Open mike 25/01/2021

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 25th, 2021 - 103 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 …

103 comments on “Open mike 25/01/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Sanctuary 1
    25 January 2021 at 7:44 am

    The media was again incredibly frustrating at the 4pm covid update yesterday, and in this mornings Herald.

    Having Audrey Young doing a grumpy old woman routine asking the same gotcha question a million times ("why are we not told these business now?", and the switcheroo "why were this businesses blindsided by releasing their information before informing them?") was bad enough but her personal annoyance has become the subject of her piece this morning in the paper, where for some vague reason the PM needs to be involved to rev up the MOH over some quibble that Audrey doesn't like.

    What is frustrating is ONE WHOLE YEAR after the COVID pandemic began the main media companies are STILL treating the pandemic as primarily a POLITICAL story, using courtier journalists who were excoriated by the public for their addiction to the gotcha dialogue of banter politics and viewing everything through the lens of horse race political analysis. Why was Audrey Young there? Why has the NZ Herald still not got a health journalist to cover this story?

    The media operate with an insular and defensive arrogance that cannot accept criticism. indeed, they interpret criticism only as proof of their own infallibility.

    The MSM seems to have learnt nothing from the blow covid dealt to their reputation last year.

    • Incognito 1.1
      25 January 2021 at 8:42 am

      I assume you’re referring to this:

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/audrey-young-where-is-jacinda-arderns-collectivism-when-it-is-needed-for-covid-19/EL5P6LGK4G5DHKPNFBOQCSFZ4Q/ [paywalled]

      Can you please add the link yourself from now on, thanks?

    • AB 1.2
      25 January 2021 at 10:11 am

      "The MSM seems to have learnt nothing from the blow covid dealt to their reputation last year."

      They are incapable of reforming themselves. When public discourse has been emptied of any real debate due to a the broader Nat-Lab neoliberal consensus – all that is left is courtier-like gossip, squabbling over trivialities, playing favourites, tribal allegiance and settling scores from past grievances.

      • Anne 1.2.1
        25 January 2021 at 10:36 am

        There is one word to describe the MSM's attitude – elitism.

        They really do believe they are a cut above the public. I know because many years ago I worked in broadcasting. The well used phrase to describe the public then was "the peasants".

    • tc 1.3
      25 January 2021 at 2:28 pm

      Tawdrey Young hacks away at the govt on behalf of the national party as per usual.

      Granny's been consistently favouring the political aspect over the health/public safety angle from day 1.

    • Psycho Milt 1.4
      25 January 2021 at 5:12 pm

      The people staffing the businesses involved would have known they'd been on-site at the same time as this person via the app if they were scanning on entry like they're supposed to. If Audrey wants someone to blame for them not knowing about it, start there.

  2. gsays 2
    25 January 2021 at 7:54 am

    I posted this link on lprent's post on frog hoping. I thought I would put it here too.

    Mark Cohen in a series of korero concerning regenerative ag and our relationship (or lack thereof) with nature.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1jzWwbwNOI

    40 minutes well spent, especially those of us in the lower Te Ika a Maui.

    Happy holiday.

  3. Pat 3
    25 January 2021 at 7:56 am

    "The biggest economic transformation since the 1980s is coming – and many of us don’t even know it."

    Rather, it should be, but time will tell if they have the vision (and will) to implement it.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/124001781/the-change-thatll-make-rogernomics-look-like-a-trial-period

    • weka 3.1
      25 January 2021 at 8:53 am

      just having a read, but jfc way to go with the negative framing. Rogernomics wrecked NZ and we still haven't recovered. Not the best introduction to fast radical change needed for the climate/ecological emergencies.

      • Pat 3.1.1
        25 January 2021 at 9:04 am

        jfc???

        and ..

        "This time, Carr and his fellow commissioners (and the governments that receive their advice) will need to succeed where leaders of the 1980s failed, by transforming the country without the mass pain and job losses that accompanied Rogernomics."

        • arkie 3.1.1.1
          25 January 2021 at 9:07 am

          Jesus F'ing Christ

          • Pat 3.1.1.1.1
            25 January 2021 at 9:09 am

            Ah..ic…so many acronyms its hard to keep up

            • weka 3.1.1.1.1.1
              25 January 2021 at 9:24 am

              Funnily enough I misunderstood

              jfc???

              and ..

              to mean you were challenging my objection to the article, not that you didn't understand what jfc meant.

        • weka 3.1.1.2
          25 January 2021 at 9:18 am

          if they want people to get on board, telling them it's going to be worse than Rogernomics is a really, really bad thing to do. Yes, there are good things in the piece, but the overall framing, the stuff that stressed people will process at the gut level, is telling us that it's going to be bad, that there will be losers. Some people like myself will respond with anger, others will simply just switch off. People already feeling despair will have to put effort into not despairing more and some won't want to or be able to. People who know climate action is important but don't have that active in their lives yet will be less like to engage and make the changes needed.

          Putting in counterbalances to all that helps mitigate it, but it's still a shit framing.

          Comparisons with Rogernomics could have been done without that framing and in ways that help us learn from the mistakes of the past.

          • Pat 3.1.1.2.1
            25 January 2021 at 9:21 am

            Or we can carry on pretending that nothing really has to change

            • weka 3.1.1.2.1.1
              25 January 2021 at 9:25 am

              you can keep on with your binary thinking Pat. It's pretty clear that I'm not arguing for head in the sand at all.

              • Pat …
                25 January 2021 at 9:35 am

                Using the example of Rogernomics as a yardstick for the level of change required is logical in the NZ context as there is nothing else within living memory to use as a comparison….whatever anyone thinks of those reforms there is no doubt it was visionary, radical and implemented at pace…all elements that are required now.

                Binary?…..meh

                And I may add that not everyone shares your apparent abhorrence of the term, as subsequent election results have shown.

                • weka …
                  25 January 2021 at 9:43 am

                  do you know what I mean when I say framing?

                  I already said that there's no problem with comparing with Rogernomics, it's about how it's done.

                  Logic is necessary but not sufficient to get people on board.

                  Rogernomics as visionary… meh. If people experience Rogernomics as harmful, that's what they will take into this framing.

                  • Pat …
                    25 January 2021 at 10:10 am

                    Yes weka, I know what framing means…do you know what yardstick means?

                    However people experienced Rogernomics they will know they have done it before and can do it again….the greatest fear is the fear of the unknown.

                    visionary

                    adjective

                    UK /ˈvɪʒ.ən.ri/ US /ˈvɪʒ.er.i/

                    visionary adjective (ABLE TO IMAGINE THE FUTURE)

                    with the ability to imagine how a country, society, industry, etc. will develop in the future:

                    • Descendant Of Smith …
                      25 January 2021 at 11:59 am

                      I never ever saw Rogernomics as visionary but more a return to the laissez-faire economics of our past. Indeed we are seeing exactly the same results (increased inequality, slum landlords, churches profiting off the poor) that we saw previously under it's strictures.

                      Visionary was the abandonment of it for a more collective, caring society with concepts like a fair days work for a fair days pay, where education and public transport was valued as a public good, where utilities were run by the state and not for extracting profit, where benefit rates were set to enable people to be part of society.

                      Rogernomics was simply a tried and true recipe for capitalism to work with minimal fettering.

                      https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/laissezfaire.asp#:~:text=The%20driving%20principle%20behind%20laissez,part%20of%20free%20market%20capitalism.

                    • solkta …
                      25 January 2021 at 12:11 pm

                      I wish we could dispense with calling it Rogernomics like it was something unique. Rogernomics, Thatcherism, Reganism, same shit different country.

                    • Pat …
                      25 January 2021 at 12:19 pm

                      @ Solkta

                      Unfortunately that is what it is widely defined as in NZ….and it serves as shorthand for a complexity that most over a certain age understand.

                    • weka …
                      25 January 2021 at 1:19 pm

                      large numbers of people don't want to 'do it again', and tying something they really don't want to experience to climate action is not going to help them to change. It's more likely they will switch off or resist.

                      In case it's not clear, many, many people in NZ have had their quality of life seriously negatively impacted by Rogernomics. Why on earth would they want to do that again? On top of what is already being experienced.

                    • Pat …
                      25 January 2021 at 1:25 pm

                      Why?…to do it better.

                      Those same people you refer too are likely the same people who have been calling for the reversal of Rogernomics since its implementation….are you telling them they must continue to rely on incrementalism?….thats what weve had since the 80's.

                      Carr is announcing that incrementalism needs to be over….so now the opportunity is there to redo Rogernomics….we can take that opportunity or not.

                    • Sacha …
                      25 January 2021 at 2:51 pm

                      Opportnuity to un-do rogernomics would be more persuasive.

                    • weka …
                      25 January 2021 at 2:59 pm

                      spot on Sacha.

                    • Foreign waka …
                      25 January 2021 at 9:37 pm

                      Not everybody in NZ will look at this with an academic mind analysing the probabilities of getting out of the next cycle of economic renewal (which incidentally I would say it is) alive, refreshed and nothing lost but so much gained.

                      There is a lot of transition required before anything applicable is sustainable and livable. Mind you, some would argue that the earth can do without people very nicely. This interim time will be difficult as the current economic model does work on a winner takes all platform.

                      UBI would be a solution, but it takes so much courage to tax those multinationals and those who amass the resources right now, I really cannot see this cotton wool brigade doing anything at all. And I may add I have been through the Rogernomic years and seen a lot of carnage. People seem to forget Enron etc… those who have pilfered the resources paid for by taxpayers. Oops, sounds familiar… 16 Billions later…These people will not change, ever. This is the lesson and lets not repeat this please.

                • Pat …
                  25 January 2021 at 12:08 pm

                  Again..

                  visionary

                  adjective

                  UK /ˈvɪʒ.ən.ri/ US /ˈvɪʒ.er.i/

                  visionary adjective (ABLE TO IMAGINE THE FUTURE)

                  with the ability to imagine how a country, society, industry, etc. will develop in the future:

                  There is no denying Douglas (et al) had a vision for a very different future for NZ from that that would have developed under the existing settings…..acknowledging such is not approval of the vision.

                  • Sacha …
                    25 January 2021 at 2:52 pm

                    Hitler was a visionary. Funny how people don't call him that though..

                    • Descendant Of Smith …
                      25 January 2021 at 5:00 pm

                      Nah he had a vision for himself and his mates.

                      The rest of New Zealand could get stuffed – and it did.

                    • Pat …
                      25 January 2021 at 7:12 pm

                      yes he was…as was Stalin…as said, it dosnt mean you support the vision, but democracy allows us to decide which visions are implemented….if we engage

                    • Pat …
                      25 January 2021 at 7:19 pm

                      "Opportnuity to un-do rogernomics would be more persuasive."

                      Then take it.

          • RedLogix 3.1.1.2.2
            25 January 2021 at 12:46 pm

            telling them it's going to be worse than Rogernomics is a really, really bad thing to do.

            On that I really have to agree. Dumbarse framing all round.

            Personally I think most people are at some level, perhaps even subconsciously, quite ready to wean ourselves off fossil fuels and move onto the next stage. They'd greet a constructive pathway to get there with some relief and joy even.

            • Pat 3.1.1.2.2.1
              25 January 2021 at 1:00 pm

              Assume you havn't read the article…..

              "The shifts required to run our economy without fossil fuels will make the economic changes of the late 1980s “look like a trial period”, in the words of Climate Change Commission chair Rod Carr."

              cant see 'worse' anywhere

              • weka …
                25 January 2021 at 1:21 pm

                Rogernomics harmed many individuals and the country as a whole. That was the trial period for what we are about to do next.

                Worse doesn't need spelling out.

                • Pat …
                  25 January 2021 at 1:30 pm

                  "Climate Change Minister James Shaw has said he thinks many people will be shocked by how much New Zealand needs to cut its emissions.

                  But the alternative – inaction and climate catastrophe – would be worse."

                  The worse is indeed spelt out

                  • weka …
                    25 January 2021 at 1:39 pm

                    yes Pat, and as you know that's not what we were talking about.

                    You and I and James Shaw all know we need to be doing much more. Getting enough of NZ on board so that the govt is free to act needs approaches that don't put people off. Tying climate action to Rogernomics is daft, for all the reasons explained.

                    • Pat …
                      25 January 2021 at 1:43 pm

                      Using the 80s reforms (rogernomics) to quantify the scale of change needed is sensible especially as many of those required to drive that change are the beneficiaries of those rerforms….they will be encouraged to accept that change as an opportunity.

                    • weka []
                      25 January 2021 at 2:47 pm

                      for the third time, using a comparison with Rogernomics isn’t wrong, it’s how they’ve done it this time. i.e. the framing.

                    • Pat …
                      25 January 2021 at 7:05 pm

                      you dont like the 'framing'…thats fine, it isnt aimed at you..its aimed at those who dont wish to risk that which they have (opposed to change) …if you look at the demographics of the climate change recalcitrants they are overwhelmingly National and Act supporters…..or supporters of Rogernomics if you like…those that opposed the effects of 'Rogernomics already support change.

                      Carr isnt as silly as he looks

                  • Foreign waka …
                    25 January 2021 at 9:45 pm

                    Is this a case of lets kill the patient or are we happy with substantial human collateral?

              • Stuart Munro …
                25 January 2021 at 2:05 pm

                Anyone who pretends there was anything positive about Rogergnomics will not have my confidence for whatever carbon strategy they bodge up. Is this fellow a scientist? If not, his prescriptions will likely be inadequate. If he likes Rogergnomics, his measures will be characterised by the massive corruption that consumed all of what should have been the public benefits of Rogergnomics.

                Might as well sack him now – no credibility whatsoever.

                • weka …
                  25 January 2021 at 3:01 pm

                  can't tell how much of the poor framing was Carr or the journos.

                • Pat …
                  25 January 2021 at 7:15 pm

                  Where in the article is there any positive reinforcemnt of the effects of 'Rogernomics'.?…time for some rational thought

  4. Sabine 4
    25 January 2021 at 8:20 am

    my house just shook.

  5. Treetop 5
    25 January 2021 at 9:58 am
    1. Will the Olympic Games go ahead in Tokyo this year?

    2. Will the Common Wealth Games go ahead in Birmingham in 2022?

    3. Is it possible to combine the Common Wealth and the Olympic Games and hold them at two different venues?

  6. Ed 6
    25 January 2021 at 10:08 am

    Key knighted Talley.

    And we now find another reason why that was such a wonderful decision.

    They dump their contaminants down the drain.

    What a wonderful company!

    What a wonderful man!

    And further evidence of New Zealand being such a clean green nation.

    They dump https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/435111/revealed-the-companies-dumping-contaminants-down-the-drain

    • alwyn 6.1
      25 January 2021 at 10:32 am

      "Key knighted Talley"

      Oh well. The Government of the day got a fair number of such things wrong didn't they?

      I mean they knighted Michael Cullen! How low could they go?

      • AB 6.1.1
        25 January 2021 at 11:20 am

        Hoping that the very civilised Mr Cullen has time to finish his book – so we get to read about how deranged Douglas and co were.

      • Patricia Bremner 6.1.2
        25 January 2021 at 6:02 pm

        Alwyn Cullen introduced Kiwi Saver and the so called "Cullen Fund" now worth 54 billion plus. You "Sir" are a troll.

        • alwyn 6.1.2.1
          25 January 2021 at 7:01 pm

          You suggest that I am a Troll. May I suggest that, at least when it comes to discussions about the Cullen Fund you, Madam, are ignorant.

          The Cullen Fund is probably the silliest thing that any New Zealand Government has done in this century. All we are doing is borrowing money for a group of Investment Bankers to invest in overseas assets. Can I introduce you to Michael Littlewood. He was the founder of the Retirement Policy and Research Centre at the University of Auckland. He is the foremost New Zealand expert on the subject.

          I suggest that you read the linked article where he explains why the Cullen Fund is crazy and will do exactly nothing to reduce the future cost of New Zealand Super. He proposes that the scheme should be wound up and the money already in it shpuld be used to help pay for the Covid Recovery. I fully agree with him.

          As Michael proposes

          "Can someone in the Government please explain to New Zealanders why we taxpayers will be borrowing $25.13 billion to pass on to the fund's Guardians to invest on our behalf?"

          "The fund will not reduce the future cost of NZ Super by one dollar – it may very partially 'smooth' the incidence of funding that cost but will not change it. The Government’s contributions won’t change the cost of NZ Super; neither will a stellar nor a poor investment performance by the fund's guardians."

          "The cost of any pension scheme, private or public, is the benefits actually paid by the scheme (plus administration costs) and that doesn’t have anything to do with how it is paid for."

          "Its presence has mistakenly led some to believe that the fund makes New Zealand Superannuation more secure and sustainable. It doesn’t. The fund is a political placebo; a fiscal hall of mirrors."

          Please read the whole linked article. The scheme is nuts and should be wound up.

          https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/121584355/we-should-use-nz-super-fund-billions-to-help-pay-for-covid19-recovery

          [You were definitely diversion-trolling, for which you receive a one-week ban in return.

          In addition, you get another week for your arrogant ad hom, which was uncalled for.

          For a supposedly clever man, you’re a slow learner – Incognito]

          • Patricia Bremner 6.1.2.1.1
            25 January 2021 at 8:29 pm

            LOL Alwyn, a man who worked in tax evasion schemes no less!!

          • Nic the NZer 6.1.2.1.2
            25 January 2021 at 9:16 pm

            Good to see a shift in position Alwyn, from the recent concern that dementia suffers would shortly bankrupt the country.

          • Incognito 6.1.2.1.3
            25 January 2021 at 11:14 pm

            See my Moderation note @ 7:01 PM.

          • Incognito 6.1.2.1.4
            25 January 2021 at 11:40 pm

            Oh well. I guess the description of "Open Mike" doesn't mean what it seems to say.

            "For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.".

            Where does it say “For diversion trolling and arrogant put downs of other commenters”?

            Oh well, I guess it doesn’t.

          • Adrian Thornton 6.1.2.1.5
            27 January 2021 at 11:11 am

            Trolling is so subjective, an example of the subjectivity of the term is that this comment in no way seems like trolling to me, ironically enough it seems like a reasoned rebuttal to the claim of being termed a troll from where I am sitting…

            Funny how two different people can read or hear the same thing but take away different interpretations and meaning isn't it?

    • Peter chch 6.2
      25 January 2021 at 10:32 am

      Thanks for posting that Ed. Just unbelievable though. Sickening. Why are there not more prosecutions, and with meaningful penalties?

    • Morrissey 6.3
      25 January 2021 at 10:56 am

      A Message from the Knights of the British Empire

      It has been brought to our attention that one Sir Peter Ivan Talijancich KNZM, hereafter known as TALLEY, has been dumping filthy pollutants down the drain and outraging fine, decent "Kiwis", or oiks.

      We would like to point out that the rogue TALLEY is an aberration, an abomination, an irritant, a boor, and a cad. An arsehole, if one were to employ the vernacular. The rest of New Zealand’s, and indeed the Empire’s, knights, however, are men of the highest character. As one of our esteemed number said of himself some years ago after indulging in a seven minute radio rant against cheeky darkies, we are GOOD MEN.

      So let’s condemn this errant knight TALLEY by all means, but let us also praise good men and true, like the following exemplars of moral courage and intellectual excellence…..

      Sir Paul Holmes, Sir Thomas Eichelbaum, Sir James Savile, Sir William Gallagher,
      Dame Denise L’Estrange-Corbet, Sir Peter Leitch, Sir Jeremiah Mateparae, Sir John Key, Sir Clive Woodward, Sir Robert Jones

      https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/-we-should-not-be-calling-him-sir-businessman-s-knighthood-questioned-6328823

      • Adrian Thornton 6.3.1
        25 January 2021 at 12:11 pm

        @ Morrissey, Exactly right…+1

      • Tiger Mountain 6.3.2
        25 January 2021 at 12:34 pm

        Ah, Sir Talley–what a splendid record “Talleys” company towns and fish businesses have…
        decapitation at sea, cleaner hoisted under chin by meat hook on chain, worker crushed to death by badly stacked frozen carcasses, worker burned almost to death, life ruined, at AFFCO Moerewa in boiler explosion, legal action taken against meatworkers personal use of Facebook, Women fish filleters discriminated against on basis of sex, Open Country Cheese lockout, Waikato 2009, Invercargill workers recruited and transported to actively scab on Dairy Workers Union members! Security guards harassment of union delegates and organisers, Need I go on…

        Time and again Talleys lose in all Employment Courts, Authorities and other forums, but they go there to make unions use up valuable membership funds on legal expenses and time off organising. Scum of the earth, should be closed down for good and prohibited from running a business again.

      • Nic the NZer 6.3.3
        25 January 2021 at 1:58 pm

        Hard to tell who are the adhominems amoung that group.

        Maybe we should have an official list of people who declined Knighthoods?

        • Morrissey 6.3.3.1
          25 January 2021 at 4:41 pm

          Hard to tell who are the adhominems amoung [sic] that group.

          Every one of them is, or was, a reprehensible human being. They were chosen to show the low calibre of person that can be the recipient of royal "honours".

          [Oh my, an orgy of ad homs by the ad hom Master himself!

          I counted 10 “reprehensible human being[s]” and they are obviously easy targets.

          However, you’d been warned only three days ago to lift your game and stop the ad hommery.

          Take 10 days off, one day for each “reprehensible human being” and next time it will increase.

          However, if you cannot help yourself, just say the word and we can all save ourselves a lot of time and make it a permanent ban without undue delay – Incognito]

          • Incognito 6.3.3.1.1
            25 January 2021 at 11:33 pm

            See my Moderation note @ 4:41 PM.

          • Incognito 6.3.3.1.2
            25 January 2021 at 11:46 pm

            Are you also banning others for giving their opinions?

            Re-read the Moderation(s) note and read it properly. You have form, you have been warned, you are begging for a permanent ban here and only just got let off the hook recently for another of your faux pas, for which you gave a sincere and genuine apology. You have not obtained impunity from banning.

            Take heed of the Moderation notes and lift your game or accept the consequence of your refusal.

            • Adrian Thornton 6.3.3.1.2.1
              26 January 2021 at 8:53 am

              I see you have commented on my thread…why? just stop micro managing everyone.

              " If this were a relationship, a counsellor might suggest breaking up and separating, amicably and while there still is smidgen of (self-)respect left … "

              That is the remark you left me…maybe you need to look at your relationship with Morrissey, as it is obvious to everyone you single him out and treat him quite unfairly.

              • Incognito …
                26 January 2021 at 9:09 am

                Oh, it was “your” thread?

                Why do you take it personal when it was clearly directed at a number of commenters? FYI, it was a comment, not a moderation. If you can’t handle it, ignore it or go somewhere else instead of whining here.

                You don’t think the question is valid? It is obvious to everyone that you are stuck in a groove that creates a bad vibe. Your avoidance is telling, sadly 🙁

                I/we have been more than fair to Morrissey. Anyway, it is none of your business how we manage The Standard. Read the Policy.

    • Stuart Munro 6.4
      25 January 2021 at 11:20 am

      If it were only Talley it wouldn't be so bad – for all that he has few redeeming features. That story reveals ongoing systematic corruption and government collusion with it. The laws have been on the books for decades – but never enforced. A majority of companies are failing repeatedly. It just isn't good enough.

      Councils are due a mighty hefty 'please explain' and maybe they too need to be fined if they fail or decline to enforce the laws we have.

      • Treetop 6.4.1
        25 January 2021 at 2:14 pm

        Talley – ho

        A huntsman's cry to the hounds on sighting a fox.

        • Stuart Munro 6.4.1.1
          25 January 2021 at 2:18 pm

          It's about time they were hunted – persistent lawbreakers setting bad examples for their marginally less corrupt corporate mates. What are we, Russia? Kleptocrats don't belong here.

        • Forget now 6.4.1.2
          25 January 2021 at 7:07 pm

          I thought you were calling him a prostitute at first there, and perhaps rightly so; in abandoning social acceptability for money. But then this got stuck in my head until I played it through:

          Now, you said it was yesterday (yesterday's another day)
          Had a lot of make believe, I don't know if it's you or
          If it's me

          oh, I don't know, (I don't know)
          Tally ho (tally ho!)

          With the “lamb’s brains”, bathtub drooling (around 2:05), and general fever-dreaminess of the video, it is tempting to retcon it’s meaning as what happens to those exposed to polluters slime.

      • tc 6.4.2
        25 January 2021 at 2:56 pm

        In areas of water management Councils have/are failing all over this country.

        WDC stand around like stunned mullet wibbling about their failures. They seem to be expecting sympathy for the 'we don't know how to fix it' atitude.

        They've failed along with many others, times up so get on with it central govt.

    • Gabby 6.5
      25 January 2021 at 4:57 pm

      Does the minister see her goal as fixing the problem or waiting out the complainers until she gets a more prestigious portfolio?

    • Patricia Bremner 6.6
      25 January 2021 at 6:05 pm

      Went on their face book and told them I would not buy their products any more. Have found a better vegan yoghurt at half the price.

  7. Morrissey 7
    25 January 2021 at 11:46 am

    Très, très uncool. No. 1: CHELSEA CLINTON

    Chelsea Clinton is mocked after claiming that she told her son Aidan, four, that 'it’s the 21st day of the 21st year in the 21st century' and he responded 'Yeah, but it’s cooler it's Joe Biden's first full day in the White House'.

    The post attracted attention from Twitter users who responded with disbelief ….

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9175573/Chelsea-Clinton-mocked-Twitter-posting-exchange-son.html

    Chelsea Clinton made a goat of herself after the Christchurch massacre in 2019….



    Très, très uncool is compiled and presented by Serena Sopwith-Fotherington, for Daisycutter Sports Inc.

  8. Ed 8
    25 January 2021 at 2:22 pm

    Graeme Hart gains $3.4 billion during COVID.

    Further proof ( if you needed it ) that the death cult a.k.a. neoliberal capitalism must be swept away, just an the Ancient Regime was thrown out in 1789.

    The rich are a real problem to the health of humanity and the earth’s ecosystems.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/435132/graeme-hart-s-3-point-4b-gain-proves-need-for-taxing-wealth-oxfam

    • alwyn 8.1
      25 January 2021 at 3:53 pm

      Oxfam? They are, of course. one of those groups that manage to get themselves registered as a charity. Thus they don't pay tax and any donations they get become eligible for a tax deduction by the donor.

      Thus for every $1,000 they receive as a donation means that the tax revenues of the State are reduced by $330 dollars. That is money that could help provide all those nice things that Oxfam say they are in favour of.

      Bugger them. They, just like Greenpeace, the Helen Clark Foundation and hundreds of others of their ilk, are registered as charities. They are merely political pressure groups and, just like the political parties, should be wholly financed by their adherents. They shouldn't have a big chunk of their funds come from tax deductions that could be spent on genuinely useful activities by the Crown.

      I should note that I have a vested interest in the activities that Oxfam are whinging about. Like John Hart I am also significantly better off than I was a year ago. Some years ago I put quite a lot of money into FPH. They are manufacturers of things that are genuinely useful to humanity during this pandemic. That is quite different to the actions of people like Oxfam who are about as useful as tits on a bull.

      • Gabby 8.1.1
        25 January 2021 at 4:15 pm

        Just as well Oxfam aren't billionaires isn't it. Think of all the tax revenue we'd be losing.

      • Morrissey 8.1.2
        25 January 2021 at 4:35 pm

        They are merely political pressure groups…

        ???? Greenpeace is far more than simply a pressure group. It's an activist organization as well.

        Do you think Oxfam should not study structural and political causes of poverty? Do you think they should just stay quiet and leave it to the politicians?

        • alwyn 8.1.2.1
          25 January 2021 at 7:06 pm

          "they should just stay quiet and leave it to the politicians".

          No, not at all. However I don't think that they are a Charity, and they certainly shouldn't be treated like one.

          That doesn't mean in any shape or form that they should be silenced.

  9. aom 9
    25 January 2021 at 3:03 pm

    The Board of Deputies (UK) have now provided a classic example to explain the term 'virtue signalling' through a report that was quickly removed from the Guardian this morning!

    While doing the 'over there' pointing at China and the treatment of Uighurs, they conveniently overlook the fact that the worst abuses, that so far have not been conclusively proven, have been perpetrated on an alleged one million people. While not diminishing the seriousness of such human rights abuses, the same Deputies have no qualms about overlooking the manner in which the Israeli Government treats the two million Gazans who live in an open prison and in the West Bank who constantly face indiscriminate human rights abuses perpetrated by the IDF and settlers in the name of the Zionist State.

    The current Deputies lack morality and discredit themselves with their intention to use the Holocaust Memorial Day as a vehicle for pushing a dubious political agenda. The Guardian is also compromised in that it hastily surrendered its journalistic integrity by removing its report – no doubt at the behest of the Board of Deputies.

    • Morrissey 9.1
      25 January 2021 at 4:54 pm

      The Board of Deputies are hardline, militant supporters of the occupation of the West Bank and the siege of Gaza. It's encouraging to see many people, including yourself, aom, calling them out for their hypocrisy.

      Another hardline supporter of Israeli aggression who posed as a humanitarian was the late Elie Wiesel. When he spoke at Saint Louis University on December 1, 2009, three women challenged him to break his silence about Gaza and to travel with them on the Gaza Freedom March to see for himself the devastation caused by Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in December 2008 and the ongoing siege….

  10. Stephen D 10
    25 January 2021 at 5:10 pm

    Being in opposition in NZ now must be a nightmare.

    Anything you say about Covid,the largest ship in port will be seen to be barking at cars. (Sorry for the mixed metaphor)

    But Bishop and Seymour just can’t help themselves. Terriers or labradors?