Open mike 23/11/2014

Written By: - Date published: 7:30 am, November 23rd, 2014 - 364 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

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

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

Step up to the mike …

 

364 comments on “Open mike 23/11/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. AsleepWhileWalking 1
    23 November 2014 at 7:43 am

    Checkout operators having their wages docked too + apparently all petrol station chains have some stores involved. Now I don’t know who to boycott.

    We need a list!

    • cricklewood 1.1
      23 November 2014 at 8:58 am

      Hopefully Andrew Little can get some media time and is all over this like a rash. How these employers can hold minimum wage staff responsible for what is at times reasonably sophisticated theft is beyond belief. Hell even expecting someone to put themselves in the line of fire confronting thieves is ridiculous especially for the pitiful wage on offer.
      If anything the store owner should be docking his own salary for failing to hire specialist security staff if it is such a big problem.
      Deductions for failing to prevent loss through criminal activity must be illegal if the aren’t already and the fines for these employers trying it on need to be huge. This is an issue where the vast majority of people are in disbelief at the treatment of these employees and free hit for Andrew Little to get off to an excellent start.

      • idlegus 1.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 10:39 am

        my wife works for a big retail book store, & her hourly wage is about $1 abvoe min wage, & shes responsible for the regions banking!!! lucky for them shes an honest person & im on a good hourly rate, but shows how short sighted the companies are.

        • DavidW 1.1.1.1
          25 November 2014 at 8:29 am

          Are you suggesting that there should be a premium for honesty? A sliding scale perhaps that started with the minimum wage for crooks, a 50 cent margin for keeping till overages, an extra $1 for only filching part rolls of toilet paper from the company loo or taking the occasional pen home from work and a bonus for being completely honest and clean?

          I don’t think it computes on a number of levels somehow.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.2
      23 November 2014 at 12:37 pm

      Yep. Considering how well business people network we can be sure that this being so widespread is no accident. These people need to be investigated by police and a lot of people going to jail for theft.

      • Tracey 1.2.1
        23 November 2014 at 3:04 pm

        There was an apologist posting during the week that this must be a one off cos it is against the law. How could he have got it so wrong?

        • Murray Rawshark 1.2.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 7:12 pm

          He could have got it so wrong by being a lover of Tories. Any self respecting Tory would know it was happening and participate in it, but as for carpark attendants who sing their praises…….

  2. phillip ure 2
    23 November 2014 at 7:44 am

    “..Marijuana May Hold Promise As Treatment For PTSD..

    ..More than 5 million people suffer from symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) annually –

    – and new research suggests that cannabis may help them find relief –

    – and may even offer better care than the current class of drugs commonly used to treat the disorder..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/22/cannabis-ptsd_n_6199254.html

    • Skinny 2.1
      23 November 2014 at 9:05 am

      My partners elderly father suffers from serious back nerve problems after having a bundled back operation. Out of shear desperation his wife took a friends advice and suggested medical pot, which he now takes. Last time we visited he seemed a lot more mobile. Gave me a smile when we had dinner, rather than just picking at his food like he use tov he was tucking in bigtime. The one thing I miss about pot is the good old munchies 🙂

      • phillip ure 2.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 9:26 am

        i wd also argue that pot is a major tool that i was able to use..

        ..to help keep me away from heroin/cocaine..

        ..and i think it should be offered as a palliative/aid to anyone trying to kick anything..

        ..and ‘the one thing i miss’..if i’m honest..is that morning jolt you get from a hit of a mix of the above..

        ..the ultimate eye-opener..

        (i also think the elderly/ailing shd be offered smoking-opium as an option to ease their days..but that’s another story..)

        • politikiwi 2.1.1.1
          24 November 2014 at 11:32 am

          On the topic of using illegal drugs to treat addiction, Phil you might be interested in the treatment of heroin withdrawls with ibogaine. (If you haven’t read up on it already.)

    • halfcrown 3.1
      23 November 2014 at 9:57 am

      Thanks for bringing that to our attention Karol.

      No doubt that self serving turd called Dung will vote for it. Traitorous shit.

      • phillip ure 3.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 1:00 pm

        i hope you aren’t a green voter there..halfcrown..

        .if you are..you will have to start beating up on yrslf..

        ..given the greens (again!) handed ‘dung’ his seat..

        ..on a vote-splitting platter…

        • halfcrown 3.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 3:34 pm

          No I am not Phillip. However I would vote for the man in the moon if I thought it would get rid of that money trading spiv we have as a PM, and yes I was pissed off that Dung got back in again.

          • phillip ure 3.1.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 3:45 pm

            the thing that really bends my bend about that one..

            ..is that the greens continue to serially gift ‘dung’ his seat..

            ..this despite ‘dung’ being the person who has kept them out of govt..

            ..twice now..?..isn’t it..?..

            ..how is that not a serious head-fuck..?

            ..is it a version/manifestation of the stockholm-syndrome..?

            • Rosie 3.1.1.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 5:36 pm

              Oh hi there phillip. Whilst unhelpful after that fact, I was somewhat encouraged to hear from a Green member, an acquaintance I ran into last week expressing his absolute despair that the Green votes that went to Tane Woodley cost Labour the Ohariu seat and kept Dunne in power.

              He will be imploring the Party to have an absolute clear instruction to their members to electorate vote Labour in 2017. I hope all other members do too.

              I hope our Green comrades do the right thing next time – but will it be too late? Dunne may not stand again (33 years is enough right?) and in the mean time the Nat Brett Hudson got into parliament on the list and is getting his feet in under the table in Ohariu.

              • halfcrown …
                23 November 2014 at 7:05 pm

                “33 years” I did not realise Rosie that it had been that long we have had to put up that stench from the sewer.

              • politikiwi …
                24 November 2014 at 11:37 am

                The Greens probably missed their chance here – if Dunne doesn’t stand in the next election (and why would he? His nest must be well padded by now…) then all the Peter Dunne votes will go to the National candidate, and the UF + NAT vote will still be higher than the LAB + GRN vote.

                Hopefully 2014 will have taught the left that they must present a united alternative. They must not be above doing dodgy deals “on principle” because the average Kiwi voter doesn’t give a flying fuck about that (case in point: John Key got re-elected).

        • Murray Rawshark 3.1.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 8:01 pm

          Maybe you could smoke a bit more and get over your addiction to hammering the Greens.

          • phillip ure 3.1.1.2.1
            23 November 2014 at 8:16 pm

            why don’t you read rosies’ comment above..

            ..and it is not ‘hammering the greens’ to point out the most fucken bone-headed thing done in that election..

            ..namely..gifting ‘dung’ his seat..

            ..was done by the greens..

            ..’c’mon..!..defend that act of utter fucken stupidity..!

            ..’cos if you are sick of hearing from me about that particular ‘issue now/already..

            ..by 2017..you’ll be projectile-vomiting..

            ..because i am going to be ‘hammering’ at this one..

            ..all the way there..

            ..not one green has stepped forward to defend that brainfade..

            ..that same brainfade they have every three yrs..

            ..this..must..stop..

            • karol 3.1.1.2.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 8:22 pm

              Do the maths!. If the Greens didn’t run a candidate in Ohariu, then the Nats would put out the word for their voters to vote for the hairdo. It’s a right wing electorate.

              The votes for the Nat candidate plus Dunne, is bigger than for the Labour plus the GP candidate.

              The Nacts know how to play that game. Why waste time trying to win a battle that can’t be won?

      • fisiani 3.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 1:50 pm

        Labour will vote for it also.

    • Tracey 3.2
      23 November 2014 at 3:06 pm

      Karol

      No one is being sent to “work” camps so this is perfectly acceptable.

  4. Corokia 4
    23 November 2014 at 8:50 am

    This behaviour by the employers is part of a wider pattern, which includes zero hour contracts, where risks are dumped on the employee. I’m a small business owner with 2 employees on fixed hours. My employees have to contact people who haven’t paid their accounts, it would be outrageous for me to suggest that I dock their wages if a client doesn’t pay. It is up to the employer to set up systems to do the job, get clients to pay etc. Then train the employees how to correctly use those systems. If the system fails the loss falls on the employer. If an employee has been negligent and a loss results, then I would think that is a matter for the dispute or discipline procedure that has been agreed on in the job contract.

    • Paul 4.1
      23 November 2014 at 9:42 am

      Everytime you go to a petrol station, supermarket, fast food establishment, ask
      “if something is stolen, do your bosses make you pay for it?”

      And never support transnational fast food corporations by spending your money there.
      If you can afford it, never shop at supermarkets.

      • ankerawshark 4.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 10:42 am

        100 + Paul. Great idea and easy to do. I nearly always chat to the check out operators anyway.

    • Foreign waka 4.2
      23 November 2014 at 10:16 am

      Yes, the “system” that is taking hold is the same that is employed in India. basically bonded labor. Contracts are constructed in that way.

  5. Skinny 5
    23 November 2014 at 8:54 am

    I agree totally staging a boycott of these lowlife outfits would get major support. The public are horrified by the ‘pin the runners bill on the attendants’ by some service stations. Now this latest nonsense, how about highlighting zero hours employers too.

    Where the heck is the CTU in all this. Come on Helen Kelly wake the hell up and ‘do your job’ it’s no time to be PC. Get
    in there!

    Reply to Ghost 🙂

    • phillip ure 5.1
      23 November 2014 at 9:32 am

      i actually had that wtf are the unions doing?-reaction to that story too..

      ..is this the first they had heard of these practices..?

      ..and if so..it is clear they are not paying enough attention to areas they should..

      ..and the you hafta join a union first! argument from them is bullshit..

      ..these are the most vulnerable/exploited of workers..

      ..these are who the unions should be also focused on..

      ..and i repeat..is this the first they have heard of these practices..?

      • Skinny 5.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 10:05 am

        As President of the CTU Kelly should be a over this. What an opportunity to recruit new members, especially the young workers. It’s little wonder unionism is falling when the leaders are probably off on holiday.

        • David H 5.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 4:33 pm

          I sent her a Tweet asking her what the Unions are going to do, and unusually no reply.

          • lprent 5.1.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 5:27 pm

            Tweets (and facebook) are usually a pretty bad way of getting busy peoples attention. I personally usually manage to look at those emails telling me what people have addressed to me only a few times a week and I suspect that I have more time to do so than most.

          • karol 5.1.1.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 5:49 pm

            It’s in the CTU Under Pressure document.

            This is about insecure & precarious work. Under “What Can Be Done?

            We say there should be a right for workers to apply to a labour inspector for a determination that their incidence of hours worked constitutes regular hours of work and therefore they are not a casual employee. There also should be protection against zero-hours contracts,
            extremely long hours and other highly irregular hours of work.

            Helen kelly tweeted a lot about zero hour contracts when it was in the news recently.

        • Tracey 5.1.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 4:42 pm

          any of you googled to see what reaction the ctu has had?

      • miravox 5.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 10:48 am

        Are unions allowed to go anywhere near businesses if there are no paid-up members?

        • phillip ure 5.1.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 10:53 am

          dunno..but they can still use the media to publicise exploitive-shit like this..

          ..they still have their platform..

          • Skinny 5.1.2.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 11:46 am

            Nationals employment law changes are not even in effect yet and you get idiot minor management thinking it’s time to clamp down on staff already. Start shift at 8am, till 4pm, take your tea break after 3 pm. What the bosses want through National is, just like your 30 minute unpaid lunch break ‘the employees doesn’t get paid breaks fullstop.

            This is what their really aiming at, i.e Bosses want you paid by the minute no paid breaks in my time.

            With the H & S reforms currently happening someone (union/members) should test this on the grounds of fatigue management. In safety critical roles especially you would knock this one over and set a precedence.

            http://www.3news.co.nz/business/manager-apologises-over-tea-break-misunderstanding-2014112219

            • greywarshark 5.1.2.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 12:09 pm

              @ phillip u
              Don’t put your cloak on and sweep it wide to expose your knee jerk reactions. I think FWaka was actually expressing the same thing you are. Only his was expressed in a more complicated way. It needs reading thoroughly, sorry. So quieten down and put the extra minute in before jumping on to your steed waving your sword (and your cloak).

          • Tracey 5.1.2.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 5:35 pm

            the ctu has been on media for two days over this… including addressing mbie.

            that whichever media you follow didnt report their views is not the fault of the union.

            there is a reason union membership is low and little of it is down to the unions of today.

      • Draco T Bastard 5.1.3
        23 November 2014 at 1:24 pm

        i actually had that wtf are the unions doing?-reaction to that story too..

        ..is this the first they had heard of these practices..?

        Chances are that these people aren’t in unions. If they had been this would have been noticed the first time and something done about it.

        It’s why businesses hate unions – it stops them ripping off employees.

    • Foreign waka 5.2
      23 November 2014 at 10:20 am

      I like to stage a boycott of all the lowlife whose stealing is actually the cause. Who do they think they are? Any why is it that theft is becoming a cavaliers delict. I am not condoning the behavior of proprietors but lets focus first on cause – not the other way around. This is also indicative what is wrong in this country, finding excuses for criminals, you just have to be the right kind?

      • phillip ure 5.2.1
        23 November 2014 at 10:38 am

        that is quite the orifice-pluck there..f.w..

        ..so you’d be in full support of poverty-busting policies then..?

        ..focused as you are on ’cause’..?

        ..given that ‘poverty is the cause of all/(most) evil’..?

        ..eh..?

        ..so..you’d support a universal basic income for starters..eh..?

        ..(or do you support the arming of petrol station attendants..?..)

        ..which is it..?

        • Foreign Waka 5.2.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 12:29 pm

          I have been working at a petrol station – actually for years. So belief me I know what I am talking about. Do you?
          It is not right to have income indexed against a basket that includes a Mercedes that just has become cheaper. It will depress my wages and increase the cost of groceries. But this is not what I was trying to say. What I was saying is that the focus is on condemning the business owner per se’ and no one is talking about the 2 ladies stealing $ 700 of groceries. Therefore, the theft of $ 700 is going under in a blur of laud noises and who is going to hold those 2 accountable?
          In my book theft is theft is theft and there are no exceptions. The only one is in war times when people need food and go out into the fields.

          It is not surprising that such statement as your are throwing my way as this is not a debate that looks at causes but creates a witch hunt. Yes, it is true that many business owners try to get the last drop of sweat from your brow, but that does not mean that I have to get their blood.

          • McFlock 5.2.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 1:09 pm

            why are you concentrating on two ladies shoplifting when murders are taking place? I’m not saying they should get away with it, but who is going to hold the murderer accountable?

            Oh, that’s right: saying one crime is bad is not an endorsement or forgiveness of any other crime.

            • Draco T Bastard 5.2.1.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 1:28 pm

              +1

            • Foreign Waka 5.2.1.1.1.2
              23 November 2014 at 1:42 pm

              As expected, deflective and point searching. The 2 ladies shoplifting are part of a wider picture and yes, what about implementing the law there too. Yes, lets just steal from the “rich” like they did in SA, look at the nation now. All you see is that you want to get your share of hitting out instead of thinking about society at large and what the reason for such behavior is. Too hard basket, and we expect a better country? Yeah right.

              • McFlock …
                23 November 2014 at 1:51 pm

                Yes, lets just steal from the “rich” like they did in SA, look at the nation now.

                SA? Do you mean South Africa? Please tell me that you just said that ending apartheid was “stealing from the rich”…

                But my point was that yes, at the moment we are focussing on thefts by employers. Because it seems that not only is this not a new practise, it is widespread and has been undetected for years. We have a police force to catch shoplifters and murderers, but what do we have when the employer uses standover tactics to take money from their staff?

                • Foreign waka …
                  23 November 2014 at 2:04 pm

                  You lack of knowledge is astounding regarding SA. To turn this in a propaganda about apartheid takes the cake.

                  Firstly, theft is theft is theft. No matter who is doing the dead.
                  Secondly, I did not condone either.
                  Thirdly, I do not respect anyone who says that one theft is more just then another.
                  And last, I am also just scraping by but at no time would I see someones property as something that is suppose to be mine.

                  Police is not catching many thiefs – see stats of burglaries and car thefts. It is a culture of envy and greed and employers are part of the same society where that kind of attitude is being seen as just.

                  • McFlock …
                    23 November 2014 at 2:13 pm

                    The stats of resolved burglaries and car thefts are a fuckload better than the stats of employer theft from employees. Which currently stands at ~zero prosecutions.

                    BTW, nobody’s said shoplifting is less wrong than abusing employer power to extort money from workers. Just that the latter crime was previously not commonly known, and is currently unpunished.

                    • Foreign waka …
                      23 November 2014 at 2:29 pm

                      You seem to belief that I take the flag for the employer but I am taking the cause of right and wrong.
                      The 2 ladies who stole groceries just became part of that statistic.

                      Of around 120 000 cases of theft and related offenses, 28 300 were solved in the last 12 months. That is 23.5% or in other words:
                      if someone steals your car, brakes into your house etc there is a 76.5% chance that you have lost your possessions forever.

                      Property damage and environmental pollution: 48 900 cases, 14 600 solved – 29.8% solved.

                      I don’t belief that this is a statistic that can be seen as a a fantastic success.

                    • McFlock …
                      23 November 2014 at 2:42 pm

                      well, that’s just super.

                      Any other crimes you want to focus on rather than the topic at hand? Any race-fixing going on? Car window-washers getting a bit bolshy?

      • ankerawshark 5.2.2
        23 November 2014 at 10:54 am

        FW @ 5.2 I reflected on the NZ I grew up in where this level of theft would’nt/didn’t occur (I know this as parents owned a dairy at one stage).

        Fixing people who steal from petrol stations, supermarkets etc is a separate issue and talking about it now deflects from the very important issue that has been uncovered. DOCKING THESE VULNERABLE WORKERS PAY IS THEFT. End of story. Its theft morally and ethically and according to the Mae Chen lawyer on the tele the contracts are illegal. I hope these b……ds (who are responsible for the practice) get done for theft.

        There was a woman from the EPMU on Campbell live. I know of another union who have been approached and commented. Excuse my cynicism but I wouldn’t be surprized if msm didn’t use the unions statements or comments.

        • Foreign Waka 5.2.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 12:17 pm

          Do you really belief I condone docking pay from staff? Are you mad? I am a borne and bread red blooded person and by god, I can see what is happening around me. I am in the workforce and affected directly by all these unethical, or shall we say despicable dishonest “business models”.
          By and by, not many Dairies pay GST these days either – cash and all. You need to understand that what I elude to is just plain honesty across the board. I can see everybody standing up and screaming murder only because it will aid their cause. How about stepping back and looking at the whole picture? 2 wrongs do not make one right. There is NO GREY AREA for theft.
          I personally would prefer union negotiated wages and conditions industry wide. It would give some very distinct measure and standard and no mistakes.
          Bosses will not give fair wages if they don’t have to and NZ is adopting the Indian model of bonded labor more and more. This kind of attitude is permeating society and hence dishonesty needs to be addressed at all level.

          • Molly 5.2.2.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 12:58 pm

            You are confusing the issue of contractual abuse by employers to excuse the “permitted” docking of wages – with the already illegal instance of theft that predicates it.

            And you make the assumption that discussion focused on docking wages, implies an excuse for the already illegal theft that took place – of petrol, groceries,… goods etc.

            Start a different thread about societal acceptance of dishonesty and theft, and you may find that there are many here that would participate robustly in the discussion.

            Legislated theft of public spaces would be one off the top of my head that I can think of… state housing being an obvious choice.

            • Foreign waka 5.2.2.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 2:37 pm

              Molly, I am talking about social norms being accepted. These are going like a red thread through all of NZ, no matter what political persuasion anyone is. Once there is a precedent that it is acceptable to steal because it is “the bad employer”, “a bad person”, “a bludger” than we are on a slippery slope.
              That is all I can say to this. But alas, I expected being bombarded with the cries of wrongdoing as NZ is already well on the way of having the division between those who are “deserving” to be hold over the coals and those who are not.
              Yes, you might be right of having this separately examined but is such a perfect example not good reason to do so?

          • ankerawshark 5.2.2.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 1:09 pm

            Foreign Weka. O.k. I apologize if it seemed I implied that you were not caring about the vulnerable workers.

            Hopefully I am not mad as such, but I am sure as hell angry about what is happening to vulnerable workers…………sometimes when you feel this way, things come out more passionately than they should.

            I think it must be hard for small business owners (I am one myself).

            It seems like there are some easy ways around theft of petrol (although only having ever worked as a pump attendant for 3 weeks in the 1970’s I will stand corrected). That’s the pre-paid option.

            Note my point that growing up when my parents owned a dairy, shop lifting was not really an issue. What has happened since??? (rhetorical question)

            • Foreign Waka 5.2.2.1.2.1
              23 November 2014 at 1:55 pm

              Thank you, yes I am angry too. But my point was that because it becomes so acceptable for people to take from others what is not theirs, employers are from the same flock and doing what they perceive is accepted in society.
              None of it is right.

              Theft of petrol: yes, there are methods, technology is offering solutions and police is often quite appreciative.
              Theft of groceries: the cashiers were to inexperienced and naive to see through the scam. The employer docking the pay now to add insult to injury. What about training? It is so much easier to just take what is not theirs…..

              Have a great Sunday.

    • Stephanie Rodgers 5.3
      23 November 2014 at 1:52 pm

      That may be the first time anyone has ever accused Helen Kelly of being too PC.

      • Tracey 5.3.1
        23 November 2014 at 3:15 pm

        I chuckled. For all anyone here knows a union has been to the media and not been published.

        On friday i listened to the head of the ppta speaking aboutthe 80% approval of the revised govt policy for new teaching positions.

        By saturday morning news, the station that aired her interview didnt quote her but the principals association as saying the ppta had endorsed the govt policy.

        That had to be a deliberate editorial choice not to quote the union itself, which it had taped the day earlier.

        If you only heard the saturday news you would think the govt got the same policy they announced in february approved by the ppta. They did not.

      • Skinny 5.3.2
        23 November 2014 at 6:01 pm

        At some point shortly the blunt instrument approach needs to be taken. I do not like the idea of further employment law changes. As soon as that happens ‘everybody out’ should be the call. These latest attacks highlighted is a platform to build to that moment. I do realise the CTU and union bosses can’t publicly come out saying down tools, however like in England some workers took a stand and defiantly told the Tories where to go with a mass walk out.

        • Tracey 5.3.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 6:07 pm

          reading your posts you are in the union and get to chat to peope like little. that puts you in a position to orchestrate this idea of yours. what percentage of the industry covered by your union are paid up union members?

          when you talk to non union members at your workplace what are the top three reasons they give you for not joining?

          • Skinny 5.3.2.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 7:38 pm

            Tracy it is freedom of association which I acknowledge, workers realise very quickly the benefits of our Union. My brothers & sisters don’t tolerate ‘free loaders’ in our industry, however freedom of choice is always what I point out. Only on one occasion have I had to point this out to a new employee. Interesting enough his was an ex pat pom.

            The reasons were, from what I gather were his parents were 2 bob Tories who come out from the mother nation all high and mighty as they do. Once he joined I had to bat for him pretty much straight away. All good you get that, he cost the membership quite a bomb, more than he was worth. He jumped to a contractor on an individual contract, they found him out as a loose cannon and sacked him. He called me for legal advice, which I gave him. He is back with us being wiser for his folly. I brokered his return, more for his wife & kids than him. He is a good union man now and can be trusted to hold the line when needed.

    • Murray Rawshark 5.4
      23 November 2014 at 8:04 pm

      I think Helen Kelly needs a rest after supporting Labour so uncritically during the election campaign.

  6. marty mars 6
    23 November 2014 at 9:07 am

    key says sorry to slater

    … But Key acknowledges the release of the email provoked increased media scrutiny of Slater and his family. “I regret any harm that may have been caused to you or your family by the release of the email, and hope that this letter may help to bring this matter to a close.”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63454874/John-Key-says-sorry-to-Whale-Oil

    …bring this matter to a close – lol – sounds like worry to me – key wants to be besties again – build the relationship, mend the bridges – must be worried about something that has happened on the left…

    • ankerawshark 6.1
      23 November 2014 at 3:18 pm

      Marty mars @ 6. Someone should warm Slatter. Our PM who IMO has psychopathic traits is apologising to Slatter.

      Cam you need to know that a “friend” like JK will use you when he needs you and drop you when he doesn’t. Promise.

      John Key “I only apologise for serious things”. i.e things that impact on him.

    • Tracey 6.2
      23 November 2014 at 3:18 pm

      What a joke.

      Slater, a man who literally or figuratively digs in peoples rubbish bins gets an apology for breach of privacy but not

      The civil servant whose name collins leaked to slater
      Not the victim of the a lleged attempted rape by a diplomat then permitted to leave the country

      Key is laughing at how easy this is being made for him…

    • Hami Shearlie 6.3
      23 November 2014 at 3:45 pm

      Bridges can never be mended – I think he was born that way!!

  7. les 7
    23 November 2014 at 9:35 am

    Little on Q&A ,this morning…looking good to me.Think NZers can warm to this man,and roll on 2017.

    • Pete George 7.1
      23 November 2014 at 9:53 am

      Andrew has started very well, based on a solid foundation. He was promising through the week, good on The Nation yesterday and better on Q & A.

      Little by Little hopes rise for a long awaited Labour recovery and rebuild.

      He seems to be stepping up well. It’s important that the Labour caucus steps up and works with him, and that he gets good support from the party.

      Perhaps some more positive involvement for some here could help too.

      • phillip ure 7.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 10:33 am

        not only do you constantly whine…you also nag..

        ..should we call you a whag…?

      • marty mars 7.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 11:58 am

        Is the factchecker gig still going pete?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 12:20 pm

          He certainly lived up to everyone’s expectations on that score.

        • Pete George 7.1.2.2
          23 November 2014 at 12:34 pm

          Old habits can be hard to shake marty.

          The left has the best chance (and maybe last chance this term) to establish a credible alternative in six years. That means recognising that a common pragmatic purpose is more important than chasing unattainable ideals.

          If getting a more left leaning Government is important to you.

          Little sounds like he’s got a good understanding of what is needed. That means reaching out to all those who could potentially vote Labour. But he’s going to need wide support.

          Who’s up to it?

          • phillip ure 7.1.2.2.1
            23 November 2014 at 12:43 pm

            ‘whose up to’ what..?

          • weka 7.1.2.2.2
            23 November 2014 at 12:47 pm

            Pete, why don’t you just fuck off. You know full well that virtually no-one here is interested in your ideas about what the left should do, and it’s almost certain that the response to your comments will be widespread ridicule and rudeness, so I can only assume you are here to cause trouble.

            • Pete George 7.1.2.2.2.1
              23 November 2014 at 1:23 pm

              You’re quite wrong weka. Do you hope that Mana will recover and come back? That’s not looking a good bet at the moment. And even if they do they will need a much stronger Labour to get any influence in Government.

              Labour in particular and the left generally need to be less confrontational and abusive if they want to be seen as credible alternatives. That means they need to appeal to people like me and many others who have voted Labour before and could vote Labour again.

              I don’t know what you’re trying to achieve with your negative approach weka but it hasn’t worked and it’s unlikely to work in the future.

              Maybe there are some here, unlike you, who see what Little is trying to achieve and see the need to support that and work positively to make some progress.

              [lprent: weka, like everyone else here, speaks for themselves unless they deliberately and explicitly state that that they are talking for some other organisation (the most notable instance of that is me and moderators talking about TS). That is part of the about and the policy. Be warned that trying to manufacture anything else as a meme will eventually result in me noticing an attempt to derail debate. ]

              • weka …
                23 November 2014 at 1:36 pm

                You’re a fucking trole mate. Your opinions about Labour or Mana or anything leftwing are completely worthless on this site. Last time you spent time here you created chaos over a reasonably long period of time until it reached crisis point and you were forced to leave (lost track of whether it was an actual ban or a self-ban). And that’s not the only time. Felix gave a pretty good description yesterday of the pattern of behaviour and nothing has changed.

                If you had wanted to come back here and genuinely engage in debate you wouldn’t have started by having a go at the ts admin/authors over their use of the Notices login. You’re as disingenuous as they come and give self described moderates a bad name.

                Even if you had managed to come back genuinely (although I suspect it would be almost impossible for you now to resist the urge to trole here), the content of you posts is so boring and banal as to be be defacto troling even if you don’t intend that ie your ideas are a really bad fit for this site, so please stop pretending that you commenting here is anything other than a negative. That’s really harsh, but you just seem to never learn.

                • Pete George …
                  23 November 2014 at 1:58 pm

                  Having a generic go at Gower just when Andrew Little had been given a good first interview on The Nation wasn’t very smart, and I think r0b would concede that in retrospect.

                  weka – I didn’t think you were a spokesperson for “this site”.

                  Little is happy to engage with anyone who he thinks will aid his cause. Perhaps some here aren’t able to do likewise. Or maybe they want to sabotage his cause.

                  It’s not just the Labour caucus that has to put past differences and rivalries aside and work together. The wider left should be thinking about that too.

                  [lprent: She never said she was. Ok, you clearly haven’t learnt a thing. Maybe I’d better plan on helping you out with your obsession. What is the most effective way to blocking site reads. ]

                  • weka …
                    23 November 2014 at 2:03 pm

                    Pete. No-one gives a shit about what you think about Labour or this site. You’re just a trole, we all know how this goes and how this will end.

                  • Lanthanide …
                    23 November 2014 at 2:30 pm

                    PG, if you wanted to point out that attacking Gower on that post was a bad thing, you should have just come out and said it.

                    I sometimes disagree with the way things are done on this site, or things that authors write, I come out and say it directly. I don’t end up with all the hate and bile that you get directed at you, because I don’t play stupid games and waste everyone’s time with a dance of seven veils where people have to try and work out what I’m saying.

                    • weka …
                      23 November 2014 at 2:35 pm

                      +1

                      You also don’t have a long history of causing chaos on this site and refusing to take any responsibility for it.

                    • Pete George …
                      23 November 2014 at 2:50 pm

                      Lanthanide – I say things how I feel like saying them. If I said things here exactly like you might have said them do you really think it would make any difference?

                      weka – You don’t take any responsibility for the part you play in deliberately trying to cause chaos.

                    • lprent …
                      23 November 2014 at 2:54 pm

                      I didn’t even see any comments attacking Gower before PG made that his preferred interpretation. Certainly there weren’t any in the post. It was a simple question in the title of if IMP was going to survive based on some commentary going on in twitter.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      23 November 2014 at 3:03 pm

                      @ Pete: Yes, and the problem that everyone has is the way you choose to say things.

                      I find it funny that you think your approach is more effective at effecting change than mine is however, seeing as how I’ve never been banned from here and have a positive relationship with almost everyone including the authors, which can’t be said for you.

                    • Tracey …
                      23 November 2014 at 3:21 pm

                      +1

                      Thats cos it doesnt have to always be about you.

                  • lprent …
                    23 November 2014 at 2:58 pm

                    As far as I can see, the only person who is suggesting that it was an attack on Gower was you. Perhaps you should apologize to Gower for raising it if you feel so strongly about it?

                    • Pete George …
                      23 November 2014 at 3:07 pm

                      In the post: “@patrickgowernz You’ll have to find another party to shit on.”

                      “@fmacskasy Gower keeps asking about millions spent by Mana-Internet. What about the millions spent by National and ACT, Paddy?”

                      Of four tweets chosen for quoting they were the last two. I doubt they were randomly selected, quotes are usually chosen to make some wort of point.

                    • lprent []
                      23 November 2014 at 3:21 pm

                      Huh? A question by Frank Macskasy about the questions that Gower was using in a broadcast is an attack on Gower?

                      Of course they weren’t “randomly” selected. They were all about a particular broadcast. One was a direct response to Gower’s statement. The other was about the questions that Gower was asking. In all likelihood they were the top of twitter list (depending on who r0b watches), when he looked at his twitter feed.

                      r0b was asking a question “End of the Internet Party?” and put in the available content that triggered him asking that question when he put it up for discussion.

                      It was simply your mad conspiracy theory that somehow made this an attack on Gower.

                    • lprent …
                      23 November 2014 at 6:06 pm

                      Oh I forgot to also point out that you clearly didn’t read the post too well.

                      There are 3 tweets. Not 4. Did you get so indignant with your daft conspiracy theory that you forgot to how to count?

                    • Pete George …
                      23 November 2014 at 7:18 pm

                      One tweet was shown twice, call that one if you like. So one from Gower, then two attacking him.

                      I don’t think there’s any need for me to apologise to Gower, he seems to agree with me.

                      Patrick Gower favorited

                      @PeteDGeorge
                      @thestandard – why is ‘Notices and Features’ being used to attack @patrickgowernz ? Who hasn’t got the guts to own the pissy fit?

                      [lprent: Nope that is just gower picking up your story and turning it over for a look. ]

                • felix …
                  23 November 2014 at 2:07 pm

                  “defacto troling”

                  lolz Pete isn’t even valid enough to qualify as a legitimate trole 😀

            • McFlock 7.1.2.2.2.2
              23 November 2014 at 1:57 pm

              butbutbut attention validates his existence….

  8. Molly 8
    23 November 2014 at 9:41 am

    The Guardian has a video on the New Era estate situation in Hackney, London. The situation has been publicised recently and repeatedly by Russell Brand.

    Shows what eventually occurs when governments shrug off the role of social and affordable housing provider.

  9. odysseus 9
    23 November 2014 at 9:48 am

    Absolutely les, I have alot of confidence in him thus far. He wasn’t even wearing a red checked shirt:).
    He is seriously solid and I see no evidence of the ” wooden” meme.

  10. Anne 10
    23 November 2014 at 10:43 am

    Message for Matthew Hooton:

    Just for once, show you have a few principles and apologise? Either you wittingly lied or you happily jumped to wrong conclusions. Whichever it was, you have been caught out.

    And don’t try the old trick of transferring your error of judgement by claiming the EPMU General Secretary, Bill Newsome is not telling the truth or is ‘spinning’ the truth.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/260028/delegates-'not-told-to-vote-for-little‘

    • Matthew Hooton 10.1
      23 November 2014 at 11:27 am

      They were, including by media release. Google “EPMU unanimously endorsed Little”

      • Skinny 10.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 12:01 pm

        Hey Hooton got my conference delegates voting form from the Labour Party in the mail, jumped online and voted. The GS didn’t tell me how to vote. When I held a union meeting last week critiqued the candidates on the basis of what they had to offer our branch. Everyone was happy with my selection on their behalf. The general consensus was I know my politics and are trusted to make the correct call. One respected senior member said “you done a bloody good job as chairman since your’ve arrived here, the others joined in with hear hear. Got a problem with our process?

        • weka 10.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 12:06 pm

          “Got a problem with our process?”

          No, he has a problem with the concept of unions and collective action giving people power.

          • Skinny 10.1.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 12:19 pm

            +1
            Matthew lives in the wrong place and time. He would fit in nicely in Southern America as a cotton plantation owner. “Can I have my tea break please Master Hooton…I done worked 20 hours solid out in dem dere fields of yours sir”.

            • Matthew Hooton 10.1.1.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 12:21 pm

              The irony of you calling me a plantation owner when you presume to vote on behalf of other people is, I am sure, completely lost on you, you brainwashed Union muppet.

              • weka …
                23 November 2014 at 12:25 pm

                Thanks for proving my point Matthew/

                • Matthew Hooton …
                  23 November 2014 at 12:32 pm

                  The EPMU members who were denied a vote by the union bosses were not being empowered. The union bosses took power from the members. This is presumably why unions are generally so weak in NZ.

              • Skinny …
                23 November 2014 at 12:34 pm

                Now listen hear Master Hooton I’m just one of the union hierarchy that you lie about thru the media.. you know the one that does “the brainwashing” don’t worry those conference delegates that weren’t too up with the play within politics Labour, soon got a bit of my brainwashing to ‘vote Little’ even swayed a few off Grant & Parker.

                Little touchy today Matthew, what Andrew’s good week upset you?

              • Tracey …
                23 November 2014 at 6:51 pm

                and you vote national cos it is in your “DNA”… not cos of brainwashing.

      • Anne 10.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 12:01 pm

        Liar and unprincipled spinner. Have you no shame?!!

        The EPMU unanimously endorsed his leadership bid. Yes. As Newsome said “it would have been strange if they hadn’t, given Little is a former EPMU president”. He went on to suggest and I paraphrase… “If they hadn’t, the MSM would have been all over it like a rash with the meme that not even his own people support Little.”

        But the ballot was a secret ballot. Newsome said the delegates were told their vote was a personal choice and there was no way the union could know how they voted – about as democratic as you can get.

        • Matthew Hooton 10.1.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 12:19 pm

          The liar here is the boss of the EPMU. He issued a press release saying the national executive had unanimously endorsed Little and that delegates should rank the other three candidates after him in any way they wanted. Now he is saying this does not mean the national executive was telling delegates to vote for Little.

          • Anne 10.1.2.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 12:55 pm

            The liar is you. The EPMU executive recommended Little. That is not the same as telling delegates which way they have to vote, which is what you are trying to suggest.

            Look who’s talking anyway. You spent a lot of time over the past few years recommending who caucus/members should consider voting for in the Labour leadership contests (which was none of your business) but because an affiliated union do the same thing (which was their business) it suddenly becomes questionable… with an inferred smell of ‘shady dealings’ added for good measure.

            Methinks Hooton is worried about the ‘Little leadership’ and the now serious potential for Labour to knock the Key circus out of business. As well he should!

            • Poission 10.1.2.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 12:59 pm

              The statement reads.

              Yesterday the EPMU National Executive had a conference call to discuss the Labour leadership election.

              The National Executive unanimously endorsed Andrew Little as a candidate and recommended that our conference delegates (who will cast the EPMU’s votes in the election) give him first preference on their ballot. They did not choose to endorse or rank the other candidates.

              A media release will go out about this this morning and there will likely be some media attention on our endorsement.

              The National Executive made their decision based on Andrew’s skills and experience, and the overwhelming support for him which has been expressed at the delegate forums I have attended since he announced he was running.

              Your conference delegates have been asked by the National Executive to make sure they vote and to take into account this strong recommendation. Conference delegates are encouraged to seek feedback from members and attend the Labour Party hustings meetings before casting their vote.

              This is an exciting democratic process which very few other political parties engage in. I’m proud that the EPMU plays a role in it

            • Matthew Hooton 10.1.2.1.1.2
              23 November 2014 at 1:06 pm

              You are being disingenious. They didn’t recommend people should “consider voting for” they told them to vote for Little. And why are you and the gen sec so defensive? There is nothing wrong with telling someone who to vote for – that’s what everyone does during election campaigns. It is just a fact that the central EPMU union bosses denied ordinary members a vote and then told local bosses who to vote for. Get over it.

              • Pascals bookie …
                23 November 2014 at 1:19 pm

                ” They didn’t recommend people should “consider voting for” they told them to vote for Little.”

                lol wtf?

                “Your conference delegates have been asked by the National Executive to make sure they vote and to take into account this strong recommendation. Conference delegates are encouraged to seek feedback from members and attend the Labour Party hustings meetings before casting their vote”

                If they aren’t asking them to consider voting for, then what is the point of attending hustings and seeking feedback?

                Your argument literally only makes sense if you assume everything they said is a lie. They’re not tories Hoots.

                • lprent …
                  23 November 2014 at 1:26 pm

                  Pretty damn clear to me. They recommended that people voted, told them who they preferred, and then told them to go out and make up their own minds. Exactly what any sensible organisation would do.

                  It isn’t like it was a covert campaign either – they didn’t go up and make up foul rumours in the way that has characterised the National party campaigns over the last decade.

                  Hooton is either being a fool, deliberately misrepresenting, or he thinks that dirty politics is the only way that politics should legitimately operate. The latter tends to be my pick.

                • Tracey …
                  23 November 2014 at 3:31 pm

                  You could have heard a pin drop… And it sounded like a pneumatic drill echoing inside hootons head.

              • ankerawshark …
                23 November 2014 at 1:19 pm

                ps Matthew Hooton, if you are so concerned about democracy, then you must be extremely concerned about the situation of coat tailing where JK gives the Epsom candidate the nod and the poor of old voters of Epsom fall into line and do as they told and vote for (your beloved) ACT. This must bother you hugely since you are so concerned about democracy.

              • McFlock …
                23 November 2014 at 1:39 pm

                The GS is probably a bit defensive because some tory spindoctor fuckwit is trying to set up the lie that delegates followed orders when voting, rather than simply getting public recommendations and advice from a number of sources before making their individual decisions by secret ballot.

                When one is under attack one should defend oneself.

          • ankerawshark 10.1.2.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 1:17 pm

            MH @ 10.1.2.1. If you are so concerned about others “lying” time to take a good look at yourself. You are a spin merchant. Saw you on The Nation. Your comments were spin lines against Labour and Little. They looked pre-rehearsed to me. In my opinion this isn’t commentary. It is spin and biased with it.

            I was going to ask you what you think of vulnerable petrol stations attendants having their wages docked for drive aways. I do shudder to think what your response will be. Unions are designed to protect workers from such an outrage. You support parties that have done everything in their power to dis-empower the unions……sit o.k. with you????

            Do you realize how much your opinions are despised on this site.

          • Stephanie Rodgers 10.1.2.1.3
            23 November 2014 at 2:00 pm

            (a) That’s not what the media release says
            (b) Conference delegates were clearly informed that the endorsement of the National Executive was not binding on their choice in voting.

            You are a liar, Matthew, and your anti-union agenda is very transparent.

            • Matthew Hooton 10.1.2.1.3.1
              23 November 2014 at 2:05 pm

              And you’re on their payroll and were Andrew Little’s PR person during the leadership race. Who paid for your time to do that? Did you take leave from the union?

              • lprent …
                23 November 2014 at 2:45 pm

                There are 24 hours in a day and 7 days in the week. Typically people get employed for something like 8 of those hours for 5 days with about an hour available per day for other tasks like eating or moderating a blog.

                Curiously even after you take out sleeping time, it means that there is a shit load of time available for doing other things. Like voluntary assisting in campaigns, turning up at hustings meetings, or running a blog.

                And that isn’t even counting things like annual leave and time in lieu.

                I live in this space, so does Lyn (who has just been off in India doing voluntary work there), and so does almost everyone who is involved in any voluntary and unpaid activity. We work for an employer based on the contracted hours.

                The argument you are making is patently ridiculous unless you have some actual proof. Effectively you are arguing a case of slavery by employers rather than a normal employment contract.

                Tell me Matthew – do you treat your employees as if they were slaves? Do you try to tell them what they should do on their own time?

              • Tracey …
                23 November 2014 at 3:33 pm

                Ignoring the documented advice of the union matthew and jumping to diversion?

              • Skinny …
                23 November 2014 at 4:13 pm

                What you fail to grasp (for whatever reason?) is the preferential voting system. None of them were ever going to win on the 1st ballot. The caucus hedged their bets by strongly voting Little second. Just like DC got the union vote so was Little logically. The members was a mixed bag, however like someone (your new replacement) on The Nation pointed out a third of the vote all-round.

            • Mike 10.1.2.1.3.2
              23 November 2014 at 2:54 pm

              It’s not anti-union, it’s pro-democracy
              I am proud that my union let its actual members vote in the contest
              The current process for the EPMU and others is indefensible

              • Tracey …
                23 November 2014 at 4:04 pm

                Are you agreeing with mt hootons interpretation? if so, please quote the passages which dictated how the secret ballot should go, and how those ballets which didnt vote for mr little were discarded or changed?

    • left for deadshark 10.2
      23 November 2014 at 12:30 pm

      I’ll add to Annes concerns about Mr hootons ability about re framing the true(other wise known as lying) on the nation (small n for small television) in regards to Mr Littles primaries result.And mr Williams sitting there,looking like an Easter Island statue.

      • phillip ure 10.2.1
        23 November 2014 at 3:26 pm

        i don’t think williams has the intellectual-firepower to adequately respond..

        ..and anyway..why bother doing anything else than ‘easter island impersonation’s..?

        ..when you ‘agree with matthew’ all the time..

        ..he puts the ‘simple’ into ‘simplistic-thinking’….

        ..then of course there were his lies as to why harawira lost by 800 votes..

  11. greywarshark 11
    23 November 2014 at 11:47 am

    Now we know where you get all your background information. By reading google headlines.

    • Matthew Hooton 11.1
      23 November 2014 at 11:58 am

      Read the press statement. He told delegates to put Little first

      • weka 11.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 12:11 pm

        here you go,

        http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1410/S00192/epmu-endorses-andrew-little-for-labour-leadership.htm

        That’s the EPMU getting feedback from its members and then consequently endorsing Little. It’s not the EPMU telling its delegates who to vote for, which was a separate thing.

        Either you are deliberately confusing different processes for your own spin purposes or you are thick. I’m guessing the former.

      • Tautoko Mangō Mata 11.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 12:22 pm

        There’s a difference between endorsing and instructing.

        endorse: to publicly or officially say that you support or approve of (someone or something)
        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/endorse

        instruct: to give (someone) an order or command
        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/instruct

        “The National Executive of the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union unanimously endorsed Andrew Little for the role of Labour leader, at a meeting held yesterday.”
        http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/epmu-endorses-andrew-little-labour-leadership/5/205105

        The executive pointed out their preference but the union members could vote for any of the 4 candidates.

        • Matthew Hooton 11.1.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 12:28 pm

          That’s right. And the national executive told the local union bosses to rank Little first. Whether they did or not was over to them, as it was a secret ballot. But they were certainly told to.

          • weka 11.1.2.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 12:31 pm

            by ‘local union bosses’ do you mean delegates?

            Please provide some proof for this “the national executive told the local union bosses to rank Little first”

            • Matthew Hooton 11.1.2.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 12:33 pm

              Read the press statement.

              • Pascals bookie …
                23 November 2014 at 12:43 pm

                this is the whole press release:

                “The National Executive of the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union unanimously endorsed Andrew Little for the role of Labour leader, at a meeting held yesterday.

                “I have been speaking to our workplace delegates at forums across the country over the past two weeks, and the overwhelming feedback I’ve received is that our members support Andrew,” says Bill Newson, EPMU national secretary.

                “We’ve had firsthand experience of his leadership, his dedication to working people, and his ability to rebuild and modernise an organisation. These are skills which will be vital for the Labour Party over the next three years.”

                The National Executive chose not to recommend rankings for the other candidates, who bring their own strengths and abilities to the race.

                “It’s really exciting that ordinary members of the Labour Party get to participate in this democratic process to elect a new leader,” says Bill Newson.

                “There’s a great lineup of candidates. But based Andrew’s known strengths, the EPMU National Executive want to send a strong message that he is the best choice for the future of the party, and for working New Zealanders.”

                Saying you think someone is the best choice isn’t an instruction. If you think that’s ‘telling people what to do’, you must be bloody outraged about MPs being whipped in parliament, denying their electors their voice! etc.

              • weka …
                23 November 2014 at 12:44 pm

                I have read the press statement. I’m asking you to point to exactly what you think supports your statement. If you don’t I will assume you just want to play bullshit spin on Sunday games and are making shit up.

                • Matthew Hooton …
                  23 November 2014 at 12:59 pm

                  FFS the whole press statement is about telling the local union bosses who to vote for, you loony brainwashed far-left union muppet

                  • Pascals bookie …
                    23 November 2014 at 1:06 pm

                    So quote the bit where they are instructed on pain of, whatever.

                  • weka …
                    23 November 2014 at 1:08 pm

                    lolz, really Matthew, pathetic stereotyped ad hominems is the best you can do?

                    The process of Affiliate involvement has been explained clearly, repeatedly. You told lies on National radio about the Labour leadership selection process, because you hate unions and you want to undermine the left. You’ve been called on it and have no response other than to call people names.

                    • Matthew Hooton …
                      23 November 2014 at 1:18 pm

                      That the EPMU national executive told local union bosses to vote for Andrew Little is an objective fact.

                      Next you’ll be saying that when John Key had tea with John Banks it was because of a shared interest in Earl Grey.

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      23 November 2014 at 1:25 pm

                      So quote the words that ‘tell’ them to vote for Little.

                      They endorse Little. They say take that endorsement into account, and consult with members and attend hustings, then make a decision about who to vote for.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      23 November 2014 at 1:54 pm

                      That the EPMU national executive told local union bosses to vote for Andrew Little is an objective fact.

                      No it’s not.

                      “I have been speaking to our workplace delegates at forums across the country over the past two weeks, and the overwhelming feedback I’ve received is that our members support Andrew,” says Bill Newson, EPMU national secretary.

                      That would be the The National Executive of the EPMU finding out what their members thought and then they went on to tell everyone that they agree with their members.

                      What’s an established fact is that you then twisted their words for your own political spin, i.e, you lied.

                    • Skinny …
                      23 November 2014 at 2:00 pm

                      At our conference all leader contenders spoke to us. One of our Unions national executives made a strong pitch for Grant. The GS didn’t say who he preferred, I debated who answered my question which one of you are going to refresh the benches? Based on that question both Robertson & Parker skirted the question, Little didn’t, it was telling and in my opinion had a being on which way delegates were going to vote. The final make up I don’t know as the papers were sent out for us to vote individually.

                      The cost of sending out a voting form to every member would be quite prohibitive, that is why it conference delegates only. Christ we want our money to go to party God knows they don’t have the deep pockets of lobbyist consultant Matthew Samuel Hooton.

                    • felix …
                      23 November 2014 at 2:04 pm

                      “lolz, really Matthew, pathetic stereotyped ad hominems is the best you can do?”

                      “best” weka?

                      I’d say on the available data that’s literally all he can do.

                    • Tracey …
                      23 November 2014 at 3:42 pm

                      In matthews world someone must be

                      A. Buying votes
                      B. Taking power away from members

                      Therefore the only conclusion he can draw is someone must be fiddling the system cos that is normal in his world. He just cant fathom there could be anyway a small number would trust important stuff to a larger number cos HOW can you control the outcome.

                      Mr Hooton appears angry, very angry and is projecting, big time.

                  • ankerawshark …
                    23 November 2014 at 1:27 pm

                    MH Like John Key told the Espom voters who to vote for.

                    • Matthew Hooton …
                      23 November 2014 at 1:32 pm

                      Yes, just like that.

                    • Skinny …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:16 pm

                      Not all people in Epsom took Matthew & Key’s advice. My sister & husband &, first time voting son ( a friend of Key’s son) who lives a few doors down from M
                      Terry Wright on Gardner Rd said “fuck you” and voted Goldsmith & party voted Green. Met them have you Hooton… Tennis club? This came after watching mind the poverty gap, big ups Brian! And years of me harassing them at social gatherings I’ll add 🙂

                  • Karen …
                    23 November 2014 at 2:09 pm

                    Union delegates are not “local union bosses” but democratically elected representatives of the union members in their area. The vote is secret – everyone who is eligible to vote is given a code to vote electronically including union delegates.

                    The voting system for electing the Labour Party leader is very democratic, but I wouldn’t expect a loony, brainwashed right wing muppet to approve of democracy.

                  • Tracey …
                    23 November 2014 at 3:37 pm

                    Tsk tsk tsk, i guess you get a grubby tongue if you have your it down the back of keys trousers for a decade

                    • srylands …
                      23 November 2014 at 3:42 pm

                      That is rude Tracey. It is the type of language I would expect from a union thug. Not a girl.

                    • Tracey …
                      23 November 2014 at 4:01 pm

                      Tissue for mr slylands please, he is salivating over mr hootons appearance.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      23 November 2014 at 4:03 pm

                      SLands, I don’t really have much time for you and I don’t agree with your politics but, hey, if you have something to say I ain’t gonna jump down your throat about it – even if I disagree.

                      However you have to get off this “That’s rude” bullshit. You say it all the time and no one cares.

                      And I have known some women who have spectacular vernacular when it comes to obscenity – my wife is a pro when it comes to obscene language (she learned from the best after all) so I’m not sure what to make of this “It is the type of language I would expect from a union thug. Not a girl.”

                      So yeah, if you can’t handle the language that’s your own cross to bear. So shut the fuck up about it, alright snookums?

                    • Tracey …
                      23 November 2014 at 4:06 pm

                      Slylands is a little star struck. His usual damsel to defend is farrar but hooton pushes some buttons too. Sly is conflicted about male and female roles…

                    • Skinny …
                      23 November 2014 at 5:24 pm

                      Oh look it’s an Executive from the Taxpayer Union piping up, we are broad church today, must be the Sunday sabbath
                      thing. Feeling a little sorry for one of your ilk on the recieving end of an argument Shrillands?

          • RedBaronCV 11.1.2.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 1:02 pm

            D’ont mind Matty. He’s coming at this from a right wing perspective where advised, endorsed etc. are the weasel spin words for “you lot are being told to do this”.

            Just doesn’t cope with a democratic perspective of advice” we think he’s the best person for the job” but it is still a secret ballot.

          • Murray Rawshark 11.1.2.1.3
            23 November 2014 at 8:55 pm

            Even if they had, so bloody what? It’s none of your business what anyone on the left does. Go and fight for democracy in ACT. Who chooses the ACT leader?

      • Tautoko Mangō Mata 11.1.3
        23 November 2014 at 12:47 pm

        Can’t see the word “told”, Matthew.

      • Clemgeopin 11.1.4
        23 November 2014 at 8:05 pm

        That was a recommendation man! You aren’t that thick not to understand this, are you? The delegates still had the power and freedom to vote for any one of the four if they wanted in their first preference. It was a confidential vote anyway!

  12. Pascals bookie 12
    23 November 2014 at 12:14 pm

    “Previously unseen proposals would see the passports of wannabe jihadis cancelled while the holders are overseas, leaving them stateless – in a breach of an international ban.”

    but but but I remember the little tory bedwetters in comments here saying they’d never do that!

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63451448/Alarm-at-draconian-leaked-spy-law

    • alwyn 12.1
      23 November 2014 at 12:49 pm

      I will forgive you for commenting that ” passports of wannabe jihadis cancelled while the holders are overseas, leaving them stateless”.
      You are not claiming it to be fact. You are merely quoting someone who is claiming it to be fact.
      For someone to be made “stateless” would require that their citizenship be cancelled. A passport is a travel document, and can be cancelled without having any effect at all on your citizenship. Cancelling your passport may make it difficult for you to travel overseas but it does NOT deprive you of your citizenship. For Vance to claim such a thing merely illustrates her stupidity.
      Don’t believe her on this topic. She is talking rubbish.

      • Pascals bookie 12.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 12:54 pm

        And here they are.

        You are going to quibble over whether ‘stateless’ is de facto or de jure? Golf clap for classical liberal, perhaps?

        Please to be explaining the purpose of cancelling the passport of a person overseas, the effects of such a cancellation, and how Vance got those aspects wrong.

        • alwyn 12.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 1:32 pm

          This was all discussed about a week ago.
          Have a look at the discussion starting here.
          http://thestandard.org.nz/islamic-extremism-not-a-threat/#comment-926289
          If you cancel the passport of a person who is overseas they will probably be deported from the country they are in and sent back to New Zealand. This is exactly what is happening with that guy Smith, currently in Brazil. That is precisely what is intended.
          He isn’t “stateless”, either de facto or de jure. He just doesn’t have a valid passport.
          If you have a look at the Citizenship Act, referenced in that discussion, you will see that it is impossible to cancel a New Zealand person’s citizenship so as to leave them stateless.
          How did Vance get it wrong? How should I know? She, like Russel Norman who she quotes, isn’t really the sharpest knife in the drawer is she?

          • Pascals bookie 12.1.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 1:49 pm

            Oh, so you’re saying the point of cancelling the passports is to force IS to deport them?

            So the whole thing about it being to prevent foreign fighters who have been radicalised from returning home is just spin?

      • Draco T Bastard 12.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 1:58 pm

        A passport is a travel document, and can be cancelled without having any effect at all on your citizenship.

        Which effectively makes it so that they can’t get home to NZ thus effectively having no citizenship.

        • alwyn 12.1.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 2:45 pm

          When that guy Smith, in Brazil, whose passport has been cancelled cannot be deported to New Zealand because his passport has been cancelled I’ll agree with you.
          Until then I will stick to what the law says and under current New Zealand law a New Zealand person’s citizenship cannot be cancelled, no matter how it was obtained if doing so would leave them stateless.

          If a passport is cancelled a person can be issued with an Emergency Travel Document. If a passport is cancelled under section 8a of the passport act then section 23 (3) of the Act says that the Minister MUST issue one of these to allow the individual to return to New Zealand.
          See the New Zealand Passport Act
          http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1992/0092/latest/whole.html
          Sections 8A and 23.

          • Pascals bookie 12.1.2.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 3:04 pm

            If you think Smith is analogous, then you are thicker than you reckon Vance is by quite some stretch.

            The other think that seems to have slipped your net here is that we are talking about some proposed legislation. If it wasn’t going to change the current law, then they wouldnae fucking bother.

            • alwyn 12.1.2.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 4:24 pm

              Oh dear, poor Pascal.
              When you can’t get anywhere by logic start abusing the other party.
              I think I shall simply add you to the people who cannot be reasoned with because they cannot accept reasoning that shows they are wrong.

                • alwyn …
                  23 November 2014 at 6:27 pm

                  He does appear to have got rather grumpy about things doesn’t he?
                  However I do not consider myself to be responsible for Mr Hooton’s views. He is not my brother, and even if he was I would reply “NO” to the question of “Am I my brother’s keeper?”.

                  • Tracey …
                    23 November 2014 at 6:41 pm

                    it was a comment that seemed to fit your profiling

                    When hooton can’t get anywhere by logic he abused weka.

                    alwyn, i wanted to help you with your list of people who cannot be reasoned with because they cannot accept reasoning that shows they are wrong.

                    • alwyn …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:03 pm

                      Yes, well thank you for the offer but I don’t actually need to add him to the list as someone I don’t need to bother replying to.
                      To the best of my memory I haven’t actually read anything he has posted on this site, so the question doesn’t arise. I would hardly bother replying to something I hadn’t seen.
                      For the pedants among us that doesn’t include the item that Tracey has pointed out to me. I am allowed one exception I hope.
                      I have of course heard him on Jim Mora’s panel and seen him on the Sunday morning TV shows and he hasn’t seemed quite so unhappy with the world.
                      I am quite therefore unable to comment on whether Mr Hooton is how you describe him.

                    • Tracey …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:10 pm

                      so you are saying that when someone behaves as you describe pb, and it gets them off your list, that same abusive behaviour in others may not be an indicator that they couldnt advance a logical argument and cannot accept reasoning that shows they are wrong?

                      hoots is like the pm… he knows the mask to wear in public.

                      😉

                    • alwyn …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:22 pm

                      Tracey. Please read again what I said.
                      If I have never read what he says, and don’t plan to read what he says in future, do you really expect me to say something like.
                      “Stop this is someone you don’t read but you should now read it as you will not wish to reply to it and you will feel much more virtuous by reading something and then not answering it than you will by not reading it at all”.
                      Or would you rather I just skipped on to the next comment and never read it at all?

                    • Tracey …
                      24 November 2014 at 8:53 am

                      sense of humour transplant this weekend alwyn?

              • Pascals bookie …
                23 November 2014 at 5:18 pm

                So adding me to that list isn’t ‘abusing the other party’?

                Come on, you suggest the point of this legislation change isn’t to limit a persons travel options, but rather to expedite their deportment, as in the Smith case.

                I suggested that the Smith case isn’t analogous. There are a number of reasons for that, most obviously that Smith is in custody, he is an escaped prisoner, and we are actively seeking his return.

                You’re claiming that a person who has their passport cancelled will be deported, and that that is the point of this. That’s nonsense, and to say so makes you kind of stupid. The 23(3) travel doc has to be issued if the person requests it. Which doesn’t look much like a deportation to me.

                • alwyn …
                  23 November 2014 at 6:23 pm

                  No I didn’t claim it was not to limit their travel options.
                  Of course it is and there is nowhere I have said anything else.
                  The reason I brought up Smith was because people have been claiming that cancelling peoples passports makes them stateless and that therefore they cannot return to New Zealand.

                  Draco T B has said, just above
                  “Which effectively makes it so that they can’t get home to NZ thus effectively having no citizenship.”

                  You have said
                  ” the passports of wannabe jihadis cancelled while the holders are overseas, leaving them stateless ”

                  The only reason I mentioned the unlamented Mr Smith’s passport cancellation is that he is a known example of someone who was overseas when the passport was cancelled and he has certainly not become a stateless person or someone who cannot return to New Zealand.

                  Of course they would have to ask for an Emergency Travel Document if they want one. But they can get one and therefore Draco’s suggestion that they CAN’T get home is wrong.

                  • Pascals bookie …
                    23 November 2014 at 6:30 pm

                    “If you cancel the passport of a person who is overseas they will probably be deported from the country they are in and sent back to New Zealand. This is exactly what is happening with that guy Smith, currently in Brazil. That is precisely what is intended.”

                    So are you claiming that the purpose of this new law is to get these people deported back to NZ, like you say in that quote, or not?

                    • alwyn …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:11 pm

                      Why are you not willing to read it as.
                      The reason for the New Zealand Government cancelling his passport is to prevent him travelling onwards and to facilitate his return to New Zealand.
                      Please note that Mr Smith is subject to existing law. What the purpose of ” this new law is to get these people deported back to NZ,” doesn’t really matter for this fellow.
                      To repeat. I brought his case up simply to illustrate that cancelling someone’s passport can, and will, render their international travel very difficult but it does not make them stateless and does not prevent their return to New Zealand.
                      The whole point of my objections is the false claims being made that cancelling a passport can make someone a stateless person.

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:24 pm

                      But you went further than that though. You said the intent was that they will find themselves being deported; that making it harder for them to return isn’t the intent.

                      That is the bit I was discussing. If you didn’t mean that, and simply wrote it poorly, then that’s fine. But I can hardly be blamed for thinking you meant to write what you wrote.

                      I think the intent of this law is specifically to make it harder for them to return. That is why I said that if you think Smith is a fit analogy then you are stupid.

                      You then claimed I abused you, which is why I again assumed that you did think the Smith analogy, (where cancelling the passport is in order to assist deportation), is fit.

                    • alwyn …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:38 pm

                      The first comment I made on this subject was

                      “For someone to be made “stateless” would require that their citizenship be cancelled. A passport is a travel document, and can be cancelled without having any effect at all on your citizenship. Cancelling your passport may make it difficult for you to travel overseas but it does NOT deprive you of your citizenship. For Vance to claim such a thing merely illustrates her stupidity.”

                      I tried, in a later comment to illustrate that the purpose was to prevent people continuing to travel overseas and to force their return to New Zealand, which is why I brought up Mr Smith.
                      Obviously I should not attempt to illustrate my comments. I shal in future simply give the opinion and not bother trying to explain it further.
                      Meanwhile I shall, for the last time, proclaim that claiming that cancelling a New Zealand citizen’s passport does NOT make them “stateless”.

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      23 November 2014 at 8:51 pm

                      No need to act the martyr. You’re not being treated unfairly.

                      You also implied that the intent was to get people deported back to NZ. I went into that, saying that if you thought so you were an idiot.

                      You then claimed I had abused you due to me not having an argument.

                      And now you are somehow trying to walk away from any claim that the intent of cancelling passports is to get the person deported back home.

                      If you now realise that that is wrong, then just say it was poorly worded, or whatever.

                      But pretending you are being bullied after throwing a bunch of passive aggressive cutsey shit my way (poor pascal, etc) is just pathetic.

                      Feel free to illustrate points in the future, but make sure they illustrate your point, rather than make completely different points that you don’t intend. That’s the opposite of illustrating.

        • srylands 12.1.2.2
          23 November 2014 at 6:29 pm

          That is bullshit. You are confusing a travel document with citizenship. Passports are not the property of the holder. They can be cancelled at any time. Citizenship is inalienable except in the very specific circumstance of someone who is naturalised obtaining citizenship by fraud.

          You are making things up.

          • Colonial Rawshark 12.1.2.2.1
            23 November 2014 at 6:51 pm

            As if cancelling passports on an ad hoc basis to strand people is not extraordinary in of itself.

            • alwyn 12.1.2.2.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 8:27 pm

              Are they really only done on an “ad hoc” basis?

              The definition is “ad hoc adjective extemporaneous, for the sake of, for this case alone, improvised, in consideration of, on account of, special”

              I thought there were some rules relating to the cancellation of passports, and that it was rare but I didn’t think it fitted this definition.

              • Colonial Rawshark …
                24 November 2014 at 5:25 pm

                Where are these rules? And who is actually making the decision to cancel the passports? Internal Affairs according to these “rules” you speak of or the Intelligence spooks under their own secret criteria?

                Clear as mud and anti-democratic.

          • Draco T Bastard 12.1.2.2.2
            23 November 2014 at 10:36 pm

            You are confusing a travel document with citizenship.

            No I’m not. I’m pointing out that people stuck outside their country and can’t get home because their travel documents have been cancelled by their home country can’t claim their citizenship.

            • Colonial Rawshark 12.1.2.2.2.1
              24 November 2014 at 5:57 pm

              Experience overseas is that Western nations cancel peoples passports in order to more easily drone them or render them.

    • Murray Rawshark 12.2
      23 November 2014 at 10:03 pm

      Will they do it to anyone who visits France, since they’re the only ones who’ve attacked us so far? Or those who join the terrorist IDF and kill a few Palestinian kids?

  13. Chooky 13
    23 November 2014 at 12:37 pm

    Is that cat at the top of Open Mike …Iprent’s alter ego ?

    • weka 13.1
      23 November 2014 at 12:47 pm

      Pete George I think.

    • lprent 13.2
      23 November 2014 at 1:33 pm

      I’m not a cat. I’m a dolphin over the net…

      • Chooky 13.2.1
        23 November 2014 at 3:50 pm

        nothing to stop you being a cat as well….that cat looks like you imo

        • alwyn 13.2.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 4:27 pm

          A person who thinks that flattery will get them anything.
          Actually I would have to say it is a very handsome, and extremely strong willed cat by the look of it.
          I will have to take your word that it looks like lprent.

          • lprent 13.2.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 5:38 pm

            Hah! I finally got around to looking at it. Angry cat?

            But you have to remember that I didn’t start this blog. I just set it up long after people had gone through the “should we do it” stage. However I think I am the only founding member still actively authoring, commenting or moderating. Hardly surprising after 7 years.

            Taking over the world? Hardly. I’ve been avoiding guru status in any role quite successfully for more than 30 years ever since I noticed as being a possible restraint on what I wanted to do.

            I try to do as much as I can to try to get more left blogs running as I can – which is why there are links all over this site to other leftish blogs. I also to try to get this voluntary site on a more sustainable basis. After all I could drop dead or even want to go and do something else at any time (or just have to go somewhere largely off the net).

            • phillip ure 13.2.1.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 8:50 pm

              “..I try to do as much as I can to try to get more left blogs running as I can – which is why there are links all over this site to other leftish blogs..”

              ..really..?

              ..care to tell me just what it is you have against whoar..?

              • lprent …
                23 November 2014 at 10:12 pm

                It is a dual technical and interest problem.

                You put out too many ‘posts’ (and I say that advisedly as your comments here are usually longer) to put on the main feeder.

                You’d swamp all of the other blogs on the front tab with a slower post rate. You have about 20-50 per day of those micro-stream-of-consciousness posts. So that is impossible.

                I could have to put you in your own tab like I did with TDB which also had a swamping issue. But your posts don’t really have the content that makes me want to exert the effort trying to squeeze a “whoar” tab into the limited available space.

                And finally I don’t read your site anyway, and apparently no other ed level must do either. It was never added to the RSS feeder.

                Blogs get added to it when someone (usually me) looks through a link on this site in a post or comments, likes what they read on the other side, and takes the effort to add it to the feeder. You do an impressive amount of trawling of the net. But you don’t do much with analyzing them and your format drives people (including me) rather nuts. There have been the *odd* comments about it over the years.

                But that all being said, you leave a lot of links about your site on this one. It is in every comment you make on your handle, and usually in the body a second time.

                • phillip ure …
                  23 November 2014 at 10:39 pm

                  “..But your posts don’t really have the content that makes me want to exert the effort ..”

                  “..And finally I don’t read your site anyway..”

                  ..which begs the question..?..as i post 40-50 each day..that you don’t look at..how do you know i don’t ‘really have the content’..?

                  ..that all seems somewhat counter-intuitive to me..

                  ..but there ya go..

                  “..You do an impressive amount of trawling of the net..”

                  ..yeah..it’s called a news-aggregation site..an attempt at a local/global snapshot of the important stuff in each 24 hr period..

                  “..But you don’t do much with analyzing them..”

                  ..all analysis/opinion/original material is in the op-ed section..

                  ..and no..i don’t comment on every story i find..

                  “..and usually in the body a second time…”

                  the only times i post my link in the body of a post is if i have had something to say..

                  ..otherwise i just link directly to source..

                  ..and most of my links posted here are direct to source..not via my site..

                  (glad to have clarified all that..)

          • Chooky 13.2.1.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 6:04 pm

            “a very handsome, and extremely strong willed cat”…yes and all cats are nice cats…but that one looks grumpy because it has just been annoyed by many mice and a particularly pesky rat ….and it is going to maul it and ban it

        • lprent 13.2.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 5:51 pm

          Hmmm. I should ask Lyn when she gets back for an objective opinion (she pulls few punches).

          I wound up putting on 25kgs after the start of 2011 between the drugs and having to stop smoking. It is bloody hard to get off. I keep injuring myself and I can’t use the diet that I used to drop weight the first time.

          I have few ideas about how I look to others these days..

  14. Penny Bright 14
    23 November 2014 at 1:03 pm

    A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH IN THE FIGHT FOR TRANSPARENCY – AGAINST CORRUPT CORPORATE CONTROL!

    Sorry folks – it is NOT ‘left’ vs ‘right’ – it’s the corporate 1% vs the public 99%, in my considered opinion as an anti-corruption and anti-privatisation whistle-blower.

    Some of you may not like these articles – but TRUTH is TRUTH and FACTS are FACTS, and I respectfully suggest that attempts are NOT made to defend the indefensible?
    _____________________________________________________________________________________

    Today’s Sunday Star Times – pg A3

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/63452454/Police-probe-mayors-election-campaign-funding

    Police probe mayor’s election campaign funding

    Police are investigating an entity that funded Auckland mayor Len Brown’s 2010 and 2013 election campaigns.

    More then $750,000 in backing for Brown’s two successful campaigns was paid by a trust that kept donors’ identities secret. Since February police have been investigating whether the trust breached the Local Electoral Act.

    …………………………………………

    The police investigation was sparked by a complaint by former police prosecutor Grace Haden, who stood unsuccessfully for a council ward last year on a Transparency NZ ticket.

    In late 2009, before his first tilt at mayoralty of the new Auckland super-city, Brown warned of the dangers of “big money” entering local politics.

    Yesterday, he shrugged off the suggestion it was hypocritical to have since benefited from large anonymous donations.

    “Having been through this for two elections, we just do what we’re required to do.”

    A probe into Auckland mayoral electoral funding is potentially sensitive for police, who were criticised for failing to prosecute 2010 contender John Banks for a breach of the same act, only to see Banks found guilty in a private prosecution taken by the maverick litigant Graham McCready.

    Haden’s complaint to police revolves around the fact that the Local Electoral Act 2001 requires a “person” to be named as contributor on an electoral return. Brown’s return names the New Auckland Council Trust, but Haden insists that the trustees should have been identified.

    Haden says without the trust deed being produced or names of the trustees being revealed, the donation is effectively “anonymous”.

    Last week Brown’s campaign team, headed by Helen Clark’s former chief spin doctor, David Lewis, released a statement to the Star-Times but refused to name the trustees or produce a trust deed.
    ……………..
    __________________________________________________________________________________

    Seen the even more politically significant Sunday Star Times Editorial? (Can’t find an on-line link – so I’ve typed it all – FYI)

    “Liar, cheat, hypocrite – could there be more?”

    Show us the money

    Police inquiry should enforce transparency for political donors.

    LEN BROWN, despite his many, many failings, does appear to have one virtue: that of prescience.

    Back in 2010, campaigning for the mayoral chains of the nation’s big new super-city, he warned darkly of the threat of anonymous figures secretly bankrolling local election campaigns.

    “We have seen the dangers of big money entering national politics, with concerns over sources and transparency of party funding,” he said. “Local government has avoided these issues, but they could emerge were candidates under pressure to raise large sums in order to be competitive.”

    How right he was.

    That very election campaign, it later emerged, his opponenet John Banks had signed off donations from internet mogul Kim Dotcom as anonymous – when, as a judge found, Banks discussed a donation over lunch at the Dotcom mansion.

    Banks is challenging his conviction, and the Court of Appeal may yet allow him to claw back some modicum of of credibility, but the damage to the reputation of our electoral process is irreparable.

    The Banks prosecution and conviction coincided with a string of electoral transparency scandals at Parliament: minister Judith Collins went in to bat for one political donor; Maurice Williamson resigned after intervening in the criminal prosecution of another.

    Erstwhile Labour leader David Cunliffe, a critic of these transactions, was forced to apologise for his own use of a secret trust, name three of his donors, and refund the money to the rest.

    Now Brown, the one-time critic of secret donations, is revealed as one of the biggest beneficiaries. His doom-laden prophesies were well-founded.

    Which brings us back to Brown’s many failings. Beyond his very public record as a cheat who lied to his family during the Bevan Chuang extra-marital affair, the mayor could now add hypocrite.

    Seeking election, he bemoaned the likelihood embattled candidates might resort to donations from opaque sources.

    At the same time he was accepting $499,000 from the faceless New Auckland Council Trust.

    Last year, his campaign accepted another $273,375.

    This in itself should be enough to give pause for thought, deciding whether he can with integrity ask the Auckland electorate for another term as mayor.

    Now it emerges police are actively investigating the trust, begging the question of whether Brown could also be caught up in allegations of law-breaking.

    The Sunday Star Times has launched an editorial campaign, Show us the Money, calling for politicians to be required to disclose the source of all donations, however big or small. this applies to both national and local politics.

    Ahead of last year’s mayoral election, Brown warned that the campaign spending limit of $580,000 “could mean the election is bought by a wealthy candidate”.

    As it turns out, Brown and his wealthy anonymous donors had quite enough cash of their own. ”

    _________________________________________________________________________________

    THAT is exactly why I have refused to pay Auckland Council rates – because they are simply NOT ‘showing us the (OUR) money’ – BILLION$ of it.

    Who are the private consultants and contractors to whom Auckland Council and Auckland Council CCOs have awarded contracts?

    Are any of these private consultants and contractors donors to this secret ‘New Auckland Council Trust’?

    Open the books – show us the money – follow the dollar!

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption whistle-blower’

    • Sacha 14.1
      23 November 2014 at 2:17 pm

      Please stop pasting the whole article, Penny. We are all capable of following a link if interested. Otherwise, it’s a whole lot of waffle to scroll past.

  15. Philip Ferguson 15
    23 November 2014 at 1:08 pm

    Rich people, at least in the States, are more likely to shoplift, more likely to cut in front on the road and more likely to take candy from a jar saying ‘for children only’ than the rest of us mere mortals.

    People with income of over 150k a year also give a much lower percentage of their income away than people on under 25k a year (US dollars).

    Our social betters, eh?
    http://rdln.wordpress.com/2014/11/23/our-social-betters/

    Phil

    • Draco T Bastard 15.1
      23 November 2014 at 2:05 pm

      The only way to get rich is to steal from as many people as possible thus it doesn’t surprise me to find that the rich have less morality than the average rat.

  16. Penny Bright 16
    23 November 2014 at 1:12 pm

    What has been done to these gutsy citizens and ratepayers from the Kaipara District Council is an ABSOLUTE DISGRACE!

    GO the Mangawhai Residents and Ratepayers Association!! DON’T BUDGE!

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/63426954/Council-targets-500-rates-rebels

    New Zealand’s only non-democratic local council has issued summons to around 300 rates “strikers” and is seeking to add rates arrears to the mortgages of another 200.

    The move is designed to stamp out the last holdouts of a ratepayer revolt in Mangawhai Heads, north of Auckland. It was a revolt spurred when ratepayers discovered massive and illegal debts had been incurred by the Kaipara District Council after a cost blowout on a wastewater project.

    Commissioners were appointed in September 2012 to sort the mess out, including dealing with about $76 million of “external” debts. But the commissioners found themselves in a bitter tussle with the Mangawhai Residents and Ratepayers’ Association (MRRA) which is angry none of those responsible for the funding fiasco have been charged or sued.

    Initially, the refusal to pay rates should not have been dubbed a rates “strike” because the rates had been illegally levied on an illegal debt. However, in May the High Court ruled that the debt was enforceable after an act of Parliament legalised the rates.

    Those two actions paved the way for the mass recovery action by the council now under way.

    Ratepayer resistance is dwindling in the face of what Bruce Rogan, head of the MRRA, dubbed a “reign of terror”.

    At one stage, an estimated 12 per cent of “ratings units” were refusing to repay rates.

    Commissioner John Robertson said the number of people protesting through not paying their rates has decreased substantially. The number fell after the High Court ruling, he said, and he expected it to fall again now notices of court action were being served.

    Rogan said the MRRA would ask the court to hear the cases of a small number of rates strikers as a test case for the rest.

    Robertson said when he was appointed he recognised the wrongs done to ratepayers.

    “We have to look forward, and we have to build the council back up,” he said. “We need to have all property owners paying their rates.

    “There are still property owners not paying rates because they are protesting. In the end, the council has to take action.”

    For retired lawyer Clive Boonham, who uncovered the illegal activities of the council, Kaipara’s woes show how unaccountable local councils are to their ratepayers.

    “As a general principle of law illegal acts of a local authority are voidable which means that a court has the power to declare them to be illegal and of no effect,” he said. “But effectively that means that a local authority can do anything that it likes, legal or not, and its actions are not deemed to be illegal until a court makes that ruling.”

    As it is expensive, time-consuming and wearying to go to court, and public watchdogs were weak and reluctant to act, that almost never happens. Even if it does, Parliament will just pass a validation act, he said.

    Robertson rejects the assertion that democracy and the rule of law were undermined by the validation act. Parliament validated the rates, not the illegalities of the council, nor the culpability of individuals, he said.

    He said commissioners were preparing cases against the auditor-general and Audit New Zealand for failing to adequately audit the council.

    Kaipara was on “a transition back to democracy” that should see elections held next year.
    _________________________________________________________________________________

    Please help to spread the word – these brave New Zealanders are making a stand for ALL of us – for open, transparent and democratically-accountable local government.

    Penny Bright

    • The Murphey 16.1
      23 November 2014 at 1:22 pm

      Q. Is this a blue-print approach to validating the illegal activities of local councils around NZ, when the inevitable wide spread rates strikes come?

      A. ____

      Q. What is ‘law’ ?

      A. ____

      • Draco T Bastard 16.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 2:11 pm

        However, in May the High Court ruled that the debt was enforceable after an act of Parliament legalised the rates crime.

        Seems typical of this government. One or more of their preferred people commits a crime and so they then make that crime legal.

  17. weka 17
    23 November 2014 at 1:14 pm

    Beaker was always my favourite muppet. Or Oscar 😈

    • Matthew Hooton 17.1
      23 November 2014 at 1:54 pm

      On Oscar I agree

      • ankerawshark 17.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 2:40 pm

        MH re your reply about John Key and cuppa in Epsom deal. I am not sure it is the same. But please provide proof of your outcry about the Epsom situation. Any links to comments on your media appearances where you decried tail gating and what happened in Epsom much appreciated. I did not see them, despite watching even though I follow politics in NZ closely.

        • Matthew Hooton 17.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 4:15 pm

          There are none. I wasn’t outraged when Key told National voters to vote for John Rodney Hide/John Banks/David Seymour and I’m not outraged that the EPMU told the local union bosses to vote for Little. This all started when “Anne” attacked me for “lying” when I said so.

          • lprent 17.1.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 5:42 pm

            …EPMU told the local union bosses…

            That is the lie.

            There are no “local union bosses” in the EPMU. FFS have you ever run across a EPMU delegate? Ornery buggers at the best of times. Being “told” how to vote by the exec would have made most of them go ballistic. Which is why they weren’t “told” how to vote.

            Nah you must be aware of that. I think that you were deliberately lying for political reasons on National radio.

            Even for you this is pretty low…

          • ankerawshark 17.1.1.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 7:05 pm

            So you accept the result of the Labour Leadership election. Kindly stop banging on about Little and the Unions then.

            Also you haven’t commented on my question to you about whether Petrol station workers having their pay dock to cover the cost of the theft for their employers sit with you? O.k. about it? This is a trick question of course, because if you are not o.k. with it, why the hell would you not support the role of unions in the work place.

      • phillip ure 17.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 4:11 pm

        i see hoots as more ‘the count’…

        ..given he is a vampire on the body politic..

        ..who..funnily enough..has also never eaten a frozen pea..

        ..(they are for the ‘proles’..frozen peas..eh..?

        ..aristocracy like ‘the count’ and ‘hoots’ always have fresh..didn’tyaknow..?..)

  18. Penny Bright 18
    23 November 2014 at 1:25 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63442779/Laila-Harre-quits-as-Internet-Party-leader

    Laila Harre is stepping down as leader of the Internet Party.

    Set up by German internet mogul Kim Dotcom, the party failed to get into Parliament at this year’s election in an alliance with Mana.

    Harre said she would step down in December once options for the party’s future had been developed.
    …………………………………

    For now she was stepping away from an electoral focus to concentrate on the question of why change was needed.

    “The limits of the election discourse exposed just hows much more deeply and widely we need to build acceptance of the need for social change.”
    ______________________________________________________________________________________

    I have messaged Laila on facebook and asked her what is her view now on the Auckland Council ‘Supercity for the 1%’ which she helped to set up, given how Auckland Council rates and debt have sky-rocketed, while services and TRANSPARENCY have plummeted.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________

    Interesting who wrote this article back in 2009?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/blogs/frontline/2575242/Harres-appointment-a-win-for-business

    Laila Harre’s appointment to a human resources role at the Auckland Transition Agency (ATA) for the new super-city is a big win for business.

    ATA Executive Chairman Mark Ford announced her appointment to his “team” yesterday and said she would be “engaged on project work involving human resources and change management.”

    Harre comes with left-wing credentials as a former alliance MP and cabinet minister in the 1999 – 2002 Labour-Alliance coalition government. After the Alliance imploded she worked for the New Zealand Nurses Organisation and more recently as National Secretary of the National Distribution Union.

    So why would the right-wing ATA, dominated by ACT/National appointees want her on board?

    AucklandNational has become increasingly worried about Aucklanders reactions to the reforms. Opinion polls show all areas of Auckland are against either the proposal itself, the process being used to ram it through, or both. The greatest support comes from the current Auckland City area but even there, it is just 45% support. If Aucklanders fail to support this major reform then National’s chances of winning the 2011 election will be heavily discounted.

    The reform process used initially was a reminder of 1980s Labour Finance Minister Roger Douglas whose strategy, when pushing through big unpopular reforms, was to keep pushing hard and keep moving (because a moving target is harder to hit).

    Act leader and Minister of Local Government Rodney Hide initially followed the same strategy. Within days of the Royal Commission report being released major decisions were being made about what would and wouldn’t be acceptable from the commissions recommendations, legislation was drafted and passed and a business -friendly ATA established. Within a couple of months we are at the select committee stage for the reforms themselves.

    All this has produced alarm among Aucklanders. They are deeply suspicious and there is an intangible underlying feeling that people across the region are being shafted and that big business interests are driving the process.

    National’s response has been to take Rodney Hide from the spotlight. The last thing they want is what looks like an Epsom-friendly super-city forced on the whole region by the ACT leader whose party polled just 3.65% of the popular vote at the last election. National Minister John Carter is now fronting the process along with Mark Ford.

    With this background, Laila Harre’s appointment provides ideal political cover – just as the Maori Party does for National on issues such as private prisons (Labour’s appointment of Jim Bolger to head Kiwibank is another good example).

    It’s more difficult to attack a reform process when well-respected figures from “the other side” are involved. Harre’s decision to join the process of corporatising and de-democratising Auckland governance will help ease Aucklanders’ fears.

    It was an inspired move to approach her and those involved will be overjoyed she accepted. Not because she will do a good job for them, which she will, but because she will provide the type of broad political cover for the agency which money can’t buy. The agency gets the added bonus that she will be the public face of the mass redundancies which will follow.

    It’s a win-win-win for Act/National/business.

    Harre says she sees it as “an opportunity to make the Auckland Council an excellent workplace”. For those who appointed her it has much greater significance.

    ______________________________________________________________________________________

    EXACTLY right.

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption / anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’ – who opposed the Auckland ‘Supercity’ literally from DAY ONE.

    • Chooky 18.1
      23 November 2014 at 3:35 pm

      @ Penny…re “It’s a win-win-win for Act/National/business” but for Harre “an opportunity to make the Auckland Council an excellent workplace”.

      …yes well Laila Harre should watch her reputation imo….it is a bit like Hooton wanting the Greens to go in coalition with the Nacts….a contradiction in terms …it fudges the issues and blunts the Green and Left opposition if one of their own endorses an inherently right wing organisation…which is exactly what the right wing want…to confuse and defuse the opposition

  19. fisiani 19
    23 November 2014 at 2:18 pm

    Very concerning that Little said the police should put a case to a trial. A politician with far limited knowledge of the evidence than the police stating that the police were wrong. Bizarre. What happened to the presumption of innocence? What part of putting ostensibly innocent men through a trial knowing that there was insufficient evidence is reasonable? A guilty verdict could arise despite the lack of evidence. A not guilty verdict could arise because of the lack of evidence. Does Andrew Little think that just because a case is high profile that the police should not assess the likelihood of prosecution. Does he not realise that police often decide to not proceed with a charge due to a lack of evidence? Does he think he can gain votes by putting alleged victims and perpetrators in court and let a judge or jury decide even with insufficient evidence. Does Andrew Little want to also determine the charges that are laid?
    In Scotland, the police do not prosecute anyone. The police there submit their evidence to the Procurator Fiscal who decides whether to prosecute. Lots of cases fail to go to court which really annoys the police but it means that the cases which are prosecuted have a high conviction rate. The Scots also have three verdicts available. Guilty, Not Guilty and Not Proven.
    We only have two verdicts available and no politician should ever tell the police whether to prosecute or not prosecute. Maurice Williamson was sacked for this and so Andrew Little who should know better,should resign.

    • Clemgeopin 19.1
      23 November 2014 at 2:40 pm

      I think there is also a perceived conflict of interest in this case because one of the boys accused is a relative of a police officer, if I remember correctly. The fact is the boys have themselves admitted on their own video what they did! So, how could the police not proceed? I think their innocence or guilt of this heinous crime should have been decided by the courts after a fair trial and not by the police.

      • McFlock 19.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 2:47 pm

        oh, was fizzball on about the roastbusters?

        I loved the bit where a guilty verdictmight arise despite a lack of evidence. It’s like he thinks the cops can determine guilt better than the courts…

      • Clemgeopin 19.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 2:49 pm

        [Edit does not work]
        Maurice Williamson was trying to help his friend who was under police investigation. A much different issue. Andrew Little is here expressing a valid view that lots of other people in the media have expressed publicly already.

    • weka 19.2
      23 November 2014 at 2:46 pm

      “What happened to the presumption of innocence?”

      Even the police don’t think there is no case to answer.

      If you want to discuss Little’s involvement, put up a link so we know what you are referring to rather than you just spouting nonsense.

        • weka 19.2.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 3:52 pm

          whereabouts in that Lanth? I watched it yesterday and don’t remember Little talking about the Roastbusters case.

          • Lanthanide 19.2.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 4:01 pm

            Oh, sorry, it was actually Q & A this morning.

            My internet is currently capped and very slow, so I copied this link from below, thinking it was Q & A from this morning.

      • fisiani 19.2.2
        23 November 2014 at 3:10 pm

        Are you by stating “even the police don’t think there is no case to answer” denying the presumption of innocence?

        • McFlock 19.2.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 3:19 pm

          you might think that, if you were a fucking moron.

        • Tracey 19.2.2.2
          23 November 2014 at 4:17 pm

          How is believing there is a case to answer synonymous with denying presumption of innocence!?

          • McFlock 19.2.2.2.1
            23 November 2014 at 4:23 pm

            On Planet Key, if the police arrest someone then the person must be guilty.

            Therefore, saying someone should go to trial when the police have so far chosen to not arrest them is equivalent to presuming the guilt of an innocent person.

            It’s all rather reasonable. /sarc

            • Murray Rawshark 19.2.2.2.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 10:23 pm

              On Planet Poaka, if you haven’t been arrested, you’ve been lucky so far and they know what you’re up to and will get you one day. Strangely enough, Phil Goff took that approach with the clean slate legislation. He said just because people hadn’t been convicted didn’t mean they hadn’t been up to something and had just been cunning. I don’t remember much of an uproar about presumption of innocence at the time.

    • Lanthanide 19.3
      23 November 2014 at 2:53 pm

      “Very concerning that Little said the police should put a case to a trial. A politician with far limited knowledge of the evidence than the police stating that the police were wrong. Bizarre. ”

      Wow.

      What Little said, is that it is the polices job to investigate a crime. Once investigate, it is up to the courts to judge if the crime occurred and set appropriate penalties. It is not the job of the police to judge whether a crime occurred before it gets to a court, which is exactly what they’re doing here.

      Personally I find it hard to disagree with Little’s position, that the police are broadening the scope of their job and trying to act as judge and jury instead of merely acting as the investigator.

      • fisiani 19.3.1
        23 November 2014 at 3:07 pm

        It IS the job of the police to decide if they have enough evidence not merely to investigate. You do not just press a charge without assessing the chance of a conviction. That would mean a massive increase in court cases, lives disrupted and far more not guilty findings. Who would that help? That’s why I mentioned Scots Law. It appears that the NZ police are using the Scots example.

        • Lanthanide 19.3.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 3:18 pm

          Like how the police decided not to prosecute John Banks because there wasn’t enough evidence, and then he was eventually convicted of a crime?

          You know the police also get to choose what they charge people with. They may not have evidence to substantiate 27 different charges against individuals, even if it appears 27 crimes were committed. But may they would have enough evidence to get a conviction for 3 of those offences, and so could charge them with that.

          It seems very difficult, given the evidence the boys willingly posted in public, that there wasn’t enough evidence to go to a trial.

        • weka 19.3.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 3:48 pm

          “It IS the job of the police to decide if they have enough evidence not merely to investigate. You do not just press a charge without assessing the chance of a conviction.”

          Is that the job of the police or the dept that does the prosecuting?

          One problem in this case is that the police bungled the investigation at the start eg not taking the original compaint seriously and following it up; doing things like asking a complainant what she was wearing. So the police have lost the confidence of the public that they know what they are doing.

          The police have a long history of dealing with rape badly, there’s not actually any reason to assume they’re any better now.

          • Tracey 19.3.1.2.1
            23 November 2014 at 4:20 pm

            yes, the police prosecuters make the decision and they would read or hear their colleagues on the beat or cid statements before deciding. it seems fizzi has chosen today at the standard to be a living example of, a little knowledge is dangerous.

            • weka 19.3.1.2.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 6:42 pm

              Are the police prosecuters part of the same department as the investigating police, or separate?

              • Tracey …
                23 November 2014 at 6:53 pm

                well, to my knowledge they dont investigate anything.

                • weka …
                  23 November 2014 at 7:01 pm

                  I was trying to get a sense of whether they are separate or more working together/collegial.

                  • Tracey …
                    23 November 2014 at 7:10 pm

                    i got that but didnt know. this from the police website suggests they are a seperate division from the investigating/beat side of things

                    “… Police Prosecution Service

                    There are over 300 staff (including 212 prosecutors) within the Police Prosecution Service. They are spread between a national office in Wellington and 41 offices throughout the country, servicing over 60 district courts.

                    Map of PPS offices and district/region boundaries

                    The Police Prosecution Service:

                    undertakes all District Court summary jurisdiction (ie, without a jury) police criminal and traffic prosecutions
                    prosecutes most District Court preliminary hearings (but not District Court jury trials subsequent to committal)
                    prosecutes Youth Court defended hearings and preliminary hearings
                    advocates for Districts at coroners’ inquests as required
                    supports Districts at miscellaneous hearings as required
                    administers the Police Adult Diversion Scheme. …”

        • Murray Rawshark 19.3.1.3
          23 November 2014 at 10:29 pm

          The Scottish police hand the evidence they have fabricated to the prosecutor, who then decides whether to proceed. How did Ngati Poaka follow that example?

    • weka 19.4
      23 November 2014 at 4:13 pm

      Mr Little said he’s very concerned about “this growing tendency for the way prosecutorial discretion is exercised by the police. It seems to be much more conservative.”

      He said police previously had a view, particularly with serious offending, “that is wasn’t their job to be sort of judge, jury and executioner. If there was enough to take a case, give it to the courts and let them decide, even if there was a not guilty verdict at the end of it.”

      He said: “Now it seems to me, and I suspect that it’s because of the financial pressures that the police are under, that they are sort of making almost a judicial decision, ‘Are we going to win this or not? We don’t want to look like we’re losing or put money into something we might lose, so we won’t prosecute.’ And I think that’s the wrong thing.”

      Mr Little believes the more serious the alleged offence the more the police should err on the side of the prosecution and let a judge and-or jury decide.

      http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/roast-busters-case-andrew-little-wanted-court-decide-6157543

      • Tracey 19.4.1
        23 November 2014 at 4:24 pm

        it used to be that if the police had a prima facie case then it could proceed to trial.

        given how sexual trials are conducted i can understand decision making including taking into account the ordeal for the victim versus possible outcome. But the corrolary to that must be constant lobbying by the police to change the law or system that sees so many not charged or charged and found not guilty.

      • Murray Rawshark 19.4.2
        23 November 2014 at 10:35 pm

        The decision used to be made at depositions. If you got a JP, the decision was whatever ngati poaka asked for. If you went before a magistrate, they actually looked at the evidence before they decided.

        • weka 19.4.2.1
          23 November 2014 at 11:06 pm

          So is that what Little means when he says the protocol has changed? Too often the police are making the decision without it going before a judge?

          • Murray Rawshark 19.4.2.1.1
            24 November 2014 at 12:05 am

            They always had the ability to not charge people. I’m not sure what might have changed, except that they may be more subject to Tory interference.

  20. Clemgeopin 20
    23 November 2014 at 2:24 pm

    Russel Norman was excellent on Q and A this morning. Very good points, bold and straight up. Much impressed.

    http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/basic-mistakes-made-ssc-russel-norman-video-6157463

    And another good interview of Andrew Little on Q and A. Here eather du Plessis-Allan was very good, giving Andrew enough time to complete his answers rather than interrupting and badgering him like what happened on the Nation yesterday.

    http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/iain-rennie-should-stood-down-investigation-held-andrew-little-video-6157461

    See the interview on the Nation here:
    http://www.3news.co.nz/tvshows/thenation/interview-labour-leader-andrew-little-2014112212

    • Chooky 20.1
      23 November 2014 at 3:48 pm

      Clem +100…thanks for that!….agreed.!..Norman and Little both very impressive

      • Clemgeopin 20.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 6:55 pm

        you are welcome, Chooky. Hopefully the worm will steadily turn positive for the progressive parties in the next three years.

  21. travellerev 21
    23 November 2014 at 3:11 pm

    Former leader Don Brash chairs the ICBC, and former Prime Minister Dame Jenny Shipley the CCB. Former Finance Minister Ruth Richardson is a director for the Bank of China’s New Zealand operation, and recently retired National minister Chris Tremain chairs the board.

    Bribing, Corruption And The New New Zealand Moral Code: Go For Your Life And Fuck The Rest!

  22. Weepus beard 22
    23 November 2014 at 3:18 pm

    I’m not sure I can stomach PG’s and Hooton’s attempts at micro-managing debate.

    If this is the future of the standard then I’m not sure I can continue. Pete George in particular sucks up so much life by inspecting the finest detail while being ignorant of the message itself that it is too exhausting to have to read.

    • McFlock 22.1
      23 November 2014 at 3:32 pm

      I have faith that pg will be banned or otherwise fuck off in the foreseeable future 🙂

      • Weepus beard 22.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 3:45 pm

        Indeed.

        I guess my point is that the socially responsible side of politics (the left) is divided enough at the moment and has enough internal arguments about the way forward that these trolls, PG, Hooton, BM, fistiani, Chris 73, etc, are in no way contributing to the benefit of the cause. Our cause.

        I know Sun Tzu says know your enemy but this shit is just not worth it.

      • weka 22.1.2
        23 November 2014 at 3:50 pm

        me too.

    • Chooky 22.2
      23 November 2014 at 3:46 pm

      @Weepus Beard +100…”too exhausting”…..i cant be bothered nor do i have the time

    • Tracey 22.3
      23 November 2014 at 3:51 pm

      Concerted effort by all to leave his self gratifying posts alone.

      He has “look at me! Look at me, i AM important” complex

    • lprent 22.4
      23 November 2014 at 6:03 pm

      It is a rope thing. You can’t assume that people can’t learn. Most of the time they eventually do.

      So people start on the same general basis after each ban apart from ramping up their next ban length if they prove that they haven’t learnt. How they behave is up to them.

      The rope is there to hang them if required. But you hope that they have actually engaged in a some thought to figure out how to avoid that same stupidities again.

      PG does seem to to adapt, and has after each ban, but he keeps looking for a angle for leverage in the rules rather than simply dealing with the debate.

    • Paul 22.5
      23 November 2014 at 8:41 pm

      +100
      I’m sick of wading through all these tr***’s
      Using the Standard less as it seems to full of their nonsense.

  23. ankerawshark 23
    23 November 2014 at 3:23 pm

    Maybe we need to go back to responding just with Rolling eyes. That might work?

  24. greywarshark 24
    23 November 2014 at 4:33 pm

    Yek might try to lie in bed and run NZ, and the world, from it but he will never be able to come up to Slavoj Zizek’s thoughts, even if he was standing on a pile of gold bars or rare earth beads.

  25. phillip ure 25
    23 November 2014 at 4:49 pm

    russel brown just did a major hatchet-job on the standard..on nat-rad..

    ..he ‘doesn’t read it’…

    ..and hoots said everyone here is ‘crazy’..

    ..and he does read it..

    ..(oh..and bradbury ‘parties’ with hoots..

    ..too close..?..d’yareckon..?..)

    • phillip ure 25.1
      23 November 2014 at 5:04 pm

      hoots also said the standard is ‘never funny’..

      ..now..that is an outright-lie from hoots..

      ..as there are quite a few people here who are quick with a quip…

      ..and humour as a political-weapon features prominently here..

      ..and that is a good thing..

      ..(and i guess he doesn’t find it amusing the jokes made here about him..?..eh..?

      ..especially when he gets all pissy/purse-mouthed..eh..?..heh..!..now that’s funny..!..

      ..add in a soupcon of self-rightousness..as he often does..

      ..and the humour lifts to a whole new level..)

    • lprent 25.2
      23 November 2014 at 5:22 pm

      When a link goes up, could someone post it in a comment. I’d guess it is a repeat of something from the week.

      But the question really is – who really cares?

      There is quite a difference between pontificating about media and politics, looking at it from a polite distance, and actually being involved in politics at ground level. My guess is that RB’s main beef would be that authors and commentary on politics should be polite and not have to do with being actively involved in political parties.

      There is a place for that kind of polite, quiet and respectful commentary on the left. It is over at Public Address and Pundit.

      Hooton? Ah always the right stirrer…. I rather suspect he gets exactly what this site is about. He just prefers the left not to have it.

      Bomber? I may have mentioned a few times before that by most standards of much of the left, I am almost the epitome of being a right winger in a left movement.

      Consequently I do much of my limited socialising amongst the people who are a whole lot lefter than I am. Specifically as much as possible unionists and academics/intellectuals. I already know the ways of business and the right (FFS I have a MBA, a background in management, and I’ve spent my entire working life in private industry as a overpaid manager or geek). What I need to know if how other people think.

      Intellectual siloing amongst people of similar opinions is something for amateur bunnies to do. You have to *know* who you are actually dealing with. Working off half-arsed myths is just stupid.

      • TheContrarian 25.2.1
        23 November 2014 at 5:25 pm

        Here ya go

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/20158002

        As an aside, Prentice, you realise that quite often you come across as arrogant pontificating twat right? Tell us more about your MBA, old wolf.

        • phillip ure 25.2.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 5:30 pm

          brown and hoots have a chortle about how brown is ‘on the enemies list’ of the standard..

          ..over ‘something i said three or four years ago..’..

          ..(which is beyond precious..on the part of brown..)

          ..(and..an ‘enemies-list’..?..whoar..!..who knew..?..)

          [lprent: There isn’t one. There are a few people who I keep my eye on because of past bad experiences with what they do to comment sections.

          However I suspect that he ran into some commenters being critical about stance he had. I vaguely remember that it was about some position he took on a film or media matter.

          If anyone is interested here is a list of comments he made, stopping abruptly in 2011.

          Ummm… Probably this one which the disagreement about the union role about Hobbit dispute. The end result of that was that Warners and Jackson used the dispute to change NZ employment law and to extort more money off taxpayers.

          I think that most of the participants don’t post or comment here anymore. The net is a dynamic medium.

          But curiously it now means that Russell Brown has just added a myth of an “enemies list”. Jez – what a dork. ]

          • TheContrarian 25.2.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 5:33 pm

            If you wanna talk about being precious, say something along the lines of The Standard being some kind of cohesive unit – LPrent will be on you in a second about how machines can’t actually write blog posts and if you do it again you’ll be banned

          • Tracey 25.2.1.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 5:40 pm

            i guess russell doesnt know about the numerous times he is quoted here or his articles linked in a positive view.

            • Chooky 25.2.1.1.2.1
              23 November 2014 at 6:39 pm

              who is Russell Brown and why does he hate us.?

              ..what political social justice issue local or international has the rabble here expressed a very strong opinion on that gets right up his nose?…and why does it get up his nose?…if we knew why then that would tell us something about him

              • Tracey …
                23 November 2014 at 6:45 pm

                i know i have read some of his stuff and enjoyed his perspective. i think the only thing i can recall that cause some angst was his dislike of the outcome of the labour leadership race.

                his response seems to have been similar to ms paganis.

          • Chooky 25.2.1.1.3
            23 November 2014 at 6:43 pm

            @philip ure …sounds like projection to me…”brown is ‘on the enemies list’ of the standard..”….weird ….who is brown?

            ….we know who hoots is….a very very cunning paid possum stirrer…from the dark side of the woods

            • Tracey 25.2.1.1.3.1
              23 November 2014 at 6:47 pm

              if brown has done something wrong he needs investigating, and the investigating needs to be consistent across similar allegations so no prejudice can be accused.

            • phillip ure 25.2.1.1.3.2
              23 November 2014 at 6:58 pm

              @ chooky..

              “..sounds like projection to me..”

              ..but then..you are well-known for yr simplistic/half-baked-observations/conclusions..eh..?

              ..so..’buzz!’..wrong again..eh..?

              ..never mind..points for consistancy..eh..?..

              • Chooky …
                23 November 2014 at 7:04 pm

                sounds like brown is projecting…not you! ..(wires crossed? …again?…too much you know what ? ).

                however now you are on to my case …..bacon sandwich ? ..lovely , luscious…yummmy

            • b waghorn 25.2.1.1.3.3
              23 November 2014 at 8:24 pm

              When I see hooten (who hoots is)I see a man who’s lost his soul , hope he decides to find it one day

        • greywarshark 25.2.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 7:57 pm

          The Big C
          Lynn being arrogant and pontificating? When you’ve got it flaunt it, so a bit of that is acceptable. It’s probably more irritable than the other things. Tired at the end of the day, and bash goes the guillotine on someone’s less than choice prose.

        • lprent 25.2.1.3
          23 November 2014 at 8:28 pm

          I am arrogant and a person who sometimes pontificates. Especially after a few beers or in code design sessions.

          Most people around the software engineering field tend to be, so do MBA students who have a well deserved rep for arrogance (writing management simulations for the buggers really teaches you that). If you even hear people in either of those areas let loose, you’d realise that I’m not exactly a atypical specimen.

          It comes from an awareness of having pushing the limits at the bleeding edge of your profession.

          You might also have noticed that it takes a certain amount of arrogance to run this site.

          However I seldom pontificate stupidly on National radio. I leave that for people with less demands on their time than I have.

          • TheContrarian 25.2.1.3.1
            23 November 2014 at 10:01 pm

            ….apart from the time you pontificated stupidly on National Radio.

            “Bunji, yeah fuck knows who that guy is. Oh yeah Bunji, yeah I know him but I won’t tell”…etc

            Tell me again about your MBA. You code AND have an MBA? Fucking amazing.
            Good shit old wolf. A true Renaissance man. Did you know Da Vinci didn’t have an MBA? Fucking amateur. Ho ho ho.

            Let’s talk later, if you have the time.

            • lprent 25.2.1.3.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 10:46 pm

              I’d only had 5 hours of sleep because I was behind at work (new job) and had to work into the wee hours to get that finished.

              Well I had to think about who he was. Guyon Espiner managed to wander through a list of “anonymous” posts on the site that day. All of them were actually from people whose identity was known – except for bunji.

              4 or 5 from memory.. Me, Anthony, Mike, Mickey, and bunji. I had to think who in the hell Bunji was and if he was publicly known.

              According to Guyon, having a single author out of five with a pseudonym meant that he was “anonymous”. I guess he has a strange understanding of the word.

              MBA: It is just a business degree. Such a pity that you are such a muckhead you didn’t understand what you read. You keep having to repeat it. Presumably because you are kind of stupid?

              Or you just have a problem with people actually completing degrees? It isn’t that uncommon these days.

  26. Colonial Rawshark 26
    23 November 2014 at 5:44 pm

    Labour UK seems to be in a complete spin over some shadow cabinet minister’s tweeted photo. What the hell.

  27. chris73 27
    23 November 2014 at 5:57 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63452454/Len-Browns-funding-probed-by-police

    – I’m sure theres nothing to it and its all just a big misunderstanding

    • Weepus beard 27.1
      23 November 2014 at 6:25 pm

      Indeed.

      [chris73]nothing in it | semantics | why don’t you think about something that matters?[/chris73]

      • chris73 27.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 6:44 pm

        You don’t think that on a political blog that an investigation into political funding by the police is worth mentioning…

        okayyyyyyyy

        • Tracey 27.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 6:49 pm

          you can write about pretty much anything in open mike.

          • chris73 27.1.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 6:54 pm

            Heres the thing, I don’t believe G. Presland did anything deliberately illegal in his dealings however he may have done something inadvertently illegal

            I come to this conclusion based on his postings over the years and his work for the Cunliffe in which he came across as earnest, well-meaning and wanting to do the right thing but maybe just gets in a bit over his head and over his abilities

            I mean did anyone think that railing against trusts then setting up a trust was a good idea?

            So probably nothing will happen except maybe a slap over the wrist with a wet bus ticket

            • greywarshark 27.1.1.1.1.1
              23 November 2014 at 7:50 pm

              chris73
              You are a RW trill. Just looking for a way of discrediting mickey. A concern trill no less, and no more.

              A lawyer may be against trusts in a certain context, but if they are legal then they are able to be used by anyone when appropriate. There may be a better way of dealing with the legality of a situation if they were reformed in part or full, but they are available in the legal system for anybody.

            • lprent 27.1.1.1.1.2
              23 November 2014 at 11:05 pm

              Heres the thing, I don’t believe G. Presland did anything deliberately illegal in his dealings however he may have done something inadvertently illegal

              Setting up a trust is a task that lawyers are employed to do. There is nothing illegal about it. Having a lawyer acting as a trustee is also common and not illegal. Paying the recipients in accordance with that trust requirements is also not illegal.

              *Receiving( money from such a trust *now* is probably illegal because the law changed last year (?)

              Did your reading ability survive to the end end of the article where it said…

              The campaign team’s statement said: “The trust structure in question has been used by political parties for many years to solicit donations for political campaigns and the New Auckland Council Trust made its final donation before the law changed.

              It appears that you and the complainant seem to wish the law change (to require non-anonymous trust donations) to be made retroactively. Something that the Act doesn’t appear to support. Could you explain what half-arsed logic you are using for that?

              I hope you have some, because there is always the Waitemata Trust and others that I’d like to find the donors for. Not to mention the campaign trusts of several candidates in the super city elections. But I suspect that what we will see from you is some kind of the right are allowed to use the actual law, but the left should obey a higher law.

              But basically the police with either lay a charge (which seems unlikely) and it goes to court for a judge to rule on. Unfortunately it is damn hard to see how a judge can retroactively open up a legal entity structure.

              To me it looks like the ROB STOCK AND ADAM DUDDING are over-egging the whole thing. They really just need to look at the dates of the donations and the date of the law change and read the legislation. There isn’t even the information in the article about what part of the law may have been transgressed or the dates of the donations or the date the law change became effective.

              It looks to me like they have been cribbing off of Whaleoil again. This kind of undocumented smear is exactly ‘his’ style and gormless reporters like these two seem to stop their brains working when they receive it.

              [lprent: And incidentally if I see too much trolling on this with no more information than this article, then I’m liable to use some long bans. I suspect that it will have little to do with the enquiry and a lot to do with starting flames. ]

            • Tracey 27.1.1.1.1.3
              24 November 2014 at 9:02 am

              that you think the article was about greg preslands behaviour and not len browns speaks more to you than anything else chris.

              tell us again about labours policy on sexual crimes and feel free to quote the policy…

              afterall english and key have contradicted each other more than once but you are happy to let their misspeaking go.

              some of us commented strongly at the time about little getting it wrong which was bad for a justice spokesman.

        • Weepus beard 27.1.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 8:53 pm

          Woosh. Over your head, obviously.

  28. marty mars 28
    23 November 2014 at 6:07 pm

    Just been to see 3 dead big sperm whales lying on Rototai beach. In the old days it would have been a celebration because of the bounty – it just makes me feel sad. It was good so many people went out to see them, to experience them like that. RIP big fellas.

    • b waghorn 28.1
      23 November 2014 at 6:55 pm

      Couldn’t agree more (the bounty) what a waste saying a prayer and burying them get the knives out I say

      • marty mars 28.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 7:35 pm

        well that’s why the old days are the old days thank the gods

        but it would be interesting to watch you go out there and start chopping them up – you’d last about a minute I’d say

        • weka 28.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 7:39 pm

          Got to share this bygone era tale from a classic old timer story teller (probably not for the sensitive though)

          Bill Mollison, while teaching a permaculture course, tells an epic (and hilarious) tale about how children from a small sea side town make great use of a dead sperm whale.

          Bills random tangents are the best

          • b waghorn 28.1.1.1.1
            23 November 2014 at 8:14 pm

            Cheers for that:-) 🙂

          • marty mars 28.1.1.1.2
            23 November 2014 at 8:46 pm

            hmmm epic for sure, hilarious not so much although interesting about the flaps on the throat

            • weka 28.1.1.1.2.1
              23 November 2014 at 8:48 pm

              Some of it was quite gruesome (couldn’t figure out at which point the whale died), I thought it was a tale well told, sometimes funny, probably largely aphocryphal, rather than hilarious.

              How close did you get to the Rototai whales? What will happen to them?

              • marty mars …
                23 November 2014 at 8:59 pm

                My son touched them, so you could get right up to them – not smelly, no flies or bloating, no shark bites – they will be towed out to Farewell Spit on the tide where tangata whenua will harvest the teeth and I think they’ll be left to decompose out there. When I took tourists out the Spit on tours we would visit any decomposing (Pilot) whales to have a look – it was interesting to watch people and their reactions to the process, usually most were respectful.

                and yes it seemed like the whale died in the story a bit after they made their blubber slide

        • b waghorn 28.1.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 7:41 pm

          You don’t know how stubborn I am . I prefer that to people charging around in ships firing harpoons at them.

          • marty mars 28.1.1.2.1
            23 November 2014 at 7:46 pm

            there is a lot of blood and guts in a big sperm whale – very messy business – not for the faint-hearted

            to have 3 die is uncommon even for the bay – would probably pay to find out what caused it

  29. TeWhareWhero 29
    23 November 2014 at 6:58 pm

    Anyone heard if it’s actually the case that David Cunliffe is not on the front bench – as opined by Patrick Gower in a tweet. Claims comes from an inside source.

    • TeWhareWhero 29.1
      23 November 2014 at 7:00 pm

      Patrick Gower ‏@patrickgowernz 17 minutes ago
      Word from inside Labour that David Cunliffe has been ABCed. Not on Front Bench.

      • Tracey 29.1.1
        23 November 2014 at 7:13 pm

        labour party still leaking then…

        • chris73 29.1.1.1
          23 November 2014 at 7:15 pm

          When the vote is as close as it was it’d be naive to think everything would be hunky-dory I reckon

          Little would need to collect scalps pronto to make his leadership secure

        • ankerawshark 29.1.1.2
          23 November 2014 at 7:17 pm

          My thoughts exactly Tracey. FFS haven’t they learnt anything? Unless Gower is lying.

          Andrew needs to stamp on it hard.

          Maybe us Labour Party member need to write to caucus and tell them to stop leaking else we, the party members will walk.

          • weka 29.1.1.2.1
            23 November 2014 at 7:29 pm

            Irrespective of what caucus or Labour staffers are doing, it’s classic Gower shit stirring. Don’t buy into it because it just legitimises his behaviour and supports a culture lacking in ethics.

            Can’t descide if Gower is the TV equivalent of WO or PG. Maybe a bit of both. Can’t be trusted, done too much shit in the past.

    • weka 29.2
      23 November 2014 at 7:03 pm

      any particular reason you are spreading Gower gossip?

  30. Chooky 30
    23 November 2014 at 6:59 pm

    Russia on USA: lead by consensus not God-given right

    ‘ Western sanctions are aimed at regime change in Russia’ – Lavrov

    http://rt.com/news/207927-russia-europe-business-usual/

    “…while some take Russia’s opposition to America’s global influence as anti-Americanism, this is not the case.

    “It’s not about anti-Americanism or forming some sort of anti-American coalition. It’s about the natural desire of an increasing number of nations to ensure their vital interests and doing it in a way they see right, not the way they are being told by a foreign party,” he said.

    If the US pursues leadership not out of a false perception that it has a God-given burden to take responsibility for everybody, but by developing the skill to form a consensus, Moscow would be the first to back Washington, Lavrov said.

  31. weka 31
    23 November 2014 at 7:14 pm

    Exodus advertising their Round the Bays sponsored run,

    Picture of a woman jogging with title “Run like there is a hot guy in front of you and a creepy one behing you”.

    https://twitter.com/lqpharriet/status/536388656856965120

    We really need to start teaching about rape culture in schools.

  32. weka 32
    23 November 2014 at 7:17 pm

    Seems to be lots of comments popping up out of synch. Are they going into moderation/spam filter first?

    • Clemgeopin 32.1
      23 November 2014 at 9:06 pm

      Notice on top says,
      “There will be a (hopefully) short reconfiguring of the databases going on at some point this evening whenever traffic dies down a bit”

  33. Clemgeopin 33
    23 November 2014 at 9:02 pm

    USA, the land of the milk, honey, freedom and plenty!

    The city of Milwaukee has more than 1,000 of these foreclosed houses to sell. Buyers were found for more than 380 homes this year, but others keep popping up as owners stop paying the taxes for a couple years and walk away. This particular property, built in 1905, was taken by the city in 2012.

    John Ernest Abbott looked at this old place and he saw home, at least for the night. His address, as listed on the morgue report, was “Homeless in Milwaukee.”

    His identity was learned from his fingerprints. The report says it’s unclear when Abbott was last known to be alive.

    Somehow Abbott broke into the house, possibly by removing a board over a window, but there was no evidence he had been there long.

    He curled up in the closet to sleep, and never woke up. His body measured just 22 degrees Fahrenheit, matching the temperature in the house. There was no sign of trauma.

    Abbott was 53, and had suffered from mental illness, in particular schizophrenia, for at least 30 of those years, according to court records and a statement his brother, Ronald Abbott of Milwaukee, gave to the medical examiner.

    He said he has been looking for his brother for years. He said Abbott had never married but had a daughter whose whereabouts are unknown. However, in conversations with psychologists trying to determine his mental competency for trial, Abbott said he never had children.

    It was another act of trespassing that landed him in court in that case. He pleaded guilty to breaking into a house in Franklin a year ago this week. He was looking for a place to sleep and seemed incensed that he was prosecuted. “It’s not murder, it’s homelessness,” he told one psychologist.

    He spent parts of this year in jail and at Mendota Mental Health Institute. On the day of his sentencing, September 23, it was determined he had already served enough time, and he was freed. It was back to the streets for him.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/oddstuff/63456180/body-found-in-closet-during-open-home.html

  34. TeWhareWhero 34
    23 November 2014 at 10:14 pm

    Gower claiming King deputy, Robertson finance.

  35. instauration 35
    23 November 2014 at 10:32 pm

    Hey Murray McCully
    The Family had a picnic dinner at the BB beachfront tonight, all meat and salad, that’s what we do – I looked up to your nest and validated the currency of occupation.
    We respect your tenancy and embrace your candid representaion.

    However, – the Family succeeded in repressing my sincere intent to engage from the “Soapbox of the Boardwalk”. Alternatively I confer my concerns in this forum – respond if you wish, else I trust the other estates will – latently.

    Why did New Zealand abstain in the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee – Russian proposed resolution condemning attempts to glorify Nazism ideology and denial of German Nazi war crimes ?

    http://www.un.org/en/ga/third/69/docs/voting_sheets/L56.Rev1.pdf

    USA, Canada and Ukraine are the only entities that voted against this resolution.

    • Murray Rawshark 35.1
      23 November 2014 at 11:52 pm

      I saw a tv report on this not long ago. What’s actually happening, particularly in the Baltic states, is that history is being rewritten. Many of the things that were done to Jews at the beginning of Barbarossa were done by local fascists and anti-semites. Many Jews were slaughtered before the Germans even arrived, and there has been a movement to blame it all on the Red Army. The Russian resolution is an attempt to stop the falsification of history.

      Since many of the Baltic fascists were welcomed to the US, Canada, and Australia after the war, and Ukraine is pretty much run by fascists, these countries have no interest in preserving history. That we should have sided with fascists, even by omission, is disgusting.