and then found the rats were having a field day.
Not true Asleepwhilewalking – I have friends in New Plymouth whose cat regularly felled native wood pigeons much to their horror and our own moggie many years ago bought into the house a tui which we tried to rescue but it died on the way to the bird lady we have here. Cats, no matter how well fed they are, if they are so inclined, will predate on birds. Some cats will sleep in the sun while birds are in the bird bath and couldn’t care less. Like children, none are the same, but they are predators no doubt about that.
… or the pussy murderer ?
“Calling Gareth a “cat killer” is unfair. Why not call him “Native Bird Protector?”
I go along with that ianmac. As a cat owner, I agree with what Morgan says about the feral cats in this country. The only concern I have is since he made that statement about cats, I get the feeling every cat hating nutter as taken it as an open season on cats. I am aware of people whose cats have gone missing or have returned home injured.
Fortunately, our puss stays in at nights, but she is microchipped and registered so to speak with the vets.
I am also in favour of having to have a licence for cats as it will bring in hopefully a bit of responsibility with cat owning, and if it goes towards saving our native fauna I am all for it,
He’s not called cat killer because of feral cats 😉
“He’s not called cat killer because of feral cats”
Thanks for that Weka I thought he was all for trapping feral cats and having them put down and strict controls on domestic cats like registering and keeping them in at nights.
Why is he called cat killer then?
His original position was to kill cats in general. He had to pull back from that because so many people protested his position. But the name and reputation stuck. Lots of people want to control feral cats and don’t get called cat killers.
Thanks, Was not aware of that.
And he is trying to protect native and endemic species on the brink of extinction. His style is bombastic so the responses to him often match, the intensity at least, imo. Cat killer is up there with some of the Clinton ones I think.
He never called for killing cats, not the domestic ones anyway. Once he said not replacing pets who died. I reckon the policies stated by politicians should be the basis for discussion. To rubbish UI because a “Cat Killer” had promoted it is ridiculous.
He wanted to rid NZ of cats. It was a dick move and the name is appropriate to him misusing his power and influence.
I have other reasons for criticising his UBI 😈
It wasn’t a dick move if you’re a conservationist and want a predator free New Zealand. Not that I think that the predator free thing is possible, but lots of kiwis are fine with killing rodents and possums in the name of conservation. He addressed the elephant in the room, cats.
I’m pro-conservation but not at any cost. I’m also pro-sustainability, and cats that live with humans play an important role in controlling rats, mice, rabbits and introduced birds. The only other option for that currently is poisoning. Or trapping (which few people will do).
As long as nativists keep conflating wild cats and household cats, we’re at an impasse. Morgan’s a big part of that problem.
100% Weka it was dick move.
When did he say he wanted to kill domestic cats?
He wanted to rid NZ of all cats,
Weka, Within the context of getting rid of all anti-wildlife pests he said “that includes potentially your furry little pet.” Point being cats can be classed as significant predators. Not that all cats must be killed.
(I think that Gareth does want NZ rid of all cats, I guess the idea is that when they die naturally they’re not allowed to be replaced. He’s an idiot).
“Point being cats can be classed as significant predators”.
So? My cat catches rabbits, mice, blackbirds and finches. Why is that a bad thing?
+ 1 yep, good point, I agree.
On RNZ – renters telling their stories to let politicians know why the rent regulations need changing.
RNZ provides a link to “People’s review of renting” on Action Station
What is needed is a Rental Housing Ombudsman, a protector of tenants who desperate people can approach and he/she would have powers to order landlord to repair properly using a local approved trades business and pay for it, or the house gets sold to the state for minimum QV. That would put the fear of God up them – the cold-hearted ones. Many of them would be on a par with the innkeeper from Les Miserables.
Charge ’em for the lice, extra for the mice
Two percent for looking in the mirror twice (Hand it over!)
Here a little slice, there a little cut
Three percent for sleeping with the window shut
When it comes to fixing prices
There are a lot of tricks I knows
How it all increases, all them bits and pieces
Jesus! It’s amazing how it grows!
Then the others would look to rationalising their holdings to what they could afford. Then the WOF for housing would also apply, but with less stringent demands, more time to carry out non-urgent repairs. Some action required here immediately by the new L/G government!! And if we don’t get one we know that the lazy cowards of Gnashionals will go the easy way that won’t upset their backers.
Insulation would help a mouldy room but ventilating every day would also be a cure. Moisture from the breath of 2-3 people being allowed to accumulate is begging for mould.
seriously the ‘are you ventilating enough’ victim blaming again?
I lived in houses with all windows open and still had to wipe water oft he walls every morning.
but yeah, it must be the lack of ventilation if the water comes dripping down from the ceiling while you sit on the golden throne.
Can’t understand your refusal to face a scientific fact Sabine.
Moisture feeds mould.
I live in a well insulated house but every day we open windows to ventilate. Seems a small price to reduce mould.
i don’t refuse to face a scientific fact.
but i refuse to blame people living in sub standard conditions like i have, and still have the images to proof, for which i took a landlord to the tenancy tribunal, after which the house was demolished for a rotten roof, rotten walls, and say its due to ventilation.
saying that water runs down on walls and clothes rotting in your closet or your furniture is getting moldy is due to not enough ventilation, while not saying a thing about leaking houses, houses without adequate heating, housing with drafty doors and windows are not to blame is victim blaming.
but your concern is noted.
Had a very clued up Auckland renter tell me her damp saga last week. She’d reported the mould on the walls every winter to the landlord. This year, while she was away, it was worse than usual – mold go into her furniture. She was paying for walls to be fixed, then they found they there had been water leaking behind the wall for years.
Now landlord is paying for it all.
Sorry, why was she paying for the walls to be fixed? Surely that’s the landlords responsibility at the outset?
Rodney Hide: Turei wins the handout vote
Rodney Hide having a poke at Turei for the handout.
I recall? that didn’t Hide bugger of on a private trip to Paris on the tax payer some years ago?
If I am right isn’t it just at little hidocritical by Rodney.
He’d thought pretty carefully about how to get the most taxpayers’ money for the trip, too:
Mr Hide racked up $11,952 in taxpayer-funded air travel for Louise Crome to accompany him on an official trip to Britain, Canada and the United States.
He used his 90 per cent travel subsidy to pay her fare, thus getting around the edict from Prime Minister John Key that ministers who take their partners on overseas business should not use their ministerial travel allowances.
he did this while claiming to be a perk buster
Thanks for the reference. I had look, but was unsucessful.
nah, being a beneficiary is receiving hand outs.
getting your Paris trips paid is due income and government perks.
The preferred phrase for government MPs is “It was within the rules.” Of course, all kinds of things are when you get to make your own rules…
@ dv (5) … yes I read this piece from Hide and was gobsmacked that the rorting self proclaimed perk buster himself, has the gall to give Meteria Turei some stick for trying to survive the best way she could for her herself and her young daughter, through not being entirely up front with WINZ!
In Hide’s situation, it was a case of getting the most out of his taxpayer funded perks! Based purely on self indulgence and greed, he used his position to take his girlfriend along on an overseas trip at our expense! Definitely not an act of desperation, as it was with Meteria and others in similar circumstances to what she was at the time!
And the NZH needs to wake up and carefully scrutinise its columnists opinion pieces before publishing! Very poor editing on its part. Shame on both the Herald and Hide.
Part way through this long read of interview transcript on the Intercept – highly recommended reading.
Interview with historian Alfred McCoy, author of books on the US empire and it’s MO of covert ops. Upcoming book n the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power.
Especially the stuff about how US global dominance has been trough the development of the CIA and covert surveillance ops, used to change governments and manipulate elections around the world, at least since mid 20th century.
another benefit fraud in the papers. 250k this time.
“Life had at times been cruel to her and two of her four children were in jail. Her daughter was expecting her fourth baby.
“People don’t know the in and outs,” she said.”
guess she thinks that makes it ok then?
Ah, love it. A bit of Maori-bashing on a Sunday morning.
I never mentioned she was Maori, nor does the article. And to be honest I do not see what that has to do with anything.
But nice try playing the race card – Its a pathetic attempt to divert.
But hey if you want to jump to conclusions that she stole because she was Maori – that says more about you than anybody else.
Please, you made an attempt to equate this case with that of Turei, a Maori, a woman, and someone then struggling to make ends meet.
Your smug and preachy distain for beneficiaries, the poor, for Maori, and possibly for women too is barely disguised by a paper-thin veneer.
I dont care if Turei is Maori or not. It has nothing to do with what she has done.
But to equate it – they both deliberately defrauded the government. Both have admitted it.
If you havnt noticed – you are the person that keeps bringing race and sex into it.
And what of the outcomes? Turei’s experience has allowed her to gain a law degree, contribute to the public good, become and MP, the leader of a political party, and possibly a government minister.
How does that fit into your framing of these two cases as identical?
Oh … Do I have to make them identical now? For what?
You seem to be an apologist for her fraud?
Why do you find it so hard to congratulate Meteria Turei on what she’s achieved?
Is it because she was once a beneficiary?
Is it because she’s a woman?
Is it because she’s Maori?
Or, is it because she’s socially conscious?
So transparent is James. Not very accurate or brave or honest but see through? YEAH – nailed it!!!
It was moronic of her to put benefit fraud into this election.
We’ll have to wait until the next polls to see if it had any effect.
But it’s opened up a field that is needlessly divisive and will encourage more and more of this kind of columnist to frame her.
It was obvious from the photo that she was part-Maori.
But I seriously doubt that was the reasoning for offending.
James, the photo accompanying the articles I saw, and the full name printed, made it clear as to her ethnicity.
Try this article for a clear comparison and argument about benefit and tax fraud.
Now, which should be exercising our government, our courts and our IRD more?
There was an image with the article in which the woman plainly looks Maori,
and she seems to have a Maori middle name, so you assumed it and were quick to condemn.
She has been receiving a benefit for 15 years, an invalid’s benefit, a supported living benefit and has had accommodation supplement. She has had a man living in the house as boarder and the DSW have decided he is her partner.
A number of assumptions there.
She would have been better off to have had good help with her upbringing of her daughters, two of whom are in jail. The right amount of money and help, and continued friendly oversight would have saved probably $1 million in costs.
What a disgraceful comment from the well-aid District Court judge, He thinks she should be left to rot while she is trying to hold the pieces of her family together.
“So the taxpayer is continuing to provide her with benefit? Good gracious,” Judge Garland said. “Unbelievable”. (Senc her to debtor’s prison as in the Charles Dickens books. What a censorious, little creep.
Tell me James, an older woman who is unwell and looking after multiple children under stressful circumstances, what is she supposed to live on? Or should she live on her own even though she probably can’t cope on her own financially, physically or as a parent.
So for 15 years – she could not come up with any other solution that to commit crimes and defraud.
+1, as I mentioned earlier in the week this whole Turei announcement is the single most stupid thing she’s done, she has effectively moved the narrative from the good policy announcements from L/G and turned all commentary towards her and fraud. Unbelievable stupidity, does anyone really think this is going to win us votes?.
Yeah we know what you think cos you keep repeating the same old right wing rubbish lines a lot. We get it, yawn.
I’ve read your repeated comments on Turei and disagree.
Many NZers are living a hard financial reality, one that is not overtly represented by any of the politicians currently in government. They cannot see a voice there that understands their concerns and issues. Turei has given them a voice, right on election time.
Along with that, the hidden judgement and persecution of those on income support has been publicly shown. And with this display of bitterness and bile, there may be some who are now thinking about the life experiences of those who they share a country with, who are living a life completely disconnected from their own. Compassion comes with knowledge, and the stories being shared provide that knowledge, and sometimes invoke that compassion.
Remember, we are asking for a new government to provide change, not just for opposition to be in power.
There is also perfect political timing in this revelation, as the usual attack dog – Paula Bennett, is in the awkward position of either attacking her – and creating a storm of controversy and accusations of hypocrisy if she is found to have done the same. And given her lack-lustre response – this is quite likely.
That dilemma continues to the rest of the National MP’s – do they condemn Turei wholeheartedly, and while doing so – perhaps condemn one of the power players in government?
@ Molly (188.8.131.52.2) …. Agree with your points raised.
It’s been a week now since Meteria Turei publicly announced she hadn’t been strictly honest with social welfare during the time she was struggling as a single parent.
Normally Natz would be gnawing at this issue like a salivating rabid dog with a bone, particularly given its timing prior to a general election.
The silence is too obvious, speaking volumes in itself.
Rattling skeletons in closets comes to mind …
So best to “zip it” in Ms Bennett’s famous words! Just in case.
Parliament should be interesting when it resumes this week!
The “fraud” in this instance was not declaring her live-in partner. In this instance, the law’s an ass and needs changing.
No – the fraud was telling lies about it and taking $ that she was not entitled to.
Thats why shes going to jail.
Yes. She broke the law and is being penalised for it.
And the law is still an ass for putting, mainly women with children, in difficult situations struggling to survive. And it very much needs changing.
The headlines belie the circumstances – make her just sound greedy, rather than struggling to survive.
You reckon she’s going to gaol jimbo? You do the mathSS on that? How much d’you figure winz’ll be into her for? MathSSwise?
Gabby – Yep – shes going to jail.
I notice the little SS dig – not sure if you are making an accusation of if you are a fan.
Just reminding you it’s mathssssss not math jame. Did you do the mathsssss? How much d’you reckon she’s owing? First offender owing fuckall probably isn’t going to gaol.
“Yes. She broke the law and is being penalised for it.”
As is appropiate.
So James have you ever paid someone under the table? You seem young so I’m not sure if you’re training or working bùt everyone does it, yep just like wanking. So email ird and be honest, please for he sake of the country give yourself up.
Has he ever been in need? That James is a supercilious little prig but not more than other RWS?
He just is so screwed that he enjoys having a perch like a cat I saw, who annoyed the little yapping dogs that couldn’t jump high enough to get at it. And that brings me to the point – who are the little yapping dogs here? Guilty for one. So I will retire.
More important things to think about than trying to make a point to a stone statue. If someone saw you talking angrily to your local statue of Councillor Quill, they would shake their heads and say – ‘mental case’. So think on that.
And some tweets from Tiso about the article:
The fraud you delight in specifying, is due to the draconian benefits system we have.
It would do you some good to remember:
1. Benefits were set by Ruth Richardson at 20% lower than the minimum required to live, and have not been adjusted to meet that requirement at this time. (Are people supposed to go into hibernation for 20% of the time?)
2. There did not appear to be any fraud committed by her claiming sickness, apart from the presence in the house of a partner. Meaning that she was, and still remains ill enough to claim a benefit (as long as she is alone). (And let’s not forget the requirements of illness benefits, where you need to continuously provide evidence of your illness even if it is a lifelong disability or condition)
3. No mention is made of her receiving child benefit payments even though she had the care of grandchildren. (And the delight of CYFS that someone has care of the children, without the support they would have to provide if those children were not under the care of a relative – despite her age, despite her illness, despite her financial position)
Now. James. Are you able to discuss the issues relating to situations like this without stopping your discourse at “Fraud. Bad”?
Is it at all possible you can continue thinking, and have a conversation about what limits there should be on whether you can have a supportive relationship while on a benefit or not? And whether your home and income should be affected if you do?
Now, Income Support is very ambiguous on what they consider a supportive relationship to be.
Do you think people who receive income support should be isolated from the human experience of love, support and sex because they receive a benefit, and that it is just to reduce income or assistance from them because they participate in those activities? Yes? Even if the support comes without financial benefit?
That’s a starter course for you.
Take a bite and chew on it for a while, before resuming your sanctimonious spittle of judgement. It will be interesting to see what you come out with.
(BTW, if you are actually a NZ resident and not a spontaneous reactive spider-bot spitting out random Randisms, then your inability to note the Maaori descendancy of the woman in the photo goes some way to explaining your lack of reality observations elsewhere).
yes – I could see she was Maori – big deal. As you suggesting that criminals should be ignored or their crimes not discussed simply because of their race?
Another good attempt at redirecting there James.
Could you possibly bring yourself to discussing the rest of the comment? Both reading and comprehension seem to be an issue with you when it comes to discussion? There are only three points there after all. I numbered them for you particularly because you do seem to run off confusedly when I ask for your opinion on certain aspects.
(And don’t even get started on the issues of race and charging, conviction and sentencing unless you really are that ignorant)
Benefit is not a right it is a privilege, if you allow people to take the piss that the benefit is an entitlement you get the morale hazard that Is Meteria and her ilk
No, it’s actually a right enshrined in law.
A right with obligations, you don’t honour your obligations don’t try to hide behind the right
Okay, so now you admit that benefits are a right
Beneficiaries don’t have much recourse when the state fails to meet its obligations.
Well Red – you sound like a right privileged prick.
You wouldn’t know a morale hazard if you fell over one.
You have brought out the important points that need to be looked at objectively before one passes the stern judgment of whatever punishment. And they can get pretty stern once people decide they have the right to dump on someone. And often on a perception that there was something going on that was no approved of.
Was whatever illegal? Anything can be made illegal by government deciding so, whether justified or not. And in the end they are just a bunch of people who are temporarily in positions of power and can pass laws that suit themselves and their buddies. Just being against ‘the’ law doesn’t mean that you are going against God’s writ.
If you have a thinking government it tries to find practical ways of dealing with a situation without being draconian. (I got a ticket for $200 for having forgotten to reregister my car. Rushed and did it and got it withdrawn thankfully, but WTF – why that level of bludgeon?)
Matt 12: 1 – 6
No, she’s going to jail because the law’s an arse as it makes it impossible to survive in those situations without breaking the law.
No, it’s not. National purposefully set the benefit rates 20% below what Treasury thought was needed just to live. And since then benefits haven’t kept up with inflation, especially housing inflation.
So for many years James could not come up with any other solution than to return to a left leaning blog site to commit ‘crimes and defraud’…
Yeah, poorly educated Māori should know better.
“So for 15 years – she could not come up with any other solution that to commit crimes and defraud.
sure, I don’t find that hard to imagine at all. If you answer my questions James, you might answer your own. I’ll ask again,
Tell me James, an older woman who is unwell and looking after multiple children under stressful circumstances, what is she supposed to live on? Or should she live on her own even though she probably can’t cope on her own financially, physically or as a parent.
We dont know what she had to live on – as we have no idea of the income of her partner.
Yet you are willing to judge her without the facts.
Still won’t answer the question. Failure of imagination or simply because if you did answer them it would show up your bigotry even more.
You are willing to give her benefit of doubt without the facts How much are you allowed to steal before it is to much ( ie crosses over to greed and fraud) , who sets that threshold, I assume left response we will form a committee and working group of experts to sort ths out
“You are willing to give her benefit of doubt without the facts”
Yes. Because I have a far better understanding of those situations and the people in them than James. And because as Carolyn says, the law is an ass.
“How much are you allowed to steal before it is to much ( ie crosses over to greed and fraud) , who sets that threshold, I assume left response we will form a committee and working group of experts to sort ths out”
So long as your not in it. Or we can just vote Green and put people in charge who actually give a shit.
As for where the line is, all the righties who’ve been running round for a couple of weeks bawling about fraud, you missed Turei’s point. Change the system and the lightweight fraud will go away. I suspect however that some righties at least are vindictive fucks who hate the poor and like the system the way that it is.
Emotional response and I know best because I am the only one who cares is not a valid arguement, albeit standard left tactics to close down an arguement before jumping to racist, I need a safe place, white privilege, you hate the poor and other weak ass attacks
You understand what projection is right?
Oh i forgot the projection conjecture is also another lame ass tactic well utilised by sjw lefties to close down an uncomfortable attack on their delusions, as is using words like survivor and denier inappropriately, with respect 😀
You forgot the bit about being a dick who can’t argue the points and so starts in with the smeary shit.
Hey I started with simply refuting your point re facts to back up your arguement as you accused others of, you then come back with accusing everyone of been vindictive fucks (nice) who don’t agree with you, Followed up with predictable lefty attacks lines , a mirror world be useful acquisition in the near future Weka , just saying and no real animosity it’s just an opinion blog
Once you start it is easier to continue than stop until somebody stops you.
James at 7.2.1 -One can easily understand now whey SMB’s do not raise their hands when they deduct domestic expenditure from there tax return and have their holidays booked as business trips.
Whilst this admission from Mrs Turei is without a doubt the single most stupendous thing ever watched in politics, it did get people talking. And yes, it is not right to defraud the system but lets examine who the people are who are forced to do so. These are single mothers who, in order to SURVIVE go through extraordinary lengths to protect their child – this is called nature in action and I would actually expect this unless anyone out there with a holier than though attitude sees themselves as something else. At what rate is anybody entitled to throw stones sitting in a glass house?
I am not impressed with Mr Turei’s action but given the circumstance and the fact that this was not about one persons fancy wishes of party and spending but protecting the welfare of a child I would indeed invoke compassion over inquisitional rules. One has to ask the question at what point is NZ calling themselves civilized.
And Weka – how do you know she does not have enough money – she was living with her partner? Did he have a job? How much $$$ was s/he bringing in each week?
James, if we were speaking of a couple who don’t receive benefits, when do you consider a couple should merge their bank accounts?
Is it an issue set by a particular set of circumstances, a period of time or something else?
And, how do you negotiate a new relationship while still caring for children from a previous relationship?
Does the new relationship go straight from friends – to financial supporter of the whole household?
I’m interested to see if your summary judgements continue when the issue of benefits is taken out of the equation.
All nice questions – but people generally know when they are living in a relationship.
That’s mighty cowardly of you James not to provide your views.
Do you want to give it a good Boy Scout try?
James’s object is to troll the left – not to expose his indefensible rationalisations to scrutiny.
Yes, I noticed that questions are like kryptonite to James’ Nietzsche-like Superman responses. That’s why I do it.
( …a very tiny part of me waits to see if he will one day answer).
And a fine job you do too – much appreciated.
Living in a relationship has nothing to do with it. Who someone shares a house with or has sex with is not the legal criteria for this kind of fraud. Which is why your judgement is so off. This exposes your bigotry.
Adults need to work it out not expect government to run and finance their lives simply as a right because they are incompetent in sorting their shite out, Government support should be last resort with conditions, anything else is madness unless you live in la la land
You might want to get rid of welfare (although stop and consider the French revolution for a moment). But thankfully lots of people still think that welfare is the right thing for a sane society to have.
Is the French Revolution a read between the lines “we will get violent if the hard left don’t get their way via the ballot box “?
Think starving people of all political persuasions
Nz does not have starving people or real poverty, relative poverty, poor nutrition choices yes I think a French peasant in revolutionary France would be quite happy with nz modern poverty, I suggest so would most kiwis from previous generations Hyperbole does the left no favours , just because you hear it constantly in this echo chamber don’t fool yourself in thinking that the great majority of nz thinks nz is a neoliberal hell hole Dystopia. If there is change in government it is more a mix of national, Nzf Blue green and centre left labour the country wants not sjw kool aid the greens are selling Hence National NZF is by far the most likely outcome in September, unless green members come to thier senses and go with a grand national blue green coalition which is still a possibility no matter how hard people shout it is not
I’ll say it again slowly. If you get rid of welfare eventually the hungry people will revolt.
James should be on TV – they had a successful vox pop style court once called Judge Judy. Judge James sounds good and would give him something to do to fill in his idle hours.
“And Weka – how do you know she does not have enough money – she was living with her partner? Did he have a job? How much $$$ was s/he bringing in each week?”
Quite. The article was a specious piece of bullshit designed to set off bigots like you. There’s not enough information in it to understand her circumstances, so why the rush to judge? Unless you are saying that all people who commit crimes are reprehensible, even the ones that do it to feed and house their kids.
Myself, I can imagine lots of circumstances where her life and the lives of her kids would be much worse if she hadn’t lived with her partner. I don’t condone breaking the law in this way, but I utterly understand why some people do it. It’s your lack of understanding I am pointing to.
A good idea to put her in prison for two or three years at a cost of about $100,000 a year. That will learn her for pinching $250,000 part of which she was entitled to.
I looked, but there was no mention of the number of years the charge related to.
This is pertinent, a sum of $250,000 over ten years is much different than over one. And also, the given the cost of rentals, the rental subsidy might add up to a very large number.
The trouble is that some read the headlines and see a women with a “lottery win” of $250,000 as if she has it in the bank. That is not the case, and given there were two journalists at work on the story, you would think these details would be included.
Re-read again, to find the period.
Fifteen years, gives her a “fraudulent” net income of less than $17,000.
Hardly the stuff of high-finance, and appallingly low for a single person, let alone one who provides for dependents. I’m guessing she may have blown it all on utilities, clothes and food, but she probably forgot about the requisite 20% hibernation she and her grandchildren are supposed to undergo in order to make ends meet.
Am going to have to repost this video from Phat Bollard again, “…What do you mean welfare is dead?”
$17,000 per year?
Very basic $250,000 total/15 years = $16,667/yr.
We seem to have a lot of reporting that conflates numbers, but we have political discourse that does the same. We should demand better.
ta, and yes I agree. Too much of this debate is flailing ideology from a large number of people ignorant of reality.
That IS excellent:
Yes if it sends a message to others the payoff is positive
if it fed the kids, kept them in a house, in school, and way from trouble with the law, yes it was ok.
Cause not doing so would most likely end in more costs for incarceration, hospital admissions for various illnesses and ailments associated with poverty, and unemployment benefits for the future generation cause they never finished school or even learned to live.
but never mind, its just James blowing hot air out of his uptight sphincter.
Sabine, what do you/I/we say to someone who is, hypothetically, in exactly the same situation yet doesn’t lie about it to defraud the taxpayer?
For everyone that breaks the rules there must be a number that don’t, that make better decisions.
Regardless if you like the rules or not, surely there must equity for those who are required to meet them?
How much jail time do you think that Bill English should have gotten for his housing welfare benefit fraud that he committed in years past? btw, he owned the house, lived there with his partner (whom i think works and thus has income) or is that a special case cause MP, white male, from the south island, off spring of a farmer, blah blah blah
A system that is inherently cruel, that is designed to be hard to navigate, of which virtually no information is available (try to ind out how much you would get if you would loose your job – go fucking try) is a system that is rife for abuse by those that create that system, by those that administer that system and by those that try to navigate the system.
So… what do we say?
Commit fraud and if you haven’t you should have?
The system has a legislative initiative called FACE, full and correct entitlement. WINZ staff can lose their job if they don’t give a client everything they are entitled.
What’s not fair with that?
Bill English should have lost his job, his title ‘honorable’ his government perks and be barred for ever from public office and he should have gone to prison for housing welfare fraud that he committed.
but he did not.
so if he has had to only pay it back than this lady too could pay it back 5 bucks a week and justice would be done.
Instead, Bill English is the Billshitter of the Nation running for re-election.
so how comfortable are you voting for someone who stole of the hard working taxpayers?
Fark Sabine, edit I’m confusing myself!
Bill payed it back.
Winny paid it to a ‘charity’
Matiria will pay it back.
I ain’t arguing any of them are better or worse.
I ain’t saying Metiria shouldn’t be an MP
I didn’t say this lady should go to jail.
I did ask how we show equity to those in a similar position who don’t lie and defraud.
he did not go to prison.
he should have. Paying back is what he was ordered to do after he was found stealing from the tax payer.
this women will go to prison and still will have to pay back what ever the state decides.
so simply my point is, if we send beneficiaries to prison for stealing form the tax payer, then we should also send to prison those that are in government, highly paid with considerable perks i might add, and still steal from the taxpayer. And Bill English stole several tens of thousands of dollars from the taxpayer and he does not even have the excuse of ‘needing’ it.
i have yet to meet a beneficiary that has ‘not stolen’.
example. a friend of mine with cancer on a sickness benefit. I bring her a bag of groceries because she is too sick to leave the house, heck, once i even paid her electricity bill so that she would not have to sit in the dark.
I don’t think she ever declared that ‘extra income’ to Winz. IS she defrauding the system?
“The system has a legislative initiative called FACE, full and correct entitlement. WINZ staff can lose their job if they don’t give a client everything they are entitled.”
If you consider this to be effective, and widely used you would most likely be incorrect. It is possible to have a stated intention that is completely different or not able to be realised due to lack of resources or direction from above. Particularly in the case where this initiative comes from the same place as those who process the benefits in the first place.
You have a lot of trust in an untrustworthy institution.
“… that make better decisions. “
And there lies the fallacy of meritocracy.
Sometimes, you just have a better situation.
For a primer, here are a list of things that can help you when you are in dire straits that have nothing to do with decision making:
1. Your personal health
2. The ability of your relationships to provide support, including but not limited to:
– personal friends and acquantainces,
– local community
3. Your living situation. Is it healthy, affordable, fit for purpose, secure, located close to your support systems, located close to services?
4. Your network of opportunity. Do those you know have the ability to offer employment, assistance, better housing, assistance with childcare?
5. Are you able to present at an interview and be judged solely on the ability to undertake that position or are you judged on your income support past, your race, your clothes, your sex? How are you able to overcome that judgement?
6. Your value system. There are those living within straightened financial circumstances who do so after taking on the care of others, to the wider benefit of their community and society. Are those values without worth? Should we require them to be abandoned – is that what you consider to be a “better decision”?
A better decision, what I was thinking, is one that doesn’t lead to a conviction for fraud.
Oh. One answer to that would be to get the ability to lie better. That would not lead to a conviction for fraud. Or to become a Minister in the National government and have the State Services support your fraudulent practice – that would also avoid a conviction. But I digress.
No comment on the rest of the issues I put there for you to consider?
You are coming to the discussion table with very little to discuss.
When the the 4th National government purposefully set the benefit below what was needed to live there’s no ‘must’ in your statement.
Really surprised that no-one has mentioned that if a person is committed of fraud over WINZ payments, then the total payment received is considered to be the fraudulent amount to be recovered – not the difference between the amount claimed and the amount that ‘ought’ to have been claimed.
Divide the numbers given in the article, and you get about $316 per week.
There is more or less no way that the difference in entitlements between having and not having a partner equates to $316 per week. (I guess the caveat would be if your partner was in a job that paid a high enough wage that neither you nor they were entitled to any social security monies)
But like I say. Unlike (say) IRD stuff where a conviction will be on the amount defrauded and a jail sentence will often be in lieu of repayment, with WINZ it’s the entire claim….and a jail sentence, and you have to pay back the amount you’ve been convicted for too.
“… then the total payment received is considered to be the fraudulent amount to be recovered>>>”
Thanks Bill. I didn’t know that was the case. It makes the level of income for the woman seem very inadequate, especially as we know she was ill and caring for children.
Q & A has exposed another hypocrite – Kerry Prendergast! While castigating Meteria Turei, the arch trougher ex-Wellington Mayor forgot she used her elected position to install herself as the Council representative on the board of WIAL then pocketed an additional $34,000 p.a. board fee for doing a job she was already being paid to do on behalf of the ratepayers.
Seen that, freaking disgusting comments by Prendergast.
The political tv shows have revealed so much this weekend, extremely moving and inspiring interviews on Q+A this morning.
Anyone else see Jacinda on The Nation, she was terrible in that interview, had no figures and struggled to answer questions, let’s hope she improves.
I thought she answered extremely well. What figures are you talking about? Ardern cam across as assured, and positive, dealt well with curly questions, and kept foregrounding Labour policies positively.
It is irrelevant how Jacinda ‘comes across’, as she is a lightweight career politician
Presentation skills can’t obfuscate the obvious
They all must go!
Like John Key as a lightweight politician?
They’re all lightweight politicians..
Weak willed, broken and compromised..
How they were going to pay for policies etc, came across terribly, looking at the shows feedback, I wasn’t the only one thinking that. If your going to do sit down interviews like that you need your ducks in a row.
I’ve often been critical of Ardern in the past for her light weight presentation.
in this instance, I felt she had a very good grasp of Labour policies and answered well on it.
Costing of policies by opposition parties going into an election, has always been a red herring thrown at them. When they do provide detailed costings, critics look for the holes or start to yawn, when they don’t provide details, they get attacked – no win situation.
Don’t worry Judith Collins came across worse.
Oh look. Two pretend lefties attacking Ardern. What a surprise.
Pretend lefties, get a life and start opening your eyes.
Er. My eyes are open. You are a fraud.
Why?, because I’m critical of my side of politics, because I’m sick and tired of the way this country is going while watching my own side of politics with their heads in the sand, thinking everything is alright?. Or because I’m sick and tired of all the own goals we score when we have a chance to win!. You do need to open your eyes, you are blinded by the vacuum that is the standard, look around you, this has been a disaster for us, but you just keep throwing around names, I guarantee I’m not as left as some, but I’m proud to be centre left. OPEN YOUR EYES and get real.
With a never ending stream of criticism from yourself, have you ever thought that you might be part of the problem?
I suspect your ego is too inflated to consider that.
Yes maybe I am part of the problem, maybe wanting Labour to move closer to the centre (you know where the majority of voters are) ala the Clark years is a mistake, maybe I should embrace the party moving further to the left and accept the loss of elections?. I should also be complacent and be silent when we score own goals. You are exactly right, I shall speak no more.
You should be happy with Labour’s TV ad further down the page. Doesn’t scare the horses and looks catered to the middle class for me.
You mean be more like National?
Once again Labour is questioned and criticised and surprise surprise the criticism and question is ignored and the critics are written off as pretend lefties.
But that’s all you ever do, criticise Labour. Come back to me when you drop the Labour policy police act for 5 seconds.
But it’s not all I ever do.
For example, a few days ago I posted this:
It’s not my fault Labour’s performance and direction is often less desirable than it is good.
Additionally, only today I was criticising National’s campaign ad. Thus, it seems you do need to open your eyes.
These two (Sara + TC) do occasionally pretend to be sympathetic to the left or to Labour in the hope people won’t see them for what they are. From Wikipedia:
“concern troll (plural concern trolls)
(Internet slang) Someone who posts to an internet forum or newsgroup, claiming to share its goals while deliberately working against those goals, typically, by claiming “concern” about group plans to engage in productive activity, urging members instead to attempt some activity that would damage the group’s credibility, or alternatively to give up on group projects entirely.”
“Occasionally pretend to be sympathetic to the left”
Yet, how do you explain the fact that my arguments and criticism always come from a left point of view, wanting the party to move further left?
Because you fake every one of them, and still do your best to spread despondency. Like Sara, you are utterly transparent, obviously insincere, and total see-through. But you won’t let that stop you…
No I’m in the wrong, 26% in the polls is a great result, I was wrong to critique and demand better…
Methinks the lady doth protest too much..
+1 Muttonbird. These two are so transparent.
I haven’t watched the Ardern interview yet but seen the reaction from non-Labour people who have is that Ardern was very impressive in spite of Owen interrupting her constantly
Yes indeed the Lisa Owen interruption tactic does tend to destroy a potentially good interview. Winston, as a seasoned politician would never have put up with Owen’s disruptive interview style. As a strong Labour supporter (no BS), I feel that Jacinda and Andrew need to handle these type of interviews better.
The numbers fetish is a right wing, and mostly pretty masculine, thing. Muldoon had his charts, Blinglish spins stats claiming we have a great economy, while the legions of homeless grow; JohnKey did his “Show me the money, son”, while the economy fails to cater for all, helps the few, and long term goes down the toilet.
It was good to see Lisa Owen highlight the momentum lost in not supporting increasing benefit rates. Which I myself was highlighting to Robert Guyton on here the other day.
First we had the call from the Children’s Commissioner, then came the Greens proposal and just as all eyes turned to see if Labour would run with it, they stopped it dead in its tracks (Little on RNZ).
bollocks sara you are trolling….she came over well
I found Lisa Owen just a joke. Why is she not parading her colors outright? In my view she is an excuse of a journalist. Given her interrupting Mrs Arden and trying to manipulating her answers, Jacinda did quite well. PS.: How often did she have to say: If you let me finish….
While Little’s and the Green’s first campaign ad left a lot to be desired, not to worry, National’s isn’t any better.
It’s far from generating the devastating impact their rowing boat ad had.
God – even I found that boring as *&^&*^.
Needs a bit of Eminem to add a bit of life to it.
The music selected is certainly dull and unappealing.
Its country yokel bill music.
and to be honest it’s slick too damn these tories are good at marketing themselves.
pefectly suited then
Absolutely fitting in that aspect.
By the way what has happened to that Eminem court case?
Judge to make a decision sometime after the election.
Do you know or assuming?
Actually, thought I was relying on memory for an October date, but looks like I was wrong.
According to this, the judge has reserved three months before making a decision which would take it till around August. Apologies for the error.
Thanks Molly. That I hadn’t seen.
So before the election then and in the middle of the campaign
Oh dear…that ad is bad, really easy to tune out when viewing it.
Stat’s are interesting….
“Let’s Get Together” – NZ National Party 2017 Campaign Ad
Published on Jul 3, 2017
Andrew Little and Labour: A fresh approach
Published on Jul 16, 2017
let’s get together
you and me
you pay taxes
and i don’t
you have to ask for accomodation benefit and declare your lives in and outs
and i don’t
you don’t eat tonight cause there ain’t enough food for all
and i don’t – heck you even pay my dinners in fancy restaurants.
let’s get together
you and i
you pay taxes
and i don’t
let’s get togheter
you and i
you pay taxes
and i don’t ‘
you and me
you have to donate to your public school to pay for essentials
but my private one gets tax payers funds for the lawns
you have no shoes
but i can call the shop and demand that the shoe seller work past her hours to sell me a pair of a thousand dollar shoes
you have no jobs
but i can say its your fault cause you are useless
let’s get together
you and i
i don’t pay taxes
but i spend your money
on things I need
like plane travel, fancy food n wine and shoes
cause nothing says more that we are in it together
then you paying taxes and me not.
“let’s get together”, when over the past 9 years of National Party rule, we have had a greater divide between the rich and the poor. How does that signify togetherness?
The double-dipper from Dipton stinks of insincerity.
Let’s get together ?
A bunch of misfits, Natzis, Maori Party, ACT, United Future ?
Screenings of Kim Dotcom: Caught in the Web in other centres follow the July 29 premiere at the ASB Waterfront Theatre, Auckland. For more information go to nziff.co.nz.
Some on here will find this interesting. Of course feel free to download it free from Mega 😉
(and yes – I know KDC has no interest in MEGA anymore).
Beautiful tribute to a inspirational solo Mum who did whatever she could, including not declaring income to WINZ, in order to give her children a chance at a better life.
Yes how beautiful that was, Turei’s probably destined us for another three years in opposition but at long as we feel good….
She’s right, Turei a self-congratulating fraudster. Passive aggression NZ – style. Won’t wash with the voters but might bring some nons to the table.
Metiria Turei on Q&A this morning:
And here is the panel response:
Listen to the Prendergast woman’s response. A woman who has no understanding or compassion for other women way less off than herself. What a b****.
And full marks to Claire Robinson who I have criticised here on occasion.
Loved her passion, came across well, just wished she hadn’t of admitted to fraud, especially when announcing some of their policies.
Prendergast was appalling.
You mention fraud a lot. Falling into the trap of keeping the conversation within the parameters set by the right.
If you can’t move the perspective wider – then there is no reason to enter into discourse with others about the issue on here, because most here move beyond that full-stop.
Do you think the current benefit system is working efficiently?
Do you think the current benefit system is ethical?
Do you think the current benefit sanctions are justifiable?
Do you think the current benefit system leaves some of our most vulnerable and ill without hope?
Bring those issues to the discussion here and in the realm of your conversations with friends and family, and I will more likely to believe your dismissal of Muttonbird’s label above.
I could care less what mutton bird or you think, the average Joe thinks it’s fraud and perception is reality, it’s yet another own goal weeks out from an election, but who cares right.
But I care what you “as another leftie” think, because I disagree with allowing the right to frame the issue as fraud – and then leave the discussion at that point.
It is precisely then that we should ask the questions along the lines that I asked above. Don’t you think?
If we allow the narrative to be driven by those we oppose – then we are no longer in opposition, we are in disquieting collusion.
Only in your eyes, and those of your fellow RWNJs.
oh beware the concerned ‘lefties’.
Since when are you a spokesperson for the average? Speak for yourself, like these people have.
Ah, so you couldn’t careless if the current system is working properly or not. If it’s forcing people to do crime just to live.
+1 – well said Molly
Prendergast lost the mayorality to a Greenie. Still bitter it seems.
She was absolutely appalling bitter or not.
Awesome interview from Turei. Greens fighting the good fight. The other woman impersonating an 100 year old straight out of the 1950s shall not be named.
And who gives you the right to own the patent on what a good women is, ah yes another lefty fallacy that they are the be end and end all on every thing, especially identity politics and victim porn
Been asking why this hasn’t happened for years now. Looks like the National Party have finally realised the market won’t provide and that they (we) must pay for their open tap immigration policy. Would rather see immigrants pay for this as a levy if they want to come here and enjoy our supposedly epic lifestyle.
Drury and Wainui, eh? Just a lazy 2 hour commute to work each day for these people.
“This new model is another way in which we are helping councils in our fastest growing cities to open up more land supply so more Kiwis can achieve the goal of home ownership.”
Did Bernard Orsman pick the image with the article? Shows a flash 3 b/rm 2 bthrm with wide roller-door garage. Just the thing low-wage aspirational young couple with small family need (and can afford). /sarc for those who can’t recognise heavy black forebodings.
New model is that it is a new way for government to open the can of worms for foreign buyers and interfere with the market to try and correct it (as effective as our Corrections Dept where most pollies should be staying – where is Barclay at the moment? What a great hiding place – no-one would look for him there.)
Gnashionals have said they will stop government subsidies and let private industry do the heavy lifting, but hey what are brothers for? Gummint must get their bread out, to sop up the lovely oozy credit available on the gravy train!
What the foreign buyers don’t know is what’s in the can of worms are fast moving, feisty tiger worms that will jump out and colonise the whole area in a trice. And seeing they won’t know what a trice is, they had better keep away and stay in safer areas of the world. And for NZ buyers, you are too late for the gold rush, the prices are at their peak now. You needed to get into the market earlier, because you are going to lose out big time if you ‘invest’ now. Spend your excesses at the casino, they will need your money because of the long lead time to the new completion date for their building expansion.
Also, with this announcement within the official election period, the National Party is using taxpayer money to raise its campaign profile.
Very cynical and I hope voters see through it.
In addition, this announcement signals a National Party back flip on their previous insistence that the housing crisis is the fault of local government for not freeing up more land. Now they seem to have changed their mind and accept that it is a problem with demand and infrastructure funding.
And we’ve let these clowns ‘govern’ for how long?
I doubt a left-leaning politician will be part of Robert Mercer and pals attempt to fuck over another democracy.
In its latest venture, Cambridge is seeking commercial clients as well as political ones. For the latter, its goal is to bring Mexican politicians more in tune with the electorate.
“So many people are undecided and unmotivated” in Mexico, Brittany Kaiser, Cambridge’s vice president of business development, said in an interview in Mexico City. “There’s a huge opportunity in this country to find the issues that are important for people and actually turn people out to vote.”
Left-leaning Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is the only member of a political party who has emerged as a presidential aspirant and it will be difficult for other parties to play catch-up, she said.
Ken Ham wants Gilbert Baker‘s rainbow.
NASTY INCIDENT HERE IN GORE AT TODD BARCLAY OFFICE AS REPORTERS FOUND NATIONAL WAS LYING AFTER REQUESTING IF TODD WAS THERE.
Mediawatch looks critically at the New Zealand media – television, radio, newspapers and magazines as well as the ‘new’ electronic media.
Sundays at 9:05am and 10:12pm
Email: [email protected]
Shooting the messenger hunting an MP gone MIA
9:10 am today
A recording allegedly made in secret was the downfall of scandal-struck MP Todd Barclay, who has vanished from public view. Now another recording has rescued the reputation of a reporter accused of… Read more AUDIO
No-one home: a staffer at MP Todd Barclay’s Gore office greets Fairfax reporter Rachael Kelly. Photo: screenshot / stuff.co.nz
They weren’t the only ones leafleting on the issue. On Monday, The Southland Times said police had been called after someone stuck notices calling for the MP’s resignation to the windows of Todd Barclay’s electorate office in Gore.
That wasn’t the only time police were asked to act on people rocking up there.
Fairfax Media’s reporter in Gore Rachael Kelly called by with a colleague last week to find out what Todd Barclay had been up to since disappearing from public life – but she had no luck.
Last weekend, Fairfax Media’s political editor Tracy Watkins reported this:
“Kelly and a local cameraman have been accused of intimidating and threatening behaviour, even of being physically aggressive. And the allegations were made at the highest levels, from the Prime Minister’s office and Parliamentary Service.”
That sounded bad. Something must have gone very wrong.
“It was alleged Kelly and her cameraman “barged” into Barclay’s office and harassed and intimidated staff – even pursuing them to the back of the office, leaving the staff feeling threatened and under siege,” wrote Tracy Watkins, who also said the police had been alerted.
Tracy Watkins said Fairfax Media’s South Island editor-in-chief Joanna Norris had phone conversations with a senior member of the PM’s staff – who was not named – and the head of Parliamentary Service David Stevenson.
But Rachael Kelly’s colleague was recording the encounter in question for a video reportto accompany her “Looking for Todd Barclay” story for the stuff.co.nz website.
It showed the pair at the office only briefly and after being told the MP wasn’t there, they politely departed. No aggro, and no barging or forced entry as alleged by the PM’s office.
After the video appeared online, the Parliamentary Service and Police decided no further action was necessary.
“If it had not been for Stuff’s ability to produce video evidence, the allegations would probably have stuck,” said Tracey Watkins, who reckoned the response could be part of a Trump-type strategy to undermine the press.
Rachel Kelly was filming her routine door-knocking because it was part of the story about looking for Todd Barclay. It was quite likely to be the only footage she would get in Gore that day with anyone who knew his whereabouts. On any other occasion, there would be no reason to have the camera running.
If journalists are going to face unfair claims of bad behaviour, they’ll be tempted to record all their dealings with political figures and their staff just in case. That won’t make it easy to form relationships that journalists really need to gather real news.
And it’s deeply ironic that this matter was settled by a recording of an encounter with Todd Barclay’s staff coming to light. That’s something that hasn’t happened yet in the matter of the secret recording Todd Barclay’s alleged to have made on the premises last year which ended up causing his downfall.