Open Mike 24/03/2017

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, March 24th, 2017 - 107 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

107 comments on “Open Mike 24/03/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Robert Guyton 1
    24 March 2017 at 7:14 am

    The Southland Times editorial this morning, “A glaring need for answers” begins,
    “The Government needs to order a full investigation into a New Zealand led raid on two tiny villages in Afghanistan in 2010”, and later adds, “Prime Minister Bill English should order a proper inquiry”.

  2. Robert Guyton 2
    24 March 2017 at 7:20 am

    “Let us test, says oil industry” – Front page, The Southland Times.
    They only want to test, so Southlanders should relax; dolphins won’t be harmed, . Judith Collins “reiterated the Government’s commitment to the dolphins”.
    “it’s often a 70 to 75 % chance of finding nothing”, says Big Oil.
    Don’t worry, Southland; jobs, home heating.

    • marty mars 2.1
      24 March 2017 at 11:43 am

      I refuse to believe that down the bottom they will fall for this bullshit – times are always tough down there – the jobs line is really pathetic and weak. Come on Murihiku.

  3. AsleepWhileWalking 3
    24 March 2017 at 8:06 am

    We always knew they were the face of evil – emails between EPA and Monsanto released.

    https://www.organicconsumers.org/essays/congress-must-investigate-collusion-between-monsanto-and-epa-now

    Glyphospate is carcinogenic.

    • Psycho Milt 3.2
      24 March 2017 at 8:47 am

      I recommend spending less time on nutbar activist sites – it’s very bad for your brain.

      • One Two 3.2.1
        24 March 2017 at 11:30 am

        Do the links prevent you from addressing the content?

        Your comments indicate a belief in monsanto and GMO as ‘science’…moreover,you endorse it

        As an aside, being that you capacity for thought is limited, illustrated by your own words…it is no surprise the best you can offer is to slate Asleepwhilewalking, personally while ignoring the content in the links…

        I’m pointing it out because you’re scared so you project….evolve or don’t, that’s your choice

        Self reflection is a cyclical process…

        Try it sometime. ..

        • inspider 3.2.1.1
          24 March 2017 at 11:58 am

          Glyphosate has been used so widely and in such volumes for decades, that i am confident that any significant link to cancer would have emerged regularly on sites more credible than this. Things like the Lancet, BMJ, NEJM, JAMA

          • One Two 3.2.1.1.1
            24 March 2017 at 12:16 pm

            The conversation is wider than one constituent part

            Confidence tricks have existed since early times…

            Many have fortified the ability to understand when their confidence is a false sense of security…then ego prevents them from admitting it and moving on in a meaningful way

        • Psycho Milt 3.2.1.2
          24 March 2017 at 12:11 pm

          OK, let’s address the content the nutbar activist site links to. It consists of a couple of cancer sufferers who were convinced that glyphosate gave them cancer, and some evidence of dodgy dealings by Monsanto of the kind that for-profit organisations tend to be noted for.

          Against that, we have the fact that glyphosate is one of the most-tested chemicals ever to be sold and every major regulator has come to the conclusion that it’s safe when used as directed (at which point we should note that water and all other chemicals are likewise only safe “when used as directed”).

          Which of these is more persuasive? Well, it depends on the extent to which your capacity for rational thought has been debilitated by exposure to nutbar activist web sites, but for the record it’s the second one.

          • One Two 3.2.1.2.1
            24 March 2017 at 12:25 pm

            Vision is not a strong suit for too many people, including yourself…

            The wider and indisputable problem is the merging of so called government agencies, with corporations. Essentially they are one and the same thing, having been enabled using various tecniques like ‘revolving door’ and ‘lobbying’

            Bias (among other flaws) hinders your ability to observe at levels required to evaluate the core issues, you turn to insults…because that is your default level..

            • Psycho Milt 3.2.1.2.1.1
              24 March 2017 at 12:34 pm

              So, you’re proposing a massive conspiracy that involves many of the world’s scientists and regulatory agencies, and my skepticism that such a conspiracy exists is an artifact of bias and a lack of vision. I think we’re done here.

              • One Two …
                24 March 2017 at 12:59 pm

                That is precisely the response (interpretation) I expected…because it is how you self protect…

                …by ignoring what is an obvious and decades long exposė of corporate and state collusion in some of the most ethically and morally bankrupt activities carried out against humanity and all living beings…

                Such exposė is readily searchable on ‘mainstream’ establishment vehicles…

                Look into it…or don’t it’s your own stunted existence which others get to tolerate…

  4. J'Accuse 4
    24 March 2017 at 8:08 am

    If you wish to understand what is happening in London read ‘The Secret Agent’ by Joseph Conrad.

    Brexit is suddenly less prominent in the media.

    • Ad 4.1
      24 March 2017 at 8:35 am

      Why don’t you give a quick precis to give us the relevance of your reference.
      Long time since I did Stage 1 English Lit.

    • Psycho Milt 4.2
      24 March 2017 at 8:44 am

      You think Masood was an agent provocateur in the pay of the Russians? I must admit to finding that somewhat unlikely.

    • Bearded Git 4.3
      24 March 2017 at 8:53 am

      Yes excellent book j’Accuse……..but in yesterday’s events it appears a lone nutter with no terrorist links ran 3 people over then stabbed a policeman. It’s hardly Twin Towers stuff. Talk about media hype.

      • Rightly or wrongly 4.3.1
        24 March 2017 at 9:44 am

        Not sure how lone wolf he was.

        The English Police have arrested 7 other people in relation to their enquiry into the attack.

        That suggests that there was some kind of support cell behind him.

        • McFlock 4.3.1.1
          24 March 2017 at 12:10 pm

          nope. It suggests that the powers of arrest in terrorist investigations are pretty bloody extreme.

          See how many charges come out of it. Then how many convictions, and for what. After the Boston Bombing most, if any, were related to panicking after the event that they didn’t know would happen. Not to mention the ones arrested for being in the vicinity while Arab.

          Hey, the seven arrested this time might have helped him plan the attack, buy a knife, and so on. But equally, the most any of them knew could be that the dude kept mouthing off about doing “something” and they just thought he was a blowhard.

          Or they happened to be in the wrong place at the time.

        • Psycho Milt 4.3.1.2
          24 March 2017 at 12:29 pm

          That suggests that there was some kind of support cell behind him.

          It suggests he knew at least seven people – whether there’s any more to it than that remains to be seen.

          • Bearded Git 4.3.1.2.1
            24 March 2017 at 1:46 pm

            Agreed McFlock and Psycho. The wave of arrests perpetuates the terrorist hype. Nothing I’ve heard suggests these 7 people were part of some massive conspiracy; just people the guy associated with.

      • Bearded Git 4.3.2
        24 March 2017 at 8:59 pm

        This is what I mean by my post above

        https://twitter.com/hashtag/westminster?src=hash

  5. Psycho Milt 5
    24 March 2017 at 10:08 am

    As a consequence I suspect that I’m going to have to deal up with the usual gormless anti-immigrant bigots today who are appear to be too stupid to look past those selective headline ‘facts’.

    It’s neither gormless nor bigoted to draw conclusions from this about the wisdom of allowing large-scale Muslim immigration into western democracies. This particular Muslim was born in Britain – all that says to me is that the British were mugs to create the situation in which that occurred. As an ethnic Brit myself, it annoys the fuck out of me to see the Guardian or BBC reporting that a “Briton” has been killed fighting for Da’esh in Syria – those guys are about as “British” as a taco.

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

    • lprent 5.1
      24 March 2017 at 10:43 am

      I don’t see the distinction. It simply doesn’t make any frigging difference if the problem is east-end crime in the 1950s, incompetent ‘mercenaries’ in the 1970s, drug dealing gangs, or various actions by the children of immigrants in post war years.

      FFS: I can easily find exactly the same stupid ill-informed and ignorant bullshit you are sprouting when I read the commentary about Huguenots or Dutch refugees in previous centuries.

      The problem is groups who don’t feel connected for one reason or another to the society they are inside, and who attack it for their own benefits and reasons for some manner or another.

      I’d also point out that you appear to know fuckall about Islam – and like you I’m not going to be bothered explaining my assumptions about why.

      • Psycho Milt 5.1.1
        24 March 2017 at 10:48 am

        I know plenty about Islam, you just dislike the conclusions I’ve drawn from that knowledge.

        And I don’t recall reading about Huguenots mounting terrorist attacks because they were ideologically opposed to the country they’d settled in – the fact is that there is a distinction.

        • inspider 5.1.1.1
          24 March 2017 at 11:24 am

          Does the Boer war count?

        • lprent 5.1.1.2
          24 March 2017 at 12:01 pm

          I’d take a bet that I can take any argument that you use for Islam, and apply EXACTLY the same argument for Christianity of some branch or another doing the same things somewhere in the world and history.

          There were a lot of complaints about the Huguenots trying to get England involved in a internal religious battle in another country. Many of those activities involved what was defined as terrorism by both the government of the time in both countries. There were some pretty authoritarian actions by the british government of the time trying to stop them doing it. Your definition of the citizens of Britian going and fighting for ISIL is EXACTLY the same. Is it just that you are comfortable with Christians doing that, or you really need to read (and understand) some more history.

          I’d point out that I’m quite irreligious. I have a great respect for the odd people I run across who can have faith and live within the precepts of those faiths. But generally I treat all religions as being inherently dangerous when they are used as an excuse by dangerous bigots, populists or the dispossessed of society.

          Consequently I can’t see any difference between the morons professing an allegiance to Islam and Christianity, or oft times with you as well.

          • Psycho Milt 5.1.1.2.1
            24 March 2017 at 12:28 pm

            An intelligent person can take any position and argue for it, that’s what debating’s all about. But fuck history – this isn’t the 17th Century, or even the 1930s, the religion that is a serious threat to enlightenment values in the present day is Islam, not Christianity or any other variant of religious superstition. And it’s all the more dangerous because it’s fundamentally illiberal out-of-the-box – no distortions or additions are required to make it toxic to liberal democracy. People who won’t face that are naive, wilfully ignorant or deliberately disingenuous.

            • lprent 5.1.1.2.1.1
              24 March 2017 at 1:16 pm

              …the religion that is a serious threat to enlightenment values in the present day is Islam, not Christianity or any other variant of religious superstition.

              Obviously not the case just on the face of it. They simply don’t have the capabilities. Just think about what is required to take out any civilization or ethos. It only happens with crushing defeat and destruction or an partisan internal civil war of some kind or an argument that changes the paradigms of society. For instance in my lifetime on the latter – the role of women, homosexuality, and the lessons of the NZ civil war started in the 1860s come to mind.

              So Pakistan has a couple of nukes. Not exactly a threat on the death and destruction side (maybe worth considering if you are in India). At least not compared to the thought of some idiot fundamentalist protestant in the US or a fundamentalist Russian orthodox or Donald Trump getting unrestricted access to the stockpiles of nukes in the US or Russia.

              Offhand I can’t think of any partisan civil war triggered by immigrants with inferior technology. Even the recent historic invasions of here, the Americas required the immigrants to have far superior technology.

              What historical analogy are you considering? The Mongols? The Huns?

              And if a society isn’t capable of defending its ideas or assimilating external ideas, then you’d have to ask exactly how well it was founded.

              Or are you simply being a simple bigot throwing up clash of civilisations idea with no fucking basis for it having happened in the recent past. Which is kind of where I suspect you are.

              In NZ, I have heard the exact type of simple-minded alarmist nonsense in my life-time with Paheka, Irish, Dutch, Polynesians, South Africans, Chinese and bloody Poms. In fact it is hard to enumerate the number of times I’ve heard your EXACT argument expressed both in past history, recent history, or my lifetime with absolutely no basis behind it apart from the simple bigotry of the human tribal hardwiring for being scared of the stranger. Hell I’ve heard it expressed about geeks like me.

              • Psycho Milt …
                24 March 2017 at 1:36 pm

                You don’t count anything that isn’t an existential threat as a threat? The fact that it’s a threat we can deal with easily if enough people decide secular liberalism is worth defending doesn’t make it a non-threat.

                What historical analogy are you considering?

                Too many to count, mostly involving Christianity, because that was the chief opponent of enlightenment values until recently. These days it’s a trivial opponent, but that wasn’t true historically. Now, having finally dealt with that opponent after centuries of conflict, we’re inviting in an even tougher one – it’s moronic and we shouldn’t be doing it.

                Or are you simply being a simple bigot throwing up clash of civilisations idea with no fucking basis for it having happened in the recent past. Which is kind of where I suspect you are.

                Assuming someone must be an arsehole because they disagree with you isn’t a good way either of testing or of improving your own opinions.

                • Matthew Whitehead …
                  24 March 2017 at 2:01 pm

                  As a pretty enthusiastic atheist, I will take Muslim immigrants over Christian ones any day of the week, especially the ones not already from liberal democracies, as they actually understand the alternative to secularism and don’t want a bar of it. They might have some culture shocks getting used to the exact nature of society here, or not knowing all of the rights they’re getting, but that’s the same for anyone changing regime types, it’s not particular to Muslims, and there are actually similar shocks for those immigrating from the UK and USA, as their laws are getting increasingly draconian.

                  Anyone who’s cool with secular democracy, liberalism, and non-discrimination should be allowed in, I don’t care WHERE they’re from. And there’s no good evidence that Muslims are any worse than any other group- in fact, if we want to be wary of regressive religious views, we should be looking at restricting immigration for all religious conservatives, but good luck selling that to the National Party.

                  You don’t seem to get that the opponent isn’t the people who genuinely want in to more liberal democracies, it’s the people who are getting bombed overseas. We don’t need to touch immigration policy to deal with that, we need to not participate in US wars of aggression, and we need to use leverage to advocate for innocent civilians.

                  • lprent …
                    24 March 2017 at 5:19 pm

                    That would be my point as well.

                    Plenty of muslims in Auckland from quite a lot of locations, Like every other group, I work with them (I’m in IT – we have everyone), occasionally argue with them, and have a vast level of amusement when they discuss their preconceptions with others.

                    You haven’t seen anything until you see a cross purposes discussion between a strong muslim and a fundamentalist christian who has a short creationist timeframe.

                    Personally I don’t notice much difference between any immigrants based on their religions or usually from their countries of origin. For instance a muslim pakistani who migrated here will usually seem more rational to me than many of the English from the UK with their rather strange expectations about how NZ should be.

                    But I’m a native Aucklander – I’m used to immigrants. I see more real differences when I hit provincial NZ and suddenly find those strange inherited class structures. Those differences always appeared more startling to me because of the strange twist of assumptions in people who were raised here as well.

                    • Psycho Milt …
                      24 March 2017 at 6:47 pm

                      Most of the Muslims I’ve met (and yes, plenty – more than you for sure) have been pleasant enough people too. It would be nice if that were in some way relevant to the discussion.

                  • Andre …
                    24 March 2017 at 7:10 pm

                    In europe, it seems it’s generally not the immigrant generation that gets radicalised. It’s the next generation, growing up in slums staring at a crap future, that seem to be the more common radicals.

                    Which points to the importance of maintaining a welcoming society. High levels of immigration that stretches our infrastructure and plausibly contributes to other problems like low wages and exploitation of workers is likely to test our ability to continue to make immigrants feel a welcome and valued part of society.

                    • Matthew Whitehead …
                      25 March 2017 at 3:01 pm

                      You’re absolutely right that we should stick to our actual capacity to take in new migrants. That’s sensible policy no matter your attitude on migration.

                      That said, I would point out that the phenomenon of radicalisation of the children of immigrants (or subsequent generations) is likely down to a confluence of factors. As you say, poverty could play a role, but so could structural racism, and so could foreign policy that looks insufficiently compassionate to people like them, in either race or religion, especially if it extends to actual wars.

                      So basically, the problem is never the immigration, as radicals are far more likely to be home-grown than actual immigrants, so you need to look at other policy areas to prevent radicalisation, and in the meantime, use good enforcement policies that hold the line between preventing attacks and not trampling on people’s liberties.

                      We also need to keep terrorism in perspective. There were accidents that killed more people than the London incident. It’s news, sure, but it’s a footnote. We’ve been panicking over terrorism for way too long for something that’s not fucking new anymore.

                • lprent …
                  24 March 2017 at 5:28 pm

                  Assuming someone must be an arsehole because they disagree with you isn’t a good way either of testing or of improving your own opinions.

                  That is because you haven’t said anything about the source of your (to me) quite irrational fears.

                  I assume that anyone doing that and being unable to articulate the source of their assertions is hiding a nefarious reason. If you can’t articulate your assumptions then people can’t respond to them, and point out the mistakes that they think you are making.

                  The overwhelmingly most common reason I have run across for that kind of hidden motive assertion based behaviour in the past has been cases of simple bigotry. So I tend to start with that as the likely explanation until I find a reason to change my mind.

                  As a strategy, this usually works. It also certainly saves me considerable time trying to be nice as I weasel the real reasons out of people.

                  Besides, I really don’t like being nice. I think it is against my personal belief systems.

                  • Psycho Milt …
                    24 March 2017 at 6:55 pm

                    That is because you haven’t said anything about the source of your (to me) quite irrational fears.

                    What fears? A few weeks back there was a discussion here about the need to be vigilant against right-wing extremism, triggered by an event so trivial as to be ridiculous (a student group at UoA with a dodgy slogan). No-one wittered on about the people demanding vigilance being bigots or being afraid, because they weren’t – they just didn’t like extremist political groups getting mainstream acceptance. I don’t either, and people like Mr Mansoor give much better reasons for that dislike than some crackpot starting up a student group.

                    I assume that anyone doing that and being unable to articulate the source of their assertions is hiding a nefarious reason.

                    In what sense unable? Seeing as you immediately declared I must be ignorant of Islam, I assumed you must know a bit about it yourself and I therefore didn’t need to explain to you why it’s a problem. If you do need it explained, let me know. But the precis is that totalitarian ideologies tend to produce people you don’t want to have around, so encouraging adherents of that ideology to move to your country is a bad idea.

              • Ad …
                24 March 2017 at 6:00 pm

                +10 LPrent

                Posted similar a little while back. Radical Islamic terrorism is a threat. You have to be up front about that.

                It’s just a vastly overblown threat that is used as a rationale by governments to do impressively world-scale dumb things, many of which undermine any superiority of virtue to Enlightenment ideals.

    • marty mars 5.2
      24 March 2017 at 11:47 am

      “As an ethnic Brit myself, it annoys the fuck out of me to see the Guardian or BBC reporting that a “Briton” has been killed fighting for Da’esh in Syria – those guys are about as “British” as a taco.”

      that is such bullshit and so selectivly bigotted – ethnic brit ffs what a plonker

      • Psycho Milt 5.2.1
        24 March 2017 at 12:18 pm

        Technically it should be ethnic English, my mistake.

        • marty mars 5.2.1.1
          24 March 2017 at 12:48 pm

          When does the melting pot actually melt? My father was English, loved being English from Bournemouth, very proud. When did the invasions and influences down there stop being them and instead became us. Is it generations, where you are born, die, grow, have kids, what you look like, what you believe? When?

          It happened for your kin when are you going to allow other people the same privedge?

          • McFlock 5.2.1.1.1
            24 March 2017 at 12:55 pm

            Q: why do the English have a different accent or dialect every 20 miles?
            A: So they know who their enemies are.

            • inspider 5.2.1.1.1.1
              24 March 2017 at 1:03 pm

              Must have been written by an American. Everyone knows that real English would never speak to their neighbours

              • McFlock …
                24 March 2017 at 1:10 pm

                lol

                I recall one of those british crime dramas (morse/frost/whatever) where they asked the grieving widow if there was someone who could sit with her, like a neighbour. The response was “no, we’ve only lived here for three years”.

          • Psycho Milt 5.2.1.1.2
            24 March 2017 at 12:59 pm

            Ethnicity isn’t about being born somewhere – if it was there’d be upwards of 4 million “Maori” in Aotearoa. For my money, if some prick considers himself a member of the umma first, a Pakistani second, and British a distant third, if at all, there’s no point in me pretending he’s wrong.

            • marty mars 5.2.1.1.2.1
              24 March 2017 at 1:08 pm

              English – stick to the point – so religion is one of the things you think is English and not English. Is it also that loyalty to the English group is lower than loyalty to some belief systems?

              See? Your whole argument is bullshit mixed with bigotry. It’s okay many feel the same that’s why this world is fucked up.

              • Psycho Milt …
                24 March 2017 at 1:26 pm

                Being a member of the umma is not the same as believing in a religion. Lip-service-only Muslims have no problem being British, but true believers have basically ruled it out.

                Still, it’s good to know my kids can call themselves Maori because they were born here, I’m sure it will come in handy one day.

                • marty mars …
                  24 March 2017 at 1:33 pm

                  And your snide answer shows me I’ve got to your wee wall of self belief – here you can work on your bigotry if you wanted.

                  • Psycho Milt …
                    24 March 2017 at 1:41 pm

                    Well, what do you want? You call me a plonker for fondly imagining I have an ethnicity and people who don’t share it shouldn’t be pretended to share it, accuse me of bullshit and bigotry, and now claim the fact I gave you a snide answer says something about me. Actually, it does; a less-patient commenter would have told you to get fucked.

        • inspider 5.2.1.2
          24 March 2017 at 12:54 pm

          Ethnic brit makes more sense because English depends on political boundaries – enjoy debating with scots and welsh about the validity of modern boundaries. Ethnic brit says your biological heritage is primarily anglosaxon/northern European / norse/Anglo Norman/celtic/ Briton, with a pinch of Roman perhaps.

          Whereas Maori can include Tariana Turia, Christian Cullen and Tony Brown.

          • weka 5.2.1.2.1
            24 March 2017 at 1:06 pm

            Ethnicity is cultural as well as genealogical, so neither ethnic Brit nor ethnic English make sense. I’m guessing what PM meant was Anglosaxon.

            • Red Hand 5.2.1.2.1.1
              24 March 2017 at 7:15 pm

              Data on British population genetics suggest he could be <50% Anglo-Saxon.

              "The majority of eastern, central and southern England is made up of a single, relatively homogeneous, genetic group with a significant DNA contribution from Anglo-Saxon migrations (10-40% of total ancestry). This settles a historical controversy in showing that the Anglo-Saxons intermarried with, rather than replaced, the existing populations."

              https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0315/180315-fine-scale-british-isle-genetic-map

              His cultural ethnicity could be worked out from his comments, maybe.

              • Psycho Milt …
                24 March 2017 at 9:39 pm

                Data on British population genetics suggest he could be <50% Anglo-Saxon.

                Fucking awesome. Now tell us about all those “part-Maoris” making the Treaty of Waitangi meaningless.

  6. Graeme 6
    24 March 2017 at 10:09 am

    Our Police doing their bit for the road transport industry,

    https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/disbanding-police-mechanics-opposed

    So they are going to get rid of 26 mermaids, truckies will love that, those guys have the biggest safety impact of all but aren’t actually sworn police because of their specialist skill set. But the moves of a dying National government, damn the consequences, let’s look after our mates and keep those donations coming in.

    Also big ups to the union, the Police Association, for calling them out on this.

    • Wensleydale 6.1
      24 March 2017 at 10:16 am

      Whenever a National government goes into a death spiral, they ram through as much nasty, self-serving crap as they can in the short time they have left. This is business as usual for them, given the circumstances.

      • Graeme 6.1.1
        24 March 2017 at 10:22 am

        Yeah, it’s sad, but also pleasing in a way that they have come to this stage.

        Let’s see our loyal opposition call them out on this and get talking about how the problem should be solved, and that’s by resourcing the Police properly. And all the other services that are falling to bits.

      • Alan 6.1.2
        24 March 2017 at 11:08 am

        47% is death spiral?

        • Robert Glennie 6.1.2.1
          24 March 2017 at 11:44 am

          In some respects yes, since A.C.T. and United Future, literally only exist in Parliament because Messrs Seymour (with no small amount of help from National) and Dunne won seats.

          They barely got anything outside of these two electorates. Certainly not enough to get in on the Party vote.

          Because of said absence of support – less than 1% combined, 47 + 1 = 48%, which last time I looked was not a majority.

        • DoublePlusGood 6.1.2.2
          24 March 2017 at 4:06 pm

          English is death process.

      • weka 6.1.3
        24 March 2017 at 11:31 am

        “Whenever a National government goes into a death spiral, they ram through as much nasty, self-serving crap as they can in the short time they have left. This is business as usual for them, given the circumstances.”

        +1

      • Bearded Git 6.1.4
        24 March 2017 at 1:53 pm

        @wensleydale

        You must mean the RMA reforms-may the Maori Party rot in hell for giving the Nats the numbers to pass these.

    • tc 6.2
      24 March 2017 at 10:59 am

      Classic national, not only fiddle while she burns but chuck some fuel on in between tunes.

      Heard of a commercial bus driver the other week struggling with the steering as it was obviously pulling…….he thanked the passenger who was going to report it as he’s had no luck getting it sorted in the brighter future.

      Following logging trucks lately that weave about the road like drunken sailors.

    • millsy 6.3
      24 March 2017 at 2:17 pm

      Sounds like they are going to outsource/privatise the roadside traffic inspections.

    • Bearded Git 7.1
      24 March 2017 at 2:04 pm

      Thanks for that marty-hilarious.

      “Bill English went to see Adele last night-Rumour has it, Adele buying exclusive Queenstown property and has citizenship sewn into the deal”

      I liked the guy on Morning Report this AM who flew from Hawaii for the concert. Also I think they said 40 people flew from one of the pacific islands for the show.

    • millsy 7.2
      24 March 2017 at 2:20 pm

      He can’t quite pull it off like Key could.

      But he is right about Adele, she is one of the few female vocalists worth listening to in the modern era.

  8. Muttonbird 8
    24 March 2017 at 3:22 pm

    Seriously. If you’re gushing over Adele you need to hand in your man card.

  9. Muttonbird 9
    24 March 2017 at 3:31 pm

    This is very weird. This project would have been structured in the minutest detail to be released on time. Sure, sometimes projects run over but this one was visibly ahead of schedule. I drive past it several times a week and the structures around the tunnel were completed months ago. Pre-publicity stories about the tunnel also appeared months ago.

    The Herald reported earlier this month that the new motorway was set to open in April, most likely the weekend of April 8 and 9.

    I’ve got two theories: One, initial testing was completed at the designated time but the tunnel, on/off ramps, or traffic engineering model failed and they are now setting about either fixing what failed or getting another opinion that ensures it won’t fail, in true John Key style.

    Two, the Nats have ordered the delay of the project so that it can be opened closer to the election thereby ensuring many thousands of temporarily happy Aucklanders vote for the status quo believing their transport woes have been addressed.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11824825

    • Siobhan 9.1
      24 March 2017 at 3:42 pm

      Number two is my preferred option.
      A stonking big gridlock on election day to remind the average Aucklander why its a bad idea to drive to work, and a reminder of how ill served they are by their elected officials, local and Government.

      “NZTA has released a written statement about the project, but a spokeswoman for the organisation refused a request for an interview to answer further questions.

      The spokeswoman said the Herald reporting on concerns about the project had been “irresponsible”, leaving them “reluctant” to comment.”
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11824825

    • Ad 9.2
      24 March 2017 at 6:04 pm

      Delays happen all the time, especially at this scale.

      It’s not politics, it’s just fix the tags now and make sure you get less grief upon opening.

      • Muttonbird 9.2.1
        24 March 2017 at 6:10 pm

        No, I don’t buy that and I addressed it in my comment.

        Delays do happen but not at this stage they are quite clearly visible from months or years out. Something has gone wrong with the engineering plan as a result of shortcuts taken earlier. Physically the whole thing is ready to go and for them to delay just two weeks out from opening a $1.4 Billion project smells like shit to me.

        It is politics in that it’s know cheap Chinese steel was used and if this is an indicator then other similar concessions will have been made in the name of cutting costs.

  10. marty mars 10
    24 March 2017 at 3:39 pm

    This is a very important issue that most know nothing about – the Ture Whenua
    Māori Bill

    http://mananews.co.nz/wp/?p=10019

    • Bill 10.1
      24 March 2017 at 4:10 pm

      I knew absolutely nothing about it at all – had never heard it mentioned. Yet from your link it sounds like a very big deal.

      “New corporate structures and corporate management, and rules making it easier to partition land, will make it easier for Maori land to be lost to foreigners.

      “And changes to current legislation will allow people with no whakapapa connection to make decisions over the land, allow a minority of owners to make decisions without telling the rest of the owners, and allow Maori land to be sold to foreigners without the approval of its owners.

      You any idea where various political parties and others stand on it?

  11. Muttonbird 11
    24 March 2017 at 4:18 pm

    Lol. Labour literally governing from opposition.

    http://i.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/auckland-city-harbour-news/90825342/plans-to-introduce-light-rail-from-auckland-airport-to-city-centre-confirmed

    It is so laughable that this do nothing government meekly announces Labour social and infrastructure policy.

    Who says NZ doesn’t have a strong opposition?

    • dv 11.1
      24 March 2017 at 4:27 pm

      Didn’t they promise 10 bridges to Northland too?

    • adam 11.2
      24 March 2017 at 6:21 pm

      Only problem is that national have done their usual – announced somthing putting it 30 years in the future.

      They are so useless – the press should cut them a new one for this.

      • Graeme 11.2.1
        25 March 2017 at 10:03 am

        Yeah, how they are doing it now, our clayton’s government says it will do something in 30 (or 40) years to solve a current crisis.

        “National, the government you’re having when you’re not having a government”

  12. Cemetery Jones 12
    24 March 2017 at 4:26 pm

    I see some guy who looks like the offspring of Phil Spector and Roger Stone has lawyered up. He can afford a much better wig than Phillip Smith, but it looks a bit odd on…

  13. red-blooded 13
    24 March 2017 at 4:34 pm

    Just visited the NZ Herald site. Pics of Grant Robertson and James Shaw with the caption, “Would you trust them with your money?” Not exactly impartial, Granny H!

    • dv 13.1
      24 March 2017 at 4:36 pm

      Didn’t the Natz give away 1 billion to SCF?

    • Ad 13.2
      24 March 2017 at 6:06 pm

      It’s the most coverage Grant Robertson has ever got in the NZHerald, including his leadership tilt. NZHerald did well giving them uninterrupted 2 whole pages.

  14. greywarshark 14
    24 March 2017 at 7:25 pm

    Handing out jobs for the girls. Got to look out for one another.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/327400/govt-rejects-nz-first-'shoulder-tap'-claim
    Maggie Barry sepent her time as a mouthpiece on RadioNZ learning all the cliches about government behaviour such as saying it was a ‘conspiracy theory’ of NZ First’s Winston Peters when he criticised over-spending and jobs for the birls (women who have learned to behave like males) .

    Documents obtained by New Zealand First leader Winston Peters show that in May last year Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Maggie Barry wrote to Dame Jenny asking her to accept the role.

    In November, a Cabinet committee considered a long-list of potential candidates before Dame Jenny was officially selected. Mr Peters said that was clearly unfair.
    “It’s totally unfair on the rest of the candidates – they think they’re involved in a fair process.
    “They’re going through the whole steps and rigmarole of the process only to find out it’s been determined before they even started. Now, that is disgraceful,” Mr Peters said.

    Ms Barry said New Zealand First’s assertion that it was not above board was nothing more than a conspiracy theory, and due process had been followed

    http://www.mch.govt.nz/first-encounters-250-commemoration-launchedOnly Jenny Shipley has the mana to host and run this. Perhaps she has a space now that some of her other portfolios have been sliding down.

    That rocky outcrop in the article is amazing.
    The government has put up $3.5 million to celebrate finding NZ and will get a replica of Endeavour and others to sail right around to prove that we are still here. However we haven’t yet become civilised, being still prone to land grabs wherever people can get away with it, and trying to chop down the trees of Eden to make the country over into a paradise for social climbers.

    I suggest we put that $3.5 million into teaching civics, how democracies work to define what policies will be best for the present and the future to enhance life, enjoyable community and the environment, and how to learn methods for getting on with others to create a society to be proud of in the 21st century. This is the one where the flower of human intelligence should be awe-inspiring in its creativity and humanity cutting through harmful short-term thinking.

    Instead we are regressing back to nostalgia for our historic folk tales that are projected onto our ignorance so that the total exceeds the sum of the parts.

  15. greywarshark 15
    24 March 2017 at 7:40 pm

    Someone that should be commemorated, as we think of Endeavour’s voyage, is Sydney Parkinson who did the painting depicted on the announcement of the remembrance voyage of Cook’s Endeavour to NZ.

    Wikipedia:
    Parkinson was employed by Joseph Banks to travel with him on James Cook’s first voyage to the Pacific in 1768,[1] in HMS Endeavour. Parkinson made nearly a thousand drawings of plants and animals collected by Banks and Daniel Solander on the voyage.

    He had to work in difficult conditions, living and working in a small cabin surrounded by hundreds of specimens. In Tahiti he was plagued by swarms of flies which ate the paint as he worked.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Parkinson

    This young bloke died of dysentery on the voyage, at the age of only 26. Ther is more details about his life and work, which is poorly recorded and only in the 1980s was his work recorded.
    http://www.botanicalartandartists.com/sydney-parkinson.html