Open mike 24/10/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:45 am, October 24th, 2014 - 137 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Nanaia Mahuta square-1
Open mike is your post.

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

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

Step up to the mike …

137 comments on “Open mike 24/10/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Rawmadness Natshark 1
    24 October 2014 at 6:57 am

    Grannys got her knickers in a twist after practically handing National and key the election they have done a U Turn and are now attacking them.

    They have made Key look very bad with their resent opinion posts.

    What the heck is going on are our press playing games all for the mighty sales agenda.

    Who would ever have thought the press liked to play with society to sell Newspapers.

    • Paul 1.1
      24 October 2014 at 7:11 am

      If you’re referring to Armstrong’s recent articles, the too little too late by him.
      He did his job by the articles demanding Cunliffe’s resignation.
      He seems either to be a paid or compromised tool of the Tories.

      David Fisher wrote a mea culpa article before the election admitting he had taken info from Slater and was now out of the tent. He appears one of the more independent Herald reporters.

      I did notice their editorial saying Key had to answer questions about Slater. Roughan writes those often and he was Key’s hagiographer. He is a completely biased journalist. Can’t believe he’ll support anyone else other than the Tories.

      Anyway, all these articles are 3 months too late.
      We have 3 years of this appalling government to endure because the media failed to do their basic job.

      • phillip ure 1.1.1
        24 October 2014 at 7:15 am

        @ paul..

        “..We have 3 years of this appalling government to endure because the media failed to do their basic job…”

        ..in large part..yes…

      • Tracey 1.1.2
        24 October 2014 at 8:35 am

        Fisher outlined the process he undertakes for writing his articles. I wonder if everyone should copy and paste it in personal emails to John Armstrong. he’s old so he may have forgotten???

        “If I was writing a story then which in any way touched on the public’s interaction with government, I would pick up the phone and ring an official. It really was that easy.

        Receptionists would direct you to areas in departments, and staff there would know who would be best placed to fill the gaps in my knowledge. That’s what we in the media need – knowledge. We don’t need quotes, although they inevitably come with the information. We need information, unvarnished, unspun and in a form in which we can understand what it actually means.

        When I started, if I wanted to know about something, I would ring and ask. For example, if I want to know about how Kauri stumps were exported, I would ring up the equivalent of the MPI and ask how Kauri stumps get exported. I would then spend half an hour on the phone to the guy who oversaw the exporting – often the guy who was physically down at the docks – and I would be informed.”

        and later

        “We find out how the world works, and we explain it to our readers.”

    • Tracey 1.2
      24 October 2014 at 8:30 am

      It indicates to me that;

      1. Herald puts pressure on journos to write certain stories pre election; or
      2. Armstrong deliberately writes as he does for his own political purposes

      His questioning of Key, albeit gently, in recent days is in stark contrast to his pre election stance on just about everything.

      Even when reporting the Speaker’s decision that key should have answer a question he did not take the easy next step and refer to previous contradictory statements by Key. It appears even his criticism is through gritted teeth

    • Paul 1.3
      24 October 2014 at 7:29 pm

      My Granny never treated people the way the Herald does.
      Reckon it’s more like angry uncle Herald.

  2. Paul 2
    24 October 2014 at 7:04 am

    Another one of those dodgy Herald best places I the world surveys
    The ones they use to try to convince the hobbits that there’s nothing wrong with NZ and they can go back to sleep.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11347417

    Here’s the list of the top places.

    1) Switzerland
    2) Singapore
    3) China
    4) Germany
    5) Bahrain
    5) New Zealand

    Now if China, Singapore, Switzerland and Bahrain are in the top 5, what questions are being asked to make them the top 5?
    Best tax avoidance centre?
    Best way to get away with abusing civil rights?
    Best place for bankers?

    These are ( with the exception of Germany) hardly a list of countries you’d want to be compared with.

    Wonder though if seat people don’t read past the headline and just think John Key’s NZ is amazing. I also wonder who the organisation is who created this survey.
    Do they have a political agenda? We know the Herald does.

    • miravox 2.1
      24 October 2014 at 7:39 am

      You wouldn’t believe the number of expats I’ve met in Vienna who hate it here because the hairdressers, waitstaff etc don’t treat them as anything other than ordinary people. It’s hard to get cheap cleaners as well, unless you’re willing to settle for underpaid Romanians.

      How obsequious have NZers become that we’re on the list of places expats love?

      (I’d guess Germany and Switzerland on the list for big money and access to power)

    • Bob 2.2
      24 October 2014 at 9:55 am

      Yeah because Singapore and Switzerland are such terrible places get real.

    • Murray Rawshark 2.3
      24 October 2014 at 10:02 pm

      The expats will be business people. They’ll love the way they get paid well and pay very little tax, plus the fact that official doors open if they have a few bucks. I came across Kiwi expats in Latin America and 99% were disgusting creatures, almost as bad as the ugly seppo stereotype.

  3. philj 3
    24 October 2014 at 7:11 am

    The media is the message. Mainstream Media interests determine what is perceived, and how people behave. 1/3 don’t vote.

    • Paul 3.1
      24 October 2014 at 7:13 am

      We are following America’s path.
      This is not good.

      • vto 3.1.1
        24 October 2014 at 7:36 am

        Conspiring is at the very heart of human interaction. It is one of our base operating procedures.

        All politicians do it
        Spouses do it
        siblings do it
        school children do it
        careerists do it
        armies and war machines do it
        media do it
        sports teams do it
        churches do it

        tell me some person or entity which does not conspire to achieve an end …..

        Conspiracies exist all around us all the time. The biggest conspiracies are conducted by the biggest people and the biggest organisations. Who are the biggest people and the biggest organisations?

        …. eternal vigilance

      • Tracey 3.1.2
        24 October 2014 at 8:42 am

        OBSTACLES TO ETHICAL
        DECISION MAKING: RATIONALIZATIONS

        We judge ourselves by our best intentions, our noblest acts and our most virtuous habits. But others tend to judge us by our last worst act. So in making tough decisions, don’t be distracted by rationalizations.

        Here are some of the most common ones:

        If It’s Necessary, It’s Ethical

        This rationalization rests on the false assumption that necessity breeds propriety. The approach often leads to ends-justify-the-means reasoning and treating non-ethical tasks or goals as moral imperatives.

        The False Necessity Trap

        As Nietzsche put it, “Necessity is an interpretation, not a fact.” We tend to fall into the “false necessity trap” because we overestimate the cost of doing the right thing and underestimate the cost of failing to do so.

        If It’s Legal and Permissible, It’s Proper

        This substitutes legal requirements (which establish minimal standards of behavior) for personal moral judgment. This alternative does not embrace the full range of ethical obligations, especially for individuals involved in upholding the public trust. Ethical people often choose to do less than the maximally allowable, and more than the minimally acceptable.

        It’s Just Part of the Job

        Conscientious people who want to do their jobs well often fail to adequately consider the morality of their professional behavior. They tend to compartmentalize ethics into two domains: private and occupational.
        Fundamentally decent people thereby feel justified doing things at work that they know to be wrong in other contexts. They forget that everyone’s first job is to be a good person.

        It’s All for a Good Cause

        People are especially vulnerable to rationalizations when they seek to advance a noble aim. “It’s all for a good cause” is a seductive rationale that loosens interpretations of deception, concealment, conflicts of interest, favoritism and violations of established rules and procedures.

        I Was Just Doing It for You

        This is a primary justification for committing “little white lies” or withholding important information in personal or professional relationships, such as performance reviews. This rationalization pits the values of honesty and respect against the value of caring. An individual deserves the truth because he has a moral right to make decisions about his own life based on accurate information. This rationalization overestimates other people’s desire to be “protected” from the truth, when in fact most people would rather know unpleasant
        information than believe soothing falsehoods. Consider the perspective of people lied to: If they discovered the lie, would they thank you for being thoughtful or would they feel betrayed, patronized or manipulated?

        I’m Just Fighting Fire With Fire

        This is the false assumption that promise-breaking, lying and other kinds of misconduct are justified if they are routinely engaged in by those with whom you are dealing. Remember: when you fight fire with fire, you end up
        with the ashes of your own integrity.

        It Doesn’t Hurt Anyone

        Used to excuse misconduct, this rationalization falsely holds that one can violate ethical principles so long as there is no clear and immediate harm to others. It treats ethical obligations simply as factors to be considered in decision-making, rather than as ground rules. Problem areas: asking for or giving special favors to family, friends or public officials; disclosing nonpublic information to benefit others; using one’s position for personal advantage.

        Everyone’s Doing It

        This is a false, “safety in numbers” rationale fed by the tendency to uncritically treat cultural, organizational or occupational behaviors as if they were ethical norms, just because they are norms.

        It’s OK If I Don’t Gain Personally

        This justifies improper conduct done for others or for institutional purposes on the false assumption that personal gain is the only test of impropriety. A relate
        d but narrower view is that only behavior resulting in improper financial gain warrants ethical criticism.

        I’ve Got It Coming

        People who feel they are overworked or underpaid rationalize that minor “perks” — such as acceptance of favors, discounts or gratuities — are nothing more than fair compensation for services rendered. This is also used as an excuse to abuse sick time, insurance claims, overtime, personal phone calls and personal use of office supplies.

        I Can Still Be Objective

        By definition, if you’ve lost your objectivity, you can ’t see that you’ve lost your objectivity! It also underestimates the subtle ways in which gratitude, friendship and the anticipation of future favors affect judgment. Does the person providing you with the benefit believe that it will in no way affect your judgment?
        Would the person still provide the benefit if you were in no position to help?

        This is from the Josephson Institute in the USA. They are religious based and I usually shy away from such stuff. In this case their advice on “Making Ethical Decisions” is one of the best pieces I have seen. I read reasonably widely. This is one that students can easily understand. because I teach ethics in my Paper.

        • boldsirbrian 3.1.2.1
          24 October 2014 at 8:59 am

          @ Tracey 3.1.2

          Excellent.

          • Tracey 3.1.2.1.1
            24 October 2014 at 9:27 am

            its easier to say you have ethics but harder to live accordingly…

            I had fewer ethics when I was young. looking back I have regrets for some of my actions and consequences. it makes me more determined to live by my ethics than a desire to have more things or money. I am currently selling my house and have hit a snag. the number of people including surveyors friends who have told me to not reveal what I know to prospective purchasers has been scarey. my lawyer and my agent have not joined that view. I will get less for my house as a result.

            not a saint just trying to do right by myself and tjose impacted by my actions. its easier than some like to tell themselves.

            • Murray Rawshark 3.1.2.1.1.1
              24 October 2014 at 10:22 pm

              I’m a hopeless salesman. I always tell the prospective buyer what the faults are. I don’t expect other sellers to treat me like that, but I’m only responsible for my actions.

        • Draco T Bastard 3.1.2.2
          24 October 2014 at 9:15 am

          If It’s Legal and Permissible, It’s Proper

          This substitutes legal requirements (which establish minimal standards of behavior) for personal moral judgment. This alternative does not embrace the full range of ethical obligations, especially for individuals involved in upholding the public trust.

          Or, as i put it:

          Just because it’s legal, doesn’t make it right.

          A good example is Bill English’s rorting of the taxpayer to buy his house in Wellington.

          It was legal but it wasn’t right.

          • Tracey 3.1.2.2.1
            24 October 2014 at 9:29 am

            this is the mantra of slylands. hence he could never see what collins did wrong. but he knows exacyly what she did wrong and invokes the rationalisation to make him feel better.

            key promised the opposite of this one but has become the posterboy for it and that is reflected in the behaviour of those he leads and some of those who vote for him.

          • TheContrarian 3.1.2.2.2
            24 October 2014 at 7:10 pm

            “It was legal but it wasn’t right.”

            But if if it means your party wins then it is a necessary step?

            http://thestandard.org.nz/strategic-voting/#comment-913949

            • Draco T Bastard 3.1.2.2.2.1
              24 October 2014 at 10:52 pm

              In context, yes because one of the things made known is that that party will be working to change the law so that such rorts don’t happen again.

              We cannot expect those with no moral compass, such as National, Act, UF, to act morally. Legally, yes, morally, no and so the laws do need to be changed to enforce moral actions.

    • tc 3.2
      24 October 2014 at 7:39 am

      They are also joining the frogs in the pot as its obvious they are owned and lack the required objectivity, roughan, armstrong, fran, young, trevitt etc have done more than they realise to further devalue what little their currency held before the campaign.

      All it takes is one decent independant offering like a crikey and they are screwed like fairfax and ruperts papers in oz already are because unlike those 2 theres little coming from other areas such as trademe for fairfax and foxtel, fox etc for rupert to sustain an old world business not performing its intended role….tell it like it is.

      • phillip ure 3.2.1
        24 October 2014 at 7:47 am

        @ tc..

        “..All it takes is one decent independant offering like a crikey.….tell it like it is..”

        oh..!..you mean like http://whoar.co.nz/ ?

      • greywarshark 3.2.2
        24 October 2014 at 9:45 am

        tc
        Fairfax sold Trade me I thought. Now a lesser organisation than originally.

        • tc 3.2.2.1
          24 October 2014 at 11:51 am

          yes the remaining 51% finally in late 2012 but made a shed load of coin out of it to prop up the flailing print assets and relieve debt.

          Kirk’s purchase raised eyebrows but eventually proved to be a very smart decision that Fairfax made heaps from with it’s sell down over time.

          The cupboard is pretty bare, the board have virtually no media experience and serial climate denier Gina’s getting bored and itchy with her loss making play onto the share register to buy a bigger megaphone.

          • greywarshark 3.2.2.1.1
            24 October 2014 at 11:59 am

            Interesting – good to keep informed about the the newspaper players we get here. Gina getting itchy – if that woman is uncomfortable could have an effect like the Hawaiian volcano pictures on here recently.

  4. aspasia 4
    24 October 2014 at 7:32 am

    Why are the media at the LP Leadership meetings? I thought you had to be a LP member to attend? This is not a reality TV show for the benefit of smart arse commentators like Gower and Henry. Let’s have Gower going home to dinner and the meeting for those who want to commit to the future of the Party. The malign influence the commentariat have had on politics is quite enough without them also being the filter for the view Party members get of their leadership contenders.

    • phillip ure 4.1
      24 October 2014 at 7:37 am

      @ aspasia..

      ..the media are only allowed to stay for the boring/aspirational-bit..the contenders’ set-pieces..

      ..they have to leave before the members q & a..

      ..which wd be when things wd get interesting..

      ..you’d think..?

  5. Manuka - Ancient Order of Rawsharks 5
    24 October 2014 at 7:43 am

    From February this year, “Key said he regularly called Slater, … to see what he’s got on his site and mind”. This was a parliamentary matter, where Key was being questioned as to possible GCSB spying on Winston, after Key revealed Winston’s visits to Kim Dot Com.

    Slater himself confirmed that he was the source, saying, “If the prime minister said that’s the case, that’s the case.” Slater described his relationship with Key as “professional … where I ask questions and he gives me answers”. “I wouldn’t say that I’m a mate of his, I’ve never been to his house, nothing like that. I’d just say that it is what it is.” http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9723130/Looks-like-Slater-is-Keys-Peters-source

    So, which hat was it again, that Key was wearing when he spoke to Slater?

    The mad hatter is dissembling.

    • Paul 5.1
      24 October 2014 at 7:49 am

      Sadly he won’t be held to account by the msm

    • phillip ure 5.2
      24 October 2014 at 7:53 am

      @ manuka..

      .what is crucial is that any questioning of key in parliament on matters slater must include a reference to some area of prime ministerial responsibiity..

      ..that means he will have to answer..

      ..and a heads-up!..q-time next tues promises to be interesting..

      ..as it seems for the first time..key will be forced to answer ‘dirty politics’ questions..

      ..and this should give the m.s.m. much to chew on..

    • Paul 5.3
      24 October 2014 at 7:40 pm

      Are we all now allowed to use the hat excuse?
      Sorry officer, I didn’t have my driving hat on. Etc etc

    • Murray Rawshark 5.4
      24 October 2014 at 10:33 pm

      He obviously answers parliamentary questions as PM. He’s made a rod for his own back with his smartarse cuteness. Now all we need is for journalists to wield it effectively. Damn.

  6. felix 6
    24 October 2014 at 8:05 am

    Just watched the q+a labour leadership thing from last weekend. My 30 sec precis:

    Parker is a joke. He said Labour should forget about partners and aim for 50%, preferably without any change to his policies. He’s obsessed with the idea that Labour is too focused on “the vulnerable”. He’s personally very likeable but he’s in the wrong party.

    Grant also came across well personally but he speaks in platitudes. Between him and Parker I felt like I was listening to Charlie Brown’s teachers. Wha wha mwa wha wha.

    I don’t remember Little.

    Nanaia spoke clearly and directly, from her heart, and from her experience, about genuine kiwi values.

    /my 2c

    • Rawmadness Natshark 6.1
      24 October 2014 at 4:03 pm

      I have to say on performance on TV Nanaia was a clear head and shoulders above the lot of them. I do fancy Little and Nanaia as a team and hope they form up I think Littles union experience and Naniaia’s oration would be a good pairing.

      Parkers toast he makes a good sergeant but a terrible General.

      I like Ardern but teaming with Robertson put me off.

      • Colonial Rawshark 6.1.1
        24 October 2014 at 4:28 pm

        Parker makes a solid commissioned officer, IMO. Perhaps a Captain. Bad service record of shooting his superior officer in the back though.

  7. Not So Windy 7
    24 October 2014 at 8:13 am

    With yesterday’s release of Revolution by Russell Brand, the following is excellent related viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk

  9. lprent 9
    24 October 2014 at 8:30 am

    Ha. Snap, someone else picked the same image of Nanaia that I picked for the guest post.

  10. vto 10
    24 October 2014 at 8:44 am

    I would suggest that Canada is now the great joke in the middle east … getting all surprised and upset at their military being attacked. Have the Canadians forgotten they are at war?

    Idiots.

    Let us not follow the same path.

  12. boldsirbrian 12
    24 October 2014 at 9:22 am

    Essential viewing for anybody concerned about Dirty Politics.

    When we forget empathy, and are willing to take away the soul of another human being.

    What Monica Lewinsky went through, and it appears that she is still going through to some extent, is not something I would wish on anybody, including the perpetrators of Dirty Politics, such as Cameron Slater. And all of Cameron Slater’s victims.

    The story is sad. Very very sad. I had tears in my eyes.

    There are so many layers to the story. Lots of lessons, for those willing to learn.
    (To be read alongside this is Comment 3.1.2 above: Thank you Tracey)

    Monica Lewinsky – Video

    Monica Lewinsky – Transcript

    • Bob 12.1
      24 October 2014 at 10:00 am

      I never cry for stupid people.

    • Colonial Rawshark 12.2
      24 October 2014 at 4:30 pm

      Monica Lewinsky is 41. I must be getting bloody old.

    • Rawmadness Natshark 12.3
      24 October 2014 at 4:47 pm

      At the transcript article I read until the bit that said…

      “How does it feel to be America’s premier blow-job queen?”

      Fucking hell pick me an ambulance I’m leaking stuff……

      in a wet myself laughing sort of way.

      • boldsirbrian 12.3.1
        25 October 2014 at 7:08 pm

        @ rawmadness Natshark (12.3)

        Perhaps the video would have been better for you to watch. The point of it all may be more apparent. Raw words on paper allow the reader to still more easily treat her as nothing more than a “blow job queen”.

        …the whole world is still laughing after nearly a couple of decades. I can understand why suicide was a real option for her.

        When we make people nothing more than some action they have done, whether it is a crime or not, we are dehumanizing them. Nobody deserves to be dehumanized. No punishment by law in our country even imagines that as an objective.

  13. wekarawshark 13
    24 October 2014 at 9:29 am

    Great picture for OM today (very telling).

    Also saw this for the first time the other day,

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

    Very good 🙂

    I also enjoyed something Lynn yesterday about hellfire on toast 😈

  14. Chooky 14
    24 October 2014 at 10:11 am

    Environmental and Financial crisis both looming at the same time…Be Warned !

    http://rt.com/shows/keiser-report/198164-episode-670-max-keiser/

    Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert discuss the looming crisis as investors chasing yield have piled into obscure and less-liquid assets leading to sell-offs in the more liquid markets during panics as investors sell what they can. They also discuss Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac and the FHFA (Federal Housing Finance Agency) lowering bank obligations on buybacks in order to spur more subprime lending.

    In the second half, Max continues his interview with Mitch Feierstein of PlanetPonzi.com about financial markets on the precipice.

  15. felix 15
    24 October 2014 at 10:28 am

    Arms industry lobbyist and part time union boss Greg O’Connor claims the unanimous support of the Police Association – which supposedly represents serving Police Officers and staff – for arming the NZ Police.

    Of course there are plenty of cops who disagree with him, but anyhoo…

    He has made the argument that the opposition to arming the Police with Tasers has been shown to be unfounded, as the sun still comes up in the morning.

    He conveniently omits mentioning that one of the primary arguments against Tasers was that they were a step toward arming the Police with firearms, and that it in a few years he would be pushing for that as well.

    He said nah, you’re all paranoid, we only want Tasers, it’s not a slippery slope.

    He lied.

    • wekarawshark 15.1
      24 October 2014 at 10:34 am

      O’Connor’s been around for a while, must be nearing retirement surely.

      • Colonial Rawshark 15.1.1
        24 October 2014 at 4:32 pm

        New head of the Sensible Sentencing Trust. (Just a guess).

      • Rawmadness Natshark 15.1.2
        24 October 2014 at 4:54 pm

        Something just doesn’t gel with O’Connor, the venomous hatred of anything not police. he seems, well the sort of cop you just would not want to meet if you were needing them.

        Something about they way he backs them that reeks of bias and therefore no integrity. Wish people representing stuff like the police actually approached the job role with a little emphasis on being fair. If your right say it. If your wrong, admit it, fix it and move the heck on with life.

        Why does society have this mantra of I work for a company/entity my job is to boast about the good and cover up the bad at all costs even if illegal as I won’t be held responsible my entity will deal with the fall out, if caught out.

        I think this is hell and in my real life I must of been a right prick.

        • Draco T Bastard 15.1.2.1
          24 October 2014 at 5:00 pm

          Why does society have this mantra of I work for a company/entity my job is to boast about the good and cover up the bad at all costs even if illegal as I won’t be held responsible my entity will deal with the fall out, if caught out.

          Because these days if you don’t love the company you don’t get the job. It’s just another way that the corporatisation of society is undermining it.

          • TheContrarian 15.1.2.1.1
            24 October 2014 at 7:14 pm

            “Because these days if you don’t love the company you don’t get the job.”

            Because there was a day when you could walk into a job interview and say “I have absolutely no interest in/no care in /dislike this company” and expect them to hire you?

            • Puddleglum 15.1.2.1.1.1
              24 October 2014 at 8:00 pm

              Yes there was such a day. Not in terms of making such statements, of course, but in realising that no such statements (in either a positive or negative direction) were thought necessary.

              There was a time when an employer hiring factory workers, for example, would never have been stupid enough to believe that the work they were offering was the object of devoted passion for the prospective employee or that they were buying anything other than someone’s labour (as opposed to their love for the company and its purpose).

              No-one pretended that it was anything more than an exchange born of mutual necessity.

              Call me old fashioned if you like but there was more honesty that it was just labour that was being requested and just labour that was being offered – not employees’ ‘hearts and minds’.

              Those might have come later but, if they did, it would have had nothing to do with the initial employment or the requirements of the job.

              • TheContrarian …
                24 October 2014 at 8:06 pm

                Call me old fashioned but if I was presented with two prospective employees – one who expressed exuberance for the role and an interest in the company and one who didn’t care either way I know which way I’d swing.

                I don’t think that this is “Because these days…” but because always.

                • vto …
                  24 October 2014 at 8:08 pm

                  I think you missed pulldeglums point

                • Puddleglum …
                  24 October 2014 at 8:45 pm

                  As vto said, I think you missed my point.

                  Declarations about the company – either way – were not part of any interview.

                  All that.the expectation of exuberance towards companies has succeeded in doing is making people better liars – to themselves as well as to their prospective employers, perhaps.

                  It’s best in interviews to stick to job competencies and personal work ethics rather than seek pledges of allegiance to tasks that are no sane person’s idea of an optimal use of life or to companies that, in all honesty and in the vast majority of cases, only appeal to the interviewee because they are offering a job.

              • phillip ure …
                24 October 2014 at 8:16 pm

                @ puddleglum..

                ..+ 1..

                ..corporate-love bullshit…

                ..and the wankers who believe/live it..

                ..but even worse..expect/demand others do..

            • Draco T Bastard 15.1.2.1.1.2
              24 October 2014 at 10:21 pm

              No, because it used to be that you could go into an interview and say I can do this job and I can do it bloody well and you’d be hired with no expectation that you owed the employer fealty. Nowadays, you need to offer fealty* to get the job.

              * You may not be getting down on your knees, kissing rings and taking oaths but that is, essentially, what you are doing when you profess love of the company to get a job. You saying that what you expect is you saying that you’re all for the re-introduction of feudalism that National and the free-marketeers have been working on.

              • TheContrarian …
                24 October 2014 at 11:02 pm

                I think you (and Puddlegum) have missed the point.

                “because it used to be that you could go into an interview and say I can do this job and I can do it bloody well and you’d be hired with no expectation that you owed the employer fealty. ”

                Sure and whatever. But if I owned a factory, making tables for example. And I made good tables that people liked, were creative and something that sold well. And one guy said “I can do this job and I can do it bloody well” but expressed no interest in the actual brand I was trying to foster and another guy, with the same skill set, said “I can do this job and I can do it bloody well – plus I have a real interest in what you are doing and want to be a part of this” I know who’d I’d hire.

                This is not a “Because these days…” situation.

                Don’t be daft. It’s not fealty. If I owned an entrepreneurship I would want to be surrounded by people that shared my vision.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  25 October 2014 at 3:01 am

                  No, you’re the one missing the point.

                  If I’m good at something chances are I’m interested in it and enjoy doing it. But that’s not what companies are after – they’re after loyalty to and love of the company first and foremost. In a word, fealty.

            • Murray Rawshark 15.1.2.1.1.3
              24 October 2014 at 11:06 pm

              There was such a day. Mid 1970s. If you’d started singing the company song, the prospective employer probably would have taken your temperature.

              In another amazing fact, I got the job I’ve got now while saying that I wasn’t particularly interested in the position, but I’d take it until something better came up. I accept that may not be common, but it happened.

        • McFlock 15.1.2.2
          24 October 2014 at 5:15 pm

          I think this is hell and in my real life I must of been a right prick.

          Hell is other people (who are jerks).

          I recall several years ago when I was visiting aus, the state I was in had a similar issue with their police association, only the rep was even worse than gunner o’conner. The debate at the time was taser safety/deaths, and the aus PA rep actually said something along the lines of “yeah, but a lot of them would have died anyway”. It’s a sad day when public advocates are that disconnected from the more nuanced aspects of communication….

        • felix 15.1.2.3
          24 October 2014 at 5:54 pm

          “he seems, well the sort of cop you just would not want to meet if you were needing them.”

          Former undercover operative, working drugs. I doubt very much he’s ever been the cop anyone needed.

          • phillip ure 15.1.2.3.1
            24 October 2014 at 6:02 pm

            ..if greg o’connor told me the time..

            ..i’d double-check..

            ..he is perhaps the most blatant spin-merchant we have..

            ..and yes..he seems to have been spinning the same furrowed-brow/worry-wart/panic!/panic! bullshit since forever..

  16. Chooky 16
    24 October 2014 at 10:36 am

    under-30s are left behind and the pauperization of workers through inflation

    http://rt.com/shows/keiser-report/197544-episode-max-keiser/

  17. Pat O'Dea 17
    24 October 2014 at 10:43 am

    ‘

    https://aucklandcoalaction.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/acat-shirt-emblem-may23_page_1.jpeg#

    Walk The Talk at Mangatangi.

    Pacific Islanders blockade Aussie coal port

    As desperate Pacific Islanders trying to save their nations from being destroyed by climate change battle Australian coal ships,

    Stand With the Pacific Climate Warriors

    Be at Mangatangi this Labour Weekend Monday at 2pm to protest Fonterra’s planned new coal mine development.

    Auckland Coal Action with the support of Mana and Green Party activists and local residents and Iwi have been fighting a two year battle against Fonterra’s plans to develop a new coal mine just south of Auckland.

    Despite getting their resource consents to proceed 12 months ago, Fonterra in the face of stiff opposition and falling coal prices have not turned a single sod of earth on the site of their proposed mine. This has put them at least 25 months behind their own publicly announced schedule. Last month Fonterra spokesperson Stephanie Haliwell told a meeting of locals that Fonterra “may defer development of the mine.”

    ‘Make The Deferment Permanent’ protest rally

    For the details and times of how to get to the Auckland Coal Action protest at the mine site this holiday Monday see HERE

  18. fambo 18
    24 October 2014 at 11:29 am

    Tea Break Petition

    Don’t know if this subject has been covered yet but regarding the petition to save tea breaks going round, I won’t be signing it for the following reasons (even though they shouldn’t be lost)

    1/ Loosing the legal right to tea breaks is only one part of a much bigger attack on workers’ rights. If the government removes this part of the law changes only, they will have achieved a small victory (which will make National look like it is listening to workers) when in fact they have lost a lot more protections anyway that are even more important.

    2/ Maybe a few years without a tea break will encourage New Zealand employees who voted for National at the last election to ponder the wisdom of their decision.

    • Rawmadness Natshark 18.1
      24 October 2014 at 5:06 pm

      The word is flexibility, and on flexibility it works both ways doesn’t it. So when I am accepted for a job I can negotiate my breaks with my employer. I might find working 9 hours a day but taking longer breaks a good thing and negotiate for it.

      The incentive is the better your employable skill set the better your bargaining power to negotiate a better employment contract. An incentive to work hard and better your valuable skills.

      Having looked at the legislation I actually feel empowered, I think it’s a bloody good amendment and the evening of the rights for employers to walk away from Negotiations eases the hatred they must have towards collective agreement bargaining which forces them to negotiate where the collective has the right to walk away currently.

      I think the removal of breaks is scaremongering, and the one clause that can be used by an employer to remove breaks, is overruled by the good faith requirement. IE an employer had better have a bloody good reason to give you no break and not compensate you for it either or face a employment tribunal that are happy to reprimand bad employers as well as employee’s from my experience. Having dealt with the employment courts and mediation I found them very fair and unbiased in Hamilton.

  19. marty mars 19
    24 October 2014 at 12:30 pm

    Māori Television and Hone

    I had already been invited by Native Affairs to feature in the show alongside other ex-MPs, Tau Henare and Shane Jones (see emails below), but when Maxwell found out he called in the Native Affairs team and told them point-blank that I would not be allowed on the show. No problems with Henare, no problem with Jones, but no way for Harawira.

    http://mananews.co.nz/wp/?p=208

    Some funny (not ha ha) games going on. Meanwhile the fight for equality goes on, in or out of Parliament, for Hone and the Mana Movement.

    • blue leopard 19.1
      24 October 2014 at 12:38 pm

      Thanks for that Marty Mars

      This is how the right-wing win; by blocking any informed and/or opposing views from reaching the public.

      What an utterly disgraceful pack of weak-minded boors the right-wing are.

      • wekarawshark 19.1.1
        24 October 2014 at 2:42 pm

        There’s a whole bunch of funny stuff going on with MT at the moment apparently (people leaving/restructuring etc). Looks like a hatchet job across the board.

        • Once Was Tim 19.1.1.1
          24 October 2014 at 5:40 pm

          “There’s a whole bunch of funny stuff going on with MT at the moment …”

          Indeed there is – just as there is at TVNZ with proposals to “outsource”.
          Just as there are underhand mechanisms at play in all the privatisations, we need a progressive government that isn’t afraid to use those same mechanisms to re-nationalise them except I doubt we’ll get one with the balls to do so. (An example – those power company sales on little “buy now, pay later” schemes. How about re-nationalise now – compensate later!) Sauce for goose …. – send a fucking message and fuck all those excuses the neo-libs offer (such as it’ll kill foreign investment, etc.).

          THe Natz Are playing silly buggers with MT, AND TVNZ, AND RNZ.
          Actually the same sort of shit is going on elsewhere as well – such as at Auntie BBC, and before too long ABC.
          Right wing conservative gubbamints rub a few ideas together across borders (with the aid of overpaid spin doctors like Crosby Textor). It’s WHY, when there is eventually a change of government, their dandy little schemes have to be dismantled in a way that they don’t actually profit from them – better still, in a way that they’re actually penalised for what is effectively theft.

    • Chooky 19.2
      24 October 2014 at 2:00 pm

      @ Marty Mars

      imo John Key has always felt threatened by Hone Harawira

      …possibly because Harawira is real Tangata Whenua…and he is as forthright and straight as Key is slippery

      (Henare, Jones and Maxwell are Key Nact boys)

      …also Key represents different values from Harawira…ie Key is a recent arrival, is capitalist, monetarist and internationalist …and Mana /Int is the antithesis

      …this is also the reason why Key and Nact want to blunt and dismantle Maori TV ….because it is the REAL VOICE and speaks directly to the people of this land who have lived here for generations and unlike most other msm lackey journalism in New Zealand …it asks the hard questions

      (….I also think this is a multi-pronged attack on NZ socially inclusive values and the Left and NZ tradtions…just look at Hootons (and Parkers) attacks on the colour Red of Labour …and Shearer’s and Hooton’s talk of the need for rebranding Labour…I wonder what plans Key and Nact have for New Zealand?)

      • blue leopard 19.2.1
        24 October 2014 at 2:22 pm

        +1 Chooky well said.

        Key & Harawira are very diametrically opposed!

        Key’s a sell out & Harawira not

        So true about the Natsies not wanting the public exposed to real voices.

        I’ll bet that is because real voices have a way of undoing all the ‘good work’ the Nasties have done on muddling peoples’ thinking processes and values.

        • Undecided 19.2.1.1
          24 October 2014 at 2:25 pm

          Hone Harawiras not a sell out…so we’ll forget all about KDC then shall we?

          KDC should have listened to Russel Norman and Hone should have listened to his wife amd rejected KDCs offer.

          • blue leopard 19.2.1.1.1
            24 October 2014 at 2:37 pm

            Agreeing to additional funding is not selling out.
            It is what you do in order to get that agreement that is what decides whether one is selling out or not.

            • Undecided 19.2.1.1.1.1
              24 October 2014 at 2:40 pm

              His turn around of dope was telling. He sold out, paid the price and helped take the left bloc down with him.

              • blue leopard …
                24 October 2014 at 3:23 pm

                I was wondering about that one- unsure how much he turned around on it – it was said at the time that Mana always had the stance of supporting it for medical use but it did seem like a bit of a shift from Hone.

                I got the impression from that email that Hone was still pretty strong on where he thought the priorities of IMP should be, and didn’t appear to be afraid to assert it.

                From my perspective there was a shift, but nothing like:

                ‘We are not considering going to war’ >> ‘We are considering going to war’

                Selling off state owned assets to people who already have enough

                ‘I am PM’ >> ‘No I am not’

                Growing up with assistance from the state >> representing political views that remove such for others.

                Being PM of NZ >> allowing TPP to continue without disclosure to the public

                Sometimes a PM >>Sometimes an office>>not actually taking responsibility

                …that sort of thing

                • wekarawshark …
                  24 October 2014 at 3:45 pm

                  My problem with the ‘Harawira sold out on the cannabis policy’ thing is that it presumes that Harawira does or should rule Mana and the IMP. He doesn’t and shouldn’t. Mana makes Mana policy, ditto IMP.

                  • marty mars …
                    24 October 2014 at 3:58 pm

                    Exactly correct weta. This meme that Hone was Mana is incorrect and spin from the right to discredit both Hone and Mana. The actions of the relevant people after IMP was announced shows the total fallacy of the meme.

                    • Clean_power …
                      25 October 2014 at 7:13 pm

                      Really? For 99.99% of the population Hone was (and is) the Mana Party.
                      His selling out to Kim DotCom was a blunder big enough to galvanise the opposition and allow Kelvin to win.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      25 October 2014 at 7:16 pm

                      Hone partnered with the Internet Party and Laila Harre. And deserves to be in Parliament far more than ACT or Hairdo does.

                    • wekarawshark …
                      25 October 2014 at 8:30 pm

                      “For 99.99% of the population Hone was (and is) the Mana Party.”

                      How do you explain the 1.42% of voters who gave their party vote to IMP?

                      “His selling out to Kim DotCom was a blunder big enough to galvanise the opposition and allow Kelvin to win.”

                      Uppity bloody maori, how dare he form an alliance with someone with filthy lucre and power and influence beyond Hone’s sphere?!

                      I’m guessing you are a righty, but for the rest of us, TTT was a demonstration of just how far the powerholders in NZ will go to stop suppress the disenfranchised. It also shows how dangerous they thought the IMP are. Big ups to Mana and IP for making that bringing those to light.

                    • blue leopard …
                      25 October 2014 at 10:13 pm

                      That is a very good point, Weka, so true.

                  • blue leopard …
                    25 October 2014 at 12:37 pm

                    @ Weka,

                    I was focussing on only a very narrow aspect of the matter.

                    I was saying that even if Hone had made a personal compromise over that issue – having to support a policy that he wasn’t that fussed on – (and I had perceived there was a level of compromise) it is not actually a sell-out in the normal sense of the word when you take the matter that the issue it is over into account.

                    For starters, it is more of a compromise than a complete about-turn and, more importantly, it is not ‘selling out’ the interests of the NZ public – rather, it is likely to provide improvements for them.

                    I didn’t know that much about the policy making process of those parties, nor knew whether the Mana policy had shifted or not. I was simply focusing on one aspect of the issue.

                    You and Draco (@4.55pm below), however, made better and more informed points than I. 🙂

                    • wekarawshark …
                      25 October 2014 at 1:07 pm

                      “I was saying that even if Hone had made a personal compromise over that issue – having to support a policy that he wasn’t that fussed on – (and I had perceived there was a level of compromise) it is not actually a sell-out in the normal sense of the word when you take the matter that the issue it is over into account.”

                      Yeah that’s pretty much what I think too. Individual politicians compromise their personal views on issues all the time (because the party sets policy not the individual). It’s obvious that Harawira’s personal views are different than what the IMP ended up with as policy but as you point out this isn’t a sell out by Harawira.

                      I’m really sick of the whole Harawira and IMP beat up because there is so much hypocricy and self-serving twisting in the arguments made against them.

                    • blue leopard …
                      25 October 2014 at 1:11 pm

                      “I’m really sick of the whole Harawira and IMP beat up because there is so much hypocracy and self-serving twisting in the arguments made against them.”

                      Yeah same here +100, and it is a ‘logic’ (read ‘anti-logic’) that appears to have taken over a rather large chunk of the population.

                      edit: Its that ‘witch-burning mentality’, isn’t it?

              • marty mars …
                24 October 2014 at 3:53 pm

                Rubbish undecided. He didn’t sell out and he didn’t help take the left bloc down.

              • phillip ure …
                24 October 2014 at 3:56 pm

                @ undecided..

                ..well..you run off with todays’ orifice-pluck-award for that one..

                ..the truth is the party members delivered that policy to harawira..

                ..and (ahem..!)..i can take some small (dis?)credit for that..

                ..in that i was at a mana executive meeting..(as a party-member/guest with no speaking rights..)

                ..where they were deciding which policies to take to the agm..

                ..and sitting there listening..it became clear that the intention was to take no policy on cannabis to the agm..

                ..as each person in turn made that argument..

                ..i then broke protocol and stood and spoke for the case for medical marijuana..

                ..and i must have made the case ok..’cos it was then decided to have a medical marijuana policy..

                (..of course then it was argued/confirmed @ the agm..by the full party..)

                ..so no..harawira did not suddenly seize a bong…and ‘see the light’..

                ..and this is hardly a radical-policy..

                ..as recent polling showed 87% of nz’ers wanted an end to marijuana prohibition..

                ..they only differed on what form that ending should take..

                ..running the gamut from med-pot to full-legalisation..

                ..and medical marijuana is the softest/easiest of those options..

                (..so you could surmise..wd be supported by that 87%..eh..?..)

                ..so currently we have a prohibition policy..that is actually supported by only 13% of nz’ers..

                ..how fucken insane is that..?

                ..(and glad to clarify all that for you..eh..?..now you know..eh..?..so no need for you to repeat those lies about/against harawira again..eh..?)

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  24 October 2014 at 4:57 pm

                  ..so currently we have a prohibition policy..that is actually supported by only 13% of nz’ers..

                  Which is why we need policies to be decided by referenda.

                  • phillip ure …
                    24 October 2014 at 5:16 pm

                    @ draco..

                    ..yes..to a certain degree..

                    ..and definitely in the pot-case..

                    ..but if we had binding referenda..

                    ..we wd return to capital punishment..

                    ..that is the big ‘but!’ with/against that idea..

                    ..how often the majority are outright wrong..

                    ..and are so easily manipulated/whipped-up into frenzies of self-rightousness..

                    ..(c.f…the history of pot-prohibition propaganda/lies..)

                    ..and liable to pass binding referenda while in that semi-deranged condition..

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      24 October 2014 at 6:46 pm

                      we wd return to capital punishment..

                      I don’t think we would. I haven’t seen the numbers for awhile but I’m pretty sure that bringing back capital punishment is still a minority position.

                      ..that is the big ‘but!’ with/against that idea..

                      ..how often the majority are outright wrong..

                      And they’ll continue to be wrong as long as they don’t have to wear the responsibility. Instead, it’s all the government’s fault.

                      ..and are so easily manipulated/whipped-up into frenzies of self-rightousness..

                      Yep, that can happen to which is why I suggest legislation that ensures that policies conform to the known facts which could see the end of such manipulation.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                24 October 2014 at 4:55 pm

                He didn’t change his mind on marijuana as he still opposed it. Mana, as it should be, had a different policy than Hone’s individual preference and that policy included medical use. Hone supported the Mana Party’s policy as he is bound to do as leader.

                The Internet Party had a different policy again which included immediate legislation to allow medical use and the eventual legalisation of marijuana for personal use and sale.

                • marty mars …
                  24 October 2014 at 5:22 pm

                  Good explanation there Draco – thank you

                • wekarawshark …
                  25 October 2014 at 2:47 pm

                  Perhaps the people who think that Harawira sold out are the same ones that don’t understand how 3 leftwing parties could work together to form and run a government. At the moment the model we have is a FPP hybrid, where you have a relatively big party with a few very small party addons who can be controlled and subsumed simply because of the numbers.

                  I have to wonder if a big part of the challenge for the left isn’t just Labour’s woes, but the fact that we have no experience yet of true a true MMP govt where parties have figured out how to work together across differing policies and sustained that over time. Hence all the MSM bullshit about what will Labour and the GP do because they don’t agree on everything, which completely misses the point that in order for better representation we need diverse people who can co-operate and compromise rather than everyone thinking the same (which just marginalises the margins).

                  • blue leopard …
                    25 October 2014 at 10:14 pm

                    @ Weka,

                    Your comment would be a good post. It is a matter worthy of discussion (and awareness raising).

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      25 October 2014 at 10:53 pm

                      Yep. And further fine tune the framing to communicate messages of meaning to left wing supporters.

                      Eg what did Harawira see in Dotcom? Harawira understood how Dotcom had been unfairly persecuted by NZ authorities for political reasons.

                      Harawira could also see that in contrast, Dotcom had been treated fairly and given a chance by his own government to turn his own life around, after he had been convicted by a court of law, as a youth. And could now contribute to NZ in ways that he would never have been able to otherwise.

      • Undecided 19.2.2
        24 October 2014 at 2:27 pm

        I suspect that the person John Key felt most threatened by was the guy they offered the job to so they could take him out of the picture

      • Draco T Bastard 19.2.3
        24 October 2014 at 4:45 pm

        imo John Key has always felt threatened by Hone Harawira

        Not just John Key but the entire establishment. That’s why Labour and NZF were so keen to see the back of him.

    • ianmac 19.3
      24 October 2014 at 3:37 pm

      Maxwell was on Russel Brown’s Media/Maori TV this week. He was quite comfortable with just a “few organisational changes.” Did not mention the loss of the two top journalists nor the interference in Hone’s invitation to front on Native Affairs. The same bland Key/Joyce approach to serious changes.

    • Murray Rawshark 19.4
      24 October 2014 at 11:22 pm

      Hone should turn up on the night with half of Mana. If it were physically possible, I’d go with them. It’s a barbecue in the grounds of AUT, so its basically a public place and hard to keep people out of.

  20. marty mars 20
    24 October 2014 at 4:06 pm

    This ones for you Phillip Ure

    http://inhabitat.com/study-reveals-roman-gladiators-were-vegetarian-athletes/

    Sorry – not sure if they were vegans 🙂

  21. dpalenski 21
    24 October 2014 at 5:33 pm

    G20 Rap where’s my Irony Block?

  22. Zolan 22
    24 October 2014 at 7:30 pm

    So, the flag’s back on the agenda.

    Ignore for now the obvious issues about this govt’s motives, the odds of success, and whether in fact we even deserve a new flag.

    I like designing things, and made these designs a while ago.

    If the occasion arises, I will probably submit one or more of them.
    But I don’t have any idea what others think of them, or the way I present them. Some free and frank criticism is welcome.

    (I’d have posted on Weekend Social if not for the inevitably political aspects)

    • Anne 22.1
      24 October 2014 at 8:11 pm

      @ Zolan
      I like them all but especially ‘Links’ because it is so original. But If we must have a new flag (nobody has come up with a good reason why imo) then I would go for ‘Te Punga’ because it’s reminiscent of the current flag.

    • greywarshark 22.2
      24 October 2014 at 8:50 pm

      @ Zolan
      Very nice. I like Link but not in black and white. Perhaps green and white or mid-dark blue and white.

      Tika is good. The others are too close to what we have and I prefer something original and different to now and from what others have.

      But I still like Red white and black done in short squares. White with green koru in the centre. That brings in the Maori aspect and our environment which is so important to us.

    • ankerawshark 22.3
      24 October 2014 at 9:38 pm

      Fushion ++

  23. Clemgeopin 23
    24 October 2014 at 8:54 pm

    Two points:
    1. The time to change our flag, if at all desired by the majority in a referendum, would be if and when we decide to break away from UK and become an independent republic. Waste of time and money and unnecessary distraction now all for the sake of the ego and a legacy stunt by Key.

    2. None of your flags inspire me with a feel proud or happy feeling. I think you need to design a few more, keeping in mind the ease for anyone, including a primary age child being able to draw it comfortably. It needs to be simple, meaningful, make one feel patriotic and proud, stand out among a flutter of flags and be aesthetically pleasing.

  24. vto 24
    24 October 2014 at 8:56 pm

    if I were a betting manwoman I would bet that the isis confrontation is most likely since nagasaki for a nuclear detonation

  25. Colonial Rawshark 25
    24 October 2014 at 9:03 pm

    I would give that “honour” to Eastern Ukraine. ISIS really is <10K guys running around being utter dicks.

    That a 200K (plus) strong Iraqi force, in which the US has invested tens of billions of dollars, cannot deal to them leaves much to reflect upon.

    First up, that ISIS can only survive because Sunni communities in Northern Iraq when deciding between who to support, the radical militant killers ISIS and the government in Baghdad, have decided ISIS is better.

    • Murray Rawshark 25.1
      25 October 2014 at 12:03 am

      “That a 200K (plus) strong Iraqi force, in which the US has invested tens of billions of dollars, cannot deal to them leaves much to reflect upon.”

      It probably means that they’re as capable as the seppo military would be without all their technological, intelligence, and logistic advantages. The Iraqi forces vs ISIL is on much more of a level playing field than anything the seppos have fought on for quite a while.

  26. vto 26
    24 October 2014 at 9:12 pm

    a nuclear detonation by the west

    • Colonial Rawshark 26.1
      24 October 2014 at 10:05 pm

      Blame it on Pakistani militants or Islamists from Chechnya. Latter is good because you get to accuse Russia of being sloppy with its arsenal.

      And only needs to be a small yield warhead to make the PR point. Less than 5kT.