Open Mike 24/07/2017

59 comments on “Open Mike 24/07/2017 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. garibaldi 1

   24 July 2017 at 7:08 am

   I have seen the “brighter future” we were promised 9 years ago. It consists of blue signs plastered all over the countryside (again). No shortage of money for those bastards.
   • Carolyn_nth 1.1

     24 July 2017 at 7:29 am

     NZ Herald sideswipe has an excellent version of the Nat’s delivery billboard.

     or if you just want the image click here.
2. Carolyn_nth 2

   24 July 2017 at 7:51 am

   Something’s been bothering me since I saw Q&A yesterday. Kerry Prendergast said that by gaining financially by lying to WINZ, Turei was stealing money that some other Kiwi would not get.

   That just doesn’t make sense to me. Would Turei not declaring flatmates mean someone else would not be given enough benefit?
   • Cinny 2.1

     24 July 2017 at 8:12 am

     “Would Turei not declaring flatmates mean someone else would not be given enough benefit?”

     No it wouldn’t Kerry Prendergasts claim is pure rubbish
   • aom 2.2

     24 July 2017 at 8:20 am

     The $10,000 maximum overpayment that Ms Turei obtained is chicken feed compared to the $34,000p.a. double dipping of Ms. Prendergast when she represented the city on her Mayoral salary then also pocketed board fees from WIAL for representing her ’employers’, the ratepayers. Only difference here is that Ms. Turei is prepared to make good on the ‘loan’ she received. This is just one example of the former Wellington Mayor’s self-serving hypocrisy.
     • marty mars 2.2.1

       24 July 2017 at 9:09 am

       Yep it would be equivalent to the lunch budget for a mayor. Petty wee Kerry.
     • JanM 2.2.2

       24 July 2017 at 9:23 am

       Not to mention someone who ” had not “deliberately” lied to receive money during her own time on the DPB”!
   • weka 2.3

     24 July 2017 at 9:13 am

     Afaik there is no hard cap on the welfare budget. Unlike Health where DHBs etc get a yearly amount so someone getting x service does use up funds that someone else can’t use.

     But if there was a hard cap then I guess yes a beneficiary getting something they weren’t entitled to would mean less money for someone else. If Turei declared her flat mates then she would have been paid less this theoretically freeing up that money for someone else. But even in the hard cap scenario it’s a nonsense given Winz have long had a policy of targets of getting people off benefits and of not telling people their entitlements. Much more likely is that Prendegast’s imaginary second beneficiary would be prevented from getting that income by Winz itself. /irony.
     • Carolyn_nth 2.3.1

       24 July 2017 at 11:39 am

       thanks, weka. That’s a helpful explanation.
     • Nic the NZer 2.3.2

       24 July 2017 at 11:01 pm

       Even the hard caps are not that restrictive. There are plenty of examples of govt departments ending up in deficit (meaning over spent their budget). The budget numbers are at best rough estimates anyway. If a department does overspend then they may have some explaining to do, which is appropriate.

       On the other side the tax take depends massively on how well the economy goes. For WINZ that also has quite a big influence on their outgoings.

       What Kerry Prendergast said here is complete nonsense.
       • weka 2.3.2.1

         24 July 2017 at 11:08 pm

         Do you know why MSD doesn’t have those caps? How does the govt budget for it then?
         • Nic the NZer 2.3.2.1.1

           25 July 2017 at 7:49 am

           Govt budgets just simply don’t work this way. If the govt tried to cap MSD spending and the economy fell in then they could end up running out of budget and turning people away from legitimate entitlements. On the other hand govt spending works overall as the govt issues money as it spends.

           Budgets are about the govt understanding and overseeing what its ministries are doing. When the budget guesses go wrong the overall impact is the govt ends up unexpectedly in deficit or running a larger deficit (or occasionally the surplus direction). The surplus/deficit outcome however has no impact on the govts abiliy to finance itself. In addition increases in the deficit tend to come back as increases in the tax take in a lot of situations so the govt deficit tends to resolve itself that way. This mechanism is also known as automatic stabilizers.
3. dv 3

   24 July 2017 at 7:54 am

   New teachers quit city, delay kids, due to unaffordable housing

   Two-thirds of Auckland’s new teachers plan to leave the city, and many female teachers are postponing parenthood because of the city’s housing costs, a new survey has found.

   The survey of 450 new teachers in the primary and intermediate teachers’ union, the NZ Educational Institute, has found that two-thirds of them, including 94 per cent of male teachers under 35, are either leaving or thinking about leaving Auckland.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11894085

   I must say I am surprised NOT.

   The problem MUST also be for many jobs in the same salary range, – the service industries.
4. CLEANGREEN 4

   24 July 2017 at 8:39 am

   NATIONAL ARE ONCE AGAIN FOUND LYING FOLKS.

   THE PM’S OFFICE TRIED TO FRAME JOURNALIST FOR SOMETHING THEY DID NOT DO TO THE POLICE!!!!!!

   SOMEONE NEEDS TO HIGHLIGHT THIS ARTICLE PLEASE!!!!!!

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=201851765

   Mediawatch looks critically at the New Zealand media – television, radio, newspapers and magazines as well as the ‘new’ electronic media.

   Sundays at 9:05am and 10:12pm

   Shooting the messenger hunting an MP gone MIA

   Media Politics

   9:10 am today

   A recording allegedly made in secret was the downfall of scandal-struck MP Todd Barclay, who has vanished from public view. Now another recording has rescued the reputation of a reporter accused of… Read more AUDIO

   No-one home: a staffer at MP Todd Barclay’s Gore office greets Fairfax reporter Rachael Kelly. Photo: screenshot / stuff.co.nz

   They weren’t the only ones leafleting on the issue. On Monday, The Southland Times said police had been called after someone stuck notices calling for the MP’s resignation to the windows of Todd Barclay’s electorate office in Gore.

   That wasn’t the only time police were asked to act on people rocking up there.
   Fairfax Media’s reporter in Gore Rachael Kelly called by with a colleague last week to find out what Todd Barclay had been up to since disappearing from public life – but she had no luck.

   Last weekend, Fairfax Media’s political editor Tracy Watkins reported this:
   “Kelly and a local cameraman have been accused of intimidating and threatening behaviour, even of being physically aggressive. And the allegations were made at the highest levels, from the Prime Minister’s office and Parliamentary Service.”
   That sounded bad. Something must have gone very wrong.

   “It was alleged Kelly and her cameraman “barged” into Barclay’s office and harassed and intimidated staff – even pursuing them to the back of the office, leaving the staff feeling threatened and under siege,” wrote Tracy Watkins, who also said the police had been alerted.

   Tracy Watkins said Fairfax Media’s South Island editor-in-chief Joanna Norris had phone conversations with a senior member of the PM’s staff – who was not named – and the head of Parliamentary Service David Stevenson.

   But Rachael Kelly’s colleague was recording the encounter in question for a video reportto accompany her “Looking for Todd Barclay” story for the stuff.co.nz website.
   It showed the pair at the office only briefly and after being told the MP wasn’t there, they politely departed. No aggro, and no barging or forced entry as alleged by the PM’s office.

   After the video appeared online, the Parliamentary Service and Police decided no further action was necessary.

   “If it had not been for Stuff’s ability to produce video evidence, the allegations would probably have stuck,” said Tracey Watkins, who reckoned the response could be part of a Trump-type strategy to undermine the press.

   Rachel Kelly was filming her routine door-knocking because it was part of the story about looking for Todd Barclay. It was quite likely to be the only footage she would get in Gore that day with anyone who knew his whereabouts. On any other occasion, there would be no reason to have the camera running.

   If journalists are going to face unfair claims of bad behaviour, they’ll be tempted to record all their dealings with political figures and their staff just in case. That won’t make it easy to form relationships that journalists really need to gather real news.
   And it’s deeply ironic that this matter was settled by a recording of an encounter with Todd Barclay’s staff coming to light. That’s something that hasn’t happened yet in the matter of the secret recording Todd Barclay’s alleged to have made on the premises last year which ended up causing his downfall.
   • ianmac 4.1

     24 July 2017 at 9:15 am

     Good to revisit that Clean Green as it was up and about last week.
   • mary_a 4.2

     24 July 2017 at 2:52 pm

     Thanks for keeping this one alive CLEANGREEN (4). It needs to be aired regularly, considering the deliberate lies told about the so called “intimidation and harassment” of Barclay’s office staff, by Rachael Kelly and her cameraman.

     I have looked at the video several times and there’s nothing I can find which justifies the accusations being directed at Rachael or her cameraman. In fact she was very polite and considerate of the staff she spoke to. The staff member seemed reasonably cooperative with Rachael and didn’t come across as showing signs of stress or being intimidated. In fact the brief interview was conducted and closed quite amicably.

     Natz want media silenced. Natz finds scrutiny and truth threatening!

     Remove the odious dirtbags in September.
   • Gabby 4.3

     24 July 2017 at 5:28 pm

     Mystified as to why the Bingles’ office person isn’t named.
5. Peroxide Blonde 5

   24 July 2017 at 8:47 am

   Do you still trust in the political process?

   And how might that affect your voting in the September election?

   The issue of trust and distrust, viewed through a political lens, is one Massey University associate professor Grant Duncan thinks is worth discussing, especially in an election year.

   Grant Duncan from Massey University will speak before Willie Jackson at the “Orewa Speech” event this Saturday.
   • ianmac 5.1

     24 July 2017 at 9:25 am

     I do not really understand why people are choosing to vote for this or that Party. I know that loyalist long term supporters vote for their Party. I know of a group of voters who said in 2014 that they voted for that nice smiling Mr Key.
     Do we vote for the policy that will give us a personal advantage?
     We talk/discuss policies but is that what we vote for?
     Really?
     • Anne 5.1.1

       24 July 2017 at 9:42 am

       I do not really understand why people are choosing to vote for this or that Party.

       Well, the Brexit vote in Britain might provide an answer. It transpires about half of the voters who voted for Brexit didn’t actually have a clue what they were voting for…

       I think a similar scenario applies in NZ – and elsewhere.
       • ianmac 5.1.1.1

         24 July 2017 at 9:53 am

         Wouldn’t it be great Anne to corner a few of the loyalists leaving for example the National Party Conference, and find out why they vote as they do. I suspect that many loyalists are blind to issues but enjoy “belonging” to the club. A bit like “belonging” to a church.
         • Peroxide Blonde 5.1.1.1.1

           24 July 2017 at 10:04 am

           I empathise!
           During one period of “attention deficit” I considered, for a nano second mind you, joining ACT on that basis that they would have more expensive wine and would put Party into Political!
         • Chris 5.1.1.1.2

           24 July 2017 at 10:40 am

           It’s the same with all partys
           • ianmac 5.1.1.1.2.1

             24 July 2017 at 10:58 am

             Yes certainly all parties Chris. My question still remains though. Why would I never vote for National or Act but vote for Labour or Greens. Tinted spectacles?
             But if we could be sure what the answer is then we could steer voters “our” way.
             At the last Election National offered few policies but nit-picked the Opposition’s multiple policies, and smiled. They scraped in. Is that all that is needed?
         • JanM 5.1.1.1.3

           24 July 2017 at 3:06 pm

           I think you could be right. I have a cousin who votes Nat because (I think) her long-departed husband did so, despite the fact that she actually agrees with almost none of its policies. As Brian Talboys was told when he had beginners nerves not to worry, as long as you’re a Nat they’d vote for you if you were a dead horse.
           • ianmac 5.1.1.1.3.1

             24 July 2017 at 3:32 pm

             A few years ago a friend who was very active for Labour, asked his aged Labour Mum who she voted for.
             She said, “That nice man Mr…. ”
             “But Mum he was a National man.”
             “Oh dear.When I saw him talking on TV he looked so neat and he was wearing a very smart tie.”

             Its the tie that sells damnit!
             • gsays …

               24 July 2017 at 8:24 pm

               Similarly… my mum grew up in ann organisers household with a portrait of Mickey Joseph slightly higher than the queens.
               Labour are for the working man she always said.

               Winston did the gold card and now he has her vote for life.
               She is politically engaged at a shallow tv1 level, but it is winston for life.
               • Sara Matthews …

                 24 July 2017 at 8:36 pm

                 My father’s the same, meat worker, union rep and now a Winston voter, does my head in!!.
     • Andre 5.1.2

       24 July 2017 at 10:40 am

       In the US, negative partisanship is becoming a larger part of the decision-making.

       https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/23/15983786/trump-negative-partisanship

       Not entirely sure how that relates to NZ with MMP, but it certainly seems to affect attitudes towards the Greens.
6. Ad 6

   24 July 2017 at 10:25 am

   If anyone wants to see what an alternative governments’ vision for Auckland might be, try next Monday 31 July, 6.30pm, Genter and Twyford spell out their vision for housing and transport.

   It’s a Fabian Society event.

   Auckland University’s Owen Glenn Business School.

   http://www.fabians.org.nz/index.php?option=com_civicrm&task=civicrm/event/info&reset=1&id=244

   It is going to be very interesting to see these two together in action.
   • Sara Matthews 6.1

     24 July 2017 at 8:37 pm

     I’m a fan of Genter and Twyford, personally think they are both underrated by their peers.
7. Bill Drees 7

   24 July 2017 at 10:47 am

   https://www.facebook.com/labourrodney/posts/864130203740596

   A significant political event: Willie will not miss the bullseye(s) I suspect!!!’
8. Carolyn_nth 8

   24 July 2017 at 11:42 am

   Russell Brown has tweeted that he understands TOP has instructed Sean Plunket “to desist from publicly setting fire to the party’s brand.”
   • weka 8.1

     24 July 2017 at 11:53 am

     Rofl.

     https://twitter.com/publicaddress/status/889267031811293184
     • Carolyn_nth 8.1.1

       24 July 2017 at 12:12 pm

       Oh, the following comments!

       Once lit, the “brand” damage is pretty long-lasting.

       PS: I do not like political parties being called brands – brands are part of commodity culture, and left wing politics should be outside that.
       • weka 8.1.1.1

         24 July 2017 at 12:27 pm

         I tend to agree, but it does seem to work with TOP.
   • Cinny 8.2

     24 July 2017 at 5:15 pm

     Bahahahahahaha
     • weka 8.2.1

       24 July 2017 at 5:19 pm

       it’s been getting better and better all say. I’ll post some more in Daily Review next hour.
9. The Chairman 9

   24 July 2017 at 2:37 pm

   @ weka

   While social intelligence is a good asset to have, on its own it isn’t enough for us to get in behind someone.

   My impression of Ardern is while she is good at coming across as understanding and caring (utilizing that social intelligence) she’s more of a centrist than left, thus is comfortable with the Party’s position. Hence, is not someone within Labour progressives should advocate for.
   • Robert Guyton 9.1

     24 July 2017 at 3:46 pm

     Soggy biscuits! Soggy biscuits for sale!
10. The Chairman 10

    24 July 2017 at 2:55 pm

    @ Matthew Whitehead

    “Or, you know, we could all keep voting Green and getting what we want. It doesn’t necessarily have to be about sending a message to Labour if you get everything you actually wanted from voting Green.”

    Sending Labour a message will not only help direct them to the path we want them to take in negotiations, but also going forward for elections to come.
    • Tony Veitch (not etc) 10.1

      24 July 2017 at 4:12 pm

      Ah, the damned by faint praise brigade! The astounding subtly of RWNJs!

      As Robert so aptly said above – ‘soggy biscuits for sale!’
    • McFlock 10.2

      24 July 2017 at 4:23 pm

      Do you want the party name in government, or do you want the policies in government?

      Because if you want policies that are currently more green than labour, vote green. That’ll give support to your preferred policies, and might even “send a message” to labour.
      • Matthew Whitehead 10.2.1

        24 July 2017 at 9:04 pm

        Also, a lot of people don’t like the leaders of Labour at the moment, and don’t want them leading the government. That’s not a reason not to vote, (or even one to consider voting for the Nats) it’s a reason to consider whether you actually want Labour to be the leading Party on the left anymore.
        • McFlock 10.2.1.1

          24 July 2017 at 11:23 pm

          meh.

          What parties are leading the left, or in general, aren’t up to me.
          All I get to do is cast a vote.

          I can vote after detailed reading of policies, or based on what I think of the different leaders, or simply because I’ve always voted that way, or a combination of all of the above.
11. The Pink Postman 11

    24 July 2017 at 4:48 pm

    Rodney Hide having a bash at Turei in his column the Sunday Herald .
    What a two faced nasty turd.He simply forgot that a couple of years ago he should be made to pay that back.
    • Sara Matthews 11.1

      24 July 2017 at 8:40 pm

      Hydes a fat hypocrit and always has been.
      • In Vino 11.1.1

        24 July 2017 at 8:56 pm

        If you are going to troll here, please do us the compliment of spelling and punctuating correctly. That last one was real muppetty.
        • Sara Matthews 11.1.1.1

          24 July 2017 at 11:07 pm

          Why don’t you leave me alone for once?, sick of you picking at me, Hide and hypocrite, happy now?, get a life and leave me alone.
          • In Vino 11.1.1.1.1

            25 July 2017 at 11:51 am

            Hyde’s = Hide is.
12. Mrs Brillo 12

    24 July 2017 at 4:49 pm

    Mr Brillo and I were discussing the hirsute appeal of those perennial charmers Winston Peters and Peter Dunne. Stunning hair, looking set fair for the forthcoming election.
    How far would you get in politics without hair, I asked, and we have been scrutinising MPs’ official photos to form an opinion. Here’s the list.

    Boldly bald:
    David Bennett (N, Hamilton East)
    Matt Doocey (N, Waimakariri)
    Steven Joyce (N, list)
    Sam Lotu-Iiga (N, Maungakiekie)
    Ron Mark (NZF, list)
    Todd Muller (N, Bay of Plenty)
    Denis O’Rourke (NZF, list)
    Lindsay Tisch (N, Waikato)

    Seriously thinning:
    Stefan Browning (G, list)
    Chester Burrows (N, Whanganui)
    Te Ururoa Flavell (M, Waiariki)
    Brett Hudson (N, list)
    Jono Naylor (N, list)
    Shane Reti (N, Whangarei)
    William Sio (L, Mangere).

    The jury is out on National list member Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi, who wears a turban at all times.

    We have been generous in our description. If they can still fake it, like Murray McCully or Darroch Ball or half a dozen others, we counted them as full heads of hair.

    A few preliminary indications: It seems easier to get a National Party nomination if you are follically challenged than in any other party. It is next to impossible to get a Labour Party nomination without a good thatch on top.
    Any other observations?
    • Ad 12.1

      24 July 2017 at 5:31 pm

      Clayton Cosgrove. Ouch.

      Madame Ardern: Wow! Give it a shimmy!

      Otherwise, general rule still applies: politics is showbusiness for ugly people.
      • Mrs Brillo 12.1.1

        24 July 2017 at 5:36 pm

        Mademoiselle Ardern, I believe.
        • Ad 12.1.1.1

          24 July 2017 at 6:45 pm

          I mistook the sparkle in her 4 carat smile 🦄
          • In Vino 12.1.1.1.1

            24 July 2017 at 8:57 pm

            Such effervescent repartee!
13. Poission 13

    24 July 2017 at 5:09 pm

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaramouche

    Anthony Scaramucci was named White House communications director in July, 2017; this prompted an 8,185% increase in searches for “Scaramouch” according to Merriam-Webster.
    • McFlock 13.1

      24 July 2017 at 6:56 pm

      lol and reruns of Wayne’s World, no doubt.
    • Andre 13.2

      24 July 2017 at 7:12 pm

      The Mooch tries to put one on Obama. Doesn’t quite work out.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/barack-obama-anthony-scaramucci_us_59754ca7e4b0e79ec19a309b
14. Ad 14

    24 July 2017 at 5:29 pm

    Irish state’s aggressive pursuit of foreign direct investment is about to pay off big time with Apple’s US$15 billion back-taxes payment:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-22/ireland-seeks-custodian-for-apple-cash-as-collection-nears

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS