Open mike 27/04/2012

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 27th, 2012 - 62 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 link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

62 comments on “Open mike 27/04/2012 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    27 April 2012 at 7:54 am

    This from Radio New Zealand:

    “New papers reveal just how much the Government conceded to Warner Bros. to ensure the Hobbit movies were made in New Zealand.

    The papers, obtained under the Official Information Act, also show the Government was less than forthcoming with the public about the reasons for changing employment law to keep the Hollywood studio happy.

    The Government did a deal with Warners in October 2010 to ensure the movies were made in this country, amid fears a dispute with actors would force them to be made elsewhere. But the papers reveal an agreement had already been signed ending the dispute and the Government knew that.

    Council of Trade Unions president Helen Kelly says at the time, the Government blamed the dispute for the law changes …”

    I wonder if it is time to review the complaint of privilege made against Brownlee for misleading the house?  Brownlee claimed on October 26 2010 that the boycott was the main cause of the uncertainty over The Hobbit

    And I wonder if this will cause Gosman to review the strongly held views he had on the dispute? 

    • vto 1.1
      27 April 2012 at 8:30 am

      My God.

      Every day and week something new emerges where we have been lied to, deceived, subjected to hypocrisy, etc.

      Is this lot worse than I recall Clark and her lot by a country mile? It certanly seems like an entirely new universe.

    • marsman 1.2
      27 April 2012 at 9:14 am

      The facts were revealed shortly after the whole affair, I remember reading it in The Standard. The MSM of course were not interested. From then on whenever I mention their names I have called them Scumbag Jackson and Scumbag Taylor, and then explain why.

    • vto 1.3
      27 April 2012 at 9:52 am

      Peter Jackson should share a cell with Rod Petricevic.

      It is the exact same thing – lying to the public in order to gain pecuniary advantage.

      Someone please establish this is not the case…

  2. Pete George 2
    27 April 2012 at 7:57 am

    The euthanasia debate in Dunedin last night was to a packed theatre, and all speakers made very worthwhile contributions on a difficult and touchy issue – “Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: A Discussion We Need to Have”.

    I hope the video will be made available, it will be a good reference for the ongoing discussions.

    I’ve seen and heard little of Maryan Street as an MP, but she came across well promoting her proposed “end of life choices” private member’s Bill.

    This was a great discussion and initiative – the euthanasia discussion begins.

  3. Hilary 3
    27 April 2012 at 7:57 am

    Waiting for the apology due to Helen Kelly from Peter Jackson, Paul Holmes, John Key, Richard Taylor and 99% of the New Zealand news media, as she is proved right over the secret Key Govt/Warner Bros deals, now some of the official papers have been released. The actors’ union issue was settled before the anti-union campaign, such as the stage managed march in Wellington, even got under way.

    • LynW 3.1
      27 April 2012 at 8:25 am

      + 1

      All credit to Helen Kelly maintaining her dignity throughout this thoroughly despicable situation. I hear The Hobbit has been given poor reviews. Divine justice perhaps!

      • Tiger Mountain 3.1.1
        27 April 2012 at 11:06 am

        A relatively innocuous entertaining little fantasy book has been tainted for good by Lord Jackson’s greed–two movies from one slim volume? Geddowda here…..

        Lord J can park his Hobbits where the sun don’t shine, up his Sopwith Camel’s exhaust perhaps.

        Well done Helen Kelly and Actors members. Shame on the techies and ‘Cur’ Richard Taylor.

    • Carol 3.2
      27 April 2012 at 8:41 am

      An appology won’t be coming any time soon, if this article is anything to go by. Confusing article, with the authors striving to skew the arguments in Brownlee’s favour.

      But surely this is damning! Who gives a business entity, in the middle of an indiustrial dispute, copies of cabinet notes on the issue?

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6815199/Brownlee-defends-Governments-Hobbit-moves

      The documents show Kiwi director Sir Peter Jackson, who received personal post-Cabinet briefings from Brownlee, rated the union vetting of foreign actors as one of only two “key issues” in the debate.

      Days before Prime Minister John Key announced a deal had been cut with Warners to keep The Hobbit production in New Zealand, Sir Peter emailed Brownlee’s office about visas for foreign actors.
      […]
      Sir Peter received a quick response to his email which informed him that Brownlee planned to speak with Warners the following day about “what decisions have been made”.

      “We have and can continue to give Warners a guarantee that we will back casting decisions through immigration processes. In the end, the New Zealand Government – and not any other party – will determine who can enter the country.”

      Sir Peter said this was “news they [Warners] have been waiting for” which he would pass on to Los Angeles immediately.

      Besides the status of self-employed contractors – which dominated public debate at the time of the dispute – “vetting” of foreign actors by Actors’ Equity was the other “key issue” he raised.

      Council of Trade Unions president Helen Kelly said “the immigration issue” had been “kept hidden” as part of discussions with Warners.

      “Alongside the change in [employment] law, the $30m [in tax credits], they agreed to remove opportunity for New Zealand performers to work,” Kelly said.

      “New Zealanders wouldn’t have liked to know that our borders were being opened up … what is the benefit to New Zealand? [Actors’ Equity] were working to have some standards around immigration in the industry.”

      This sentence is written as if what Brownlee says is fact:

      New Zealand’s dynamic and vibrant film industry was “built off the back of the genius of Peter Jackson and Weta Workshop and the many people that work for their organisations”.

      No matter that Brownlee ignores all the work by people who made other significant movies and TV programmes, from Shortland Street (whatever you think of it, it has been a training ground for many in the industry – ditto for the Xena-Hercules-Spartacus productions, and movies like Whale Rider, Utu, Goodbye Porkpie, Smash Palace, The Navigator, Desperate Remedies, In My father’s Den, Sione’s Wedding, etc, etc…. etc, etc)

      • millsy 3.2.1
        27 April 2012 at 7:52 pm

        Goodbye Pork Pie — classic Kiwi movie. Its like opening a pre-1984 time capsule.

        Way better than Jackson’s early works, which are quite frankly unwatchable by anyone outside boys in their mid-to-late teens.

        • felix 3.2.1.1
          27 April 2012 at 8:24 pm

          I get this really strong urge to revisit Goodbye Pork Pie every couple of years.

          Never gets old.

  4. Hilary 4
    27 April 2012 at 8:54 am

    Sad to see that so many people in the insecure film industry were happy to be participants in attacks on their own job security, such as in that professionally run march through Wellington against worker’s rights, after the dispute between actors and producers had been settled.

    • Hayden 4.1
      27 April 2012 at 9:01 am

      Doubly sad that it was followed by the foreign crew restriction being lifted as well. I wonder if they feel slightly used.

  5. The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 5
    27 April 2012 at 9:03 am

    Oh dear:

    http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/2012/04/unfortunate-experiment.html

    • felix 5.1
      27 April 2012 at 9:29 am

      Oh ffs.

      Reckon it’s about time he Trottered off somewhere nice and quiet and shut the fuck up about everything for a long time. And take that useless prick Pagani too.

    • Kevin Welsh 5.2
      27 April 2012 at 1:00 pm

      I’m with Trotter on this one.

      Shearer is fucking awful on tv. And not much better in parliament.

      How likeable he is, whether he has the common touch or a million other things is irrelevent if he comes across as unprepared, stumbling over his words or vague.

      Key, in my opinion, is a half-wit with a smile and a wave. But he can present himself. And the 15-30 secs on the news each night is all the heaving masses see, and they like it.

      And that is all that matters to the majority.

    • Deborah Kean 5.3
      27 April 2012 at 6:34 pm

      OK, I just don’t get it! Why do Standardistas all hate Trotter and Shearer? I’ve already seen for myself, and mentioned here (to a resounding silence!) how Shearer’s words are distorted… both by the msn (no surprises there!) and Standardistas, which makes me sad.
      Now, that Bowalley Road has finally loaded (I wish I could afford broadband!) I see that Trotter is writing against Shearer… So, WTF? Most here hate Trotter, and they also hate Shearer and call them both right wing, which is pretty insulting. So, what gives?

    • millsy 5.4
      27 April 2012 at 8:23 pm

      I was a cautious supporter of Shearer as leader, and I have to say, that I am a little bit worried about his tendency to take the Labour party down the Blairite road, however a leadership change now would be futile. Labour can choose Robertson (who IMO is better off in a number 2 type position), and then what happens when Labour doesnt rise in the polls? Jacinda Ardern? Andrew Little, Trevor Mallard? The last thing Labour needs is a revolving door leadership. And anyway, the god-botherers will have a field day with Robertson as leader.I can imagine Family First and the Society for Protection of Commnity Standards denigrating him almost every day about hot gay orgies in the beehive, and ‘gay propaganda’ in our schools.

      Anyway, I dont know what you lot are on, but I have/had no faith in David Cunliffe’s ability to stick to Labour principles as a hypothetical leader. Firstly, he signed up to National’s purging of the public service, just before the election, and secondly, a few years ago, as Health Minister, he said in an interview that he had private health insurance. IMO any health minister who has private health insurance is not that all committed to a public health service in this country.

      • just saying 5.4.1
        27 April 2012 at 9:57 pm

        Frankly I’d be pretty surprised if anyone in the Labour caucus didn’t have private health insurance. Our public hospitals are dangerous. Certainly those medical professionals who work in public health (and can afford it) go private.
        I’d love to see Labour representatives who weren’t part of the elite. People who live as most of us do. Our public hospitals would be miles safer if those who made the funding and other decisons about them (and their families) were forced to rely on them with no special treatment within them.
        But that’s a pipe dream. Labour stopped representing the people a long time ago.

        • Vicky32 5.4.1.1
          27 April 2012 at 10:44 pm

          Our public hospitals are dangerous. Certainly those medical professionals who work in public health (and can afford it) go private.

          That is absolutely not true.  Thanks to my GP getting ahead of herself, I have had to spend longer at Auckland City Hospital this year than I have for a long time. The only danger I have found there is that the place is a maze, it always takes me a long time to find my way out!
          My son is a health professional, he works at Welly Hospital on Ward 6 South (Cardiothoracic) and he does not have, and does not want to have health insurance. It’s not necessary. I have complete confidence in the public system as do my son and his colleagues.

          • just saying 5.4.1.1.1
            27 April 2012 at 11:47 pm

            That’s nice Vicky.
            But certainly not my experience – quite the reverse.
            I’ll have to take your word for it that your son and his colleagues have “complete faith” in the public health system. The many health professionals I know certainly do not.

            Btw – might pay to watch the amount of detail you are giving in your comments – assuming you want you and your son to remain anonymous.

            • QoT 5.4.1.1.1.1
              28 April 2012 at 12:01 am

              Welcome to Vicky’s world, js, where her personal experience is absolutely universal and pointing out it isn’t makes you a gigantic Christian-bashing bully or something.

            • Vicky32 5.4.1.1.1.2
              28 April 2012 at 12:48 am

              Btw – might pay to watch the amount of detail you are giving in your comments – assuming you want you and your son to remain anonymous.

              I am not that fussed, really! L., is not the only male nurse on 6 South, (and I do know that they all have faith in the system, being part of it and all! 🙂 ) I am sorry your experience has been otherwise, but ours (including my sisters and their kids) has been excellent…
              Pay no attention to QoT, after all that’s what she desperately craves – attention! Hence her total lack of useful contribution to the discussion, just her/his usual bitchery against me… 😀

              • QoT …
                28 April 2012 at 1:44 pm

                And pay no attention to Vicky32, after all that’s what she desperately craves – seeing as how she’s the one who *frequently* refers to me in comment threads I haven’t participated in, and continues to find it ~hilarious~ to try baiting me by pretending she doesn’t know what gender I identify as.

    • QoT 5.5
      27 April 2012 at 9:50 pm

      Mmm, and what a delightfully tasteless “look at how au fait I am with NZ political history” reference in the title, too.

  6. Molly Polly 6
    27 April 2012 at 10:33 am

    I had the opportunity recently to hear David Shearer speak again. He is a genuinely lovely man, as Phil Goff was before him. His speech was similar to his candidate speech back in November. His back story is impressive (we heard it yet again). For someone who has led teams delivering aid to war torn countries, you would expect his manner to be considered and measured. It is. You would also expect some fire in his belly on certain issues, because lets face it, we are staring down the barrel at some huge changes which will affect New Zealand for ever. But his approach is a softly, softly one. At times it can be painful to hear, as you want him to stop waffling and say something inspirational.

    Grant was at the meeting too. He politely interrupting David when he felt he could make a better, more positive contribution. It gave the impression that Shearer is not his own man.

    Right now we need strong leadership to counter attack the never ending calamities that the Key government is foisting on this country. Every day there is a new one.

    The Labour Caucus was wrong when they chose Shearer/Robinson. Time to own up and have another leadership challenge. For the sake of the Party. This time ensure that the broad membership have a role in the decision making. We were not heard the last time…despite the obvious choice that was presented to us at the leadership candidate meetings.

    • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 6.1
      27 April 2012 at 10:45 am

    • Jilly Bee 6.2
      27 April 2012 at 11:15 am

      I totally agree with your sentiments Molly Polly – I rejoined the party ‘again’ last year, hoping for a better result. I was extremely disappointed with the leadership change. I still am firmly of the opinion that David Cunliffe should be the leader – the present leadership is simply not functioning and the polls are reflecting this malaise. My renewal invoice is sitting my my unpaid accounts and I’m not about to renew my membership at present – I’m very disillusioned with the state of politics in our country at present, but I’m also worried about the attitude of my fellow citizens to what this government is doing – if they think the direction we’re hurtling towards is OK, well, I’m left pretty speechless.

      • Bill 6.2.1
        27 April 2012 at 11:57 am

        Just add punctuation and so many T-shirt logo possibilities spring to mind using the last four words of your comment Jilly. 😉

      • LynW 6.2.2
        27 April 2012 at 12:43 pm

        Wow Jilly Bee, you could be my doppelganger! This is my situation exactly! I even made the effort to attend and hear the ‘candidates’, with Cunliffe and Mahuta my definite choice. I recently donated to Stand UP, from a link on the Standard. Had I been sure of Labour my money would have gone to them.

        • belladonna 6.2.2.1
          27 April 2012 at 6:25 pm

          +1

        • rosy 6.2.2.2
          27 April 2012 at 6:52 pm

          +1 and me too – joined for the first time after Goff and Cunliffe’s showing during the election campaign, but my renewal notice is still sitting in the ‘to do’ file – disappointed, I am.

          This is interesting – aren’t we (women) a target market for Shearer? to stop us swooning over the god of masculinity that is Key?

          Or maybe we already vote left so don’t really figure in the calculations.

          • Molly Polly 6.2.2.2.1
            27 April 2012 at 7:39 pm

            We are not swinging voters…we are tribal Labour and have been for ever and probably always will be because we share the same Labour values. Despite the leadership change, I really wanted Shearer to prove that my instincts were wrong. Right now it feels like a slow motion train wreck in action…and has done so for sometime. I’m sick of pretending that everything is wonderful and by some miracle it’s going to come right. With the right leader it will…so I’m hanging in there.

      • muzza 6.2.3
        27 April 2012 at 3:53 pm

        It does not matter who leads the party, any of them. The people we see, are not the people who make the decisions!

        Sooner people wake up to it, the better chance this country might have!

  7. Campbell Larsen 7
    27 April 2012 at 11:37 am

    Well it seems I was half wrong and half right:

    “…Dr Schellinck, who runs a company called Focal Research Consultants, is regarded as a world expert in mining information from loyalty cards as a means of better understanding those who use them.”

    So focal research is more about data mining than solving problem gambling – although being a smart man Dr Schellinck and his cohorts know that this kind of information gathering is not so popular with the public when used in other environments like analysing peoples supermarket purchases.

    Why? because principally this kind of technology has been used to maximise revenue for the client/ vendor.

    The answer for Focal Research? get involved in gambling research and tobacco control measures meanwhile continuing to promote the invasive information gathering technologies which would otherwise face reasonable resistance. Voilà: transformed into ‘the good guys’

    There appears to be a movement afoot which in the spirit of ‘pre-crime’ is attempting to label or typecast people though behavioural analysis techniques. It is concerning to see that the focus is on perceived failings/ shortcomings of the individual rather than on creating a society and environments which create healthy people. Proponents for this kind of approach claim the power of the clairvoyant and adopt the fervour of the zealot when it comes to identifying problem people, but are conspicuously silent on the issue of problem environments and the impact of the problem values of neo- liberalism.

    An article in Tuesday’s Herald was pushing the predictive power of a 90 minute test:

    The 90 minute assessment conducted on three-year-olds appeared to predict future problem gambling as well as much more complex behavioural assessments, the study said. […]
    Toddlers who exhibited a lack of emotional control were also more prone to poor physical health, criminality and alcohol and other substance abuse, the study said.”

    No pressure kids, but you had better do well on that test, otherwise you might find in hard to escape the box that you get put in.

    Moody pre-schoolers, problem gamblers Trumpets the Herald today – pushing exactly the kind of attitude which is later singled out for criticism in the article:

    Associate Professor Peter Adams, of the Auckland University Centre for Gambling Studies, said there was a risk the gambling industry would use the research to claim availability of gambling was “less of an issue than what happens under the bonnet of the person”.
    “I would argue that with any risk factors, the environment is a key factor as to whether it becomes problematic.”

    What is ‘normal’ exactly? Studies have shown that consumerism and advertising create a perpetual state of dissatisfaction and anxiety. Relative social status via monetary wealth and its trappings underpin many people’s perception of worth or happiness – consciously or unconsciously. Is it ‘normal’ to adapt to these conditions or more ‘normal’ to struggle with them? A functional analysis of individual adaption points to the capacity to thrive in a given set of circumstances – but at what point to we look beyond the individuals’ capacity and on to the capacity of the circumstances/ society to create thriving lives?

    The predictive power of behavioural analysis has obvious limitations, and the risks of sweeping generalisations are great. In our eagerness to understand problems let us not forget to examine the assumptions and values of our society and the environments that we have created for people. Nothing exists in isolation.

  9. Gosman 9
    27 April 2012 at 11:52 am

    Good article in The Economist. It reminded me of some of the debate on here.

    http://www.economist.com/node/21553449?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/ar/aretherepublicansmad

    • Bored 9.1
      27 April 2012 at 12:09 pm

      Yes Gos, there is method in their madness and its your money. And like the fool you are you blithely turn your stupid eye elsewhere as the finance gang who back the Republicans, the Nats and the rest of the thieving classes take your money and mine. Being an idiot is one thing, getting done in the pocket by your own “mates” is stupendously Darwinian.

  10. Pascal's bookie 10
    27 April 2012 at 1:39 pm

    Friday lulz:

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/04/how_times_change.html

    “I totes remember that!!”

    • Draco T Bastard 10.1
      27 April 2012 at 2:56 pm

      I remember all the BS about the world cooling as well. I’m just glad that I’m opened minded enough to listen to the actual data rather than cling to misreporting from journalists.

    • felix 10.2
      27 April 2012 at 3:23 pm

      But but but it “doesn’t mean it isn’t happening, just that predicting something as complex as climate is very very difficult.”

      So this definitely isn’t an invite to have a thread about how climate change isn’t real or anything like that.

      • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 10.2.1
        27 April 2012 at 3:27 pm

        Climate change isn’t real or anything like that.

      • Pete George 10.2.2
        27 April 2012 at 3:32 pm

        No, “that blog” is where to go if you want to have real discussions about:
        a) climate change isn’t happening
        b) climate change has always happened, so what
        c) climate change is a conspiracy to force world government on us
        d) all science on climate change, evolution and birth certificates is a fraud

        And that’s the mild arguments.

  11. Treetop 11
    27 April 2012 at 2:08 pm

    “All that is necessary for the triump of evil is that good people do nothing.”

    http://www.jackkrobinson.com/taking-a-stand/

    Scroll down a little.

    Good to see that the Office of the Ombudsman released papers on the Warner Bros which now vindicates Helen Kelly. Cabinet papers need to be released on the Sky City tendering process for a national convention centre.

  12. bad12 12
    27 April 2012 at 3:28 pm

    John(the convicted)Banks raving about the ‘urgent’ need to raise the age of National Superannuation to 67,

    (Yeah sure John you and Slippery have removed all the small change outta the pockets of the Have Nots to pay for the Haves obscene tax cuts and deliberately f**ked the economy while you did that, now you want the working poor who cannot save for their retirement to work even longer to cover up the mess),

    I wonder where it comes from this absolutely Bullshit call to raise the age of eligibility for the Pension,

    Oh thats right,from the Treasury Wonks who have got what figures right in their economic predictions recently,

    Raising the age of eligibility for the Pension is simply more of the intergenerational theft that the neo-libs seem to find so attractive as economic policy,and, what the hell Phill Goff was doing going into the 2011 election campaign promising to do such I will never be able to figure out,

  13. Bill 13
    27 April 2012 at 3:45 pm

    Looking at all the distractions on various threads (and yes, I’m guilty of buying into them and perpetuating them from time to time), it strikes me as an idea to have a ‘Side Issues’ post alongside ‘Open Mike’ that posters could move meandering off topic discussions to. Some of them do have merit. But aren’t relevent to the post.

    Absently thinking. Or maybe in future posts I put up (if it’s technically possible within the edit options) I’ll just shift off topic discussions that pop up to ‘Open Mike’

    Any thoughts/suggestions?

    • bad12 13.1
      27 April 2012 at 4:00 pm

      I thought ‘Open Mike’ was here for the random discussions to take place and save on the other ‘Posts’ being hijacked and dragged of topic,

      Doing such,dragging discussion away from the actual topic is one of the ‘tricks’ used by the ‘right’ to shut down discussion and/or criticism of National’s policy,although in the past few days there has been so much ‘bad news’ from within the present Government the few commentor’s from the ‘right’ have been inundated by the flood and being essentially lazy havnt been able to muster the energy to hijack all the Posted threads,

      I think Open Mike does a good and I quite enjoy having to read the whole thing to get into what various people are thinking at any given time…

      • Bill 13.1.1
        27 April 2012 at 4:10 pm

        Doing such,dragging discussion away from the actual topic is one of the ‘tricks’ used by the ‘right’ to shut down discussion and/or..

        I guess I’m just playing with ways that might shut down any ‘shutting down’ while leaving the moved discussion/debate/argument in tact. And yes, ‘Open Mike’ functions well.

    • prism 13.2
      27 April 2012 at 10:00 pm

      Sounds sensible line to take Bill. The archival material will be denser on the subject. I have asked for the occasional post to be deleted after copying it and shifting it to the right area. If I got shifted to Open Mike when off topic I guess I couldn’t complain. Would you shift the ‘flame wars’ too?

      • Bill 13.2.1
        27 April 2012 at 10:37 pm

        Firstly I don’t know if editing/moderating functions will allow for the shifting of comments from one post heading to another easily. And the last thing I want to do is ‘play’ with the functions to find out 🙂 . I’m only kind of playing with possible possibilties as it were. And I definately wouldn’t want to mess with someones elses post and the comments it attracts.

        But if parts of a thread go ‘off track’, either through misdirection or irrelevent argument, then I reckon it’s it would be quite reasonable for authors (where they have moderating/editing powers) to shift those sections of the thread elsewhere…Open Mike or another dedicated post heading…so that relevent comments don’t get crowded out.

        It kind of depends in part on the actual nature of the post too. Sometimes it matters less than other times and I’d have no problem foot noting any post I did with a red amber or green ‘flag’ so that commenters were aware of the desired level of focus for their comments .

        And sure, a comment that is going awry could be edited so the commenter was alerted that they either had to produce a follow up comment to bring things back on track or have it moved.

  14. Pascal's bookie 14
    27 April 2012 at 7:09 pm

    nanananaa

    nanananaaaa

    hey hey hey

    Good Bye Banks.

  15. bad12 15
    27 April 2012 at 11:30 pm

    About now I would like to take a minute of reflection and perhaps to ask of the Prime Minister ”Hows it hanging there Slippery” ”Still the job of ya dreams mate,or is it all starting to look like some sort of Friday night horror”,

    Have to say,hang in there Slippery mate dont lose ya bottle just yet,hell just when you manage to smother the insane internal power rush fueled fighting and backstabbing in your own mob someone else shoves something ugly in the works likely to bring down a Government,

    Stay with us wont you Slippery, watch as that other John whines,weasels,and,weakens into tears of abject failure beaten upon the alter of His own dishonesty until He slinks in disgrace from the gaze of us all,

    Know one thing Mr Prime Minister the same fate awaits you…