Open mike 24/01/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:57 am, January 24th, 2014 - 152 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

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

Step right up to the mike …

152 comments on “Open mike 24/01/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Bill 1
    24 January 2014 at 4:21 am

    A Late Reminder

    So, I said I’d put a comment to remind those interested that we’re meeting up on Sat at 1pm at the bandstand in the Dunedin Botanics.

    I said I’d put the reminder up this morning. I forgot.

    So here it is. Buried way own this thread. What can I say…?

    [lprent; That is easy to fix. Moderator edit (not quick edit). Change the date/time of the comment and you now wrote it at 0421 rather than 1421. Good practice is to leave a note stating what you did. ]

  2. phillip ure 2
    24 January 2014 at 7:26 am

    well..here it is..

    ..the song the green caucus could well be singing to the labour caucus..post-election..

    ..(clap along..!..eh..?..)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DohRa9lsx0Q

    phillip ure..

  3. BLiP 3
    24 January 2014 at 7:27 am

    ‘

    John Key continues to display his contempt for New Zealanders by launching the 2014 political year with an orchestrated litany of lies. Not that anyone especially noticed nor even, these days, seems to care about. Rather, John Key’s puppeteers had spend the preceding three days priming both Labour and (alas) the Greens as well as the press gallery chooks with the “big picture” meme of “education”, thus taking everyone’s eyes off the fact that New Zealand is being governed by the most mendacious Prime Minister in its history.

    Take John Key’s comments about employment and the economy, as but one example. No one I’ve seen has responded to his “State of the Nation” bollocks that National Ltd™ has shredded worker’s rights, mocked the living wage, and put the employment law up for sale to the likes of Warner Bros. Its probably not a whole lie to say, as he did, that “. . . the economy will grow strongly this year. Our economic growth is forecast to be one of the highest in the developed world in 2014 . . . “ but where’s the analysis? The simple fact is that the apparent upsurge in economic activity is entirely predicated on trashing human rights, recovering from a natural disaster, and ruining the enviroment.

    Among John Key’s big lies is his statement

    . . . the Government will get back to running surpluses next year. At first they will be very small but they will build up over time. There might be some room for modest spending or revenue initiatives, but the top priority has to be getting our debt down . . .

    Bullshit.

    What ever surplus John Key manages to contrive is based entirely on the ACC rort and, his speciality, “funny money, rubber numbers” spreadsheet manufacturing. The idea that reducing debt is based entirely on neo-conservative wishful-thinking and bolstered by a school-boy error made by Reinhart and Rogoff. Even if it were true, why has National Ltd™ borrowed more than $50 billion in six years and sold off two prime income-generating assets? FFS.

    Perhaps John Key’s most egregious lie was meticulously inserted into his introductory blather amongst a list of half-truths and platitudes. It concerns another of National Ltd™ ‘s shameful acts: the wholesale commercial exploitation of Aotearoa’s natural environment:

    . . . This summer is the most active season ever for oil and gas exploration, with the industry spending up to $750 million. At the same time, the Government is strengthening the regulations that govern drilling, particularly in deep water . . .

    Bullshit.

    Slipped out during the pre-Christmas news-dump was an Official Information Act release of 1800 pages of documents supporting Anadarko’s drilling applications. Hidden within those documents is the actual data concerned Anadarko’s “Plan A” for a “worse case scenario” oil leak. Anadarko’s “Oil Leak Management Plan” in the event of a major oil well blowout states that there will be a “best estimate” wait of 35 days while equipment required to cap the well is flown out from Scotland. That plan was approved by the Environmental Protection Agency which, in an Orwellian feat of National Ltd™ political management, does not have listed as one of its functions “the protection of the environment”. That’s bad enough. Yet, also released during the Christmas news-dump is the fact that National Ltd is about the change the regulations governing deep sea oil drilling so that applications such as Anadarko’s do not have to be publicly notified.

    Sunmissions on this latest National Ltd™ double-dealing close on Friday next week. Geoff Cumming over at the New Zealand Fox News Herald has, somehow, managed to get a worthy backgrounder printed even if the anonymous leader writer(s) is shouting “drill baby, drill”.

    /rant

    • geoff 3.1
      24 January 2014 at 7:30 am

      Excellent rant. cheers.

    • phillip ure 3.2
      24 January 2014 at 7:38 am

      more on keys’ litany-of-lies yesterday..

      ..and why the fuck do the corporate/access-media never call him on them..?

      ..when they are so easily-provable..?

      http://whoar.co.nz/2014/ed-another-john-keygovt-lie-exposed/

      phillip ure..

      • BLiP 3.2.1
        24 January 2014 at 7:45 am

        ‘

        No doubt the drop in crime is related to international trends – but only partially so. The real reason New Zealand’s crime rate has “dropped” is that John Key changed the method of gathering statistics. Previously, the statistics were “reported crime” so, say, if three neighbours all called about the same domestic incident across the road, that was counted as three reports. Now, its just one. Tricksy National Ltd™ is tricksy.

        • MaxFletcher 3.2.1.1
          24 January 2014 at 9:38 am

          But wouldn’t that make sense given it is the same incident and counting the same incident three times would inflate statistics? It’d be like counting the number of cars on the road by how many people were in the car.

          I mean, no matter how many people make a report it is still only one incident.

          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 3.2.1.1.1
            24 January 2014 at 9:53 am

            Each witness will have to be spoken to separately. More witnesses, more police time spent, greater cost. Makes a lot of sense to gather the reporting stats as well as the incident stats.

            In any case, John Key is lying: it doesn’t represent a drop in crime, whatever stats you collect.

            There are various “forcings” (to borrow a word from climatology) that affect the crime rate. Two examples: increased inequality increases crime, removal of lead from petrol decreases it.

            The National Party enacts penal and economic incompetencies that increase the crime rate. And then lies about it.

            • MaxFletcher 3.2.1.1.1.1
              24 January 2014 at 10:10 am

              “Makes a lot of sense to gather the reporting stats as well as the incident stats.”

              Yes it does – but reporting stats reflect the amount of time and resources but doesn’t represent the amount of incidents actually occurring.

              Counting three reports of the same incident as three separate incidents doesn’t make any sense.

              “removal of lead from petrol decreases it”
              Yes – a very interesting study/theory this was. Kinda fits doesn’t it?

              • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                24 January 2014 at 10:27 am

                BLiP’s point was that Key is lying, and he is. Pretending that changing the reporting method represents a reduction is dishonest, whether or not it makes sense to change the reporting method.

                • MaxFletcher …
                  24 January 2014 at 10:41 am

                  Well, Key lying isn’t anything new.

                  That said though – you can’t get a true picture of the crime rate if you are to include multiple reports of the same incident as representing separate incidents.

                  • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                    24 January 2014 at 10:49 am

                    That depends what you need to know. If you want to know how crime has affected a neighbourhood the number of witnesses is a very important statistic.

                    In this case, was the decision to change the reporting method made by a statistician, or a politician (or political appointee)?

                    • MaxFletcher …
                      24 January 2014 at 10:54 am

                      That’s true however if you want to get a raw figure on how many assaults (for example) have happened, if you count the number of reports over the number of incidents you’ll get a number not reflective of the crime rate. You might count 20 reports when there were only 4 assaults.

                      Assessing the community harm is a different bucket of fish all together. Are there any reports that do quantify community harm?

                    • One Anonymous Knucklehead …
                      24 January 2014 at 11:14 am

                      yep – the reported crime rate, as distinct from the individual incident rate.

                      PS: I take it this means that one violent incident with three victims (a mother and two kids, say) will now be reported as one crime.

                    • MaxFletcher …
                      24 January 2014 at 11:24 am

                      “I take it this means that one violent incident with three victims (a mother and two kids, say) will now be reported as one crime.”

                      Well – it might be reported as a single crime (triple homicide say – looking at the worst case scenario) however the murderer would face three charges (3 counts of murder). So there is a strange dichotomy here in reported crime vs. charges faced. Not just in NZ either. Many countries might report one incident of a single incident (say crashing a car into a power pole) whereas the driver might face multiple charges (drunk driving, no license, dangerous driving, speeding, drug possession).

                  • McFlock …
                    24 January 2014 at 1:29 pm

                    Hang on – did you just go into a big discussion about how stats on A don’t measure B, and then just dismiss the fact that Key’s lying is “nothing new” when that’s the entire point?

                    More people are affected by crime in dunnokeyo’s “brighter future”, and he’s solved that problem by deliberately undercounting the number of people immediately affected.

                    • MaxFletcher …
                      24 January 2014 at 2:00 pm

                      “More people are affected by crime in dunnokeyo’s “brighter future”, and he’s solved that problem by deliberately undercounting the number of people immediately affected.”

                      So if one murder effects 10 people that equals 10 murders? Or still just one murder?

                      The Standard is a weird place. Firstly someone argues the caffeine and sugar is more dangerous that a heroin/speedball and now reporting a single crime as a single crime instead of how many people called in to report it is a bad thing

                      [lprent: It is called “individuals arguing”. Individuals have varying ideas. But please examine the policy, especially the section about ascribing intelligence to a machine. I tend to be a little harsh in how I deal with individuals who transgress that with generalisations about this site. ]

                    • McFlock …
                      24 January 2014 at 2:11 pm

                      The weirdest thing about commenters here is that the tories never seem to be able to focus on a subject for more than 30sec.

                      The argument as to whether the crime rate should be reported incidents, number of reports, or number of victims in each incident is irrelevant to the fact that Dunnokeyo has changed the scale and claimed that things have therefore improved.

                      No doubt at intermediate school he measured his dick using the inches side of the ruler, then used the centimetre side and claimed that he’d swelled to 2.5 size in 5 seconds.

                    • MaxFletcher …
                      24 January 2014 at 2:15 pm

                      Wait, what – I’m a tory?

                    • McFlock …
                      24 January 2014 at 3:11 pm

                      no idea. But you’re arguing like one at the moment.

                    • MaxFletcher …
                      24 January 2014 at 3:16 pm

                      Errrr, right.

                      And to the mod – talking my impressions as the stand as a site doesn’t equal ‘ascribing intelligence to a machine”. It describes my experiences here.

                      People sure are twitchy and combative round these parts.

                    • lprent []
                      24 January 2014 at 5:13 pm

                      What do you expect on a political site? Friendly relaxed people having a good time?

                      Most people who take the effort to get informed enough to be able to participate in a meaningful way on a political site are usually frustrated because the world isn’t listening to their great ideas. They’re also usually smart and if they have been around the sites for a while – pretty damn bored with people saying the same old myths yet again.

                      There are nearly 14 thousand posts on this site with nearly 700 thousand comments. Most of us have heard it all before. We’ve also mostly found that tearing a strip off people whilst explaining why they’re wrong (and linking to to the explanations) tends to reduce how often we have to get bored by repetitions.

                      😈

                    • McFlock …
                      24 January 2014 at 3:23 pm

                      well, focusing on the accuracy, suitability or reliability of statistical measures (be they crime, economics, health or human-made global warming) is something tories love to do, rather than giving more than passing acknowledgement (when completely unavoidable) to the fact that the tories are outright lying about the measure, anyway.

        • RedBaronCV 3.2.1.2
          24 January 2014 at 7:31 pm

          Judging by a couple of high profile cases looks like they ignore complaints =reduced crimes

    • BLiP 3.3
      24 January 2014 at 8:07 am

      ‘

      Ooops . . .

      . . .The idea that reducing debt is a priority is based entirely on neo-conservative wishful-thinking and bolstered by a school-boy error made by Reinhart and Rogoff . . .

      . . . and, yeah, the typos.

      NOTE TO SELF: Early morning ranting on The Standard after getting pissed off by the New Zealand Herald and before morning coffee does not result in an exhibition of clarity of thinking.

      • andy (the other one) 3.3.1
        24 January 2014 at 10:44 am

        This only gets a small mention in the Herald.

        The New Zealand government’s operating deficit was bigger than expected in the first five months of the financial year after it reported a smaller take in corporate taxes and goods and services tax than it anticipated a month ago in its updated forecasts.

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11191429

        Double Dipton, your doing a heck of a job. Headline should read “Govt debt $400 million worse than predicted. As someone said the other day, it will be an interesting experiment when The Herald goes behind the pay wall.

    • karol 3.4
      24 January 2014 at 8:47 am

      BLiP: No one I’ve seen has responded to his “State of the Nation” bollocks that National Ltd™ has shredded worker’s rights, mocked the living wage, and put the employment law up for sale to the likes of Warner Bros.

      It was much stated on Twitter at the time of the speech by many on the left.

      Some examples:

      Julie Anne Genter

      Just as a fact check, real median incomes have not grown AT ALL since Key has been in office. #5longyears #nzpol

      And JAG again:

      Well this is pretty defensive. Key attacking Labour/Greens with a bunch of mistruths. Guess it’s bc we’re more popular than Nats now #nzpol

      Bomber:

      Key’s social welfare upbringing was gold plated, it’s now shit encrusted – comparing them to the bennie bashing his Gov uses is ridiculous

      Myself:

      Key says: “It’s not true that the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer”. Mis-speaking about the increasing inequality gap.

      And many more covered in Bryce Edwards’ collection of Tweets about Key’s speech.

      I also thought I did mention it in my comments in my post update yesterday – but on reflection, I thought it was so obvious I just pointed out what Key had said. It is good that you directly spell out Key’s lies, BLip.

      I did mention it in the front page blurb for my post. And xtasy posted some very critical comments about Key’s lies in the speech. At the end of his comment he wrote:

      Liar Key, liar Key, liar Key, caught out again, but the media failed to mention this!

      Indeed the speech is full of LIES, if you go through it, and the only other explanation for Key’s claims is, his mind was “fogged” most the time, on booze and the “strange” effects it has.

      Mainly it is mainly the MSM that ignored all Key’s blatant lies.

      • BLiP 3.4.1
        24 January 2014 at 4:09 pm

        ‘

        Thanks, karol. My faith in “the watchers” is partially restored and, yeah, I was having a crack at the indolent MSM. It would seem cheerleading has replaced analysis, fact-checking, and cynicism has in political reporting these days. In my defence I did say “I have not seen” but, I guess, it might be my own fault in that I am not a member of the twitosphere. Being as palaverous as I am, there’s never enough characters ; )

        Do you think twitter is worth joining? My impression from what I have seen is that one has to do an inordinate amount of “raisin plucking” which hardly seems worth the effort.

    • Chooky 3.5
      24 January 2014 at 8:53 am

      +100…very intelligent informed rant especially on John Key’s oil rort…(thankyou BLiP Rooster)

      i might add Keys changes for education are most underwhelming…apart from the other factors which drive educational excellence and which the National govt has consistently undermined ….this is a USA Neo liberal inspired attack on teachers( it is being done in the USA)…blaming teachers by implication for for our unravelling international education quality and laying the ground for privatising and charter schools

      …..why not just bring back the old school inspectorate to advise schools and teachers? ( this inspectorate was made of very experienced older teachers nearing retirement and deemed excellent at their jobs and they didnt cost much more!)

      …. this would be without the huge cronyist monetary incentivist bribes to those Principals the Nact govt deems as ‘excellent’ to advise everyone else especially ‘under performing’ schools from low socio economic areas ( irony irony)

      …..the potential for a cronyist fascist top down education is here imo….

      ….ie you are only an excellent Principal deserving of tens of thousands more in your pay packet if you are a Nact supporter and do not criticise the Nact govt

      ( and for God’s sake never teach critical thinking!)

    • David H 3.6
      24 January 2014 at 9:28 am

      And at the bottom of the ‘speech’ on ZB site there’s only 15 likes. and everywhere else I am reading comments usually along the lines of what about alleviating poverty, and buying teachers.

  4. Jenny 4
    24 January 2014 at 7:46 am

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/9633612/The-Logical-Conclusion-Party

    Beat the aged and infirm, prosecute the sick. The logical conclusion of Colin Craig’s policies

  5. logie97 5
    24 January 2014 at 8:02 am

    High performing principals.
    What is a high performing principal?
    What will the criteria be for such assessment?
    More importantly, what are the criteria for determining a poor performing principal.
    What is the role of ERO in this?

    Oh yeah, league tables.

    When are people going to learn that you cannot incentivise this particular profession.
    You have to reduce the workload of teaching to improve the outcomes.

    But a money trader probably will never understand that…

    • phillip ure 5.1
      24 January 2014 at 8:06 am

      @ logie..

      ..tho’ i was cheered by both cunnliffe and turia saying the real problem is poverty..

      ..(with the subtext that they will do something meaningful/substantial about/to end that poverty..?..)

      ..i live in hope..

      ..phillip ure..

      • bad12 5.1.1
        24 January 2014 at 8:14 am

        Metiria Turei nailed it this morning with ‘there cannot be any raising of education out-comes while a significant number of children are turning up at school unwell, unfed, and under-clothed'(my interpretation of Her quoted words from RadioNZ this morning)…

        • Puckish Rogue 5.1.1.1
          24 January 2014 at 8:18 am

          Well she would say that wouldn’t she

          • Pasupial 5.1.1.1.1
            24 January 2014 at 10:06 am

            PR

            You’re are right; Turei can be relied upon to express the impact of specific social issues (poverty), on wider society (education). I only wish that you could endeavour to be as cogent.

        • Te Reo Putake 5.1.1.2
          24 January 2014 at 9:06 am

          Metiria was excellent, bad. Absolutely hit the nail on the head. Poverty is the problem, and it’s not solved by chucking money at an invented strata of elite teachers.

        • karol 5.1.1.3
          24 January 2014 at 9:48 am

          Thanks for the tip, bad – will go listen.

        • karol 5.1.1.4
          24 January 2014 at 10:06 am

          bad, I can’t find any audio with Turei on RNZ this morniNG – which segment did she comment in?

          • bad12 5.1.1.4.1
            24 January 2014 at 12:43 pm

            Karol, sorry if i gave you a wrong steer there, i am not 100% sure that Mets appeared on ‘Morning Report’ which is where i think i heard Her quoted, i think the news reader might have quoted what She said without providing the actual soundbite,(and i have translated from that),

            David Cunliffe who i am sure i did ‘hear’ on the same morning report was even more specific stating that while there was some merit in the 300+ million dollars to be thrown into the education portfolio unless there was something done to change the stat of 1 in 4 kids living in poverty then the song will essentially remain the same…

        • Hutty 5.1.1.5
          24 January 2014 at 11:13 am

          John Hattie has done a ‘Meta Analysis’ of all the research on what influences educational outcomes. Hattie, John A. (2008). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement.

          He compiled a list of 138 outcomes that influence educational achievement, in which socio-economic status and home environment rank well further down the list (i.e. poverty)

          http://visible-learning.org/hattie-ranking-influences-effect-sizes-learning-achievement/

          Clearly educational achievement is influenced by a lot more than simply “poverty” as Turei states. Others factors show to have more influence such as, teacher quality and reports on progress…

          • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1.5.1
            24 January 2014 at 12:52 pm

            Can’t actually get any meaning from that sales blurb.

          • Hayden 5.1.1.5.2
            24 January 2014 at 2:38 pm

            He compiled a list of 138 outcomes that influence educational achievement, in which socio-economic status and home environment rank well further down the list (i.e. poverty)

            Yet well ahead of “Quality of Teaching” (source: your own link). It even has “School effects” on the list, whatever that’s supposed to mean.

    • North 5.2
      24 January 2014 at 8:22 am

      The cynic would say a high performing principal is one who sees him/herself in line for a big monetary boost if he/she is prepared to learn the Crosby Textor education script and sing John Key’s praises. There always have been heaps of stinking big-fish-little-pond Tory schoolteachers.

      Piss all to do with kids’ education all to do with retention and further cementing in of one-percenter power. And the corruption that goes with it.

      • phillip ure 5.2.1
        24 January 2014 at 9:09 am

        @ north..aye..!

        phillip ure..

      • Anne 5.2.2
        24 January 2014 at 10:09 am

        Piss all to do with kids’ education all to do with retention and further cementing in of one-percenter power. And the corruption that goes with it.

        +1 North.

        Since when has this National/ACT government been interested in raising the standards of ALL children in this country? Never. Its not part of their political philosophy to see everyone well educated. Good grief! They might become better informed and that is the last thing they want to see happen. Worse, the MSM as we know it will also become better informed and that would spell disaster for them.

        No, its about providing extra monetary incentives to get the kind of educators who are willing to become part of yet another corporate structure owned and controlled by the powerful few at the expense of the many.

        • Anne 5.2.2.1
          24 January 2014 at 10:13 am

          Don’t know why my comment @ 10:09am is in moderation.

          • ambergris 5.2.2.1.1
            24 January 2014 at 10:32 am

            Singapore & HK as educational models brings to mind Nationals historical fixation on Taiwan as a hi-tech exemplar for NZ. There does not seem much for entrepreneurship or hi-tech in this latest proposal.

    • KiwiGunner 5.3
      24 January 2014 at 8:48 am

      You simply have to look at the appointments in the replacement to the Teachers Council to see what type of person will be the new Executive Principal. I would rule out any opponents of the National Standards/School Closure in Christchurch/Increased Class Sizes ‘initiatives’.

      NZEI should be very worried because I would guess that Secondary School principals will fill most of these roles (It was very interesting to hear Key talk up his education and name his Intermediate and High School only and by omission dis Primary Education – a common theme of this govt). Primary Schools are seen as easier to bully because of the high number of females in the workforce and clearly a comparatively weak Principals Association and Union.

      I feel quite sad that Education spokespersons seem blinded by dollars (for them) so far and that only the Greens and NZF have really seen through this bulldust. You know teachers and principals would collaborate more given the opportunity – the roles and money are simply about building a managerial system and giving the government power within schools to do things that they currently can’t do with schools run by Boards – for be sure the new Executive Principals will be the new masters here/

      • bad12 5.3.1
        24 January 2014 at 4:43 pm

        KiwiGunner, good point, in your first paragraph you point out 3 things which i would suggest if a principle in particular shows full support for will probably earn Him/Her that extra 20 to 50 thousand,

        Charter schools being another, possibly a willingness to shove higher achieving students toward charter schools might make a good reason for National to annoint a principle as superior and thus deserving of a larger slice of the pie…

    • Chooky 5.4
      24 January 2014 at 9:20 am

      @ logie agreed

      ….and why does the Nact govt and Ministry of Education and Treasury keep taking advice from private consultants with no education background but who are influenced by USA Neo Liberal private education buinesses eg USA Charter School businesses….We dont need this commercial business model of education in New Zealand!

      Labour and the teacher unions should be listening to our own Professors and lecturers in Education without a commercial axe to grind and who have years of international educational research annalysis under their belts

      ….what Nact is proposing will undermine our egalitarian education system…. into a fascist cronyist right wing commercial top down education system

      Hekia Parata is just a pawn in the game for these ideas…she is not the originator

  6. bad12 6
    24 January 2014 at 8:08 am

    Ratana, at what is considered to be the start of the ‘political year’ are holding their main annual Hui at Ratana Pa over the next few days,

    With 40,000 members Ratana, definitely what i would describe as a religous/political movement, has a huge influence upon the out-come of the Te Tai Hauauru seat in particular,

    In what looks like a bad case of political suicide the Maori Party have selected a non-Ratana member to stand in this electorate upon the retirement of Tariana Turia,(who incidently is a Ratana adherent),

    Other news from the Maori electorates has news reports suggesting that Labour believe that they can ‘take back’ all 7 Maori electorate seats at the 2014 election,

    Shane Jones was questioned on this very point on RadioNZ National’s Morning Report, unfortunately as soon as Jones opened His mouth my brain(what’s left of it) immediately switched off,

    In the age of MMP Labour need coalition partners,(with an S),do not they understand this, in the electorates of Te Tai Tokerau and Waiariki there is in fact 2 extra seats for ‘the left’ and why in the name of any deity you can care to name Labour would want to ‘win back’ these seats is beyond me,

    Such an attitude is simply the politics of the past FPP system and Labour need urgently to address this issue as it may be the difference between opposition and government, adhering to the ‘moral high-ground’ over supporting probable coalition partners gaining a larger slice of parliamentary representation while National happily ‘gift’ seats to the bizaare, dishonest and unhinged, in my opinion is just plainly stupid…

    • Te Reo Putake 6.1
      24 January 2014 at 8:17 am

      Who do you reckon Labour should ‘gift’ the seat to, Bad? Are you saying Labour need to be as arrogant as National in order to lead the next Government? Language like ‘gift’ suggests you think Labour own the seats. They don’t. They have to earn the right to represent each seat, just like any other party.

      Assuming you mean Labour should patronise/franchise mana, the obvious question is ‘why’? mana have given no indication that they would support a Labour led Government, let alone want to be part of one.

      • phillip ure 6.1.1
        24 January 2014 at 8:26 am

        stop dancing on the head of a pin..trp..

        ..it is called..mmp..

        ..you are arguing some fpp false-construct..

        ..a ‘purist’-argument like yrs..

        ..(especially when the other side has worked out how to work under mmp..)

        ..is just a recipie for electoral-defeat..

        ..lab/grns/mana need to all work together in this area..

        ..to ensure the biggest possible bloc of progressive-mps..

        ..after the election..

        ..anything else is blind-folly..

        ..phillip ure..

        • Te Reo Putake 6.1.1.1
          24 January 2014 at 8:36 am

          My preference has always been blocs announced pre-election, Phillip. Be honest with voters and say what the likely alternative Government is. That requires agreement now, not in the weeks after the election. I include mana in that, and as I said, there is no indication that they want be part of the next Government, so it’s sensible for Labour to fight and win all 7 seats.

          btw, the mP have just announced they intend to support National. So at least we know where their heads are at. Up their arses, apparently.

          • phillip ure 6.1.1.1.1
            24 January 2014 at 9:04 am

            re blocs..aye..

            .and then those components of that clearly-defined bloc..

            ..should work together to ensure the most seats/best outcomes..?

            ..that they don’t ‘hurt’ each others’ chances..?

            ..you’d think..?

            ..which in reality will entail them all making concessions to each other..

            ..and what is wrong with that..?

            ..seems fair..

            ..not to mention..logical..

            ..the/any other way just ensures a smaller progressive bloc..in a best-case scenario..

            ..and/or defeat..in a worst-case scenario..

            ..and who wants that either/or outcome../

            ..eh..?

            .with of course the/a seat ripe for plucking..dunny-brushes..

            ..being a prime candidate..

            ..lab grns should agree on one candidate..

            ..and not split the vote..

            ..and thus ensure we throw that bastard out..

            ..eh..?

            phillip ure..

            ..

          • bad12 6.1.1.1.2
            24 January 2014 at 9:15 am

            Sensible??? now that’s as big a laugh as Te Ururoa Flavell telling morning report that the Maori Party ‘plan’ on winning 12 seats in the 2014 election,(obviously planning a future after Parliament as a comic),

            Don’t you f**king ‘get’ MMP Te Reo, if Labour grabs say 35% of the party vote at election 2014 then that’s the number of seats they will have in the next Parliament irrespective of how many of the Maori electorates they hold,

            Should the Mana Party exit the election with 2 of those Maori electorate seats then ‘the left’ have 2 seats more than it would have should Labour win those 2 electorate seats,

            Slippery the Prime Minister will be running around the country during the election making much of the fact that a vote for either Dunne in Ohariu, ACT in Epsom, and Craig if National gift Him a seat is a vote for a National Government,

            Given that, my opinion is Cunliffe will be begging for another 3 years of opposition if He takes the ‘moral high-ground’ and does not do exactly the same in the Te Tai Tokerau and Waiariki electorates,

            Principles neither put food on the table or provide employment and a roof over your head…

            • Te Reo Putake 6.1.1.1.2.1
              24 January 2014 at 9:20 am

              I get MMP fine, bad. And the likelihood is that LP+Greens aren’t going to need mana to get over the line anyway. If extra support is needed, NZF are the most likely place it will come from. The real problem with giving mana a helping hand is outlined below in 4.1.2.1.

              • bad12 …
                24 January 2014 at 9:39 am

                Befor i get to work this HAS to be answered, NZFirst, now i am starting to think you suffer from delusions,a disease of the mind,or at the least, an inability to move on from things that have long past,

                You slate the Mana Party for not having declared it will support a Labour lead Government in favor of the dream of a cozy business as usual ‘Dream’ of a cozy coalition with NZFirst,

                NZFirst’s stated position is that they will talk first with the Party who has the most votes, want to take a guess which Party that will be Te Reo,

                If Slippery the Prime Minister needs NZFirst to form a third term Government do you think that the ‘used car salesman in chief’ will not agree to NZFirsts terms, more fool you if you do…

                • Te Reo Putake …
                  24 January 2014 at 2:19 pm

                  Um, bad, in your hurry to misunderstand what I wrote, you’ve made several mistakes. I think LP+ GP is the most likely outcome. That’s my dream ticket. I think LP+GP+NZF is also possible, or LP+one other and the 3rd providing support on confidence and supply.

                  I did not slate mana. I just pointed out the obvious fact that no-one knows what they intend to do, therefore they cannot be relied on to support a Labour led Government. That situation might change, but it’s over to mana to put their position. Until then, they don’t enter the calculations.

                  I think there is significant risk that NZF would go with National, but I’d say it’s 60/40 that they’d go with Labour, just so Winston can be the one to knife Key like Key knifed him.

                  • bad12 …
                    24 January 2014 at 4:00 pm

                    Te Reo, now your just being a deliberate Liar, the comment i reply to here was posted at 9.20 this morning, track down the page a bit and you posted a comment attacking the Mana Party,(based on nothing), at 9.16 this morning,

                    You might forget what you wrote in the blink of an eye but the rest of us can see it here in black and white,

                    Your whole wrong-turn in attacking the Mana Party is in my opinion just cover for you being unable to admit that those of us urging the Labour Party to show support for the Mana Party in the Waiariki and Te Tai Tokerau electorates are in fact right when we point out that such support will result in another 2 votes for ‘the left’ in the next Parliament,

                    Your spurious attack on Annette Sykes and John Minto is just more of your bullshit unless you provide some evidence to back up the claims you make and i believe your dislike of the Mana Party is stirred by ‘some’ other reason and wonder what this might be…

              • weka …
                24 January 2014 at 10:34 am

                “I get MMP fine, bad. And the likelihood is that LP+Greens aren’t going to need mana to get over the line anyway. If extra support is needed, NZF are the most likely place it will come from. The real problem with giving mana a helping hand is outlined below in 4.1.2.1.”

                I’ll take that to mean that you would prefer the left to risk losing the election than considering Mana a coalition partner or a party for confidence and supply. And/or risk losing the election rather than making strategic decisions around where it stands people in the seats.

                If you think Mana are the problem here, that they haven’t said that they would want to be in govt with Labour, what do you think they would do post-election if they were kingmakers?

                btw Can’t see a 4.1.2.1

                • Te Reo Putake …
                  24 January 2014 at 2:23 pm

                  “I’ll take that to mean that you would prefer the left to risk losing the election than considering Mana a coalition partner or a party for confidence and supply.”

                  Take that meaning if you want to. But you’d be wrong. Labour is going to stand in all the seats. Mana have not given any indication of why Labour should soften that stance. Only a fool would assume that mana are going to support the LP/GP Government. When Hone says they will, either before or after the election, cool. Till then, nothing changes.

                  5.1.2.1, sorry.

                  • weka …
                    24 January 2014 at 4:10 pm

                    “Take that meaning if you want to. But you’d be wrong.”

                    And yet nothing you have just said demonstrates that I am wrong and that you don’t really think that.

                    “Mana have not given any indication of why Labour should soften that stance.”

                    They don’t have to. All Labour has to do is understand how MMP works. Otherwise it’s gambling eg L/GP will get enough seats to govern on their own. I think what you are really arguing here is that you don’t like Mana and think it is too radical or something and would prefer NZF over relying on Mana. Pretty bizarre to be trusting Peters to form a left wing govt but not Mana.

                    “Only a fool would assume that mana are going to support the LP/GP Government.”

                    ok, so what do you think Mana will do post-election if they don’t support a left wing govt? Do you think they would allow the formation of a right wing govt if they had a choice?

                • McFlock …
                  24 January 2014 at 2:26 pm

                  There’s a cost to gifting a seat, which is the eternal tory rehash of “Labour does it too”.

                  The old moral equivalence thing which serves national far more than it serves the left.

                  And for what – an extra seat for Mana? If they can’t get up to 1.6% in this election (1 electorate and one list seat), then what good are they? Just another UF/ACT appendix-party that is corruptly used to inflate bloc votes.

                  Personally, I think that I’d prefer to see a party try to win using integrity and good policies for once. Hasn’t happened in a while – the Alliance was building good levels until shafted by its saviourleader.

                  • weka …
                    24 January 2014 at 4:05 pm

                    It’s not 2 seats for Mana, it’s any seats. Labour wants them all. Read bad12’s comment if you still don’t understand how that could cost the left the election (although I’m sure you already do).

                    So my quesion remains. Would you prefer to risk another NACT govt rather than the left making easy concessions?

                    • McFlock …
                      24 January 2014 at 4:21 pm

                      Don’t they have a reasonably reliable electorate seat already?

                      But even if they don’t, I don’t think that they are likely to be the difference between government and opposition. Because, as I previously stated, being seen to be manipulating the electoral system as shamelessly as national do could well cost labgrn as much as it gains. Yes, if labour only get 35% then mana might be essential. But if labour act with the same level of integrity as national, will they even get up to 35%?

                      We’re not looking at free money, here – there might or might not be a couple of dollars under a particular rock, and we might or might not be kicked in the arse if we bend down to look.

                      Cynically manipulating the electoral system might be the only thing that helps us win the election. In that case, no I’m not entirely sure I want the left to “win”. But it might also cost us the election, or at the least be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

                      So basically things are pretty even. I’m happy to not bother looking under the rock, and I don’t think labgrn should be considering selling their souls quite yet. If labgrn don’t improve their polling, maybe. But it’s way too early to be making that call of desperation.

                    • weka …
                      24 January 2014 at 6:53 pm

                      Ok, good to know, that the principle outweighs the reality of getting NACT out of power.

                      I don’t think what is being suggested is the same as what National are doing. No-one is saying that Labour should sponsor a Mana candidate in a Maori seat, or manipulte who Mana chooses to stand.

                      AFAIK, Labour granted the GP a concession in Coromandel back in the day so that Fitzsimmon could take the seat from the National party candidate. That was a history making move.

                      “Don’t they have a reasonably reliable electorate seat already?”

                      Depends who you talk to. The Maori seats are the wild card this election because of the demise of the mP. I haven’t looked at the past election results closely enough to know what the exact issues (eg 3 way vote splitting), and Maori politics seem to generally fall outside the scope of non-Maori to have a good grasp of. So who knows, but what is clear is that what you are proposing is a risk.

                      “We’re not looking at free money, here – there might or might not be a couple of dollars under a particular rock, and we might or might not be kicked in the arse if we bend down to look.”

                      I have absolutely no idea what you mean there. Care to clarify?

                    • McFlock …
                      24 January 2014 at 8:55 pm

                      I mean that you’re looking at one side of the equation without considering the costs.

                      nactivists here already pretend that Anderton consistently got given an unofficial pass in Wigram. Not sure about the lab/grn gift in coromandel, but I think the point is that neither party were using it to boost their representation in parliament and thus change the government. If a labgrnmana govt gets in by one seat, I’m not sure it would survive the second election. But a legitimate majority might be able to last long enough to make a solid change.

                      And I’m sorry, but if labour choose not to stand in a Maori electorate, then that is sponsoring a Mana candidate. It’s as obvious as a cup of tea.

              • phillip ure …
                24 January 2014 at 11:01 am

                you must be joking trp..

                ..a vote for peters/nz first is no longer ‘safe’..

                ..it was last time out..’cos the key-option wasn’t there..

                ..this is not the case this time..

                ..key has given peters the kiss of death..

                ..you are peddling false-medicine there..trp..

                ..peters/nz first is not an option this time..

                ..unless you don’t care about this gang of spivs getting back in again..

                ..phillip ure..

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  24 January 2014 at 1:16 pm

                  Now that is a very good point. Peter’s only option now would be to say that he won’t be supporting National.

                  • McFlock …
                    24 January 2014 at 2:27 pm

                    and who would believe him?

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      24 January 2014 at 4:49 pm

                      Actually, I would. He knows how badly he got burned in 1996 when he went with National after letting it be implied that he was going with Labour.

                      Of course, I’m not voting NZ1st anyway.

          • Lanthanide 6.1.1.1.3
            24 January 2014 at 9:21 am

            In a king-maker position, MP would go with National? Really?

            Got a link?

            • phillip ure 6.1.1.1.3.1
              24 January 2014 at 11:03 am

              @ lanth..r u kidding..?

              ..surely it is up to you to show the link where/proving they won’t..?

              ..eh..?

              ..especially as flavell has already said he would support national again..

              ..you go first ..with yr link..eh..?

              ..phillip ure..

              • Lanthanide …
                24 January 2014 at 1:00 pm

                I’m not the one who made the claim, so I don’t have to prove it.

                The real point here is I want to know if the MP has actually said it, or if it’s something that TRP has made up or insinuated.

                • Te Reo Putake …
                  24 January 2014 at 2:29 pm

                  Good call Lanth. I got it wrong. I thought I heard Flavell say he wanted to keep working with National, but he actually said they would try and work with whoever led the Government. National was just one of the possible options.

                  It’s toward the end:

                  http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2583319/maori-party-leader-prepares-for-ratana-celebrations

                  • phillip ure …
                    24 January 2014 at 4:27 pm

                    i heard that too..

                    he said he would talk to both..

                    ..that is all..

                    ..so like with peters..

                    ..a vote for the maori party..

                    ..is a possible vote to return key/the tories to power..

                    ..both peters and the maori party..

                    ..are not ‘safe’-votes..

                    ..they are the parties you vote for when you don’t want anything to change..

                    ..you want nothing done to fight/end poverty/inequality..

                    ..both parties are full of people who would go-tory at the snap of keys’ fingers..

                    ..(and i think that ‘not-safe-votes’-meme is one that should be widely circulated/repeated this election-year..)

                    ..phillip ure..

                  • Lanthanide …
                    24 January 2014 at 7:53 pm

                    And today: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9644043/Key-Maori-better-off-under-National

                    MP Pita Sharples has distanced his Maori Party from National at Ratana, but Prime Minister John Key says Maori are better off under his government.

                    Ad Feedback

                    Sharples, a former co-leader of the Maori Party, said today it was trying to separate itself from National and reaffirm its status as an independent Maori voice.

                    The Maori Party has supported National since its election victory in 2008 and that relationship is said to be costing the Maori Party support at a time when it is in danger of losing at least two of the three Maori electorate seats it holds.

                    When asked whether it was time for the Maori Party to move away from National, Sharples conceded “it probably is”.

                    “I think we’ve already started to be honest,” he said.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      24 January 2014 at 7:58 pm

                      Distance yourself from the dog if you can Pita Sharples, shame that you’re still covered in fleas.

                    • North …
                      25 January 2014 at 4:49 am

                      So you believe Sharples’ studied murmurings do you Lanthanide ?

                      I don’t. He exemplifies those in Maoridom who fancy themselves an aristocracy. Who when it comes to it value their personal relationship with Key more than anything else.

                      Where Paula Bennett as a former beneficiary has pulled up the ladder Sharples too has pulled up his ladder – the ladder of activism. It’s “tepu tepu tepu” for Peter now. Please…….no one mention “Beamer Beamer Beamer”. Or “knighthood knighthood knighthood”

                    • Lanthanide …
                      25 January 2014 at 1:15 pm

                      My belief doesn’t really have anything to do with this little exchange.

                      TRP made what I considered to be a surprising statement, because I had never seen anything similar to what he’d said anywhere else. When asking for proof of the statement, TRP realised he got it mixed up.

                      I then found a statement that was pretty much to the opposite of what TRP said.

                      Whether I believe any of it is irrelevant.

            • Will@Welly 6.1.1.1.3.2
              25 January 2014 at 4:12 pm

              lanth? are you naive?

              • Lanthanide …
                25 January 2014 at 9:21 pm

                No, not at all, just asking for confirmation of what to me is surprising information, because I had never before seen any strict commentary on this particular subject.

                Turns out my surprise was well and truly warranted, what-with the MP now saying they’re distancing themselves from National.

        • Skinny 6.1.1.2
          24 January 2014 at 9:30 am

          Reading the stats on the latest Roy Morgan poll I am at a loss as to how and why the Maori party are polling at 2%. Surely there aren’t that many Maori tories? I thought they would be lucky if they retained 1 seat, however seeing the 2% and hearing Tua & Rush are candidates makes me think their good for 2 seats. It’s a tricky one but I was optimistic that Labour would cut them off at the knees and reject any coalition arrangement just like they have with ACT and the Conservatives. There needs to be a concerted effort by left party’s to knock them out if not completely down to one. Stating the obvious, vote splitting in the Maori seats is a issue of concern. If? it is a tight election 1 seat may be the deference.

          • RedBaronCV 6.1.1.2.1
            24 January 2014 at 7:47 pm

            Are all the general seats using their manpower to get any voters for the Maori seats that live in their geographic electorate as well as general electorate voters? Upping the Maori seats turnout advantges the left generally does it not?

          • Will@Welly 6.1.1.2.2
            25 January 2014 at 4:54 pm

            Skinny – Maori from the iwi leaders forum is almost exclusively made up of members who will vote National, they hold onto their baubbles of power steadfastly. Their job is wealth creation, and hanging onto that wealth – growing the pot – they don’t want to distribute it without some sort of payback. What wealth is distributed is like that in the old feudal system – for services rendered, for compliance to the wishes of the iwi leaders, and for being faithful servants.
            Within Maoridom there is a sense of hierarchy, and yes, there are alot of Maori tories. These tend to be ones who never lost their rural roots even if they became urban dwellers.

      • bad12 6.1.2
        24 January 2014 at 8:45 am

        Asking me questions such as these ones simply reveals a lack of thought on your part, refer to the comment above regarding National’s ‘gifting of seats,

        In relation to who would Mana support in Government, really??? i find the question to be plainly dumb, perhaps you think the Mana Party other than support a Labour lead government would either support National or let no-one govern…

        • Te Reo Putake 6.1.2.1
          24 January 2014 at 9:16 am

          I have no idea what mana would do, bad. Neither do you. Nobody does. Which is actually my point.

          If mana want to play a role in the next government, they need to say so. Labour are not going to walk away from a winnable seat just on the off chance mana decide post election to help out. Labour have never previously gifted a seat (though it’s fair to say they never actively contested my old electorate of Sydenham while Jim Anderton was part of the Government).

          And given the sectarian/anti social democracy nature of mana’s advisers and leadership, my gut feeling is that they (or he) would sit on the cross benches, voting issue by issue. I can’t see Labour taking the risk, without clear evidence of a commitment to post election support.

          ps, if anybody has evidence mana intend to actively support LP/GP, I’d be pleased to see it. Anyone?

          • bad12 6.1.2.1.1
            24 January 2014 at 9:26 am

            Te Reo, i have work to do, this comment raises some points that demand an answer and it would help if you didn’t generalize with your attack on the Mana Party, try naming names when you make such accusations against the Mana Party’s advisers and leaders,

            Will definitely come back to this comment once the mahi is done…

          • marty mars 6.1.2.1.2
            24 January 2014 at 9:59 am

            “If mana want to play a role in the next government, they need to say so.” No they don’t – you know any seat is winnable on the day but the last day they tested it it was not winnable for labour so not sure why you think it is now.

            “And given the sectarian/anti social democracy nature of mana’s advisers and leadership”
            pray tell who do you mean and compared to what? labour? NZF? Edit – oh I see who you are meaning – why add bomber he’s TIP now and John and Annette – no don’t agree with your analysis at all.

            The fact that Mana haven’t made any definitive statement re support is canny and wise. If Mana support is not needed, so what? business as usual for the left in parliament. But no doubt in the future labour leadership will come down off their lofty mountains and crawl over the shingle to get the vote and support of Mana – just a question of when not if.

            i suspect though that the machinations regarding how to deal/work with/cohabit with the greens will keep them very busy.

    • Draco T Bastard 6.2
      24 January 2014 at 1:08 pm

      and why in the name of any deity you can care to name Labour would want to ‘win back’ these seats is beyond me,

      I think Labour are feeling weak and threatened by the rise of other parties especially considering that National are holding strong.

      • bad12 6.2.1
        24 January 2014 at 4:32 pm

        Fair comment Draco, but surely Labour must understand the MMP landscape by now, if the 2014 election turns out to be as tight as i think it might,(someone with a 1 seat majority), and Labour has ‘won back’, as the ongoing dialogue is wont to describe it, Waiariki and Te Tai Tokerau will they enjoy the next 3 in opposition…

        • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.1
          24 January 2014 at 4:37 pm

          but surely Labour must understand the MMP landscape by now

          You would think so and under Helen Clark I was pretty sure that they did but it seems that they lost it with the change in leadership back in 2k8.

          The way I figure it is that they’ve drunk the Kool-aid and are thinking competitively rather than strategically and cooperatively.

          • bad12 6.2.1.1.1
            24 January 2014 at 5:33 pm

            +1 to that Draco…

          • Tim 6.2.1.1.2
            24 January 2014 at 6:20 pm

            +1 to BOTH those sentences (the loss during the 2k8 leadership change, and the competitive thinking)
            Some more than others (the ABC and the leadership aspirants especially).
            I’m hoping Cunliffe is thinking/acting methodically and strategically in order to bring about change given he knows exactly what some of his colleagues are about.
            Roll on the big speech!
            It’ll determine whether or not they get an electorate vote from me, and whether or not Labour will be around in 2020 to worry about

          • cricklewood 6.2.1.1.3
            24 January 2014 at 6:23 pm

            Thats human nature to a point I’d bet an mp with a borderline list position but a chance in a seat wont be terribly keen on cooperation…

  7. Puckish Rogue 7
    24 January 2014 at 8:47 am

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9640616/Education-overhaul-targets-top-teachers

    – check the opinion poll out as well, its quite interesting

    ‘A REALLY GOOD THING’

    Post-Primary Teachers Association president Angela Roberts said the policy sounded promising, because it was being resourced.

    “Teaching and learning and providing teachers with the time, and enabling them to teach and share their practice and have the time to do that, is vital to enable something like that to be sustainable and happen systemically.”

    She said it was a good direction to move toward – away from a system that was struggling with teachers who were “stretched to capacity”.

    ‘GAME CHANGER’

    Secondary Principals’ Association president Tom Parsons called it a “wonderful initiative”.

    “It’s super, what a game changer, what a tremendous thing.

    “They’ve taken the politics out of this and are just looking at the welfare and the benefits for every New Zealander at school now, and in the future.”

    Parsons, who is principal of Queen Charlotte College in Picton, has been a critic of many Government policies in the past two years, including the introduction of national standards.

    But he joined the PPTA in its view that industry involvement was crucial and the new policies would lift student achievement.

    He said $359m was a “big deal” and would do away with the “real competition between schools for bums on seats”.

    – Once again the Left have failed to realise that John Key is smart, very smart…at a stroke hes taken out one of the largest, most vocal opponenets of National

    • Chooky 7.1
      24 January 2014 at 10:08 am

      the Teachers Unions have been bought or they are politically naive…..this sharing of expertise could have been done by bringing back the old School Inspectorate …without the cronyist tens of thousands of dollars rewards for so called ‘excellent’ Nact compliant Principals

      …it will not solve the decline of State Education in New Zealand …which has been starved of finance and support from this Nact Govt which is intent on rewarding privatisation of education

      Teachers unions should be listening to University research education academic experts

  8. ScottGN 8
    24 January 2014 at 9:01 am

    I see the online Herald closed comments relating to Audrey Young’s crappy column yesterday after about half an hour. Judging by most of the comments that did get through I guess it’s because they didn’t really support the editorial line she was promoting.

  9. geoff 9
    24 January 2014 at 9:23 am

    LPRENT:
    Do you think TS could save bandwidth costs if pages dynamically updated just those portions of the page that were new, ie new comments, edits, etc? Would that even be technically possible?

  10. Steve James 10
    24 January 2014 at 9:52 am

    Wow! Great stuff

    Educational Reaction

    PPTA

    Government plans to put resources into teaching and learning rather than finance and administration are being greeted with optimism by PPTA.

    President Angela Roberts said Prime Minister John Key’s announcement that $359 million would be invested in teaching and school leadership over the next four years was a positive one.

    She praised his commitment to ““support a culture of collaboration within and across schools” and said the creation of principal and teacher positions to provide leadership and support across communities of schools marked the beginning of a collaborative approach long sought by PPTA.

    The Principals’ Federation

    Principals’ Federation President Phil Harding said the announcements were significant for both principals and teachers.

    “It’s hard for me to say it but I’m pretty damned impressed. It is a huge amount of new money and I have never seen such a transformation of ideas and discussion into policy and money in my life. It has gone from a theoretical discussion about how the system needed to evolve and change just last year to the appropriation of significant resource.”

    The Secondary Principals Association

    Secondary Principals’ Association president Tom Parsons called it a “wonderful initiative”.

    “It’s super, what a game changer, what a tremendous thing.

    “They’ve taken the politics out of this and are just looking at the welfare and the benefits for every New Zealander at school now, and in the future.”

    Difficult to argue with that.

    • Puckish Rogue 10.1
      24 January 2014 at 9:58 am

      But they’ll try

      • Pasupial 10.1.1
        24 January 2014 at 11:45 am

        PR

        Not as hard as you try. But then, most of us aren’t paid by the word for commenting.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 10.2
      24 January 2014 at 10:01 am

      Easy to point out that it’s a win for the teachers’ unions. Which makes me wonder, cynically, exactly what’s in this for the National Party’s clients, and how they will betray the country when the fine print is revealed.

    • Skinny 10.3
      24 January 2014 at 10:15 am

      How about a link to what former head of NZEI Ian Leckie’s comments he has a far different view on this vote buying policy put together by Crosby/Textor, Joyce!

      • greywarbler 10.3.1
        24 January 2014 at 10:27 am

        I agree Skinny This is best that I can achieve.
        New policy not addressing underlying problem – principal ( 4′ 29″ )
        The education sector reforms over-haul has been widely welcomed but has also drawn some criticism for not addressing hurdles to learning such as poverty.

        From Morning Report on 24 Jan 2014
        http://www.radionz.co.nz/search/results?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=Ian+Leckie
        or
        http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport

        • Skinny 10.3.1.1
          24 January 2014 at 11:22 am

          Cheers Grey that brings some balance into the shrill above.

          • greywarbler 10.3.1.1.1
            24 January 2014 at 11:41 am

            Skinny
            I don’t know who is shrill. Were you thinking of the Principals Federation speaker
            Phil Harding? Sounds like a trade union just for principals? Perhaps more money for themselves is their principal principle.

            It’s making education even a more attractive profit centre. There will be some great education trusts to invest in soon.

            Advertisement notice.
            An excellent way to invest in services needed by the public. A blue-chip investment with guaranteed growth profiles in uncertain times. When all else fails to provide a secure future and business growth in employment-rich enterprises even more money will be poured into education. Education is the magic ingredient that offers no surety of outcome but untold possibilities. Rather like a pokie machine, and we know how the punters love those, especially the ones who haven’t got much money to start off with.

            That’s how I feel about the present situation. And hey, I hold to my principles, but if you don’t like them I have others. So if you like my prospectus for education, I come cheap, eager to earn more so I can get up to average earnings for NZ. Just drop me the word on the blog!!

      • Pat Newman 10.3.2
        30 January 2014 at 6:42 pm

        I spend three days last week in Wellington listening to Academics and researchers from New Zealand, Australia, USA and England talking about the effects of National Standards and the directions being taken in education in their countries.
         Margie Hōhepa
         Te Reo Areare
         Barbara Comber
         Martin Thrupp
         David Berliner
         David Hursh
         Meg Maguire
         Bob Lingard
         Lester Flockton (Facilitator)

        http://www.education2014.org.nz/?page_id=296 is the link to all the PowerPoints of the presenters.

        Basically what the research found, and backed up by PERLS Data, was that the biggest stopper to all children succeeding in NZ Schools was the huge inequity gap between children living in New Zealand. That is not Deficit Theory, it is reality!

        Then we had the announcement from Mr Keys about the huge money they were proposing to principals to “fix” schools. On the face of it, I can understand some principals thinking great, that’s extra money…. However I expected our principal leaders to have thought a little more deeply before leaping into support the concept in such glowing terms as the current President of NZPF did! I am aghast at the proposal, and astounded by Phil Harding,s statement’s in the New Zealand Herald!

        Why?

        The proposal:
        (1)Presupposes that the sole problem of why some of our children are failing is an individual schools problem or fault. That outside influences or conditions or socioeconomics have no part in solving the problem.
        (2)Is based upon the concept that National Standards results will be the measure of a successful principal
        (3)Doesn’t give any support to the need for a Holistic Education for all our children, not just numeracy and Literacy
        (4)Presupposes that you can fly in a “fixer” who will spend two years and depart leaving behind a “fixed” school!!!!!
        (5)In my view, is the start of amalgamating schools under “one head’ concept rather than having the beauty of different schools with community input.

        What we really need:

        – Are decent support services covering not just Numeracy and Literacy and Leadership, but all Curriculum areas.
        – Is a support service staffed by good practitioners seconded into it for 2-3 years and then returning back into the profession.
        – A rebuilding of some form of trust between us the practitioners and the Ministry of Education, something that has been missing for quite a few years now, ever since they became the enforcers of political decisions in education.
        One must also wonder if this is an admittance that SAPS and Ministry Advisers have failed in what they were supposed to be achieving. Will they continue in their present positions??
        Well that’s my view for what it is worth. Check out the website link from above. What they say is based upon good solid research, and not as a result of some politicians thinking up another bright idea. $395million would have gone a long way to providing that badly needed support!!

    • ianmac 10.4
      24 January 2014 at 10:18 am

      Lauding the fresh flow of collaboration and cooperation between schools BUT how will that sit with League Tables? League Tables are a recipe for competition.

    • Pasupial 10.5
      24 January 2014 at 11:23 am

      SJ

      I find it very easy to argue with the contention that; “They’ve taken the politics out of this…” given that it was announced during the PMs State of the Nation speech at the start of an election year. Here’s Cunliffe & Turei’s take (from PRs stuff link at 6):

      ” Cunliffe said today he would give a speech on Monday that would set the broad direction for Labour’s plan. Education could not be seen in isolation from issues of poverty, the cost of living and the variation in standard creeping in because of national standards and charter schools, he said.”

      ” “Growing inequality in New Zealand is negatively impacting on our kids’ learning,” co-leader Metiria Turei said in a statement. “Sick and hungry kids can’t learn. This policy does nothing for kids and families living in poverty.” ”

      Bradbury is as incendiary (and speculative) as ever:

      http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/01/24/how-a-359m-budget-for-a-war-with-education-unions-can-be-sold-as-beneficial/

    • framu 10.6
      24 January 2014 at 12:16 pm

      “They’ve taken the politics out of this”

      any one saying that about this policy and the timing of the announcement has just put themselves in the idiot corner and shouldnt be given the time of day.

      of course its political – fucks sake, its national announcing a policy that appears to be good for the teachers union!

      A people really that gullible and easily led?

    • Naki Man 10.7
      24 January 2014 at 1:44 pm

      These negative people don’t really care about their kids education.
      They just want more hand outs. The entitlement mentality is alive and well

      • Te Reo Putake 10.7.1
        24 January 2014 at 1:51 pm

        That’s the most devastating critique of National I’ve seen all day, naki man. Nice work.

        • phillip ure 10.7.1.1
          24 January 2014 at 4:44 pm

          you should put that on a t-shirt..there..naki..

          ‘..the tories..they just want more handouts – the entitlement-mentality is alive and well..’

          ..well done..!..there..!..that person..!

          ..phillip ure..

    • McFlock 10.8
      24 January 2014 at 2:32 pm

      Well, if it’s as great as you say, dickwads like you will learn how to avoid plagiarism when you cut and paste Farrar’s Daily Instructions for Toryboy Lickspittles.

  11. Hami Shearlie 11
    24 January 2014 at 10:06 am

    I have always thought of teaching as a vocation or profession and it has always been called this in the media etc – so it was very very interesting to hear the word John Key used to describe it during his Education Announcements – He called it “the teaching industry” – so teaching is just a business now like any other business! That must be why the only people listening to his speech seemed to be business people – who incidentally PAID to be there, very unlike David Cunliffe’s speech which is to be totally free to hear!

    • vto 11.1
      24 January 2014 at 11:18 am

      It is all there is to him Hami and to him life is a dollar. Everything breaks down to a dollar.

      The man is empty.

    • vto 11.2
      24 January 2014 at 11:22 am

      I thought it was interesting how high he placed the value of the extra money in achieving the ends. That is the problem with these dye-in-the-wool neoliberals – they think people make decisions, and go about life, based to the bulk on money.

      • Draco T Bastard 11.2.1
        24 January 2014 at 1:27 pm

        That’s taught in the financial and economic schools as gospel. In their world people need to be incentivised and money’s it.

    • phillip ure 11.3
      24 January 2014 at 4:46 pm

      @ hami..

      ..i was there..

      ..it was like an undertakers’-convention..

      ..had all the charms of a pig-trough..

      ..at feeding time..

      ..phillip ure..

    • Tim 11.4
      24 January 2014 at 7:40 pm

      @ Hami
      ” “the teaching industry” – so teaching is just a business now”
      +1
      They just don’t get it! A very hollow man.

      Have you also noticed various Natzi politicians have stopped talking about “learnings” too? (Soimun Brudjiss especially).
      Not a good look when you’re about to announce a mayja jickashun polsee.

      I haven’t heard ‘litrissy and newmrissy’ for a while either. No doubt the Natzi torking points and CT spin will be outsourced to any newly bonused Prince Pal.

  12. philj 12
    24 January 2014 at 10:40 am

    Choosy, Thanks for your analysis. It clarified what I had yet to understand… it’s a swipe at teachers. Quite a clever framing of the issue and surprising that the teacher unions have only seen the dollars. Clever from Hekia? It’s saying the problem is with teacher performance and not poverty. Thanks again Chooky.

  13. marty mars 13
    24 January 2014 at 11:12 am

    Good stuff from Hone and Mana here

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Harawira-Mana-doesnt-need-celebrities/tabid/1607/articleID/329583/Default.aspx

    Asked if Mana would be looking for a high-profile name to give it the edge over Labour and the Maori Party in its fight for the Maori seats, Mr Harawira said he wasn’t interested.

    “Mana’s got a job to do, and that’s to convince the voters that we are the party that represents the interests of the poor and the dispossessed – that’s the target we’re going for. We don’t need celebrities to promote that image…

    “The Maori Party is with National and that’s the position that I want all Maori to understand – the Maori Party is with National, Mana is with the people.”

    It is fantastic to know that Mana know exactly who they are targeting as constituents. We just need to help those people find hope.

    • karol 13.1
      24 January 2014 at 1:30 pm

      Excellent. Seeing also some good recommendations for Hone from some Ratana people.

    • bad12 13.2
      24 January 2014 at 4:06 pm

      NICE, well said Hone, based on the latest Roy Morgan the Green Party is polling where i thought they would be,(up), so as it stands i have a vote for the Mana Party…

  14. taxicab 14
    24 January 2014 at 1:40 pm

    Yet again we see how there is one law for them and one for the rest of us http://laudafinem.com/2014/01/23/like-father-like-son-the-story-of-another-of-new-zealands-unwarranted-politically-wangled-name-suppressions/ I wonder how high up the influence was accessed to pull this off .

    • Hayden 14.1
      24 January 2014 at 8:05 pm

      Wow, three generations of (alleged ;)) criminals. Perhaps someone needs a motorway to help this family drive past them and commit crimes somewhere else.

  15. Rosie 15
    24 January 2014 at 2:05 pm

    Folks, in light of the need for Dotcom to pull his CD Launch/Party Launch party least he be in breach of section 217 of the Electoral Act I have some confusion as to how the law works in regard to the Green’s Picnic for the Planet planned for this Sunday at Waitangi Park in Wellington.

    This event has been well advertised in local papers and karol refers to it her “Spot the difference” article. It’s a picnic so you bring your own food but there will also be food stalls, so as far as the food “treats” go, none will provided by the party as such. But what about the band? Minuet is the entertainment “treat” that is being provided.

    Then I came across this article in our local paper, The Wellingtonian:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/the-wellingtonian/9640347/Dotcom-party-ruling-sets-precedent

    where Gordon Campbell states

    “In that case, it is hard to see how the Greens’ annual “Picnic For The Planet” differs from the Dotcom “Party Party” bash – it, too, could be construed as encouraging its attendees to look more favourably upon the Green Party.”

    Seems it’s an annual event and I’m unaware of of any previous issue with it.

    Just curious about the definition of “treating” and when and where it applies and when and where it doesn’t.

    As for the event itself, it sounds like fun and it would be good to go along and see what Turei has to say – and then view the livestream of Cunliffe on Monday and see how startlingly different from Shonkey’s “state of the Nation” drone both speeches will be.

  16. Rosie 16
    24 January 2014 at 2:12 pm

    @ Greywarbler

    Hey Warbly, thanks for your link to the Victory suburb community development article two days ago on Open Mike. I did see it, and hope to get a chance to read it properly soon. Will be interesting to note the challenges the organisers faced and see where the issues over lap with the development we are on.

    Cheers 🙂

    • greywarbler 16.1
      24 January 2014 at 3:10 pm

      Hi Rosie
      Good. Someone getting people together doing things and talking about doing things, and hinking about things and having a few minor festivals seems to get people going. There used to be a great community constable there who got mentors for teenagers who couldn’t read that well and were fazed by forms so they could go through the processes and get driving licences which opened up opportunities for them and I guess brought them up in their own esteem. He was very busy I think and stood down after a while for a quieter job.

  17. Morrissey 17
    24 January 2014 at 2:46 pm

    Edward Snowden and Aaron Alexis—-of COURSE they go together!
    Pravda is alive and well, and operating in New Zealand
    Worldwatch, Radio NZ National, Friday 24 January 2014

    At 12:45 every weekday afternoon, Radio New Zealand runs a feature called Worldwatch, which is billed as “Extending the news agenda to give you a global perspective on news and current affairs.” In fact, the agenda it follows is something different to the news agenda. More often than not, listening to Worldwatch is not much different than listening to an official broadcast straight out of Washington, or London, or Tel Aviv. Veteran newsman John Greaves announces these poisonous little propaganda pieces; sadly he seems to be immune to what is often outright political slant and sometimes even downright dishonesty.

    Today’s edition offered two particularly grievous examples, one after the other. The first was from the BBC’s Mike Wooldridge, reporting from the Syrian “peace talks” in Geneva. After a darkly humorous interview with that embarrassed, bumbling corpse Ban Ki Moon, who failed dismally to explain why he has allowed himself to be bullied into excluding Iran from the talks, Wooldridge still managed to end his item with the obligatory swipe at one of the official enemies. With all the gravitas he could summon, he intoned: “Syria continuing to test diplomacy—to the limits.”

    Still, in spite of that absurd parting shot, at least Mike Wooldridge did try to get some sense out of that useless South Korean timeserver.

    The next item, however, was sinister. In a society that was serious about truth and justice, it would have led to outrage from listeners. But of course, this is New Zealand, a country which tolerates people like John Banks continuing to occupy a seat in parliament, and where politicians and news media refer to violent knife-killing enthusiasts as “victim advocates”.

    Introducing the item, John Greaves read out that the Justice Department is taking a civil case against the United States Investigation, a private company that conducts security-background checks for the federal government. This action comes, Greaves intoned, because of criticism after the USIS had cleared Aaron Alexis, who killed 12 people in the Washington Naval Yard shootings last September—–and also Edward Snowden.

    That’s a neat little exercise in character assassination. Aaron Alexis and Edward Snowden. Mass murderer and whistle-blower. Any journalist, in fact any person with an intellect and a conscience would surely see there was something wrong with that equation—but not John Greaves.

    Lumping a mass murderer together with a champion of civil liberties like that was not an unfortunate accident. The spin-meisters in Washington thought very carefully about that press release. Reading out their cynical little dig at Public Enemy Number One was exactly what the clever folk at the State Department want and expect from responsible journalists like John Greaves.

  18. greywarbler 18
    24 January 2014 at 3:23 pm

    Have Ratana got the right idea about politicising people and making it part of everyday life? Can individual parties combine for a big day out regularly, and government hold one where there are singers and political speakers and talk corners and chats over cups of tea and coffee (no alcohol or drugs). Something that is all political and so everyone has opportunity to be seen explain themselves and have a discussion. Time for politicians to be serious and have it interspersed with NZ entertainers. Let’s excite people. Dotcom wasn’t too wrong imo.

    • bad12 18.1
      24 January 2014 at 4:15 pm

      The Green Party are having a remarkably similar to what you outline launch to election year at Wellingtons Waitangi Park on Sunday starting at 10am,

      Metiria Turei will give Her state of the nation speech, there will be food stalls along with various NGO’s explaining themselves and at least one live band,(hope the lousy Wellington summer behaves itself),

      This should be a ripper of a gathering as radicalism in Wellington is mostly of the Green variety and i expect not 100’s to attend but thousands…

    • bad12 18.2
      24 January 2014 at 4:25 pm

      PS, Greywarbler, Ratana with 40,000 members is political, religious and social, social services being delivered through Morehu Social Services,

      The real deal right across the spectrum, they do not put up candidates themselves,(although very few of those who have represented the Te Tai Hauauru electorate and Western Maori befor it have not been adherents of the prophet),

      What is discussed at Ratana Pa this early in the new year goes on to be the topic of discussion on Marae throughout the lower North Island…

      • greywarbler 18.2.1
        24 January 2014 at 8:58 pm

        They sound so clued up. If only we were more like Maori, they had stalwarts in the culture and rights who led the way to overcoming the crushing changes to everything they had known to their place today. If we hadn’t had the Right Wing lefties, and the destruction of employment and the economy while they searched for efficiencies down every cul de sac of the Friedman maze, who knows how happy we could have been. Our squabbles would have finished with business still there to return to.

        Their rise contrasts with ours which I feel has reached the Bell Curve zenith and is downward now. While Maori, still have the strength to push on upwards.

  20. Morrissey 20
    24 January 2014 at 4:35 pm

    Should a war criminal be arrested in a restaurant?
    The Panelists are amused by the very idea of it
    The Panel, Radio NZ National, Friday 24 January 2014
    Jim Mora, Elly Jones, Sapna Samant

    We join the panel pre-show, just before the 4 o’clock news….

    JIM MORA: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    ELLY JONES: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    JIM MORA: Ha ha ha! Mmm-kay. What else?
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Oh yes! This story about a BOUNTY for attempting to arrest former British prime minister Tony Blair!
    ELLY JONES: He he he he he!….[snort]
    JIM MORA: A bounty?
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Yep! …[snicker]… The waiter in a restaurant in London, a gentleman by the name of Twiggy Garcia—
    ELLY JONES: HA! [snort]
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Well, Mr Garcia saw on the internet that there was a bounty being offered for anyone who tried to arrest Tony Blair on the grounds he prosecuted “an illegal aggression against Iraq”.
    ELLY JONES: He he!… [snort]
    SUSAN BALDACCI: He has no job now, but he does have the two thousand pounds!
    JIM MORA: And presumably Mr Blair resisted him and would not accompany him to the station?
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Ha ha ha! That’s right. Ha ha ha!
    ELLY JONES: He he!… [snort]
    JIM MORA: So he got 2,000 pounds out of it. That will encourage others to do the same now.
    SUSAN BALDACCI: Actually Garcia was the FIFTH person to put his hand on Tony Blair’s shoulder!
    ELLY JONES: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    SAPNA SAMANT: He he he he he he he!
    MORA: Sapna Samant, how ARE you?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/twiggy-garcia-who-attempted-citizens-arrest-on-tony-blair-awarded-over-2000-9078074.html

  21. karol 21
    24 January 2014 at 6:18 pm

    Alistair Thompson has resigned from being Secretary of Dotcom’s Internet Party.. He didn’t last long there.

    He did not announce a reason for his resignation, but he is also running for a position on the InternetNZ council.
    Vikram Kumar, who has previously headed Internet New Zealand and Dotcom’s Mega company, will take over as interim general secretary for the Internet Party.

    Dotcom seems to be going through a lot of advisors and consultants.

  22. NZ Femme 22
    24 January 2014 at 6:24 pm

    Alistair Thompson has resigned from his position as General Secretary of the Internet Party – no reason given in the article.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11191621