Bernard Hickey supports Colombo’s claim – kind of. And is against bank bail outs.
But the concerns about Auckland’s houses being overvalued and New Zealand households having too much debt are valid, as is the risk that a slump might affect our banks.
Colombo’s assumptions about what would happen if house prices did fall were off the mark, but the reasons are not reassuring.
Essentially, New Zealand’s housing market and banking systems are unlikely to crash because they are “too big to fail”. Even if they were to fall, the authorities are unlikely to let them.
This is shown by the bank bailouts in 2008 & 9 when the property market was in danger of crashing.
But next time, it may be the lack of guarantees on bank deposits that results in savers taking a big hit, to protect the banks.
But it does raise the bigger issue of what happens next time our economy receives a 2008-style shock. Currently, our banks are not guaranteed by the Government and the Reserve Bank has set up a system known as Open Bank Resolution — if a bank is in trouble, the Reserve Bank can shut it down and force an overnight recapitalisation that would see term-depositers receive a haircut by having their deposits written down, and the bank can open again the next day.
This is not something everyone is told when they deposit their money in a bank.
It is a fig leaf because no New Zealand Prime Minister with borrowing capacity would allow term-depositers to take that pain. They would bail out the bank in the same way the Irish, British and American Governments did.
The two points that Colombo missed are that traditionally the Aus/NZ banks have been willing to tolerate negative equity mortgages as long as the debt was being serviced. Unlike American banks they do not bundle up (securitise) and on-sell their mortgages and for this reason have far more skin in the game. This means the banks here, while they will act against the outlier defaulters – will in general look to protect their customer base.
Secondly bankruptcy law here means that if you do default on a mortgage you cannot walk away as is common in other countries. Here in NZ if you default you will still be left with any residual debt if the bank does not recoup all of it’s losses and costs via a mortgagee sale. This is a big disincentive not to default.
As a result when the property market turns bear, it is the volume of sales that drops, not prices.
Having said all that, there are two wild-card factors to consider:
In 2009 there was a six month period when around 90% of all new mortgages in NZ where actually written by Kiwibank. The big Aussies had simply stopped all new lending and without KiwiBank our property market would have gone through a very dramatic shutdown.
The other big change is the increasing portion of our housing stock now owned by overseas investors. How they might react to a bad bear market is completely unknown.
Do you have a reference for the statement about Kiwibank providing 90% of new mortgages in six months of 2009?
I wasn’t aware that it reached anything like that number and I would like to have a look at it.
Secondly bankruptcy law here means that if you do default on a mortgage you cannot walk away as is common in other countries. Here in NZ if you default you will still be left with any residual debt if the bank does not recoup all of it’s losses and costs via a mortgagee sale. This is a big disincentive not to default.
Which needs to be changed as well. We legally need to recognise and accept the risk that goes with loaning money to people and banks and not protect those that take those risks.
Yes, was just reading an article about that point you make there DTB,
How Neoliberalism takes a hypocritical stance.
They give markets and market theory the highest priority and position it so it is pivotal to the system, yet they do not accept ”market discipline. They do this by allowing those loaning money (digits) to get bailed out – this removes the risk from those loaning money and places it on the borrowers and takes out market discipline from the equation. Ergo they have taken out the very thing that ‘balances’ the market. They don’t even follow their own theories when push comes to shove.
That’s because the politicians are more concerned with saving the wealthy from the risks that they take and the reason for that seems to be because a) the wealthy rule and b) the politicians are also wealthy. It’s in the rhetoric that we need the wealthy to pay for things but, of course, the wealthy never pay for anything – it’s how they get rich.
and the reason for that seems to be because a) the wealthy rule and b) the politicians are also wealthy.
Also, politicians know that they all have inherently insecure jobs, but they get a taste of the lifestyle and would like somewhere nice to go to after leaving Parliament to keep up that lifestyle.
It is a fig leaf because no New Zealand Prime Minister with borrowing capacity would allow term-depositers to take that pain.
Which would be the wrong thing to do. Essentially, what a government guarantee of bank deposits does is allow a few people to get an income from neither working nor taking any risk. Can’t call these people anything but bludgers.
Of course, I happen to think that people getting interest happen to be bludgers anyway. Having money should not entitle you to an income from others work.
While there is the Islamic (and traditional Christian) prohibition on interest, I’m not so sure it would work in the modern world where virtually all money is credit.
Personally I’d prefer a self-imposed limit on interest rates in the 1-3% range (depending on the risk) and a cap on table mortgage terms of 20 years.
That would be a more moderate and workable compromise.
While there is the Islamic (and traditional Christian) prohibition on interest, I’m not so sure it would work in the modern world where virtually all money is credit.
Well, the answer there is to stop money being created through credit.
That would be a more moderate and workable compromise.
No, it wouldn’t because after awhile institutions and people would be going well beyond it.
“Bludgers” using term deposits? really? Well then I am one of those bludgers. But where else can I put my savings? I don’t own property. I need to keep my savings somewhere. So what am I meant to do? Put it under my mattress? My term deposit hardly earns me a vast income. I don’t put the money there so it will gain me extra income – just somewhere to keep it til I need it. It is the least speculative place to put the money. It generally doesn’t grow in value the way a lot of property does.
That money is to go to my full retirement as I will be continuing to rent.
I’d be a bludger too in that case, karol. I’ve basically rented all my life, apart from a few years helping pay off a mortgage that was retrospectively defined as rent. I get interest on what I’ve got saved, but hardly more than the rate of inflation. I’m hoping to buy a dwelling of some sort once I retire, but what are my other options for looking after the money I’ve saved? The interest is certainly not enough to live on.
Yes. Anyone with income from either interest or shares is getting money from others work rather than their own. Can’t think of anything more accurately described as bludging.
It is the least speculative place to put the money.
Kiwibank has a 0% interest on call account that’s government guaranteed. It will, of course, lose value to inflation. I’m also not suggesting that you use it – present conditions dictate that you need to use the term deposits.
You’ll note that over the last year or two I’ve been suggesting policies that make having any sort of accumulated money worthless. I’m not backing away from that just because someone I have some respect for is upset about it.
Former Labour MP John Tamihere said Jones represented a Labour constituency that was increasingly being sidelined as interest groups gained greater control.
“The real debate isn’t about Shane Jones, it’s about certain sector groups in Labour having far too much say in advance, well in advance of their constituencies in the street.”
The party was becoming dominated by “liberal academic elites” more focused on social engineering issues such as the so-called anti-smacking law than issues such as creating jobs which had a broader voter appeal, he said.
What a load of unadulterated crap. What is happening is that actual leftwing people are starting to establish themselves within the party, ie McCarten, and, quite rightly, they’ve got no time for people who aren’t actually committed to leftwing policies.
Eventually the electorate will swing away from National and the reason they will is because they will be sick of being shat on by right wing policies.
When that inevitably happens there will be a strongly leftwing opposition ready and waiting to tear their putrid policies for the privileged to shreds.
Makes me sick too. It would seem that a good thing to come out of the Cunliffe leadership is that the rats are leaving the ship. Shane “Hand Shandy- Blue Movie” Jones was damaged goods with an ego and expectation level way out of proportion. Pagani, ditto. Tamihere actually does things for his community, but why he should weigh in about sector groups is rather strange. Surely the sector groups issue was dealt to by the recent leadership election.
Tamihere likes to talk. So we have the Tamihere and Willie Jackson song and dance team coming out with good and pathetic things as well. It’s mainlytop-of-the-head talk and makes for scintillating chats, but the sound and fury is the main thing, rather than thoughtful critique supporting a Party that is struggling towards its left wing roots, to have some substance.
I’ve seen suggestions on Twitter that it would be lovely if the Jones/Tamihere/Trotter/Pagani brigade were to set up their own party – put their money where their mouths are, so to speak. If there’s such a large faction of left-leaning blue-collar blokes just crying out for representation which speaks to them and only to them, surely they’ll have no trouble getting over the 5% line.
Such a comment displays a degree of tribalism that mirrors what it says….hey why dont we ignore these peoples opinions and send them into a heretics exile…nice one, what a way to attract other people to the Left…come over here and get done over as a form of initiation. (I cant believe I am defending them but hey…we might do better to reflect on our own position).
PS Why Trotter gets added to Pagani etc is beyond me, every time the “Left” attacks him I sit and laugh because the attackers cant see that he is invariably on the button…or does that just piss off those who cant think and see things as lucidly as him?
Some in Labour – including caucus – are in denial over Trotter. He sometimes goes over the top with his intellectual and flowery language but his basic assumptions are often right on the button. He’s definitely not in there with the Paganis and the Tamiheres…
I have enjoyed Trotters articles in the past. I appreciate Trotter’s ability to put things in historic context, however perhaps you haven’t read some of his more recent articles on ‘The Daily Blog’? – he seems to be awfully quick to put the boot into Labour in a manner that shows he is prone to being suckered in to right-wing framing of matters.
What are political commentators for? For spreading propaganda or analysing it? I expect political commentators to be providing informed commentary and insight to the cut and thrust of political propaganda – not swallowing it whole (or half)-heartedly and then spreading it. Recently Chris appears to have been ‘challenged’ in achieving this end in his role of ‘commentator’.
On the Paul Henry Show, he came on after Cunliffe (and good on Paul Henry for bringing on someone supposedly left). Trotter proceeded to express the view that Jones departure was a great blow to Labour – there was no mention of counterarguments to that view. There are counterarguments to that view – and it is an academic’s role (as I take Trotter to be) to provide this balance. Trotter did not provide an informed view at all.
I really don’t know what is going on with Trotter just now, but when he has the role of ‘commentator’ and especially ‘left-wing commentator’ and gets on mainstream media only to provide right-wing framing – than there is something very wrong with the equation and I believe a great deal of damage is done to left-wing interests from this occurring.
Trotter will be shut out of the inside of Labour now. Many of his old contacts in Labour will now be worthless because those contacts no longer hold the reins of power within the party.
That’s why he has been framing the Greens as the rising power and trying to consign Labour to the dustbin of history. It’s sour-grapes. He may not even be consciously aware that he is doing it but it is sour-grapes nonetheless.
He is also being drowned out. Pre-internet he was one of the few declared leftwing political commentators in the media. Now there are heaps, his once solitary voice is now getting lost amongst a hoard of other leftwing voices and that not only hurts his ego but will hurt his income too.
And that means he is actually beholden to the MSM because they are his paymaster. The only things he has going for him are those panel appearances on Q+A, the articles that get printed in fairfax newspapers etc. He cant slum it like us and do it for free on the net because he’s got to keep up his comfortable middle class lifestyle.
What is ironic is that Chris was championing the take-back of Labour by the members but the result is that he has become less and less relevant as the party becomes more democratic.
Chris’ status has always relied on an authoritarian Labour Party, controlled from caucus, ala Helen. That was why his opinion was valued, because he was an insider to an exclusive club. Now…not so much
Trotter has been causing problems for the Left since the eighties,their will be a few out there who’ve seen him in action ,when he was inside Labour party.As been said,he’s on the way out.A cheap commentator for MSM at the moment.
Trotter has been causing problems for the Left since the eighties
Someone needed to. And more should.
If at least some on the Left aren’t occasionally challenging and even defying the political establishment – including the establishment Left – then they are simply paying fealty to the system we got pushed on to us in the 80’s. Centre right neoliberalism.
very true,but I feel Chris Trotter has failed on that score many times in resent history.Just take a another look at his resent effort on,(your going to make me say it)the (Paul Hendry showoff).thats not balanced.The so-called left have had enough trouble with MSM.So is he a leftwing com……..I leave that open,or just a blogger for the MSM.
By ‘causing problems to the left’ I feel certain that you didn’t mean ‘challenging the left’ I feel pretty sure you were relating to the type of problem that I wrote about – that of simply swallowing and propagating right wing spin.
My opinion is that CV’s response to you was highly disingenuous and twisted the meaning of what you were saying.
I found your comment informative because I hadn’t known Trotter had been swallowing rightwing propaganda and propagating it for as long as he probably has been.
In truth I’ve long believed that while Labour is the proud heritage of the left; the Greens are it’s future. Within a generation, maybe even sooner, it could be Labour who is the minor party… unless it is willing to completely reform it’s internal processes.
The reason for the Green’s success this election? In two parts; many thought is safe to ‘give the Greens a go’ because this election was a foregone conclusion. But more importantly… look at the quality of the people they have; fresh new generational faces like Holly Walker, Gareth Hughes… inspiring choices like Mojo Mathers. And all of the Green MP’s … when they speak they all make sense… taking as their role model Jeanette Fitzsimmons.
Now while the Green party may well have some considerable maturing to do; that’s a process underway nicely thank you. The same cannot be said of Labour; internally it’s struggling with renewal, not so much in a policy sense, but in a people sense. For decades Labour could count on a solid backing of funds, people and moral support from the Unions. The right wing has very successfully diminished that base, and for the same reason they have destroyed the Student Unions as well. (Next stop the Teachers Union as well…)
The challenge here is Labour’s. Personally I’ve put my 2c on Camp Cunliffe; because as you say he has the track record, the experience and the communication skills to be a Leader now… not in two elections time. If the caucas cannot see that … then it will be an important failure and one that most certainly hand the initiative firmly to the Greens.
But given I happily back both horses I guess I’m not too fussed in the long-term.
Yes Trotter is totally different to Pagani. She comes across as a self promoter and a careerist.
No understanding of loyalty to her team…spends more of her time in the company of Talkback hate merchants like Williams.
If she has problems with the Labour Party, she should be airing them within the movement, not shouting off to any corporate media person, who needs her for the faux left spokesperson for their ‘balanced” debates.
And if she really does not like the Labour Party, she should leave it, found her own party.
Have you considered that the views expressed by Jones and Tamaheri could accurately be considered ‘tribalism’?
Have you considered how a large party representing peoples’ interests might need to be careful about supporting views that alienate potentially half of the population in order to cater to a smaller percentage?
It’s got nothing to do with driving people out – we’re talking about people who are no longer inside Labour. Just like Taito Phillip Field and Gordon Copeland, Tamihere and now Jones have left their party, declared that they have masses of support behind their ideas, but can’t prove it.
The line that Shane Jones was somehow ‘driven out’ or ‘exiled’ from Labour is just silly. He was number 5 in caucus and given significant portfolios and opportunities to speak on behalf of the party. He was leading the so far very successful, very high profile Countdown story. Yet commenters insist on acting like he received the kind of treatment Cunliffe did at Shearer’s hands. It is simply factually wrong.
Steph, what line about driving Shane Jones into exile? Read again please. Personally I am pleased he took himself, and i think Trotters blog on the reasons he did is very persuasive..
If you read my comments more carefully (or if I could write more lucidly) what I was alluding to was the propensity of “leftist” bloggers to drive people they dont agree with away in a very “tribal” almost mob orientated manner. The message is that our behavior often mirrors the people we rage at.
I don’t need to read anything again, Ennui. Your comment accused me of ‘tribalism’ and wanting to send people into ‘heretics exile’. This aligns with comments others have made about Jones being driven out of the Labour Party – it’s been a common theme of the past week. As I said, in the case of Shane Jones it’s laughable to suggest he was ‘sent into exile’, and in reference to my own comment it’s silly to suggest I was promoting such an option.
Steph, we disagree…cool. I have looked at your site, and I cant say I am 100% on your page. Despite that we might have to agree to disagree if we are going to fight the common enemy, which I suppose was the root of my comment about not driving allies away.
Your comment accused me of: tribalism; ignoring other people’s opinions; demanding people get ‘done over’; and being ‘pissed off’ because I don’t ‘think and see things’ as lucidly as Chris Trotter.
I really dislike people who use the ‘agree to disagree’ card when they’re the one who started throwing around insults.
Ennui………….who do you think Shane Jones represented? Who is the demographic that he and Tamihere and Pagani are talking about who feel unwanted in the party?
Is it Maori? Blue collar workers? middle age, middle class, males? Who? Is it pro-mining, anti-gay what?
What is it that’s so important to them that they feel Labour isn’t doing? Don’t just say Labour isn’t a broad enough church for them, cause that means nothing.
One thing I think is interesting is Shane got less votes in his electorate (and failed to win the seat off Sharples), than the Labour Party vote.
Who knows who Shane Jones represented? Certainly not me. I suspect Trotter is correct that Jones only ever really represented Jones, and that by not accepting that he was “divinely ordained” to lead the Labour Party did poor little Shane wrong.
I am with you and others Jones was all about himself like ‘a legend in his own mind’
Think he got a bit of a wake up call reading opinions on this blog site. Hope he is true to his word and stays out of the media.
My own thought is that people like Jones assume that by supporting business they are automatically helping the workers, which in fact is sometimes true and sometimes false. It depends on the business, whether or not it employs people and pays them well, (or underpins the viability of other businesses in an area), whether or not its effect on the environment is commensurate with the good it does, and so on and so on. These people are no doubt good fund raisers, since they come across to business as relatively safe hands on the left. The problem is that they are then tempted to undermine the broader values of left to shore up their cred in that area – like Jones’s attacks on the Greens, for example.
This of course turns off people who look to the left for protection from the powerful. Such people are not fooled for one second by smoko-room chat, even if the big donors think its a winner. It is as though they are being told, “Look mate, I’d like to help you, but if I did I would alienate my powerful mates, and if I do that I won’t be able to help you,” which is of course deeply circular, and far from convincing.
The problem lies with the weakening of the unions, and Labour being forced to seek funding from much the same sources as National. It can only be solved by building up such numbers that it starts to look as if we can win without their help.
If there’s such a large faction of left-leaning blue-collar blokes just crying out for representation which speaks to them and only to them, surely they’ll have no trouble getting over the 5% line.
The Labour Party dove under 30% of the vote last election. Labour bled votes to the Greens, NZ First, and of course a group out there which ended up with way more people than Labour in the election day polls – i.e. non voters.
Today Labour can barely hold 32-33% in the polls yet you have the audacity to dismiss the working class with this kind of hubris. Yeah.
Would have been good had you answered some of the astute questions Anker poses @ 2.2.3.4 prior to referring to Jones as representing the working class in the way you just have.
My point was that Labour has NOT been representing the blue collar working class.
NB I was referring to a Labour Party WITH Shane Jones. So IMO Shane Jones did nothing in that dept apart form being vaguely blokey at times, which the working class is typically smart enough to see right through.
Well perhaps in future you might check out the context with which the comment you are responding to is written in then prior to responding with unfounded indignation.
Not dismissing the working class at all, Viper. Dismissing the idea that the blue-collar red-neck narrow-minded hates-women-and-gays faction, so beloved of Shane Jones, Tamihere et al, exists. Once again I must ask you to stop assuming you know what I’m saying. Your assumptions are generally wildly off the mark.
Former Labour candidate Josie Pagani agreed, saying those in the party who had rejoiced in Jones leaving “are guilty of sectarianism at its worst”.
The division in the party was between those focused on social mobility and those focused on social engineering – “we’ll make you better off versus we’ll make you a better person,” she said.
“we’ll make you better off versus we’ll make you a better person”????
Where the fuck does she come up with this shit? What a moran. Is this the result of being shunned by the like of TS? She no longer has as much access to the internals in the party so she’s spews out this shit because shes having a big sulk?
Helen Kelly in good form with facts at her fingertips rather than speculation and rhetoric. It would be good to see more of her (rather than Tamihere, Trotter).
Maybe she gets money from National sources just the way Jones did.
Her task ….to undermine Labour at very opportunity.
Might also explain why she’s always at the top of the list of invitees as a ‘Labour spokesperson’ by the corporate media.
Just join the Nats Josie..that’s where your heart is.
Just be honest.
John Pagani joined NZOG in September 2012. He has a degree in politics from the University of Auckland and a law degree from Victoria University of Wellington. After working as a news producer at Newstalk ZB in Auckland, he moved to Parliament where he worked as a communications director and senior strategist, taking time out to start a public affairs consultancy specialising in development in 2002.”
So that explains a hell of a lot.
Pity that conflict of interest within the Pagani household is not mentioned by the corporate media.
Pagani is sadly hilarious, Whale Oil reblogs her posts and the problem is with the rest of the left, sure thing…
Here’s a pro tip Josie, if Cameron Slater is supporting what you are saying and helping to disseminate your message, it probably isn’t good for the left.
A few years ago when Josie stood for Labour I had some trouble reconciling what she was saying and who she was to the Labour party I was once a member of:. She seemed to me to be an unreconstructed neo lib. In a funny kind of way I put it as being akin the great Semitic faiths, Jews and Islamics and Christians each have a “broad church”, but that does not include somebody of one of the other faiths. I cant see how Labour as a “broad church” can include neo libs, they belong to that other “broad church” that includes National.
As per the modus operandi of neo lib right wingers, Pagani (either of them) represent what is specifically good for the individual (who is Pagani) first and foremost.
It’s moron. That misspelling really grates on me 🙁
I always get pissed off by the claims about social-engineering and it always seems to come from the right. They don’t seem to realise that their own policies are also social-engineering – just very, very bad social-engineering that will destroy our society as it always has done before.
Do all the muppets in the press, like John Armstrong, Chris Trotter, Josie Pagani, Fran OSullivan, etc have it in for Labour because their usual contacts within the party Goff, Mallard, Jones etc are now on the outer and are therefore of little value to them?
Gallery journalists try and build relationships with politicians so they can get leaks. They must be fucked off that those relationships, which they built up over the course of many years, are now completely worthless.
And the result is we get anti-labour dreck from a bunch of sulky hacks.
National Radio on Sunday morning is quite good with Wallace Chapman ( even although I miss Chris Laidlaw)
Unfortunately no audiolink up (yet?)…but very good discussion on what is best for New Zealand education and the importance of highly university trained professional teachers and taking education professionals with you in any changes in education.
John Key and NACT are proposing unqualified teachers and are ignoring the teaching profession’s s views …as well as undermining/attacking teacher unions and teacher professionalism.
From international education experts also…. the thumbs down for Charter Schools and privatisation of education
8:40 New Zealand Principals’ Federation national president Philip Harding
Philip Harding attended The International Summit on the Teaching Profession. He talks about how New Zealand can achieve better educational outcomes.
That was a pretty disappointing Radio report on the Education Forum Chooky. There was too much time wasted on the froth and on the chosen reps who just said blah blah blah on amorphous cliches. The nearest to real stuff was from the man from Finland who you notice referred to the PISA testing as a sideline and unfortunate that some countries narrow their teaching just to do well with PISA. Sure there was a black mark for Charter Schools and that NZ underfunds education and ignores funding in the areas that would make a difference.
NZ does not do well it seems, in the lack of Government cooperation/listening to those who actually do the teaching.
@inamac….yes the end was a bit fudgey from some NZers…. and the conclusions could have been more of a ‘sock it to ’em’ ….but overall all… the points covered by the international experts were pretty succinct against devaluing the professionalism of teachers ,privatisation and Charter Schools and PSIS testing …emphasis was placed on how important teachers/educators are and upgrading their status (which has been devalued in the last 5 years under NACT) and letting teachers/ educators/universities /research lead educational and teaching practice change
…overall it was pretty good from Radio NZ i thought
…..( i am trying to be positive here, after my rather negative statements about Guy Espiner)
She obviously hasn’t learnt any lessons from the Mad Butcher comments that went down like a cup of cold sick. There is a severe lack of comms discipline in the Labour caucus at the moment.
Key The Minister for Warner Brothers can probably be credited with the “illiteracy” jibe: you could quote him from Hansard on numerous occasions upto November 2008 telling precisely the same lie.
I note that Winston, the master attention seeker, decided it merited a comment. In that context I’m not sure what Fenton has done wrong.
Looks like The Herald isn’t too chuffed about it either: the article starts: “New Zealand has been insulted…”
Just one of the little in-jokes that pops up from time to time in animated movies. Probably Warner Brothers executives having a laugh at begging bowl NZ ministers, with not enough money, not understanding the employment law they enacted to enable the Hobbit movies.
I was almost in tears listening to the hysterical crap pouring out of Coddington’s mouth and being confirmed by that Professor chap whose name I’ve forgotten and don’t care. Both of them were following the right wing line and blindly echoing the bullshit being fed them by others. Then along came Robert Reid and knocked them down. I hope we see much more of him!
The most revealing piece of info. came from Shane Jones and Moira Coatsworth when confronted with the question: who leaked the story?
Jones was clear. He didn’t leak it. He planned to tell the Caucus at the first meeting after the break (I presume that would have been Tues. 6th May) and then it would have become public – on Labour’s terms.
Coatsworth when asked the same question told Smalley… I think you’ll have to ask the National Party.
Back to Whale Oil? No wonder the MSM pay the slime-bag so much homage. You scratch my back boys and girls, and I’ll scratch yours.
Coddington is an utter moron. Her tiny hamster brain couldn’t help but vocalise that the ‘last nail in the coffin’ line she’d been fed (probably by demnetia-riddled Richard Prebble) was overly dramatic.
Meanwhile Robert Reid absolutely crushes them! Calls them on their creation of bullshit re: Shane Jones-working-class-hero bollocks. Except he’s too kind, calls it myth making instead of telling coddington and miller and woods right to their rotten faces that they’re a bunch of well-heeled liars.
Susan Wood is the absolute pits. And she can always rely on her sycophantic pet, Raymond Miller, to bleat the blairite, centre right horseshit.
what was his line? Labour’s constituency is very fragile? What a load of shite, how is it more fragile than any other parties’ constituency? He would have said the same about National in 2002. He’s one of those morons that think if he just plants his opinions somewhere in the middle he’ll stay relevant.
Just watched Q+A. Robert Reid was great. Especially pointing to the Media Myths promoted against the truths. And that Media were right there talking the myths. And Coddington is unbelievably awful as a commentator. Perhaps she is there as a Labour plot to show the shallowness of the NAT/ACT?
Election year and Q+A better start getting their Qs straightened out.
Yes BG re Robert Reid. He was marvellous and raised that interesting point the Countdown pay their workers $2 more per hour than NW (I think it was NW). This gets lost in the whole “Jones the hero of the working man”. His countdown thing was good, but it seemed a bit random and not part of a coherent plan, policy for workers and jobs.
And I am still asking who will leave the party or no longer support the party because Jones has gone? Whose voice did he represent? And who is it more important that Labour represents?
The deputy editor of the Herald on Sunday gave a good hint this morning that Shane Jones ”will be back”,
Apparently Jones hasn’t finished with politics but we are left up in the air as to what such a small but loaded point means for the future,
My speculation is that Winston Peters close to the 2017 election will force the resignation of one of His Caucus after having quietly inserted Jones as ‘next in line’ on the NZFirst Party list,(or Peters will use His influence with whoever is the Government to buy out of the Parliament one of the NZFirst MP’s with ‘a job for the boys’ ala the current situation with Jones),
At the point of having inserted Jones into the Parliament Peters will announce His retirement and Jones as the leader,(which might put a twist in a few noses in the NZfirst Caucus,
Yep. People on the list may turn down the option to take the seat in their vacancy, but for Bad’s hypothetical to be correct, Jones would need to be on the NZ First List for the 2014 election.
The political scientist on Q and A Raymond Millar just said Jones leaving may have done Labour a favour as there will now be no Jones attacking the Greens as a coalition partner in the campaign.
In my opinion, having an MP who has a weak work ethic, has alienated half the voting public and has been actively working against the left wings best interests for a very long time remain in the Labour party was never a good idea. After all, he was being paid by Nationals associates to undermine Labour’s core values, and that I believe is the main reason for him resigning being ushered out.
Although the subject matter is a bit boring, Jones saying that he was not willing to work with the Greens as a reason to leave is secondary to him recently being caught out taking bribes from the right wing. It is his way of undermining any future left wing government that might curtail the fossil fuel industry and inhibit slaver-fishing vessels. After all, these are the industries that have been generously funding his, shall we say, lifestyle.
I presume that Jones was the perpetrator of various leaks to the media that have damaged Labour in the past. That’s why I’m happy to see him go. Without Jones, the biased media in New Zealand are panicking about losing their mole and their fear of not having any dirt to dish on Labour leading up to an election is showing. Perhaps they might like to start actually working for a story, instead of just parroting right wing attack lines and making stuff up.
I must say that I’m enjoying the reality check recent commentators on The Standard are giving MP’s and various media hacks who are also well past their used by date. The MSM have even been whinging about it. Let’s hope their propaganda is just as transparent to the average voter.
First proposed in the 1920’s and supported by the hardcore Marxist greenie Gordon Coates, railways minister in the far left socialist United-Reform coalition….
Great day for Auckland, goes to show, despite everything, things other than roads can still be built up, not torn down.
I’m going to choose my words carefully about the whole Shane Jones situation because emotions seem pretty charged on the topic.
For me, I didn’t care overly for Jones. Some of his economic positions were similar to mine, but I consider myself a social liberal and Jones’s attitudes were quite ghastly, at times. Personally, I’m not bothered to see him leaving, though I will miss some of his bombastic deliveries of speeches.
However, the real issue is the almost congratulatory nature of some that he’s left. That’s the issue where I think Pagini is actually a little bit true. Jones did speak for some of Labour in its broad church. He did win 16% in the leadership election. People did like him. When they see people high-fiving Jones’s departure, it does tend to suggest that their position is not actually welcomed anymore in the party. Even if only a third of his supporters consider voting for NZ First or National, that might be 1.5-2% of the votes moving away from Labour. In a close election, that might be important.
I think the Labour MPs have covered themselves well. Regardless of what they think of Jones and his attitudes, they’ve made all the right sounds. We like him, we wish him luck, Kelvin is a great replacement, we move on. However, if the celebratory nature of some Labour members extend into the media narrative (which it’s starting to do), then there’s cause for concern.
The best thing would have been to do what the MPs did. Instead of having people writing about how Jones going is actually a good thing and good riddance.
Hey Phillip. I see you can spell words now. Well done. Have you tried putting a capital letter at the beginning of each new thought. You finish each thought with a dot. One dot, not two. These are then called sentences.
Similar thoughts or sentences are grouped together and these are called paragraphs. This is important because it allows readers to follow your reasoning in a logical fashion. Otherwise they might think what you are writing is just mindless crap!
Agree Disraeli Gladstone. There’s been overly negative stuff on this site about Shane Jones. I was not in agreement with his views, but he certainly isn’t the bastard some here have tried to paint him.
It’s looking more and more likely the story was prematurely leaked by the National Party (see my 8.1.1) and that, in my view, is where the anger should be directed.
the real issue is the almost congratulatory nature of some that he’s left. That’s the issue where I think Pagini is actually a little bit true.
Certainly there have been some comments but as far as I can make out predominately by Green or Mana supporters. This line has been used to suggest that there has been a whole lot of Labour members dancing on Jones’ grave and to be honest I have not seen any real evidence of it. There has been robust discussion as there always is.
mickysavage is right. The bulk of Labour members and supporters who have publicly commented here and elsewhere have been reasonably respectful of Jones’ decision to leave.
Some of us within the party make no apologies for giving Shane stick, and fully justifiable when you consider he has turned renegade on a political party of which he is still an mp, and that is endeavoring to win an election in under 6 months.
Critiquing this mornings Q&A there are a couple of things I will point out. Moria Coastworth accusing, I presume some of us on here of mouthing off, like we weren’t well qualified, or it was somehow unjustifiable. Pretty piss poor Moira that you didn’t show some guts like Robert Reid did and call Shane out, atleast on his non disclosure that he ‘did not consult with the McCully job offer’ and as LP President that come as a huge disappointment. So how about you show some leadership of your own or maybe while there is a purge happening you might consider joining Jones.
Good work Bob Reid for balking at the bullshit notion that Jones reps working class people. Also for pointing out that Countdown/Progressive Enterprises is but one half of the supermarket duopoly, in that sense the issue has broadened out as we knew it would lead on and hence the support given to the attack by some of us. I maintain that Jones was fronting for his Croatian family/business mates Tally’s, financial donations garanteeded. Which reminds me Jones putting up Willow Jean as the Northland LP candiate is hardly done the party a favour, more likely the Mana & the Greens. Tell us how many of the Affco (Tally’s owned) blue collars are going to vote for the partner of the ‘hated boss’ that locked them out for 26 weeks? Another classic Jones fuck up!
I think Coatsworth is party of that caucus clique where they have to publically pretend they’re all respectful of each other and matey matey etc but actually they fucking hate each others guts.
Ha ha got a laugh out of your comment, not quite that bad but certainly 2 divisions. Let us hope the tension will subside and allow some breathing room with Jones out of the picture. Must have been rather testing trying to contain a mule headed Jones, exerting his own deep seeded hatred of the Greens.
The next breach of discipline/unity will be the party list rankings I would assume. The staff in the engine room will have written up a summary execution type notice, and force every MP and candidate to sign well prior to the list release. You can guarantee a number of MP’s are going to be effectively shunted out of parliament and may not want to go amicably, more likely kicking and screaming. Any thought of such happenings needs to be spelt out when they gather after the current break, McCarten’s not so subtle style is probably required for that.
Who is to say that the people who took the time out to look up on this website (and perhaps the Daily Blog) can not see sense in the reasons people provided for asserting that Labour may be better off without Jones.
Amongst other things, it is highly jarring when one has read clear messages from the Labour leader after their strategy meetings earlier in the year, that the leader (at least) recognises the merit of speaking well of the other biggest left wing party and working well with them and then to have one member of the party coming out with the things Jones said about the Greens.
That such incidents occurred indicate poor discipline and raise questions re harmony within the caucus due to the expressed conflict with the main themes that have been discussed and reported about Labour-the-Party’s stance toward other left-wing parties that they are likely to have to work with in some way, shape or form.
That Jones was quick to cite Labour’s stance on the Greens as a reason for leaving makes a whole lot of sense and removes the concerns raised in the previous paragraph.
Who is to say that the people who liked Jones didn’t find it odd that he took a job from one of the National party strategists, Murray McCully allowing National to make statements that ‘Jones is joining our government’ (Key).
Who is to say that people who liked Jone’s character, and took time to read the opinions of people on this site expressing discontent, didn’t leave the site with a shifted perception; that those who expressed frustration at the framing of this event ‘as a disaster for Labour’ made a valid point?
If Shane Jone’s qualities cited here and elsewhere reflect him accurately, that he appeals to a certain misogynism and boorishness out there in the community. One has to really question – how much of these qualities can Labour – as a large political party on the left – afford to cater to such stances without alienating large sections of the community and alienating themselves from their own major political principles? i.e. How can a party ‘for the people’ take a stance against half the population in the name of appealing to a small percentage of the population?
Really, these are sincere questions that need to be asked and addressed.
+1 yes, did you see Stephanie Roger’s comment at 2.2 above? (Snap!)
This would be the way to go. I don’t think a large party can cater to degenerate aspects of our culture. Leave that to a small ‘special interests’ party. It would, indeed, be interesting to see how many votes are gathered by such a party.
This would be the way to go. I don’t think a large party can cater to degenerate aspects of our culture.
That’s a good way to for a political party to reconnect with its constituency of poncy snotty well educated morally self exalting social liberals.
Consider that National, the party of the 1%, wins far more votes than Labour, the so called broad church for the 99%.
It’s not only ironic, it points to a massive disconnect with wider NZ society that Labour has not dealt with yet, especially considering that since the 1930’s, National has had significantly more years in power than Labour has, and it was Labour who opened the nation’s gates wide open to neoliberalism and corporate financialisation.
The resentment and anger many still hold towards what Labour did, and what it has since become, isn’t “degenerate” – it is valid and quite justifiable.
You appear to have missed answering the questions that earlier I posited need to be answered.
If Shane Jone’s qualities cited here and elsewhere reflect him accurately, that he appeals to a certain misogynism and boorishness out there in the community. One has to really question – how much of these qualities can Labour – as a large political party on the left – afford to cater to such stances without alienating large sections of the community and alienating themselves from their own major political principles? i.e. How can a party ‘for the people’ take a stance against half the population in the name of appealing to a small percentage of the population?
Let me make it clearer for you:
How many people in NZ do you think Shane Jones represents?
How many people in NZ do you think he alienates.
How many people in NZ do you think Shane Jones represents?
How many people in NZ do you think he alienates.
Shane Jones was an irrelevancy to the working class last month, and he is an irrelevancy to the working class today. They might have appreciated his gumption on a couple off issues but in terms of representing their interests with any authenticity? Few thought so. I have a few Tory mates who thought he was alright however.
So now, let me ask you another set of questions.
What proportion of people in NZ do you think the Labour Party represents the interests of?
And how many of the people in that group would actually agree with that?
O.k, so you respond to my questions by saying Shane Jones is an irrelevance to the working class last month and today.
This response strikes me as a bit of a cop out CV.
I take it, therefore that you are saying he represents no one, and therefore must alienate no one?
I disagree. I think that the element of truth occurring with the mainstream media’s narrative of this is that there is a section of NZ that do respond to misogyny and boorish behaviour.
And I was responding to that aspect of their narrative by questioning whether Labour can afford to cater to such attitudes if they wish to appeal to many.
You appeared to have a problem with that comment, yet do not appear to be capable of answering it honestly. This precludes the possibility of having an honest and constructive discussion on the matter with you.
I for one would be very interested in knowing what sort of numbers we are talking about here. How many people do the Shane Jones style politicians of NZ actually represent? Who are they? And how many people are alienated, put off politics, or voting due to parties/ media narratives scrabbling after this section of New Zealand? How big is this section of NZ?
It is questions such as these that need to be addressed in order for a political party such as Labour to retain relevance.
The narrative by the media answer none of these questions, nor do you, yet both yourself and the media are prepared to write about such notions just the same. This is simply about playing shadow boxing games devoid of any real information. This is the type of behaviour that hurts the left far more than the right-wing. Because the left requires a bit of thoughtfulness. The right doesn’t and I suggest to you that that is the right’s competitive advantage and nothing else.
This is simply about playing shadow boxing games devoid of any real information. This is the type of behaviour that hurts the left far more than the right-wing.
You want data on Shane Jones appeal to the wider electorate?
Fine, but if that information exists anywhere it will be in the private internal polling done by the political parties, so source that if you can.
The only data I have to go on is the few % of Labour Party members who actually voted for Jones in the leadership vote last year. I guess in the most concrete sense, that’s his constituency.
Because the left requires a bit of thoughtfulness. The right doesn’t and I suggest to you that that is the right’s competitive advantage and nothing else.
Wrong. National understands the mindset and the mood of NZers better than Labour does. And it shows routinely. While Labour moans that the Royals visit is playing politics in an election year, Key just gets stuck in and NZers simply find Kate and George charming, lovely and gracious (and cute).
Another thing, National never apologises for acting in the interests of it’s own constituents. Corporate casinos, private property developers, dairy farmers, finance company investors, etc. It just goes out there and does what it needs to in order to help its mates. Whereas Labour always seems to be apologising for something. Except raising the retirement age of course, they seem really righteous about that one piece of policy which will fuck over workers and the unemployed in an attempt to balance the books and be “fiscally responsible”.
This is how the Tory party serving the interests of the 1% regularly manages to get almost 50% in opinion polls. But the “broad church” Labour Party of the 99% struggles to get even 33% in opinion polls.
I can’t say it any louder: MASSIVE DISCONNECT with the wider electorate.
So I return back to my original point – Shane Jones was irrelevant a month ago and he remains irrelevant now.
I’ll add this in more direct response to you – yes Jones pissed many people off and alienated many others.
But on the scale of what Labour has done to turn away supporters, voters and potential voters, the things I listed above, and many others, are WAY higher up the list.
Where Jones’ political body finally gets buried will have zero impact on how people view Labour on election day. He’s irrelevant.
No, CV, it is not wrong. National may be able to go sucking up to a couple of wealthy elite and get a boost in ratings for doing so, yet would it not be perceived as somewhat incongruous if Labour – representing workers did so?
Shouting at me re massive disconnects hardly serves your purpose. Perhaps it might be better to listen and realise that what I am saying is not in conflict with what you appear to be wanting to shout back at me? What I am saying to you is there is this narrative re ‘blue collar workers leaving in droves’ from the Labour party going along, yet not once is this ‘blue collar worker’ defined apart to say that a person like Shane Jones represents them.
As Mr Reid on Q&A so astutely put it half of workers are women – top marks Mr Reid on being the first person to mention this obvious little fact. Women are also up there in the worst paid most unemployed stats, I would hazard a guess that this is the type of constituency Labour need to appeal to, yet references to ‘blue collar workers’ persist (perhaps largely by the media)and perhaps this sector is largely dominated by men? I don’t know what this term is really referencing. Trades people appear to be on pretty good wages last time I checked when compared to the type of work women traditionally do. (There are safety issues that effect some section of this group – I doubt very much that such people are supportive of National’s stance on the matter).
I hold to my previous comment that Labour cannot getaway with the type of clowning that National can (it is easier to appear cavalier and that ‘it dunt matta’ when this is your genuine attitude), the way Labour wins is by knowing their strengths, knowing their most likely supporters and knowing National’s weaknesses and shaping everything they say and do to these three factors.
I actually have a feeling this is what they are doing and this process takes time to show results. Any mistakes that have occurred is from Labour lacking focus in this respect – buying into rightwing framing and being overly concerned about offending the sections of society that will never vote for them anyway.
The left came very close to winning the last election – there is no reason why they cannot achieve an election win this time around.
Oh, I’m not saying it’s not good that he’s gone. I’d agree with that.
But I think the “crowing” of Jones’ opponents is making the issue worst. I agree with Mickey that a lot of the crowing is done by Greens/Mana/Whoever Bomber’s Being Paid For Now. But there are some Labour members adding their voices.
I think if everyone can of just nodded, “oh right, Shane, well good luck. Now, Kelvin, good man,” I think Labour could have really got away with hardly any damage.
..i think even his most fervent supporters will be going stfu shane..!
..he is doing far more damage to his own cause with his own mouth..(and seeming to be trying to inflict as much damage on the party that gave him what he got..ungrateful prick..!..)
..and if he hadn’t insisted on going out the door cock in hand – and spraying everyone/thing labour in sight/he can..
..he may have been able to retain some dignity..some mana..
..as it is..?..
..yeah..nah..eh..?
..the game has moved onto:..’just fuck off jones..!’..
“That’s the issue where I think Pagini is actually a little bit true.”
….. and of course that’s exactly why these shills are given airtime and the ability to exercise their so-called left-wing creds.
…… they’re always just “a little bit true” – a bit like most of those economic commentators we see on the nightly gogglebox ‘news’, and why they claim “From the Left” creds on Nine-to-Noon.
(“I tend to agree with you Mathew”) – which of course is code for ‘I’m a moderate leftie’ – despite the pendulum having had 30 years to swing right. Tony Blair anyone?
The ‘elephant in the room’ about the whole Shane Jones situation is that it highlights the absolute dearth of talent within the National Party, that they need to shoulder-tap an Opposition MP because none of their own possess the necessary competence.
Good point Dave. And perhaps there was an aspiring soon-to-be ex Nat MP being a bit pissed off. “That should have been my job McCulley!”
“But,” says McCulley, “None of youse are as capable as the Jones boy. You are Nats after all.”
I came across this comment on Facebook posted on Kelvin Davis’s page:
Men should take responsibility for male violence but it isn’t that simple. The following is a quote in reaction to that comment, is it a fair call?
In the case of many Maori men, they had their first taste of being beaten up by their (solo) mother until they got old enough to leave home and big enough to be the boss themselves. At this point woe betide the woman who tries,or appears to try to dominate him. No father around modelling good behaviour because the DPB allows resource to flow from men to women without reciprocation so women have kids alone.
Feminism and the erosion of mana tane (male honour and prestige) is the colonisation that dare not speak its name. Good luck with those Labour Party Hand Mirror feminists Kelvin; they’ll love you while you’re in your white knight “it’s all men’s fault” phase, but as soon as you follow the facts, look at the bigger picture and hold women to account for their part in these problems you’ll realise what a poisoned chalice you hold.
Get that people? This person thinks that women help perpetrate violence against themselves.
Hmm, let me see….dumb-arse connection of disparate dots by means of bald assertion followed by the wise council to ‘follow the facts’. Gee, Mickey, give us a clue while I away for a wee cuppa made from bagged up factory floor sweepings, will you? 😉
Also, men taking responsibility for male violence is that simple, that’s the entire point of….uh…..men taking responsibility for their role in perpetrating violence.
How very dare you! He’s a perfectly work-life-balanced specimen that works on logic and weighing up all the evidence in non-partisan FASHION. Furthermore – he’s a total legend (even IF in his own mind).
At least we have a point of measurement I ‘spose. Shame it’s a fossil.
sick’s right. Now he is telling lies and doing his usual clusterfuck of communication – see the Greville Whittle thread esp where he claims he was quoting someone, that they’re not his words, he wants to ‘promote engagement’ etc
Someone with a FB account might want to go over there and warn people that they’re dealing with a special kind of tr8ll.
good move. why burden yourself with the irrelevant?
If I could, I’d do likewise – it’s only that I don;t subscribe to Facebook – or most other ‘supposedly social’ media.
Apparently I should be devastated because I haven’t signed up for twitter.
(The double breasted suit will soon be back in fashion – or so I hear …. oh – and cuffs on men’s strides – or so I hear – that’ll be so so so cool won’t it?)
I much prefer Twitter. It’s a weird situation: Facebook tends to be much more focused on interacting with people you already know and presumably share interests with, but a lot of people find Twitter far more engaging and personal.
The thing with PG is how he takes a perfectly good debate and drops deadshit all over it.
There is a kernel of a point in what he’s saying.
My partner and I are dealing with a neighbor we’ve gotten to know whose relationship with her boyfriend is unhealthy. Too much angry screaming and shouting. We’ve confronted it twice now.
We’ve made it clear – any hint of violence and things will be really simple; the cops will get called immediately. No compromise on that.
But actually dealing with the underlying causes and fallout is so much more complex than just ‘it’s all his fault’. And most people, from their own direct experience, know this.
If an alcoholic gets in a car and drives they take all the responsibility and blame. But figuring out why they are getting all fucked up, and off abusing alcohol is a whole different discussion in which blame isn’t helpful.
Sigh. I really hope we’re not going to get into one of those conversations again 🙂
Who, other than PG, has said “it’s all his fault”?
All the people I know that work with violence acknowledge and work with multiple causes.
PG’s framing is one that sets up a false premise that kind of sounds like it might make sense, as a way of introducing some pretty fucking dodgy theory – men are violent because Māori mothers don’t have husbands and beat their kids. And you’ve just bought into his racist, misogynist scam, not because you are like him but because he has such a good hook.
I doubt that you can ressurrect the perfectly good debate and try and talk about it in this context Red. Pretty sure there will be strong resistance to talking about domestic violence in the way you are suggesting, in the context of what PG has just done.
I agree with so much of what you say on the blog RL, but on abuse issues I feel you have something of a hair trigger (as do I).
On the paragraph Pete used I believe it’s not framed as a gender issue as such, but as a DPB issue – i.e. If women have kids and leave the fathers (because those fathers would be good role models) the ones who incite young men to violence can only be women. If the DPB was denied then women would have to stay with the men who fathered their children and the problem of kids learning violence from their mothers would be solved. Moreover this is a Māori problem.
In this framing it’s not a case of whether men or women are responsible for domestic violence (obviously both are, because the author admits boys will grow up to hit women). It’s that domestic violence is a result of:
1. Sole parent Māori women
2. The availability of benefits to women with children.
I think you’ve missed the point by arguing about whether women commit violence against their sons (clearly, some do). Seeing we agree on that, is it possible to have a discussion about the framing of the piece?
It’s worth restating the common ground here: violence is always the responsibility of the person who lashes out. Regardless of gender, race, class, provocation or anything.
PG is indeed on very fucking dodgy ground by framing it as a race issue because it’s not.
Equally anyone framing it solely on gender grounds is on similarly thin ice considering that whereas men’s physical strength and cultural conditioning mean they are responsible for the most harm; women contribute to domestic violence and abuse stats in their own special way that cannot be ignored.
I drew a comparison with alcohol abuse because it’s a slightly less ‘loaded’ issue (bad pun intended … sorry). I think that was my sole point – to avoid the kind of bad conflation that PG has made it’s useful to be very clear about the distinction between an absolute, very simple responsibility for committing violence – and having a completely separate discussion about the root cause of why families degenerate into being so angry and dysfunctional with each other in the first place.
I don’t see anybody framing violence ‘solely on gender grounds’. What Kelvin Davis has said is (the fact) that the majority of violence is committed by men against women and children, and his opinion that an important way to address this issue is for men like him to stand up and acknowledge the problem.
I don’t see anybody framing violence ‘solely on gender grounds
Fair enough.
hat the majority of violence is committed by men against women and children
But what are you doing just there?
The point is that while violence is a universal issue, neither is it a uniform one. The violence men commit is indeed the most dangerous, lethal and apparent. Women also commit violence that while it may be somewhat less dangerous, less lethal and far less apparent – frequently leaves emotional and psychological scars far deeper than physical ones. (On this point I speak personally.)
A similar point can be made if we look through the issue from the perspective of race; poor, marginalised and dysfunctional families (and for economic reasons also frequently happen to be Maori or Pacifica) have their own particular experience and patterns of domestic violence that is different to the less apparent but equally reprehensible violence that goes in in ‘respectable’, white, middle-class homes.
So yes I completely reject any attempt to frame this issue around race, gender or class. It may not be uniform in it’s manifestations, but it is universal in it’s harm.
Well to be fair neither did PG say ‘no white person ever commits violence ever’ either.
(In fact a small mischievous part of me might argue that us whitey boys have a special talent for organised mass murder in the form of industrialised warfare – but that’s a tangent too far)
I’m thinking that maybe the left has drifted into this mistake before. Take the S88 Reform Bill debate. Now I died in a whole dozen ditches here defending and promoting that reform. There were of course the church fundies and die-hards who were not going to budge from their belief that it was their God-given/cultural prerogative to beat the crap out of their children if it so pleased them.
But they were a minority. Albeit vocal and organised – but still a minority.
The real problem were the big middle of New Zealanders, all of whom have grown up in a family or have children – and have an experience of the kids getting a smack or a bit of a whack or two. Most of it probably harmless enough. And most people could a good day get their heads around the idea that smacking kids was probably counterproductive and they might be able to raise them without resorting to it. With a bit of encouragement.
Yet the way the debate was framed we fell into the trap of making too many of these middle New Zealanders feel wrong and guilty about it. And it was that which stirred up so much emotional resentment. And probably lost the 2008 election for that matter.
Now where I am in Victoria (Australia is a decade behind NZ in this domestic violence issue) there have been a string of grotesque family murders. Virtually every woman my partner makes friends with has some appalling story. I’m not seeking to minimise this issue one tiny bit.
But here’s the rub. Along with many men, while I’ve never, ever, slightly assaulted a woman, my only personal brush with domestic violence was when a woman rather badly kicked me. (A long time ago.) And most men, while willing to take responsibility for their actions, willing to stop the violence, even if needing a fair bit of encouragement – at the same time are very resistant to the idea that somehow the cause of it was always their fault and they are ones who are always guilty and shamed.
Even if that message is not the intended one, when we focus just on men’s violence it is too often the only message heard. And it provokes the same counterproductive resentment encountered over the S88 Reform. We do that when we conflate responsibility for stopping the violence – with responsibility for the root cause of the anger and dysfunction leading to it.
The counter is to frame the issue in universal terms. When we said “The law does not permit us to assault adults for any reason, why then should it make an exception for children who are even more in need of protection” the heat would go away. Because that argument made sense, and ultimately was why almost every Party in the House voted for it. (Except the execrable ACT Party. It was the beginning of the end for them.)
I don’t feel in any way qualified to have an opinion about that situation where you were assualted Red.
You do seem to be mixing things up. Neither myself, nor Stephanie, nor Kelvin Davis, nor most of the commenters on his FB thread have said that men don’t ever experience violence at the hands of women. Or that all violence is soley the fault of men. So I am at a loss to know what your point is.
I will say again, no-one is saying that it is all men’s fault (apart from PG). If you see people saying that, then I can only suggest that you check out what they really mean and see if it fits what you are thinking.
Please stop supporting PG’s false framing and racist/misogynistic framing.
I don’t feel in any way qualified to have an opinion about that situation where you were assualted Red.
Well if hypothetically I had been the one doing the kicking would you then feel qualified to have an opinion?
Or that all violence is soley the fault of men. So I am at a loss to know what your point is.
My point boils down to this:
“Even if that message is not the intended one, when we focus just on men’s violence … too often is is the only message heard. And then it provokes the same counterproductive resentment encountered over the S88 Reform. We do that when we conflate responsibility for stopping the violence – with responsibility for the root cause of the anger and dysfunction leading to it.”
Please stop supporting PG’s false framing and racist/misogynistic framing.
It would help if you stopped reading demons into little isolated fragments of what I’m saying. Please feel free to ask for clarification if I am unclear.
“I will say again, no-one is saying that it is all men’s fault (apart from PG).”
I’ve never said that, so it’s ironic you’ve (weka) claimed that at the same time as accusing me of “false framing”.
Redlogix makes a very good point. I think he’s right about S88, I had a lot of experience debating against smacking children but it became apparent that many decent parents felt very confronted and shamed by “smacking is illegal”.
And the same thing applies in wider debates about violence. I’ve debated extensively against violence, especially on Kiwiblog, but I can confirm what Redlogix suggests, it’s counterproductive to blame violence on men and traget men specifically.
Men are obviously a major factor in violence but far from the only one. Many women can also be violent, and some even defend violent partners over the wellbeing of children.
But the key point on this (and some could take a lesson on it in politics too) – if you single out and attack groups, whether they be Maori or men or beneficiaries or whatever, you are far more likely to alienate than engage. It’s often counterproductive.
“Well if hypothetically I had been the one doing the kicking would you then feel qualified to have an opinion?”
Of course not.
“It would help if you stopped reading demons into little isolated fragments of what I’m saying. Please feel free to ask for clarification if I am unclear.”
I don’t know what you mean by ‘reading demons into little isolated fragments’. When I asked you to stop supporting PG’s framing, I meant that the act of trying to have a conversation about domestic violence, in the context of what PG did (racist, misogynistic framing to a Māori man in a community that will include many Māori including Māori mothers), and where you believe at core PG has a point… that act is supporting bullshit irrespective of what your actual argmuent is.
“Even if that message is not the intended one, when we focus just on men’s violence … too often is is the only message heard. And then it provokes the same counterproductive resentment encountered over the S88 Reform. We do that when we conflate responsibility for stopping the violence – with responsibility for the root cause of the anger and dysfunction leading to it.”
Don’t know who you mean by ‘we’ in that statement, who exactly focuses ‘just on men’s violence’? Who is conflating responsibility for stopping violence with responsibility of the anger and dysfunction leading to it?
Unless someone is trolling, drunk or emotionally wound up – it’s rare for someone to make a statement in a blog that is completely right or wrong. I’ve read a fair portion of the 800,000 comments here on TS over the years, and if there is one thing I have learned it is that discussions are generally more fruitful and satisfying if you look for those points you can agree on and work from there.
Even the most superficially obnoxious and upsetting comment (and yes they still do) is worth trying to a deep breath on and having a bit of a think about before launching into an angry, testosterone-poisoned rebuttal. Or maybe I’m just getting old and boring and I don’t have it in me anymore 🙂
So if you thought I was 100% backing PG’s position – you have it wrong.
However I’ve spent much of the last four hours reading The Hand Mirror. Lots of great articles – but nothing relating to my experience. Four hours isn’t long and I may well have missed something, but the tag cloud didn’t lead anywhere obvious.
What happened to me was a quite serious assault. A close friend of mine who witnessed it 35 years ago still recalls it clearly. (It was at a party.)
Of course at the time I never reported it. It never occurred to me at the time, I simply would not have defined in my mind that what happened was wrong. Until very recently I would have told you it was my fault. And because of that denial my next really big mistake was in marrying that person. The many consequences of that error still echo in my life to this day.
I’ve been blogging here since 2008 and this is the first and only time I’m going to refer to it. Because if you cannot tell that one person seriously kicking another (regardless of gender or ‘circumstance’) is domestic violence – then frankly I’m out of this discussion.
Red, please take this kindly… you are really missing what I am saying in my comments. To try and clarify,
Of course women can be the offender in domestic violence. That’s a given. You will never have seen me say anything to the contrary, and I don’t think I’ve seen any of the feminist minded people here on ts say that either.
I didn’t feel qualified to have an opinion about either of the situations you put forth, simply because there was no information. You said she kicked you hard, in my response I called that assault. I didn’t know if it was domestic because I didn’t know what the relationship between you and her is, but it was obviously assault. Someone assaulting someone at a party doesn’t in itself equal domestic abuse (as opposed to other kinds of assualt), but I wasn’t assuming anything, I just said I couldn’t comment. There was nothing in anything I have said that even implied that women can’t be violent towards men. I also didn’t, and still don’t know what you wanted me to say in response to
Was it my fault that a woman kicked me? Did I deserve it?
I suspect part of the problem is that you are thinking in terms of blame and guilt and, from the sounds of it, misapplied responsibility. I don’t really think about it in those terms.
The last time I was around physical violence, it was the neighbours yelling at each other in their backyard. It was at night, and I listened for a bit to get a sense of how serious it might be. Then something changed (he picked something up and hit her with it), and she started screaming at him. I drove my car up their drive and talked to them from the rolled down window but with the doors locked (I didn’t know either of them well enough to feel safe). I asked her to come over and talk to me on her own, which she did and she said she would be ok and I believed her. He was apologetic and shame-faced.
I wasn’t sitting there thinking ‘it’s all his fault’. I was thinking about my own safety, whether she would be safe, whether I would need to call the police etc. None of that had anything to do with assigning blame or guilt. It was simply that he lost control of his anger and stepped over a line and I responded by taking action (as did his partner).
I didn’t know her, but I did know him from around the community and certainly knew people who knew him. Later in the week she came over and had a cup of tea and I felt reassured that things were not that out of control (she left him some time later). I saw him round the community over time and was open and friendly to him in the same way I had been before. I told one other neighbour what happened because I thought someone else in the vicinity should know, but I told it neutrally, a recounting of what happened. I didn’t assign blame other than to say that it was him that did the hitting (that’s not really blame that’s just responsibility). I didn’t tell anyone else what had happened, but if someone had talked about him to me in terms of violence I would have considered telling the story or not based on the context.
So, I made a whole bunch of judgement calls in that situation, based on wanting things to be good for all people. If he had done things that suggested he thought it was ok to hit her or tried to blame her for his actions, I would have no doubt made different judgements, not because those things make him evil, but because they lessen significantly the chances of him not hitting her or someone else again. They also would have suggested he had some fucked up ideas about human relations and women, which would have affected my opinion of him as a person.
I can understand with the kind of experiences you have had that your situation has had many effects on you, including probably quite complex ones around being male and violence and where the boundaries are in terms of your own safety. I also understand that men have unique challenges in this because of the roles that the kyriarchy place on them. It’s to our society’s shame that for someone in your situation there is mainly the MRA groups instead of positive, affirming places to go to get support.
I need you to understand that in this conversation my points are political and I’m not speaking about personal experiences. I think both are valuable, but I also think you are responding from your own experiences not to what my actual politics are.
So when I say that PG has done something despicable, what I mean is that he told lies about the people he was speaking to, and he told them in such a way that clouded the issues which enable him to then put forth some fucked up theories of racism and misogyny. None of the people in the conversation that started on Kelvin Davis’ FB page appear to believe the idea that ‘it’s all mens’ fault’. Nor does feminism in general believe that (talk to feminists raising sons and you will understand how much women have a vested interest in not demonising men). Pete’s whole approach told lies about Davis, feminists, and subsequently a number of us. The problem for you is that you tried to have a conversation about personal experiences of violence in a context that was already too fucked to be repaired (which is why I suggested to not do it).
Beyond that, I can understand why some men think that some women think that ‘it’s all men’s fault’ despite it usually not being true. I saw that you didn’t see the difference between that and what Stephanie said for instance. I think there is useful dialogue to be had here that is more focussed on checking things out rather than assuming. It’s possible that we might even get some shared understanding. However I also note that some of your politics clash with mine (and others) on this… I think getting to point where we understand what each others’ politics actually are before we argue about them might be useful. Not sure that now is the right time given the PG Tips effect.
I asked Martin to provide proof to back up what he said, as you may have seen (I presume you checked things out). I think it’s likely some truth to at least some of what he says, family violence has many complex causes. Male violence is a major, but it’s not isolated. There seems to be a high number of Maori solo parents, I think close to half of those on the DPB are Maori.
Violence isn’t limited just to those on benefits, but a lack of money, a lack of support, a lack of a positive father figure, revolving boyfriends, disinterested fathers and disinterested boyfriends are all factors in awful levels of family violence. This is complicated by the fact that violence is an inter-generational problem deeply embedded in some parts of our cultures.
There are two options here Pete, although they’re not mutually exclusive. One is that you do believe, pretty much, with what you posted. The other is that you are a complete imbecile when it comes to online communication. Either way henceforth you will be known for espousing some pretty fucked up views on Māori, women and violence.
You would think he at least would know how to use quotation marks and paste a link with all the copy pasting he does. Why is there no link to the source on his Facebook post I wonder? Didn’t want to expose Kiwiblog to the bad press?
but this old chestnut raised its head pretty quickly “To push the whole message you need evidence and statistics. Is anything substantial available?”
He is still wanting everyone else to do his fact-checking work for him
We know that he does know how to use quotation marks, so the reasonable assumption is that he either wanted to confuse people or he wanted to weasel his way out of his opinions while expressing them. or both.
“Rhys Dwyer Is this the same Pete George who is Editor in Chief of the fact checking site Politicheck?”
To be fair, that’s a good assumption. If Pete had been honest about his sources, most people would have reacted by saying ‘why should we dignify racist, sexist commentary from the sewer?’
And whether you believe him when he says he wants to ‘promote engagement’, or whether you think he just wants to stir up anger and upset in order to high-mindedly opine about it on his own blog later, it would’ve failed either way.
Is it sexist to suggest some women are responsible or partly responsible for our massive problems with violence? If you think it is do you think it’s sexist to single out men on violence?
No one, no one is saying that domestic violence is 100% a male caused problem. It’s a complex issue with many causes. However, it is predominantly a male problem and Kelvin Davis is making the point that males should step up and help stop it and not just leave it to “Hand Mirror feminists” as your quoted friend likes to put it.
But let me quote the quote that you were happy to use to try and get some engagement and debate going:
“being beaten up by their (solo) mother until they got old enough to leave home”
“because the DPB allows resource to flow from men to women without reciprocation so women have kids alone”
“Feminism and the erosion of mana tane (male honour and prestige) is the colonisation that dare not speak its name.”
“Good luck with those Labour Party Hand Mirror feminists Kelvin; they’ll love you while you’re in your white knight “it’s all men’s fault” phase, but as soon as you follow the facts, look at the bigger picture and hold women to account for their part in these problems you’ll realise what a poisoned chalice you hold.”
“their mums prioritising getting drunk over having healthy kids.”
If you don’t think those aren’t the words of a toxic misogynist then I cannot help you and I’m not going to engage with someone so out of touch.
And if you can see that they are the words of a deeply sexist position, then why on earth were you granting them legitimacy by using it as the platform for debate.
mr George,I’m just dipping my toes on this blog,but o’dear me.you may just find…that…… (to with an inch of your life)you have no hand to hold it.Now enough of the toilet jokes.You must try not to prove the point about being educated beyond your intellect.
Just a big fail all round there Pete George. However it’s this sentence that is most troubling to me:
No father around modelling good behaviour because the DPB allows resource to flow from men to women without reciprocation so women have kids alone.
The paraphrasing here is that women should no longer receive the DPB because it encourages them to have children alone. This is the same old argument that we’ve seen a million times from the idiot neoliberals that don’t want to pay their taxes.
Btw, women also pay taxes in New Zealand, so there is no “flow from men to women without reciprocation”. Whoever wrote that is a very sick individual.
The problem is that without welfare which allows solo mothers to survive independently, they and their children are more likely to be forced to reside in violent situations. Restricting finances is one of the ways in which an abuser tries to trap their victims so that they cannot escape.
Is that what you want Pete George…for woman to not have a financial means of escaping the abuse?
And the assumption is that any two-parent heterosexual family setup must be better than a solo-mother set up (it’s also funny how the staunch defenders of men like to ignore the solo dads out there!)
Pete the Weasel seems to be claiming that it’s a quote from somewhere else (he doesn’t say where) to stimulate discussion. I used to find him amusing. Now I almost vomit in disgust.
One wee thing that puzzles me about PG’s facebook offering is that he preludes what you’ve cut and pasted with (paraphrasing) “here’s a quote in response…”, but then doesn’t use quotations or ascribe the (supposed) quote to anyone.
Maybe somebody who can be bothered with him would care to have him clear that one up? I mean, are they his words or not? If he doesn’t agree with what’s being said, then why post it with no qualifying commentary? etc
“Men should take responsibility for male violence but it isn’t that simple.”
I take that to mean that he agrees with what he then cut and pastes. But of course the way that he is communicating this means he has an out. He can express reprehensible ideas but he doesn’t have to take responsibility for that.
“If he doesn’t agree with what’s being said, then why post it with no qualifying commentary? etc”
Because that’s his modus operandi? To let everyone react to something he can then deny. Someone said the other day that it’s all about attention. This is starting to reach pathological proportions.
Besides, google returns only one hit from a random sampling of the ‘quote’, and that’s the FB page. It’s possible that he could have typed it out from hard text but it would have been so easy to attribute it too, so either way he’s just being his usual disingenuous, tr*lly self.
I imagine Rory has some serious thinking to do. We have to believe Rory is aware of Pete’s behaviour today, indeed of this past week.
I sincerely want a site like Politicheck to not only exist, but succeed and proudly stride towards its ambitions. How can it with Pete George shackled to its ankles.
I just had a look at poliwannacracker today to see how it’s evolving. It seems to be nothing more than another Pete George blog.
The “facts” being checked include items of conjecture like “Will NZ First only decide after the election?” and “Will party members decide on Mana/Internet Party alliance?”
In other words, utter trivia. Pretending to answer the questions no-one is asking. Might as well check “What does Pete feel like waffling about today?”
Verdict: Business as usual for Pete. Not looking good, Rory.
The stated goal of Politicheck is: … to analyse all statements made during the election by all parties and say whether or not, based on evidence available, they are telling the truth.
Yet they have so far done:
4 checks on Labour statements
4 checks on the Internet Party (one about Mana/Internet, one about Clare Curran joining the IP)
1 about ACT
1 about a Campbell Live poll
2 about Simon Bridges – one of which about the troubling question ‘have the Greens ever been in government?’
1 about Labour claims about National policy – involves taking 1 tweet from David Cunliffe and saying ‘the government isn’t technically doing nothing’
1 about John Key claims about Labour policy – verdict: he was obviously wrong but we’ve asked for him to verify it
To be honest, that’s not a particularly impressive list (and there’s no tagging/categorising of posts so you have to scroll through the whole list to check what they’ve covered!)
But he also responds to criticisms of his original comment by saying this:
You’ve made a number of assumptions without knowing anything about me. otherwise I agree with much of what you’ve said. It’s nothing to do with “don’t pick on us”, but if it’s addressed as a male problem only from my experience it can alienate the people that need to be engaged with.
If the editor of a factchecking site cannot put quotation marks in or provide a source they are a complete fake. I suspect that the non use of the quotation marks was deliberate rather than a display of utter dim that usually encompasses petes comments and I say that based on his numerous postings to date.
I think it’s very convenient for Pete to phrase his contributions in this way. It allows him to disown any responsibility for the terrible things he writes by claiming (as he does on Facebook) that he’s just trying to ‘promote engagement’ and of course it’s ‘not his opinion, it’s just a quote’.
You forgot this bit Micky. God forbid I have to support PG but you did leave this paragraph out and it’s pertinent.
No word on fetal alcohol syndrome? That would be a good place to start, by stopping kids futures being stolen before they’re even born by their mums prioritising getting drunk over having healthy kids.
Unfortunately when my partner was Pregnant, we used to see the young teen mothers to be coming to anti natal classes hung over, and some were as young as 17. So to me Drinking when pregnant is just another form of child abuse. The babies just start getting abused earlier.
edit: Come to think on it this is probably the most sense he has made in all my time here about 3-4 years.
Looks to me like the Green Party has taken over Labour.
No wonder Jones quit.
What a shambles.
Job killers who say they’re for the workers.
What a message that sends to voters.
[How about you actually back up your claims with the odd fact? There is nothing more annoying than having to deal with inane comments that have no basis in reality – MS]
I note their housing insulation policy required work to be done. Job creators. I further note their giving confidence and supply to a government that achieved the lowest unemployment rate in New Zealand history.
I further note that an example of a “Green” practice is riparian planting which increases per-acre yield.
Whereas you don’t know what Green policy looks like other than vague references to the bogeyman. It’s not unusual to find this sort of fear-mongery in a right-winger, with your engorged amygdallae and so-forth.
Yes, National should stop doing that – people will eventually work out what type of jobs and working conditions National encourage; degenerate ones if any at all.
[How about you actually back up your claims with the odd fact? There is nothing more annoying than having to deal with inane comments that have no basis in reality – MS]
Fair enough. (The left though would be in serious trouble if their comments were filtered by that same criteria).
I’ve written a blog post to substantiate my opinion.
All you have supplied is an extended opinion. Your article is devoid of justification – that is, you haven’t provided any information as to how your opinion is based in reality -I can see why you are having severe problems achieving that aim.
Why on earth do Labour bother running their Red Alert blog. Last posts that I could see are back in March. If they cannot keep it up to date and topical then they should close it
Wallace Chapman interviewed Far From the Tree author Andrew Solomon on RNZ this morning.
I read this incredibly thorough and sensitive book recently, and can’t recommend it too highly.
Solomon interviewed hundreds of families with children who are different from them – by virtue of disability, prodigy, mental illness, criminality, gender identity – and revisited some over several years. There is also a chapter about children born after rape.
Every story is told with sensitivity and humour, and each chapter gives an overview and history of the historical/medical/social issues of the identity.
A good post/article/view on Stuff Nation. The over 200 comments are quite interesting too, being overwhelmingly in support of the article as far as I could see. That pleasantly surprised me.
That’s all they have slogans.
Keep the debate on the issues and drop the personality driven agenda the media will attempt to foist on the debate.
Remember how Robert Reid dealt to the media’s agenda.
lol I do hope that is just a momentary I’ve-lost-patience goodbye, and not meaning that you’ve completely given up on overcoming these technical issues you are experiencing….
An evaluation on the effects of privatisation of schools in US shows us the importance of voting out this current government.
“From 2010 to 2013, Rocketship increased it assets from $2.2 million to $15.8 million. And while it posted impressive test scores at its first schools in California, over the last four years, test scores have fallen at every Rocketship school. All seven Rocketship schools failed to make adequate yearly progress according to federal standards for the last school year.
“Given that Rocketship places such a strong emphasis on standardized testing, it is telling that, even by this measure, the company has faced struggles and disappointments,” Lafer writes.
While Rocketship is a nonprofit, its business model enriches its directors through a deal with a licensed software company called “DreamBox,” supplied by for-profit vendors, who happen to also sit on Rocketship’s board.” https://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/25-2
This is the path that Act would drag our education along!!
A lot of comment here and elsewhere viz Jones, Tamihere, Pagani, Trotter suggesting the Labour Party no longer represents them. Would be interesting to know which party they will vote for come September. Or will they join the 800,000…?
A new season of White Lotus is nearly upon us: more murder mystery, more sumptuous surroundings, more rich people behaving badly.Once more we get to identify with the experience of the pampered tourist or perhaps the poorly paid help; there's something in White Lotus for all New Zealanders.And unlike the ...
In 2016, Aotearoa shockingly plunged to fourth place in the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. Nine years later, and we're back there again: New Zealand has seen a further slip in its global ranking in the latest Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). [...] In the latest CPI New Zealand's score ...
1. You’ve started ranking your politicians on how much they respect the rule of law2. You’ve stopped paying attention to those news publications3. You’ve developed a sudden interest in a particular period of history4. More and more people are sounding like your racist, conspiracist uncle.5. Someone just pulled a Nazi ...
Transforming New Zealand: Brian EastonBrian Easton will discuss the above topic at 2/57 Willis Street, Wellington at 5:30pm on Tuesday 26 February at 2/57 Willis Street, WellingtonThe sub-title to the above is "Why is the Left failing?" Brian Easton's analysis is based on his view that while the ...
Salvation Army’s State of the Nation 2025 report highlights falling living standards, the highest unemployment rates since the 1990s and half of all Pacific children going without food. There are reports of hundreds if not thousands of people are applying for the same jobs in the wake of last year’s ...
Mountain Tui is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Correction: On the article The Condundrum of David Seymour, Luke Malpass conducted joint reviews with Bryce Wilkinson, the architect of the Regulatory Standards Bill - not Bryce Edwards. The article ...
Tomorrow the council’s Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee meet and agenda has a few interesting papers. Council’s Letter of Expectation to Auckland Transport Every year the council provide a Letter of Expectation to Auckland Transport which is part of the process for informing AT of the council’s priorities and ...
All around in my home townThey're trying to track me down, yeahThey say they want to bring me in guiltyFor the killing of a deputyFor the life of a deputySongwriter: Robert Nesta Marley.Support Nick’s Kōrero today with a 20% discount on a paid subscription to receive all my newsletters directly ...
Hi,I think all of us have probably experienced the power of music — that strange, transformative thing that gets under our skin and helps us experience this whole life thing with some kind of sanity.Listening and experiencing music has always been such a huge part of my life, and has ...
Business frustration over the stalled economy is growing, and only 34% of voters are confidentNicola Willis can deliver. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Wednesday, February 12 are:Business frustration is growing about a ...
I have now lived long enough to see a cabinet minister go both barrels on their Prime Minister and not get sacked.It used to be that the PM would have a drawer full of resignations signed by ministers on the day of their appointment, ready for such an occasion. But ...
This session will feature Simon McCallum, Senior Lecturer in Engineering and Computer Science (VUW) and recent Labour Party candidate in the Southland Electorate talking about some of the issues around AI and how this should inform Labour Party policy. Simon is an excellent speaker with a comprehensive command of AI ...
The proposed Waimate garbage incinerator is dead: The company behind a highly-controversial proposal to build a waste-to-energy plant in the Waimate District no longer has the land. [...] However, SIRRL director Paul Taylor said the sales and purchase agreement to purchase land from Murphy Farms, near Glenavy, lapsed at ...
The US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act has been a vital tool in combatting international corruption. It forbids US companies and citizens from bribing foreign public officials anywhere in the world. And its actually enforced: some of the world's biggest companies - Siemens, Hewlett Packard, and Bristol Myers Squibb - have ...
December 2024 photo - with UK Tory Boris Johnson (Source: Facebook)Those PollsFor hours, political poll results have resounded across political hallways and commentary.According to the 1News Verizon poll, 50% of the country believe we are heading in the “wrong direction”, while 39% believe we are “on the right track”.The left ...
A Tai Rāwhiti mill that ran for 30 years before it was shut down in late 2023 is set to re-open in the coming months, which will eventually see nearly 300 new jobs in the region. A new report from Massey University shows that pensioners are struggling with rising costs. ...
As support continues to fall, Luxon also now faces his biggest internal ructions within the coalition since the election, with David Seymour reacting badly to being criticised by the PM. File photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate ...
Not since 1988 when Richard Prebble openly criticised David Lange have we seen such a challenge to a Prime Minister as that of David Seymour to Christopher Luxon last night. Prebble suggested Lange had mental health issues during a TV interview and was almost immediately fired. Seymour hasn’t gone quite ...
Three weeks in, and the 24/7 news cycle is not helping anyone feel calm and informed about the second Trump presidency. One day, the US is threatening 25% trade tariffs on its friends and neighbours. The reasons offered by the White House are absurd, such as stopping fentanyl coming in ...
This video includes personal musings and conclusions of the creator climate scientist Dr. Adam Levy. It is presented to our readers as an informed perspective. Please see video description for references (if any). Wherever you look, you'll hear headlines claiming we've passed 1.5 degrees of global warming. And while 2024 saw ...
Photo by Heather M. Edwards on UnsplashHere’s the key news, commentary, reports and debate around Aotearoa’s politics and economy in the week to Feb 10 below. That’s ahead of live chats on the Substack App and The Kākā’s front page on Substack at 5pm with: on his column in The ...
Is there anyone in the world the National Party loves more than a campaign donor? Why yes, there is! They will always have the warmest hello and would you like to slip into something more comfortable for that great god of our age, the High Net Worth Individual.The words the ...
Waste and fraud certainly exist in foreign aid programs, but rightwing celebration of USAID’s dismantling shows profound ignorance of the value of soft power (as opposed to hard power) in projecting US influence and interests abroad by non-military/coercive means (think of “hearts and minds,” “hugs, not bullets,” “honey versus vinegar,” ...
Health New Zealand is proposing to cut almost half of its data and digital positions – more than 1000 of them. The PSA has called on the Privacy Commissioner to urgently investigate the cuts due to the potential for serious consequences for patients. NZNO is calling for an urgent increase ...
We may see a few more luxury cars on Queen Street, but a loosening of rules to entice rich foreigners to invest more here is unlikely to “turbocharge our economic growth”. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate ...
Let us not dance daintily around the elephant in the room. Our politicians who serve us in the present are not honest, certainly not as honest as they should be, and while the right are taking out most of the trophies for warping narratives and literally redefining “facts”, the kiwi ...
A few weeks ago I took a look at public transport ridership in 2024. In today’s post I’m going to be looking a bit deeper at bus ridership. Buses make up the vast majority of ridership in Auckland with 70 million boardings last year out of a total of 89.4 ...
Oh, you know I did itIt's over and I feel fineNothing you could say is gonna change my mindWaited and I waited the longest nightNothing like the taste of sweet declineSongwriters: Chris Shiflett / David Eric Grohl / Nate Mendel / Taylor Hawkins.Hindsight is good, eh?The clarity when the pieces ...
Photo by Towfiqu barbhuiya on UnsplashHere’s what we’re watching in the week to February 16 and beyond in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty:Monday, February 10The Kākā’s weekly wrap-up of news about politics and the economy is due at midday, followed by webinar for paying subscribers in Substack’s ...
A listing of 23 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, February 2, 2025 thru Sat, February 8, 2025. This week's roundup is again published soleley by category. We are still interested in feedback to hone the categorization, so if ...
Today, I stumbled across a Twitter Meme: the ending of The Lord of the Rings as a Chess scenario: https://x.com/mellon_heads/status/1887983845917564991 It gets across the basic gist. Aragorn and Gandalf offering up ‘material’ at the Morannon allows Frodo and Samwise to catch Sauron unawares – fair enough. But there are a ...
Last week, Kieran McAnulty called out Chris Bishop and Nicola Willis for their claims that Kāinga Ora’s costs were too high.They had claimed Kāinga Ora’s cost were 12% higher than market i.e. private devlopersBut Kāinga Ora’s Chair had already explained why last year:"We're not building to sell, so we'll be ...
Stuff’s Political Editor Luke Malpass - A Fellow at New Zealand IniativeLast week I half-joked that Stuff / The Post’s Luke Malpass1 always sounded like he was auditioning for a job at the New Zealand Initiative.Mountain Tui is a reader-supported publication. For a limited time, subscriptions are 20% off. Thanks ...
At a funeral on Friday, there were A4-sized photos covering every wall of the Dil’s reception lounge. There must have been 200 of them, telling the story in the usual way of the video reel but also, by enlargement, making it more possible to linger and step in.Our friend Nicky ...
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. This fact brief was written by Sue Bin Park from the Gigafact team in collaboration with members from our team. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline. Is methane the ...
The Government’s idea is that the private sector and Community Housing Providers will fund, build and operate new affordable housing to address our housing crisis. Meanwhile, the Government does not know where almost half of the 1,700 children who left emergency housing actually went. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong ...
Oh, home, let me come homeHome is wherever I'm with youOh, home, let me come homeHome is wherever I'm with youSongwriters: Alexander Ebert / Jade Allyson CastrinosMorena,I’m on a tight time frame this morning. In about an hour and a half, I’ll need to pack up and hit the road ...
This is a post about the Mountain Tui substack, and small tweaks - further to the poll and request post the other day. Please don’t read if you aren’t interested in my personal matters. Thank you all.After oohing-and-aahing about how to structure the Substack model since November, including obtaining ...
This transcript of a recent conversation between the Prime Minister and his chief economic adviser has not been verified.We’ve announced we are the ‘Yes Government’. Do you like it?Yes, Prime Minister.Dreamed up by the PR team. It’s about being committed to growth. Not that the PR team know anything about ...
The other day, Australian Senator Nick McKim issued a warning in the Australian Parliement about the US’s descent into fascim.And of course it’s true, but I lament - that was true as soon as Trump won.What we see is now simply the reification of the intention, planning, and forces behind ...
Among the many other problems associated with Musk/DOGE sending a fleet of teenage and twenty-something cultists to remove, copy and appropriate federal records like social security, medicaid and other supposedly protected data is the fact that the youngsters doing the data-removal, copying and security protocol and filter code over-writing have ...
Jokerman dance to the nightingale tuneBird fly high by the light of the moonOh, oh, oh, JokermanSong by Bob Dylan.Morena folks, I hope this fine morning of the 7th of February finds you well. We're still close to Paihia, just a short drive out of town. Below is the view ...
It’s been an eventful week as always, so here’s a few things that we have found interesting. We also hope everyone had a happy and relaxing Waitangi Day! This week in Greater Auckland We’re still running on summer time, but provided two chewy posts: On Tuesday, a guest ...
Queuing on Queen St: the Government is set to announce another apparently splashy growth policy on Sunday of offering residence visas to wealthy migrants. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in our political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Friday, February 7:PM Christopher ...
The fact that Waitangi ended up being such a low-key affair may mark it out as one of the most significant Waitangi Days in recent years. A group of women draped in “Toitu Te Tiriti” banners who turned their backs on the politicians’ powhiri was about as rough as it ...
Hi,This week’s Flightless Bird episode was about “fake seizure guy” — a Melbourne man who fakes seizures in order to get members of the public to sit on him.The audio documentary (which I have included in this newsletter in case you don’t listen to Flightless Bird) built on reporting first ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Karin Kirk The 119th Congress comes with a price tag. The oil and gas industry gave about $24 million in campaign contributions to the members of the U.S. House and Senate expected to be sworn in January 3, 2025, according to a ...
Early morning, the shadows still long, but you can already feel the warmth building. Our motel was across the road from the historic homestead where Henry Williams' family lived. The evening before, we wandered around the gardens, reading the plaques and enjoying the close proximity to the history of the ...
Thanks folks for your feedback, votes and comments this week. I’ll be making the changes soon. Appreciate all your emails, comments and subscriptions too. I know your time is valuable - muchas gracias.A lot is happening both here and around the world - so I want to provide a snippets ...
Data released today by Statistics NZ shows that unemployment rose to 5.1%, with 33,000 more people out of work than last year said NZCTU Te Kauae Kaimahi Economist Craig Renney. “The latest data shows that employment fell in Aotearoa at its fastest rate since the GFC. Unemployment rose in 8 ...
The December labour market statistics have been released, showing yet another increase in unemployment. There are now 156,000 unemployed - 34,000 more than when National took office. And having thrown all these people out of work, National is doubling down on cruelty. Because being vicious will somehow magically create the ...
Boarded up homes in Kilbirnie, where work on a planned development was halted. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in our political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Wednesday, February 5 are;Housing Minister Chris Bishop yesterday announcedKāinga Ora would be stripped of ...
This week Kiwirail and Auckland Transport were celebrating the completion of the summer rail works that had the network shut or for over a month and the start of electric trains to Pukekohe. First up, here’s parts of the press release about the shutdown works. Passengers boarding trains in Auckland ...
Through its austerity measures, the coalition government has engineered a rise in unemployment in order to reduce inflation while – simultaneously – cracking down harder and harder on the people thrown out of work by its own policies. To that end, Social Development Minister Louise Upston this week added two ...
This year, we've seen a radical, white supremacist government ignoring its Tiriti obligations, refusing to consult with Māori, and even trying to legislatively abrogate te Tiriti o Waitangi. When it was criticised by the Waitangi Tribunal, the government sabotaged that body, replacing its legal and historical experts with corporate shills, ...
Poor old democracy, it really is in a sorry state. It would be easy to put all the blame on the vandals and tyrants presently trashing the White House, but this has been years in the making. It begins with Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan and the spirit of Gordon ...
The new school lunches came in this week, and they were absolutely scrumptious.I had some, and even though Connor said his tasted like “stodge” and gave him a sore tummy, I myself loved it!Look at the photos - I knew Mr Seymour wouldn’t lie when he told us last year:"It ...
The tighter sanctions are modelled on ones used in Britain, which did push people off ‘the dole’, but didn’t increase the number of workers, and which evidence has repeatedly shown don’t work. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in our political economy around housing, ...
Catching you up on the morning’s global news and a quick look at the parallels -GLOBALTariffs are backSharemarkets in the US, UK and Europe have “plunged” in response to Trump’s tariffs. And while Mexico has won a one month reprieve, Canada and China will see their respective 25% and 10% ...
This post by Nicolas Reid was originally published on Linked in. It is republished here with permission. Gondolas are often in the news, with manufacturers of ropeway systems proposing them as a modern option for mass transit systems in New Zealand. However, like every next big thing in transport, it’s hard ...
This is a re-post from The Climate BrinkBoth 2023 and 2024 were exceptionally warm years, at just below and above 1.5C relative to preindustrial in the WMO composite of surface temperature records, respectively. While we are still working to assess the full set of drivers of this warmth, it is clear that ...
Hi,I woke up feeling nervous this morning, realising that this weekend Flightless Bird is going to do it’s first ever live show. We’re heading to a sold out (!) show in Seattle to test the format out in front of an audience. If it works, we’ll do more. I want ...
From the United-For-Now States of America comes the thrilling news that a New Zealander may be at the very heart of the current coup. Punching above our weight on the world stage once more! Wait, you may be asking, what New Zealander? I speak of Peter Thiel, made street legal ...
Even Stevens: Over the 33 years between 1990 and 2023 (and allowing for the aberrant 2020 result) the average level of support enjoyed by the Left and Right blocs, at roughly 44.5 percent each, turns out to be, as near as dammit, identical.WORLDWIDE, THE PARTIES of the Left are presented ...
Back in 2023, a "prominent political figure" went on trial for historic sex offences. But we weren't allowed to know who they were or what political party they were "prominent" in, because it might affect the way we voted. At the time, I said that this was untenable; it was ...
I'm going, I'm goingWhere the water tastes like wineI'm going where the water tastes like wineWe can jump in the waterStay drunk all the timeI'm gonna leave this city, got to get awayI'm gonna leave this city, got to get awayAll this fussing and fighting, man, you know I sure ...
Waitangi Day is a time to honour Te Tiriti o Waitangi and stand together for a just and fair Aotearoa. Across the motu, communities are gathering to reflect, kōrero, and take action for a future built on equity and tino rangatiratanga. From dawn ceremonies to whānau-friendly events, there are ...
Subscribe to Mountain Tūī ! Where you too can learn about exciting things from a flying bird! Tweet.Yes - I absolutely suck at marketing. It’s a fact.But first -My question to all readers is:How should I set up the Substack model?It’s been something I’ve been meaning to ask since November ...
Here’s the key news, commentary, reports and debate around Aotearoa’s political economy on politics and in the week to Feb 3:PM Christopher Luxon began 2025’s first day of Parliament last Tuesday by carrying on where left off in 2024, letting National’s junior coalition partner set the political agenda and dragging ...
Half of Pacific children sometimes going without food is just one of many heartbreaking lowlights in the Salvation Army’s annual State of the Nation report. ...
The Salvation Army’s State of the Nation report is a bleak indictment on the failure of Government to take steps to end poverty, with those on benefits, including their children, hit hardest. ...
New Zealand First has today introduced a Member’s Bill which would restore decision-making power to local communities regarding the fluoridation of drinking water. The ‘Fluoridation (Referendum) Legislation Bill’ seeks to repeal the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Act 2021 that granted centralised authority to the Direct General of Health ...
New Zealand First has introduced a Member’s Bill aimed at preventing banks from refusing their services to businesses because of the current “Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Framework”. “This Bill ensures fairness and prevents ESG standards from perpetuating woke ideology in the banking sector being driven by unelected, globalist, climate ...
Erica Stanford has reached peak shortsightedness if today’s announcement is anything to go by, picking apart immigration settings piece by piece to the detriment of the New Zealand economy. ...
Our originating document, theTreaty of Waitangi, was signed on February 6, 1840. An agreement between Māori and the British Crown. Initially inked by Ngā Puhi in Waitangi, further signatures were added as it travelled south. The intention was to establish a colony with the cession of sovereignty to the Crown, ...
Te Whatu Ora Chief Executive Margie Apa leaving her job four months early is another symptom of this government’s failure to deliver healthcare for New Zealanders. ...
The Green Party is calling for the Prime Minister to show leadership and be unequivocal about Aotearoa New Zealand’s opposition to a proposal by the US President to remove Palestinians from Gaza. ...
The latest unemployment figures reveal that job losses are hitting Māori and Pacific people especially hard, with Māori unemployment reaching a staggering 9.7% for the December 2024 quarter and Pasifika unemployment reaching 10.5%. ...
Waitangi 2025: Waitangi Day must be community and not politically driven - Shane Jones Our originating document, theTreaty of Waitangi, was signed on February 6, 1840. An agreement between Māori and the British Crown. Initially inked by Ngā Puhi in Waitangi, further signatures were added as it travelled south. ...
Despite being confronted every day with people in genuine need being stopped from accessing emergency housing – National still won’t commit to building more public houses. ...
The Green Party says the Government is giving up on growing the country’s public housing stock, despite overwhelming evidence that we need more affordable houses to solve the housing crisis. ...
Before any thoughts of the New Year and what lies ahead could even be contemplated, New Zealand reeled with the tragedy of Senior Sergeant Lyn Fleming losing her life. For over 38 years she had faithfully served as a front-line Police officer. Working alongside her was Senior Sergeant Adam Ramsay ...
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson will return to politics at Waitangi on Monday the 3rd of February where she will hold a stand up with fellow co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick. ...
Te Pāti Māori is appalled by the government's blatant mishandling of the school lunch programme. David Seymour’s ‘cost-saving’ measures have left tamariki across Aotearoa with unidentifiable meals, causing distress and outrage among parents and communities alike. “What’s the difference between providing inedible food, and providing no food at all?” Said ...
The Government is doubling down on outdated and volatile fossil fuels, showing how shortsighted and destructive their policies are for working New Zealanders. ...
Green Party MP Steve Abel this morning joined Coromandel locals in Waihi to condemn new mining plans announced by Shane Jones in the pit of the town’s Australian-owned Gold mine. ...
The Green Party is calling on the Government to strengthen its just-announced 2030-2035 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement and address its woeful lack of commitment to climate security. ...
Today marks a historic moment for Taranaki iwi with the passing of the Te Pire Whakatupua mō Te Kāhui Tupua/Taranaki Maunga Collective Redress Bill in Parliament. "Today, we stand together as descendants of Taranaki, and our tūpuna, Taranaki Maunga, is now formally acknowledged by the law as a living tūpuna. ...
Labour is relieved to see Children’s Minister Karen Chhour has woken up to reality and reversed her government’s terrible decisions to cut funding from frontline service providers – temporarily. ...
It is the first week of David Seymour’s school lunch programme and already social media reports are circulating of revolting meals, late deliveries, and mislabelled packaging. ...
The Green Party says that with no-cause evictions returning from today, the move to allow landlords to end tenancies without reason plunges renters, and particularly families who rent, into insecurity and stress. ...
The Government’s move to increase speed limits substantially on dozens of stretches of rural and often undivided highways will result in more serious harm. ...
In her first announcement as Economic Growth Minister, Nicola Willis chose to loosen restrictions for digital nomads from other countries, rather than focus on everyday Kiwis. ...
The Government’s commitment to get New Zealand’s roads back on track is delivering strong results, with around 98 per cent of potholes on state highways repaired within 24 hours of identification every month since targets were introduced, Transport Minister Chris Bishop says. “Increasing productivity to help rebuild our economy is ...
The former Cadbury factory will be the site of the Inpatient Building for the new Dunedin Hospital and Health Minister Simeon Brown says actions have been taken to get the cost overruns under control. “Today I am giving the people of Dunedin certainty that we will build the new Dunedin ...
From today, Plunket in Whāngarei will be offering childhood immunisations – the first of up to 27 sites nationwide, Health Minister Simeon Brown says. The investment of $1 million into the pilot, announced in October 2024, was made possible due to the Government’s record $16.68 billion investment in health. It ...
New Zealand’s strong commitment to the rights of disabled people has continued with the response to an important United Nations report, Disability Issues Minister Louise Upston has announced. Of the 63 concluding observations of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), 47 will be progressed ...
Resources Minister Shane Jones has launched New Zealand’s national Minerals Strategy and Critical Minerals List, documents that lay a strategic and enduring path for the mineral sector, with the aim of doubling exports to $3 billion by 2035. Mr Jones released the documents, which present the Coalition Government’s transformative vision ...
Firstly I want to thank OceanaGold for hosting our event today. Your operation at Waihi is impressive. I want to acknowledge local MP Scott Simpson, local government dignitaries, community stakeholders and all of you who have gathered here today. It’s a privilege to welcome you to the launch of the ...
Racing Minister, Winston Peters has announced the Government is preparing public consultation on GST policy proposals which would make the New Zealand racing industry more competitive. “The racing industry makes an important economic contribution. New Zealand thoroughbreds are in demand overseas as racehorses and for breeding. The domestic thoroughbred industry ...
Business confidence remains very high and shows the economy is on track to improve, Economic Growth Minister Nicola Willis says. “The latest ANZ Business Outlook survey, released yesterday, shows business confidence and expected own activity are ‘still both very high’.” The survey reports business confidence fell eight points to +54 ...
Enabling works have begun this week on an expanded radiology unit at Hawke’s Bay Fallen Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital which will double CT scanning capacity in Hawke’s Bay to ensure more locals can benefit from access to timely, quality healthcare, Health Minister Simeon Brown says. This investment of $29.3m in the ...
The Government has today announced New Zealand’s second international climate target under the Paris Agreement, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts says. New Zealand will reduce emissions by 51 to 55 per cent compared to 2005 levels, by 2035. “We have worked hard to set a target that is both ambitious ...
Nine years of negotiations between the Crown and iwi of Taranaki have concluded following Te Pire Whakatupua mō Te Kāhui Tupua/the Taranaki Maunga Collective Redress Bill passing its third reading in Parliament today, Treaty Negotiations Minister Paul Goldsmith says. “This Bill addresses the historical grievances endured by the eight iwi ...
As schools start back for 2025, there will be a relentless focus on teaching the basics brilliantly so all Kiwi kids grow up with the knowledge, skills and competencies needed to grow the New Zealand of the future, Education Minister Erica Stanford says. “A world-leading education system is a key ...
Housing Minister Chris Bishop and Associate Agriculture Minister Mark Patterson have welcomed Kāinga Ora’s decision to re-open its tender for carpets to allow wool carpet suppliers to bid. “In 2024 Kāinga Ora issued requests for tender (RFTs) seeking bids from suppliers to carpet their properties,” Mr Bishop says. “As part ...
Associate Education Minister David Seymour has today visited Otahuhu College where the new school lunch programme has served up healthy lunches to students in the first days of the school year. “As schools open in 2025, the programme will deliver nutritious meals to around 242,000 students, every school day. On ...
Minister for Children Karen Chhour has intervened in Oranga Tamariki’s review of social service provider contracts to ensure Barnardos can continue to deliver its 0800 What’s Up hotline. “When I found out about the potential impact to this service, I asked Oranga Tamariki for an explanation. Based on the information ...
A bill to make revenue collection on imported and exported goods fairer and more effective had its first reading in Parliament, Customs Minister Casey Costello said today. “The Customs (Levies and Other Matters) Amendment Bill modernises the way in which Customs can recover the costs of services that are needed ...
Minister of Internal Affairs Brooke van Velden says the Department of Internal Affairs [the Department] has achieved significant progress in completing applications for New Zealand citizenship. “December 2024 saw the Department complete 5,661 citizenship applications, the most for any month in 2024. This is a 54 per cent increase compared ...
Reversals to Labour’s blanket speed limit reductions begin tonight and will be in place by 1 July, says Minister of Transport Chris Bishop. “The previous government was obsessed with slowing New Zealanders down by imposing illogical and untargeted speed limit reductions on state highways and local roads. “National campaigned on ...
Finance Minister Nicola Willis has announced Budget 2025 – the Growth Budget - will be delivered on Thursday 22 May. “This year’s Budget will drive forward the Government’s plan to grow our economy to improve the incomes of New Zealanders now and in the years ahead. “Budget 2025 will build ...
For the Government, 2025 will bring a relentless focus on unleashing the growth we need to lift incomes, strengthen local businesses and create opportunity. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon today laid out the Government’s growth agenda in his Statement to Parliament. “Just over a year ago this Government was elected by ...
Associate Education Minister David Seymour welcomes students back to school with a call to raise attendance from last year. “The Government encourages all students to attend school every day because there is a clear connection between being present at school and setting yourself up for a bright future,” says Mr ...
The Government is relaxing visitor visa requirements to allow tourists to work remotely while visiting New Zealand, Economic Growth Minister Nicola Willis, Immigration Minister Erica Stanford and Tourism Minister Louise Upston say. “The change is part of the Government’s plan to unlock New Zealand’s potential by shifting the country onto ...
The opening of Kāinga Ora’s development of 134 homes in Epuni, Lower Hutt will provide much-needed social housing for Hutt families, Housing Minister Chris Bishop says. “I’ve been a strong advocate for social housing on Kāinga Ora’s Epuni site ever since the old earthquake-prone housing was demolished in 2015. I ...
Trade and Investment Minister Todd McClay will travel to Australia today for meetings with Australian Trade Minister, Senator Don Farrell, and the Australia New Zealand Leadership Forum (ANZLF). Mr McClay recently hosted Minister Farrell in Rotorua for the annual Closer Economic Relations (CER) Trade Ministers’ meeting, where ANZLF presented on ...
A new monthly podiatry clinic has been launched today in Wairoa and will bring a much-needed service closer to home for the Wairoa community, Health Minister Simeon Brown says.“Health New Zealand has been successful in securing a podiatrist until the end of June this year to meet the needs of ...
The Judicial Conduct Commissioner has recommended a Judicial Conduct Panel be established to inquire into and report on the alleged conduct of acting District Court Judge Ema Aitken in an incident last November, Attorney-General Judith Collins said today. “I referred the matter of Judge Aitken’s alleged conduct during an incident ...
Students who need extra help with maths are set to benefit from a targeted acceleration programme that will give them more confidence in the classroom, Education Minister Erica Stanford says. “Last year, significant numbers of students did not meet the foundational literacy and numeracy level required to gain NCEA. To ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters has announced three new diplomatic appointments. “Our diplomats play an important role in ensuring New Zealand’s interests are maintained and enhanced across the world,” Mr Peters says. “It is a pleasure to announce the appointment of these senior diplomats from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and ...
Ki te kahore he whakakitenga, ka ngaro te Iwi – without a vision, the people will perish. The Government has achieved its target to reduce the number of households in emergency housing motels by 75 per cent five years early, Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka says. The number of households ...
The opening of Palmerston North’s biggest social housing development will have a significant impact for whānau in need of safe, warm, dry housing, Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka says. The minister visited the development today at North Street where a total of 50 two, three, and four-bedroom homes plus a ...
Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. – The United States shares the pathologies of all dying empires with their mixture of buffoonery, rampant corruption, military fiascos, economic collapse and savage state repression.ANALYSIS: By Chris Hedges The billionaires, Christian fascists, grifters, psychopaths, imbeciles, narcissists and deviants who ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The Albanese government has secured bipartisan support for a major new regime covering political donations and spending, after making significant concessions. The government agreed to increase the proposed threshold above which donations must be disclosed ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra With the election only months away, the Labor government finds itself suddenly battling with the Trump administration for an exemption from new US tariffs on steel and aluminium. The opposition has supported the effort, but ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julee McDonagh, Senior Research Fellow of Frailty Research, University of Wollongong PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock Ageing is a normal part of the life course. It doesn’t matter how many green smoothies you drink, or how many “anti-ageing” skin care products you ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bronwyn Carlson, Professor, Critical Indigenous Studies and Director of The Centre for Global Indigenous Futures, Macquarie University The Conversation, CC BY-SAAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and images of deceased people. Colonial commemorations ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Hazel, Associate Professor, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide Masarik/Shutterstock In some overseas countries, pets can travel with their owners in a plane’s cabin, in a carrier under a seat. In Australia, pets must travel in the ...
A raft of proposed legislation changes to the media and screen industry have been announced this morning – we read through it all all so you don’t have to. What’s all this then? This morning the Ministry for Culture and Heritage released its draft proposed changes to media and screen ...
David Seymour's recent off-road parliamentary excursion led to a reprimand from the Speaker, who also said the rules didn't apply to this instance. What are the rules? ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lee Morgenbesser, Associate Professor, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University, Griffith University Many Americans have watched in horror as Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, has been permitted to tear through various offices of the United States government in recent ...
By Patrick Decloitre,RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls has announced he will travel to New Caledonia later this month to pursue talks on the French territory’s political future. These discussions on February 22 follow preliminary talks held last week in Paris in “bilateral” mode ...
As Benjamin Netanyahu threatens to resume war, Hamas outlines widespread Israeli ceasefire violations in document sent to the mediators.By Jeremy Scahill and Sharif Abdel Kouddous of Dropsite News Hamas officials submitted a two-page report to mediators yesterday listing a wide range of Israeli violations of the Gaza ceasefire since ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Murray Print, Professor of Education, University of Sydney A federal parliamentary inquiry has just recommended civics and citizenship become a compulsory part of the Australian Curriculum, which covers the first year of school to Year 10. The committee also recommended a ...
Welcome to The Spinoff Books Confessional, in which we get to know the reading habits of Aotearoa writers, and guests. This week: Claire Baylis, author of Dice and guest at the forthcoming HamLit programme at the Hamilton Arts Festival. The book I wish I’d writtenMy mind seems surprisingly unwilling ...
The courts should deal with illegal fishing, not the "court of public opinion", Shane Jones says, as he announces proposed changes to the Quota Management System. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Megan McElhone, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, Monash University A London court has found Sam Kerr not guilty of the racially aggravated harassment of Metropolitan Police officer Stephen Lovell. As captain of the Australian women’s national soccer team, Kerr was widely condemned when ...
Could iwi and hapū be the unexpected solution to the government’s asset dilemma? David Seymour pressured the prime minister into an unwelcome conversation, and in the couple of weeks since the Act leader raised the issue in his state of the nation speech, privatisation has shifted from absent in the ...
Human rights advocates must uphold human dignity, rights and justice, while rejecting the discriminatory tactics we oppose, writes Taimor Hazou.Two weeks ago the Palestinian Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) launched a campaign inviting New Zealanders to call a hotline if they suspected an Israel Defence Force (IDF) soldier that had ...
Immigration New Zealand figures shows more people have been looking at the ETA and visitor visa pages on the website, however fewer people have applied to come or to extend their stay. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kirsten Banks, Lecturer, School of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology Debris on the surface of Mars from the Perseverance mission, captured on April 19 2022. NASA/JPL-Caltech In his inauguration speech in January, United States President Donald Trump ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alix Woolard, Senior Research Fellow, The Kids Research Institute Australia Stock Unit/Shutterstock Have you ever asked someone how their day was, or been chatting casually with a friend, only to have them tell you a horrific story that has left you ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Quentin Grafton, Australian Laureate Professor of Economics, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University The Roper RiverChris Ison/Shutterstock Water is now a contested resource around the world. Nowhere is this more evident than in the fight playing out over the ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Graeme Turner, Emeritus Professor of Cultural Studies, The University of Queensland Matej Kastellic/ Shutterstock As we head towards the federal election, both sides of politics are making a point of criticising universities and questioning their role in the community. ...
Alex Casey examines the perils of having your period at a music festival. It was right after Clairo’s swooning set that Sarah* knew it was time. She was on the second day of her period at Auckland’s Laneway festival, and braved the portaloos to empty her menstrual cup and change ...
A battle between health officials and local councils is heating up, as one government party seeks to change the rules. The Bulletin’s Stewart Sowman-Lund explains. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here. ...
Bernard Hickey supports Colombo’s claim – kind of. And is against bank bail outs.
This is shown by the bank bailouts in 2008 & 9 when the property market was in danger of crashing.
But next time, it may be the lack of guarantees on bank deposits that results in savers taking a big hit, to protect the banks.
That’s pretty much my take as well.
The two points that Colombo missed are that traditionally the Aus/NZ banks have been willing to tolerate negative equity mortgages as long as the debt was being serviced. Unlike American banks they do not bundle up (securitise) and on-sell their mortgages and for this reason have far more skin in the game. This means the banks here, while they will act against the outlier defaulters – will in general look to protect their customer base.
Secondly bankruptcy law here means that if you do default on a mortgage you cannot walk away as is common in other countries. Here in NZ if you default you will still be left with any residual debt if the bank does not recoup all of it’s losses and costs via a mortgagee sale. This is a big disincentive not to default.
As a result when the property market turns bear, it is the volume of sales that drops, not prices.
Having said all that, there are two wild-card factors to consider:
In 2009 there was a six month period when around 90% of all new mortgages in NZ where actually written by Kiwibank. The big Aussies had simply stopped all new lending and without KiwiBank our property market would have gone through a very dramatic shutdown.
The other big change is the increasing portion of our housing stock now owned by overseas investors. How they might react to a bad bear market is completely unknown.
Do you have a reference for the statement about Kiwibank providing 90% of new mortgages in six months of 2009?
I wasn’t aware that it reached anything like that number and I would like to have a look at it.
Fair point. I’m going by memory. It may not be as high as 90% – but it was a startlingly high number.
It wasn’t that Kiwibank wrote a vast number of mortgages, but that for a short period the others simply stopped.
Which needs to be changed as well. We legally need to recognise and accept the risk that goes with loaning money to people and banks and not protect those that take those risks.
Yes, was just reading an article about that point you make there DTB,
How Neoliberalism takes a hypocritical stance.
They give markets and market theory the highest priority and position it so it is pivotal to the system, yet they do not accept ”market discipline. They do this by allowing those loaning money (digits) to get bailed out – this removes the risk from those loaning money and places it on the borrowers and takes out market discipline from the equation. Ergo they have taken out the very thing that ‘balances’ the market. They don’t even follow their own theories when push comes to shove.
That’s because the politicians are more concerned with saving the wealthy from the risks that they take and the reason for that seems to be because a) the wealthy rule and b) the politicians are also wealthy. It’s in the rhetoric that we need the wealthy to pay for things but, of course, the wealthy never pay for anything – it’s how they get rich.
+1
Also, politicians know that they all have inherently insecure jobs, but they get a taste of the lifestyle and would like somewhere nice to go to after leaving Parliament to keep up that lifestyle.
How Iceland dealt with their failing Banks : Watch Iceland President’s video below
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2013/01/iceland-heres-how-you-deal-with-a-bank-crisis/
Which would be the wrong thing to do. Essentially, what a government guarantee of bank deposits does is allow a few people to get an income from neither working nor taking any risk. Can’t call these people anything but bludgers.
Of course, I happen to think that people getting interest happen to be bludgers anyway. Having money should not entitle you to an income from others work.
While there is the Islamic (and traditional Christian) prohibition on interest, I’m not so sure it would work in the modern world where virtually all money is credit.
Personally I’d prefer a self-imposed limit on interest rates in the 1-3% range (depending on the risk) and a cap on table mortgage terms of 20 years.
That would be a more moderate and workable compromise.
Well, the answer there is to stop money being created through credit.
No, it wouldn’t because after awhile institutions and people would be going well beyond it.
“Bludgers” using term deposits? really? Well then I am one of those bludgers. But where else can I put my savings? I don’t own property. I need to keep my savings somewhere. So what am I meant to do? Put it under my mattress? My term deposit hardly earns me a vast income. I don’t put the money there so it will gain me extra income – just somewhere to keep it til I need it. It is the least speculative place to put the money. It generally doesn’t grow in value the way a lot of property does.
That money is to go to my full retirement as I will be continuing to rent.
I’d be a bludger too in that case, karol. I’ve basically rented all my life, apart from a few years helping pay off a mortgage that was retrospectively defined as rent. I get interest on what I’ve got saved, but hardly more than the rate of inflation. I’m hoping to buy a dwelling of some sort once I retire, but what are my other options for looking after the money I’ve saved? The interest is certainly not enough to live on.
Yes. Anyone with income from either interest or shares is getting money from others work rather than their own. Can’t think of anything more accurately described as bludging.
Kiwibank has a 0% interest on call account that’s government guaranteed. It will, of course, lose value to inflation. I’m also not suggesting that you use it – present conditions dictate that you need to use the term deposits.
You’ll note that over the last year or two I’ve been suggesting policies that make having any sort of accumulated money worthless. I’m not backing away from that just because someone I have some respect for is upset about it.
God I’m sick of these lying arseholes making up shit about the Labour party. Here’s one example from fucktard Tamihere:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9981934/Labour-reels-in-Jones-wake
Former Labour MP John Tamihere said Jones represented a Labour constituency that was increasingly being sidelined as interest groups gained greater control.
“The real debate isn’t about Shane Jones, it’s about certain sector groups in Labour having far too much say in advance, well in advance of their constituencies in the street.”
The party was becoming dominated by “liberal academic elites” more focused on social engineering issues such as the so-called anti-smacking law than issues such as creating jobs which had a broader voter appeal, he said.
What a load of unadulterated crap. What is happening is that actual leftwing people are starting to establish themselves within the party, ie McCarten, and, quite rightly, they’ve got no time for people who aren’t actually committed to leftwing policies.
Eventually the electorate will swing away from National and the reason they will is because they will be sick of being shat on by right wing policies.
When that inevitably happens there will be a strongly leftwing opposition ready and waiting to tear their putrid policies for the privileged to shreds.
Makes me sick too. It would seem that a good thing to come out of the Cunliffe leadership is that the rats are leaving the ship. Shane “Hand Shandy- Blue Movie” Jones was damaged goods with an ego and expectation level way out of proportion. Pagani, ditto. Tamihere actually does things for his community, but why he should weigh in about sector groups is rather strange. Surely the sector groups issue was dealt to by the recent leadership election.
but why he should weigh in about sector groups is rather strange.
Because Tamihere’s ego still can’t handle that Labour rejected him. It’s fucking pathetic.
Probably true, he has been out for such a long time now that I am surprised he thinks he still matters.
Tamihere likes to talk. So we have the Tamihere and Willie Jackson song and dance team coming out with good and pathetic things as well. It’s mainlytop-of-the-head talk and makes for scintillating chats, but the sound and fury is the main thing, rather than thoughtful critique supporting a Party that is struggling towards its left wing roots, to have some substance.
I’ve seen suggestions on Twitter that it would be lovely if the Jones/Tamihere/Trotter/Pagani brigade were to set up their own party – put their money where their mouths are, so to speak. If there’s such a large faction of left-leaning blue-collar blokes just crying out for representation which speaks to them and only to them, surely they’ll have no trouble getting over the 5% line.
Hey! Now that’s a good idea! Let’s see how many votes their bullshit can really get.
+1 Stephanie Rogers
…and Snap! (similar sentiments expressed at the end of my comment at 12.4)
Such a comment displays a degree of tribalism that mirrors what it says….hey why dont we ignore these peoples opinions and send them into a heretics exile…nice one, what a way to attract other people to the Left…come over here and get done over as a form of initiation. (I cant believe I am defending them but hey…we might do better to reflect on our own position).
PS Why Trotter gets added to Pagani etc is beyond me, every time the “Left” attacks him I sit and laugh because the attackers cant see that he is invariably on the button…or does that just piss off those who cant think and see things as lucidly as him?
Some in Labour – including caucus – are in denial over Trotter. He sometimes goes over the top with his intellectual and flowery language but his basic assumptions are often right on the button. He’s definitely not in there with the Paganis and the Tamiheres…
I have enjoyed Trotters articles in the past. I appreciate Trotter’s ability to put things in historic context, however perhaps you haven’t read some of his more recent articles on ‘The Daily Blog’? – he seems to be awfully quick to put the boot into Labour in a manner that shows he is prone to being suckered in to right-wing framing of matters.
What are political commentators for? For spreading propaganda or analysing it? I expect political commentators to be providing informed commentary and insight to the cut and thrust of political propaganda – not swallowing it whole (or half)-heartedly and then spreading it. Recently Chris appears to have been ‘challenged’ in achieving this end in his role of ‘commentator’.
On the Paul Henry Show, he came on after Cunliffe (and good on Paul Henry for bringing on someone supposedly left). Trotter proceeded to express the view that Jones departure was a great blow to Labour – there was no mention of counterarguments to that view. There are counterarguments to that view – and it is an academic’s role (as I take Trotter to be) to provide this balance. Trotter did not provide an informed view at all.
I really don’t know what is going on with Trotter just now, but when he has the role of ‘commentator’ and especially ‘left-wing commentator’ and gets on mainstream media only to provide right-wing framing – than there is something very wrong with the equation and I believe a great deal of damage is done to left-wing interests from this occurring.
BL +100
That may well be correct blue leopard. I don’t follow much of his media commentary. I was thinking more of his blogsite writings.
Couldn’t agree more.
I don’t think Trotter is quite the same category as the others but what is going on with Trotter is the same as what as what is going on with Armstrong et al. As I said below (http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-27042014/#comment-804920)
Trotter will be shut out of the inside of Labour now. Many of his old contacts in Labour will now be worthless because those contacts no longer hold the reins of power within the party.
That’s why he has been framing the Greens as the rising power and trying to consign Labour to the dustbin of history. It’s sour-grapes. He may not even be consciously aware that he is doing it but it is sour-grapes nonetheless.
He is also being drowned out. Pre-internet he was one of the few declared leftwing political commentators in the media. Now there are heaps, his once solitary voice is now getting lost amongst a hoard of other leftwing voices and that not only hurts his ego but will hurt his income too.
And that means he is actually beholden to the MSM because they are his paymaster. The only things he has going for him are those panel appearances on Q+A, the articles that get printed in fairfax newspapers etc. He cant slum it like us and do it for free on the net because he’s got to keep up his comfortable middle class lifestyle.
What is ironic is that Chris was championing the take-back of Labour by the members but the result is that he has become less and less relevant as the party becomes more democratic.
Chris’ status has always relied on an authoritarian Labour Party, controlled from caucus, ala Helen. That was why his opinion was valued, because he was an insider to an exclusive club. Now…not so much
Good to have some reasoning offered, it certainly puzzles me a lot.
Trotter has been causing problems for the Left since the eighties,their will be a few out there who’ve seen him in action ,when he was inside Labour party.As been said,he’s on the way out.A cheap commentator for MSM at the moment.
Someone needed to. And more should.
If at least some on the Left aren’t occasionally challenging and even defying the political establishment – including the establishment Left – then they are simply paying fealty to the system we got pushed on to us in the 80’s. Centre right neoliberalism.
very true,but I feel Chris Trotter has failed on that score many times in resent history.Just take a another look at his resent effort on,(your going to make me say it)the (Paul Hendry showoff).thats not balanced.The so-called left have had enough trouble with MSM.So is he a leftwing com……..I leave that open,or just a blogger for the MSM.
This one?
http://www.3news.co.nz/Political-expert-calls-Jones-departure-significant/tabid/1837/articleID/341103/Default.aspx
Hmm, Chris Trotter could have done better.
Shane Jones – a ‘cathedral’? If that is damning by overinflated praise, that would be much too subtle for many? 🙄
Left for Dead,
By ‘causing problems to the left’ I feel certain that you didn’t mean ‘challenging the left’ I feel pretty sure you were relating to the type of problem that I wrote about – that of simply swallowing and propagating right wing spin.
My opinion is that CV’s response to you was highly disingenuous and twisted the meaning of what you were saying.
I found your comment informative because I hadn’t known Trotter had been swallowing rightwing propaganda and propagating it for as long as he probably has been.
blue leopard,yes thank you.
@ Left for Dead,
Cheers 🙂
This recent Chris Trotter article has me:
http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com.au/2014/04/the-greens-stand-alone.html
I was saying something similar a few years back:
http://thestandard.org.nz/2c-on-the-leadership/#comment-415887
Nowhere near as eloquent at Trotter, but on the same page.
Yes Trotter is totally different to Pagani. She comes across as a self promoter and a careerist.
No understanding of loyalty to her team…spends more of her time in the company of Talkback hate merchants like Williams.
If she has problems with the Labour Party, she should be airing them within the movement, not shouting off to any corporate media person, who needs her for the faux left spokesperson for their ‘balanced” debates.
And if she really does not like the Labour Party, she should leave it, found her own party.
Ennui,
Have you considered that the views expressed by Jones and Tamaheri could accurately be considered ‘tribalism’?
Have you considered how a large party representing peoples’ interests might need to be careful about supporting views that alienate potentially half of the population in order to cater to a smaller percentage?
Stephanie Rogers comment has merit.
It’s got nothing to do with driving people out – we’re talking about people who are no longer inside Labour. Just like Taito Phillip Field and Gordon Copeland, Tamihere and now Jones have left their party, declared that they have masses of support behind their ideas, but can’t prove it.
The line that Shane Jones was somehow ‘driven out’ or ‘exiled’ from Labour is just silly. He was number 5 in caucus and given significant portfolios and opportunities to speak on behalf of the party. He was leading the so far very successful, very high profile Countdown story. Yet commenters insist on acting like he received the kind of treatment Cunliffe did at Shearer’s hands. It is simply factually wrong.
Can attest to that. It’s blatant and provable rubbish. All the evidence points to the opposite…
Steph, what line about driving Shane Jones into exile? Read again please. Personally I am pleased he took himself, and i think Trotters blog on the reasons he did is very persuasive..
If you read my comments more carefully (or if I could write more lucidly) what I was alluding to was the propensity of “leftist” bloggers to drive people they dont agree with away in a very “tribal” almost mob orientated manner. The message is that our behavior often mirrors the people we rage at.
You ascribe far too much power to leftist bloggers.
I don’t need to read anything again, Ennui. Your comment accused me of ‘tribalism’ and wanting to send people into ‘heretics exile’. This aligns with comments others have made about Jones being driven out of the Labour Party – it’s been a common theme of the past week. As I said, in the case of Shane Jones it’s laughable to suggest he was ‘sent into exile’, and in reference to my own comment it’s silly to suggest I was promoting such an option.
Steph, we disagree…cool. I have looked at your site, and I cant say I am 100% on your page. Despite that we might have to agree to disagree if we are going to fight the common enemy, which I suppose was the root of my comment about not driving allies away.
Your comment accused me of: tribalism; ignoring other people’s opinions; demanding people get ‘done over’; and being ‘pissed off’ because I don’t ‘think and see things’ as lucidly as Chris Trotter.
I really dislike people who use the ‘agree to disagree’ card when they’re the one who started throwing around insults.
Ennui………….who do you think Shane Jones represented? Who is the demographic that he and Tamihere and Pagani are talking about who feel unwanted in the party?
Is it Maori? Blue collar workers? middle age, middle class, males? Who? Is it pro-mining, anti-gay what?
What is it that’s so important to them that they feel Labour isn’t doing? Don’t just say Labour isn’t a broad enough church for them, cause that means nothing.
One thing I think is interesting is Shane got less votes in his electorate (and failed to win the seat off Sharples), than the Labour Party vote.
Who knows who Shane Jones represented? Certainly not me. I suspect Trotter is correct that Jones only ever really represented Jones, and that by not accepting that he was “divinely ordained” to lead the Labour Party did poor little Shane wrong.
I am with you and others Jones was all about himself like ‘a legend in his own mind’
Think he got a bit of a wake up call reading opinions on this blog site. Hope he is true to his word and stays out of the media.
My own thought is that people like Jones assume that by supporting business they are automatically helping the workers, which in fact is sometimes true and sometimes false. It depends on the business, whether or not it employs people and pays them well, (or underpins the viability of other businesses in an area), whether or not its effect on the environment is commensurate with the good it does, and so on and so on. These people are no doubt good fund raisers, since they come across to business as relatively safe hands on the left. The problem is that they are then tempted to undermine the broader values of left to shore up their cred in that area – like Jones’s attacks on the Greens, for example.
This of course turns off people who look to the left for protection from the powerful. Such people are not fooled for one second by smoko-room chat, even if the big donors think its a winner. It is as though they are being told, “Look mate, I’d like to help you, but if I did I would alienate my powerful mates, and if I do that I won’t be able to help you,” which is of course deeply circular, and far from convincing.
The problem lies with the weakening of the unions, and Labour being forced to seek funding from much the same sources as National. It can only be solved by building up such numbers that it starts to look as if we can win without their help.
+1
They could get Mike Williams to be their campaign manager too, and Mathew Hooter as PR man three
The Labour Party dove under 30% of the vote last election. Labour bled votes to the Greens, NZ First, and of course a group out there which ended up with way more people than Labour in the election day polls – i.e. non voters.
Today Labour can barely hold 32-33% in the polls yet you have the audacity to dismiss the working class with this kind of hubris. Yeah.
I read it that Stephanie was calling out the pagani et al brigade on purporting to represent the working class, when they do nothing of the sort.
+1 Ergo Robertina
@ CV,
Would have been good had you answered some of the astute questions Anker poses @ 2.2.3.4 prior to referring to Jones as representing the working class in the way you just have.
My point was that Labour has NOT been representing the blue collar working class.
NB I was referring to a Labour Party WITH Shane Jones. So IMO Shane Jones did nothing in that dept apart form being vaguely blokey at times, which the working class is typically smart enough to see right through.
Well perhaps in future you might check out the context with which the comment you are responding to is written in then prior to responding with unfounded indignation.
Not dismissing the working class at all, Viper. Dismissing the idea that the blue-collar red-neck narrow-minded hates-women-and-gays faction, so beloved of Shane Jones, Tamihere et al, exists. Once again I must ask you to stop assuming you know what I’m saying. Your assumptions are generally wildly off the mark.
In that case I appreciate your candid clarifications.
And this from J Pagani in the same article:
Former Labour candidate Josie Pagani agreed, saying those in the party who had rejoiced in Jones leaving “are guilty of sectarianism at its worst”.
The division in the party was between those focused on social mobility and those focused on social engineering – “we’ll make you better off versus we’ll make you a better person,” she said.
“we’ll make you better off versus we’ll make you a better person”????
Where the fuck does she come up with this shit? What a moran. Is this the result of being shunned by the like of TS? She no longer has as much access to the internals in the party so she’s spews out this shit because shes having a big sulk?
within that cliched/bullshit litany from those rightwing losers…
(i swear if pagani sheds any more crocodile-tears..she will start hanging out in ponds/waterways..)
..within this drivel was this:
“..Council of Trade Unions president Helen Kelly pointed out that the unions had overwhelmingly supported Cunliffe –
who took 71 per cent of the union vote – compared with 12 per cent for Jones.
“David Cunliffe actually appeals to blue collar workers –
hundreds of them got out to vote and voted for him.”
She said the belief ‘a Harvard-educated industry-boy like Shane’ would appeal to workers ‘is very patronising’.
Half the workforce were women –
and Jones also did not appeal to them – she said.
She rejected claims of a divided party – where dissenting views were not welcome..”
Helen Kelly in good form with facts at her fingertips rather than speculation and rhetoric. It would be good to see more of her (rather than Tamihere, Trotter).
Maybe she gets money from National sources just the way Jones did.
Her task ….to undermine Labour at very opportunity.
Might also explain why she’s always at the top of the list of invitees as a ‘Labour spokesperson’ by the corporate media.
Just join the Nats Josie..that’s where your heart is.
Just be honest.
Well her husband works for NZ Oil and Gas who donated to Jones so join the dots on that one.
Never knew that, thanks you.
Here’s his bio on their site.
“John Pagani
External Relations Manager
John Pagani joined NZOG in September 2012. He has a degree in politics from the University of Auckland and a law degree from Victoria University of Wellington. After working as a news producer at Newstalk ZB in Auckland, he moved to Parliament where he worked as a communications director and senior strategist, taking time out to start a public affairs consultancy specialising in development in 2002.”
So that explains a hell of a lot.
Pity that conflict of interest within the Pagani household is not mentioned by the corporate media.
Thanks Ant.
NZ Oil & Gas – the firm that proudly stood behind Pike River.
Creditability there. If ever a firm deserved buggering, there’s one.
thats right,who did they sell their shares to?
Pagani is sadly hilarious, Whale Oil reblogs her posts and the problem is with the rest of the left, sure thing…
Here’s a pro tip Josie, if Cameron Slater is supporting what you are saying and helping to disseminate your message, it probably isn’t good for the left.
She knows it.
Her husband is a shill for big corporate interests who don’t want a left wing party winning in NZ.
i agree..pagani is totally focused/on (her own) message..
..and that message is rightwing/neo-lib/randite-apologist in nature..
..like jones..she is just pretending..by claiming to be in labour..
..(and slater pimps her drivel..?..whoar..!..)
Yep.
She’d be ok with a Labour govt, as long as Labour steers right.
A few years ago when Josie stood for Labour I had some trouble reconciling what she was saying and who she was to the Labour party I was once a member of:. She seemed to me to be an unreconstructed neo lib. In a funny kind of way I put it as being akin the great Semitic faiths, Jews and Islamics and Christians each have a “broad church”, but that does not include somebody of one of the other faiths. I cant see how Labour as a “broad church” can include neo libs, they belong to that other “broad church” that includes National.
As per the modus operandi of neo lib right wingers, Pagani (either of them) represent what is specifically good for the individual (who is Pagani) first and foremost.
It’s moron. That misspelling really grates on me 🙁
I always get pissed off by the claims about social-engineering and it always seems to come from the right. They don’t seem to realise that their own policies are also social-engineering – just very, very bad social-engineering that will destroy our society as it always has done before.
DTB! know your memes, boi!
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/get-a-brain-morans
(And dont try and cover your arse by claiming you were being ironic ;P)
Yeah, I know the meme – still grates.
The problem with that pacific one is that they should of spelt it right … 😉
He could have been calling him an Asteroid.
10372 Moran (1995 FO10) is a main-belt asteroid discovered on March 26, 1995 by Spacewatch at Kitt Peak.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10372_Moran
Does Pagani even know what she means when she comes out with these ‘pearls of wisdom’ ? – lols.
could susan wood be a worse/more cliched/simplistic interviewer..?
..she doesn’t so much think..
..as jump from (pre-prepared) bullet-point to bullet-point..
and then rachel smalley ups the ante in the mindless/stupid-questions stakes..
..stupid and stupider..
..and smalley seems to believe her bullshit..
..furrowed-brow and all..
..head thumping into table stupidity..
I really thought Smalley was better than that. Must have to get brainwashed, when you go work at TVNZ.
Do all the muppets in the press, like John Armstrong, Chris Trotter, Josie Pagani, Fran OSullivan, etc have it in for Labour because their usual contacts within the party Goff, Mallard, Jones etc are now on the outer and are therefore of little value to them?
Gallery journalists try and build relationships with politicians so they can get leaks. They must be fucked off that those relationships, which they built up over the course of many years, are now completely worthless.
And the result is we get anti-labour dreck from a bunch of sulky hacks.
And that probably is the truth of it. They’ve gotten used to been spoon-fed insider tip-offs and have become lazy.
Now they have not much more than their own prejudices to write about. Shows doesn’t it.
National Radio on Sunday morning is quite good with Wallace Chapman ( even although I miss Chris Laidlaw)
Unfortunately no audiolink up (yet?)…but very good discussion on what is best for New Zealand education and the importance of highly university trained professional teachers and taking education professionals with you in any changes in education.
John Key and NACT are proposing unqualified teachers and are ignoring the teaching profession’s s views …as well as undermining/attacking teacher unions and teacher professionalism.
From international education experts also…. the thumbs down for Charter Schools and privatisation of education
8:40 New Zealand Principals’ Federation national president Philip Harding
Philip Harding attended The International Summit on the Teaching Profession. He talks about how New Zealand can achieve better educational outcomes.
That was a pretty disappointing Radio report on the Education Forum Chooky. There was too much time wasted on the froth and on the chosen reps who just said blah blah blah on amorphous cliches. The nearest to real stuff was from the man from Finland who you notice referred to the PISA testing as a sideline and unfortunate that some countries narrow their teaching just to do well with PISA. Sure there was a black mark for Charter Schools and that NZ underfunds education and ignores funding in the areas that would make a difference.
NZ does not do well it seems, in the lack of Government cooperation/listening to those who actually do the teaching.
@inamac….yes the end was a bit fudgey from some NZers…. and the conclusions could have been more of a ‘sock it to ’em’ ….but overall all… the points covered by the international experts were pretty succinct against devaluing the professionalism of teachers ,privatisation and Charter Schools and PSIS testing …emphasis was placed on how important teachers/educators are and upgrading their status (which has been devalued in the last 5 years under NACT) and letting teachers/ educators/universities /research lead educational and teaching practice change
…overall it was pretty good from Radio NZ i thought
…..( i am trying to be positive here, after my rather negative statements about Guy Espiner)
Mother of god, Darien Fenton learn to choose your f’ing battles, The Lego Movie isn’t one of them:
“Key said yesterday most people would take The Lego Movie line “for what it is – a light-hearted line in a children’s fantasy film”.
But Opposition tourism spokeswoman Darien Fenton said Key should use his contacts to tell Warner Bros the “Middle Zealand” references were not on.”
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11244890
She obviously hasn’t learnt any lessons from the Mad Butcher comments that went down like a cup of cold sick. There is a severe lack of comms discipline in the Labour caucus at the moment.
“Middle Zealand….a “wondrous land full of knights, castles, mutton, torture weapons, poverty, leeches, illiteracy, and, um … dragons.”
..um..!..what exactly is incorrect about that lego-movie statement..?
Ant’s right. Pick your battles.
She said on Twitter that it was a joke which had obviously failed.
https://twitter.com/DarienFenton/status/460186481785442304
The joke is on us this Monday when John Key starts talking about Labour wanting to “ban” The Lego Movie.
No doubt National are laughing their arses off.
Yep. It may not have gone down so well with a few people but I figure most people will grin at it.
And if some member of Labour don’t realise the media in on the other side by now, then they are fools or in the pay of that same media.
KeyThe Minister for Warner Brothers can probably be credited with the “illiteracy” jibe: you could quote him from Hansard on numerous occasions upto November 2008 telling precisely the same lie.I note that Winston, the master attention seeker, decided it merited a comment. In that context I’m not sure what Fenton has done wrong.
Looks like The Herald isn’t too chuffed about it either: the article starts: “New Zealand has been insulted…”
Just one of the little in-jokes that pops up from time to time in animated movies. Probably Warner Brothers executives having a laugh at begging bowl NZ ministers, with not enough money, not understanding the employment law they enacted to enable the Hobbit movies.
Robert Reid has just put the boot in to the Key government in fine style as a member of the panel on Q and A-worth a watch on TV1+1.
robert reid is a total star..
..i especially like how he called all the media/commentators on their utter jones-fretting bullshit..
I was almost in tears listening to the hysterical crap pouring out of Coddington’s mouth and being confirmed by that Professor chap whose name I’ve forgotten and don’t care. Both of them were following the right wing line and blindly echoing the bullshit being fed them by others. Then along came Robert Reid and knocked them down. I hope we see much more of him!
The most revealing piece of info. came from Shane Jones and Moira Coatsworth when confronted with the question: who leaked the story?
Jones was clear. He didn’t leak it. He planned to tell the Caucus at the first meeting after the break (I presume that would have been Tues. 6th May) and then it would have become public – on Labour’s terms.
Coatsworth when asked the same question told Smalley… I think you’ll have to ask the National Party.
Back to Whale Oil? No wonder the MSM pay the slime-bag so much homage. You scratch my back boys and girls, and I’ll scratch yours.
Coddington is an utter moron. Her tiny hamster brain couldn’t help but vocalise that the ‘last nail in the coffin’ line she’d been fed (probably by demnetia-riddled Richard Prebble) was overly dramatic.
Meanwhile Robert Reid absolutely crushes them! Calls them on their creation of bullshit re: Shane Jones-working-class-hero bollocks. Except he’s too kind, calls it myth making instead of telling coddington and miller and woods right to their rotten faces that they’re a bunch of well-heeled liars.
Susan Wood is the absolute pits. And she can always rely on her sycophantic pet, Raymond Miller, to bleat the blairite, centre right horseshit.
what was his line? Labour’s constituency is very fragile? What a load of shite, how is it more fragile than any other parties’ constituency? He would have said the same about National in 2002. He’s one of those morons that think if he just plants his opinions somewhere in the middle he’ll stay relevant.
Just watched Q+A. Robert Reid was great. Especially pointing to the Media Myths promoted against the truths. And that Media were right there talking the myths. And Coddington is unbelievably awful as a commentator. Perhaps she is there as a Labour plot to show the shallowness of the NAT/ACT?
Election year and Q+A better start getting their Qs straightened out.
I thought his mythbusting was awesome as well. Good work Robert Reid.
Yes BG re Robert Reid. He was marvellous and raised that interesting point the Countdown pay their workers $2 more per hour than NW (I think it was NW). This gets lost in the whole “Jones the hero of the working man”. His countdown thing was good, but it seemed a bit random and not part of a coherent plan, policy for workers and jobs.
And I am still asking who will leave the party or no longer support the party because Jones has gone? Whose voice did he represent? And who is it more important that Labour represents?
Bomber Bradbury gives perspective for the Left and Labour on Shane Jones and the working class male
http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/27/why-shane-jones-wont-matter-on-september-20th-and-why-labour-need-to-start-talking-about-their-first-100-days/
The deputy editor of the Herald on Sunday gave a good hint this morning that Shane Jones ”will be back”,
Apparently Jones hasn’t finished with politics but we are left up in the air as to what such a small but loaded point means for the future,
My speculation is that Winston Peters close to the 2017 election will force the resignation of one of His Caucus after having quietly inserted Jones as ‘next in line’ on the NZFirst Party list,(or Peters will use His influence with whoever is the Government to buy out of the Parliament one of the NZFirst MP’s with ‘a job for the boys’ ala the current situation with Jones),
At the point of having inserted Jones into the Parliament Peters will announce His retirement and Jones as the leader,(which might put a twist in a few noses in the NZfirst Caucus,
Pure speculation of course…
Im guessing he will be writing a column for the Herald.
He cannot insert someone into the list during the term The list must be presented before this election and holds fast until next election
Yep. People on the list may turn down the option to take the seat in their vacancy, but for Bad’s hypothetical to be correct, Jones would need to be on the NZ First List for the 2014 election.
I’m guessing he will resurface as John Key’s right hand Maori
…replace Tau Henare or Tariana Turia
….National must be running out of new high profile Maori by now
so..are we all thoroughly overdosed on the musings/self-justifications/poor-me! whinings of the jones..?..
..is the chorus of ‘good riddance!’ getting even louder..
..and is the right in labour..trying to lose this election..
..so they can seize back control of the party..?
..post-election..?
(raising the pension age being a total vote-killer..?
..shearer/that west coast guy..adding to the jones chorus..?..w.t.f. was that about..?..)
Agreed Phillip-I’m hearing “good riddance” getting louder too.
The political scientist on Q and A Raymond Millar just said Jones leaving may have done Labour a favour as there will now be no Jones attacking the Greens as a coalition partner in the campaign.
In my opinion, having an MP who has a weak work ethic, has alienated half the voting public and has been actively working against the left wings best interests for a very long time remain in the Labour party was never a good idea. After all, he was being paid by Nationals associates to undermine Labour’s core values, and that I believe is the main reason for him
resigningbeing ushered out.Although the subject matter is a bit boring, Jones saying that he was not willing to work with the Greens as a reason to leave is secondary to him recently being caught out taking bribes from the right wing. It is his way of undermining any future left wing government that might curtail the fossil fuel industry and inhibit slaver-fishing vessels. After all, these are the industries that have been generously funding his, shall we say, lifestyle.
I presume that Jones was the perpetrator of various leaks to the media that have damaged Labour in the past. That’s why I’m happy to see him go. Without Jones, the biased media in New Zealand are panicking about losing their mole and their fear of not having any dirt to dish on Labour leading up to an election is showing. Perhaps they might like to start actually working for a story, instead of just parroting right wing attack lines and making stuff up.
I must say that I’m enjoying the reality check recent commentators on The Standard are giving MP’s and various media hacks who are also well past their used by date. The MSM have even been whinging about it. Let’s hope their propaganda is just as transparent to the average voter.
Good points well said Jackal
I presume that Jones was the perpetrator of various leaks to the media that have damaged Labour in the past.
I think that award probably goes to Trevor Mallard.
Great to see the new electric trains launched. Took governments of left and right to do.
NZHerald and TransportBlog have full coverage.
First proposed in the 1920’s and supported by the hardcore Marxist greenie Gordon Coates, railways minister in the far left socialist United-Reform coalition….
Great day for Auckland, goes to show, despite everything, things other than roads can still be built up, not torn down.
I’m going to choose my words carefully about the whole Shane Jones situation because emotions seem pretty charged on the topic.
For me, I didn’t care overly for Jones. Some of his economic positions were similar to mine, but I consider myself a social liberal and Jones’s attitudes were quite ghastly, at times. Personally, I’m not bothered to see him leaving, though I will miss some of his bombastic deliveries of speeches.
However, the real issue is the almost congratulatory nature of some that he’s left. That’s the issue where I think Pagini is actually a little bit true. Jones did speak for some of Labour in its broad church. He did win 16% in the leadership election. People did like him. When they see people high-fiving Jones’s departure, it does tend to suggest that their position is not actually welcomed anymore in the party. Even if only a third of his supporters consider voting for NZ First or National, that might be 1.5-2% of the votes moving away from Labour. In a close election, that might be important.
I think the Labour MPs have covered themselves well. Regardless of what they think of Jones and his attitudes, they’ve made all the right sounds. We like him, we wish him luck, Kelvin is a great replacement, we move on. However, if the celebratory nature of some Labour members extend into the media narrative (which it’s starting to do), then there’s cause for concern.
The best thing would have been to do what the MPs did. Instead of having people writing about how Jones going is actually a good thing and good riddance.
You have to give him credit. Somehow he turned pimping this country out to the extractive industries into a ‘core Labour value’.
yeah..since when did fuck the oceans?drill baby baby drill!/dig that dirty-coal/let’s frack!..
..when did these become ‘core labour values’..?
..what’s that you say..?
..they are current labour party policies..?
..whoar..!
..what’s up with that..?
.and along with the stunning silences since the release of the doom-report on climate-warming..
..we have parker attempting to rally the troops..
..”.it’s the l.v.r..!..to the barricades..!..”
..if ya didn’t laff..you’d cry…
Hey Phillip. I see you can spell words now. Well done. Have you tried putting a capital letter at the beginning of each new thought. You finish each thought with a dot. One dot, not two. These are then called sentences.
Similar thoughts or sentences are grouped together and these are called paragraphs. This is important because it allows readers to follow your reasoning in a logical fashion. Otherwise they might think what you are writing is just mindless crap!
i have always been an excellent speller…
..can’t repair a car-engine..but boy..!..i can spell..
..know yr strengths..eh..?
..what are you good at..pete..?
..and tell me pete..why do you squash all yr words/sentences up into a block..?
..post-‘sentences’ is the only scrawny piece of white-space relief you offer..
..’white-space’ is free..eh..?
..no trees are harmed..
..let yr words/sentences breath…eh..?
Phil, your first sentence ends with 3 dots. Why not two?
Not that it matters, just curious if that has some significance.
But I do like your musings…
i was feeling generous..
as you evidently do periodically 🙂
lol phil…you do provide me with a lot of laughs….i was told by a professional book editor it is definitely three dots…definitely de rigueur
….also never take any notice of mad ‘Once was Pete’ …he is a BAD speller!…i am a bad speller but he is worse
LOL! Oh, Ok. That well explains your extra unexpected ‘periodical’ period. Cheers
is that 3 dots i see or do i need glasses?
I think you are seeing three.
I don’t think you need more glasses, but may be something even more in them, shaken or stirred.
Now now, that’s very unkind to Phillip don’t you know, its Phillip’s ‘art’ cannot you see…
jealousy is such an ugly emotion..
..especially when so raw/untrammeled..
Agree Disraeli Gladstone. There’s been overly negative stuff on this site about Shane Jones. I was not in agreement with his views, but he certainly isn’t the bastard some here have tried to paint him.
It’s looking more and more likely the story was prematurely leaked by the National Party (see my 8.1.1) and that, in my view, is where the anger should be directed.
the real issue is the almost congratulatory nature of some that he’s left. That’s the issue where I think Pagini is actually a little bit true.
Certainly there have been some comments but as far as I can make out predominately by Green or Mana supporters. This line has been used to suggest that there has been a whole lot of Labour members dancing on Jones’ grave and to be honest I have not seen any real evidence of it. There has been robust discussion as there always is.
mickysavage is right. The bulk of Labour members and supporters who have publicly commented here and elsewhere have been reasonably respectful of Jones’ decision to leave.
Some of us within the party make no apologies for giving Shane stick, and fully justifiable when you consider he has turned renegade on a political party of which he is still an mp, and that is endeavoring to win an election in under 6 months.
Critiquing this mornings Q&A there are a couple of things I will point out. Moria Coastworth accusing, I presume some of us on here of mouthing off, like we weren’t well qualified, or it was somehow unjustifiable. Pretty piss poor Moira that you didn’t show some guts like Robert Reid did and call Shane out, atleast on his non disclosure that he ‘did not consult with the McCully job offer’ and as LP President that come as a huge disappointment. So how about you show some leadership of your own or maybe while there is a purge happening you might consider joining Jones.
Good work Bob Reid for balking at the bullshit notion that Jones reps working class people. Also for pointing out that Countdown/Progressive Enterprises is but one half of the supermarket duopoly, in that sense the issue has broadened out as we knew it would lead on and hence the support given to the attack by some of us. I maintain that Jones was fronting for his Croatian family/business mates Tally’s, financial donations garanteeded. Which reminds me Jones putting up Willow Jean as the Northland LP candiate is hardly done the party a favour, more likely the Mana & the Greens. Tell us how many of the Affco (Tally’s owned) blue collars are going to vote for the partner of the ‘hated boss’ that locked them out for 26 weeks? Another classic Jones fuck up!
I think Coatsworth is party of that caucus clique where they have to publically pretend they’re all respectful of each other and matey matey etc but actually they fucking hate each others guts.
Ha ha got a laugh out of your comment, not quite that bad but certainly 2 divisions. Let us hope the tension will subside and allow some breathing room with Jones out of the picture. Must have been rather testing trying to contain a mule headed Jones, exerting his own deep seeded hatred of the Greens.
The next breach of discipline/unity will be the party list rankings I would assume. The staff in the engine room will have written up a summary execution type notice, and force every MP and candidate to sign well prior to the list release. You can guarantee a number of MP’s are going to be effectively shunted out of parliament and may not want to go amicably, more likely kicking and screaming. Any thought of such happenings needs to be spelt out when they gather after the current break, McCarten’s not so subtle style is probably required for that.
Who is to say that the people who took the time out to look up on this website (and perhaps the Daily Blog) can not see sense in the reasons people provided for asserting that Labour may be better off without Jones.
Amongst other things, it is highly jarring when one has read clear messages from the Labour leader after their strategy meetings earlier in the year, that the leader (at least) recognises the merit of speaking well of the other biggest left wing party and working well with them and then to have one member of the party coming out with the things Jones said about the Greens.
That such incidents occurred indicate poor discipline and raise questions re harmony within the caucus due to the expressed conflict with the main themes that have been discussed and reported about Labour-the-Party’s stance toward other left-wing parties that they are likely to have to work with in some way, shape or form.
That Jones was quick to cite Labour’s stance on the Greens as a reason for leaving makes a whole lot of sense and removes the concerns raised in the previous paragraph.
Who is to say that the people who liked Jones didn’t find it odd that he took a job from one of the National party strategists, Murray McCully allowing National to make statements that ‘Jones is joining our government’ (Key).
Who is to say that people who liked Jone’s character, and took time to read the opinions of people on this site expressing discontent, didn’t leave the site with a shifted perception; that those who expressed frustration at the framing of this event ‘as a disaster for Labour’ made a valid point?
If Shane Jone’s qualities cited here and elsewhere reflect him accurately, that he appeals to a certain misogynism and boorishness out there in the community. One has to really question – how much of these qualities can Labour – as a large political party on the left – afford to cater to such stances without alienating large sections of the community and alienating themselves from their own major political principles? i.e. How can a party ‘for the people’ take a stance against half the population in the name of appealing to a small percentage of the population?
Really, these are sincere questions that need to be asked and addressed.
well the main ‘caterer’ to those ‘misogynism and boorishness’ ‘qualities’..
..has now walked out the door..
..perhaps he could form his own party..?
..the ‘mysoginists and boors’ party..
..then we would be able to evaluate his actual level of support out there..
+1 yes, did you see Stephanie Roger’s comment at 2.2 above? (Snap!)
This would be the way to go. I don’t think a large party can cater to degenerate aspects of our culture. Leave that to a small ‘special interests’ party. It would, indeed, be interesting to see how many votes are gathered by such a party.
That’s a good way to for a political party to reconnect with its constituency of poncy snotty well educated morally self exalting social liberals.
Consider that National, the party of the 1%, wins far more votes than Labour, the so called broad church for the 99%.
It’s not only ironic, it points to a massive disconnect with wider NZ society that Labour has not dealt with yet, especially considering that since the 1930’s, National has had significantly more years in power than Labour has, and it was Labour who opened the nation’s gates wide open to neoliberalism and corporate financialisation.
The resentment and anger many still hold towards what Labour did, and what it has since become, isn’t “degenerate” – it is valid and quite justifiable.
You appear to have missed answering the questions that earlier I posited need to be answered.
If Shane Jone’s qualities cited here and elsewhere reflect him accurately, that he appeals to a certain misogynism and boorishness out there in the community. One has to really question – how much of these qualities can Labour – as a large political party on the left – afford to cater to such stances without alienating large sections of the community and alienating themselves from their own major political principles? i.e. How can a party ‘for the people’ take a stance against half the population in the name of appealing to a small percentage of the population?
Let me make it clearer for you:
How many people in NZ do you think Shane Jones represents?
How many people in NZ do you think he alienates.
p.s. I am not ‘a political party’.
Shane Jones was an irrelevancy to the working class last month, and he is an irrelevancy to the working class today. They might have appreciated his gumption on a couple off issues but in terms of representing their interests with any authenticity? Few thought so. I have a few Tory mates who thought he was alright however.
So now, let me ask you another set of questions.
What proportion of people in NZ do you think the Labour Party represents the interests of?
And how many of the people in that group would actually agree with that?
You see, that’s the disconnect.
O.k, so you respond to my questions by saying Shane Jones is an irrelevance to the working class last month and today.
This response strikes me as a bit of a cop out CV.
I take it, therefore that you are saying he represents no one, and therefore must alienate no one?
I disagree. I think that the element of truth occurring with the mainstream media’s narrative of this is that there is a section of NZ that do respond to misogyny and boorish behaviour.
And I was responding to that aspect of their narrative by questioning whether Labour can afford to cater to such attitudes if they wish to appeal to many.
You appeared to have a problem with that comment, yet do not appear to be capable of answering it honestly. This precludes the possibility of having an honest and constructive discussion on the matter with you.
I for one would be very interested in knowing what sort of numbers we are talking about here. How many people do the Shane Jones style politicians of NZ actually represent? Who are they? And how many people are alienated, put off politics, or voting due to parties/ media narratives scrabbling after this section of New Zealand? How big is this section of NZ?
It is questions such as these that need to be addressed in order for a political party such as Labour to retain relevance.
The narrative by the media answer none of these questions, nor do you, yet both yourself and the media are prepared to write about such notions just the same. This is simply about playing shadow boxing games devoid of any real information. This is the type of behaviour that hurts the left far more than the right-wing. Because the left requires a bit of thoughtfulness. The right doesn’t and I suggest to you that that is the right’s competitive advantage and nothing else.
You want data on Shane Jones appeal to the wider electorate?
Fine, but if that information exists anywhere it will be in the private internal polling done by the political parties, so source that if you can.
The only data I have to go on is the few % of Labour Party members who actually voted for Jones in the leadership vote last year. I guess in the most concrete sense, that’s his constituency.
Wrong. National understands the mindset and the mood of NZers better than Labour does. And it shows routinely. While Labour moans that the Royals visit is playing politics in an election year, Key just gets stuck in and NZers simply find Kate and George charming, lovely and gracious (and cute).
Another thing, National never apologises for acting in the interests of it’s own constituents. Corporate casinos, private property developers, dairy farmers, finance company investors, etc. It just goes out there and does what it needs to in order to help its mates. Whereas Labour always seems to be apologising for something. Except raising the retirement age of course, they seem really righteous about that one piece of policy which will fuck over workers and the unemployed in an attempt to balance the books and be “fiscally responsible”.
This is how the Tory party serving the interests of the 1% regularly manages to get almost 50% in opinion polls. But the “broad church” Labour Party of the 99% struggles to get even 33% in opinion polls.
I can’t say it any louder: MASSIVE DISCONNECT with the wider electorate.
So I return back to my original point – Shane Jones was irrelevant a month ago and he remains irrelevant now.
I’ll add this in more direct response to you – yes Jones pissed many people off and alienated many others.
But on the scale of what Labour has done to turn away supporters, voters and potential voters, the things I listed above, and many others, are WAY higher up the list.
Where Jones’ political body finally gets buried will have zero impact on how people view Labour on election day. He’s irrelevant.
No, CV, it is not wrong. National may be able to go sucking up to a couple of wealthy elite and get a boost in ratings for doing so, yet would it not be perceived as somewhat incongruous if Labour – representing workers did so?
Shouting at me re massive disconnects hardly serves your purpose. Perhaps it might be better to listen and realise that what I am saying is not in conflict with what you appear to be wanting to shout back at me? What I am saying to you is there is this narrative re ‘blue collar workers leaving in droves’ from the Labour party going along, yet not once is this ‘blue collar worker’ defined apart to say that a person like Shane Jones represents them.
As Mr Reid on Q&A so astutely put it half of workers are women – top marks Mr Reid on being the first person to mention this obvious little fact. Women are also up there in the worst paid most unemployed stats, I would hazard a guess that this is the type of constituency Labour need to appeal to, yet references to ‘blue collar workers’ persist (perhaps largely by the media)and perhaps this sector is largely dominated by men? I don’t know what this term is really referencing. Trades people appear to be on pretty good wages last time I checked when compared to the type of work women traditionally do. (There are safety issues that effect some section of this group – I doubt very much that such people are supportive of National’s stance on the matter).
I hold to my previous comment that Labour cannot getaway with the type of clowning that National can (it is easier to appear cavalier and that ‘it dunt matta’ when this is your genuine attitude), the way Labour wins is by knowing their strengths, knowing their most likely supporters and knowing National’s weaknesses and shaping everything they say and do to these three factors.
I actually have a feeling this is what they are doing and this process takes time to show results. Any mistakes that have occurred is from Labour lacking focus in this respect – buying into rightwing framing and being overly concerned about offending the sections of society that will never vote for them anyway.
The left came very close to winning the last election – there is no reason why they cannot achieve an election win this time around.
@ disraeli..
..nah..!..he’s a rightwing-plant in labour..
..best he’s gone..
..and best his old-school-reactionary views be painted as they are..
..it has a cauterising effect/benefit..
Oh, I’m not saying it’s not good that he’s gone. I’d agree with that.
But I think the “crowing” of Jones’ opponents is making the issue worst. I agree with Mickey that a lot of the crowing is done by Greens/Mana/Whoever Bomber’s Being Paid For Now. But there are some Labour members adding their voices.
I think if everyone can of just nodded, “oh right, Shane, well good luck. Now, Kelvin, good man,” I think Labour could have really got away with hardly any damage.
i think it has moved on from there..
..i think even his most fervent supporters will be going stfu shane..!
..he is doing far more damage to his own cause with his own mouth..(and seeming to be trying to inflict as much damage on the party that gave him what he got..ungrateful prick..!..)
..and if he hadn’t insisted on going out the door cock in hand – and spraying everyone/thing labour in sight/he can..
..he may have been able to retain some dignity..some mana..
..as it is..?..
..yeah..nah..eh..?
..the game has moved onto:..’just fuck off jones..!’..
“That’s the issue where I think Pagini is actually a little bit true.”
….. and of course that’s exactly why these shills are given airtime and the ability to exercise their so-called left-wing creds.
…… they’re always just “a little bit true” – a bit like most of those economic commentators we see on the nightly gogglebox ‘news’, and why they claim “From the Left” creds on Nine-to-Noon.
(“I tend to agree with you Mathew”) – which of course is code for ‘I’m a moderate leftie’ – despite the pendulum having had 30 years to swing right. Tony Blair anyone?
+1 Once was Tim
The ‘elephant in the room’ about the whole Shane Jones situation is that it highlights the absolute dearth of talent within the National Party, that they need to shoulder-tap an Opposition MP because none of their own possess the necessary competence.
+1 Daveosaurus
Good point Dave. And perhaps there was an aspiring soon-to-be ex Nat MP being a bit pissed off. “That should have been my job McCulley!”
“But,” says McCulley, “None of youse are as capable as the Jones boy. You are Nats after all.”
Yep they had 13 candidates left! I wonder what Tau Henare thinks of the appointment?
Phillip Ure, regarding literacy (snigger)
NZ is rated at 7th in the world and the only reason we are not top is possible thanks to your fearless work
i think you may be slightly over-egging the effects of my scribbles there..ray…
..eh..?
Oops!
😈 😆
I came across this comment on Facebook posted on Kelvin Davis’s page:
Men should take responsibility for male violence but it isn’t that simple. The following is a quote in reaction to that comment, is it a fair call?
In the case of many Maori men, they had their first taste of being beaten up by their (solo) mother until they got old enough to leave home and big enough to be the boss themselves. At this point woe betide the woman who tries,or appears to try to dominate him. No father around modelling good behaviour because the DPB allows resource to flow from men to women without reciprocation so women have kids alone.
Feminism and the erosion of mana tane (male honour and prestige) is the colonisation that dare not speak its name. Good luck with those Labour Party Hand Mirror feminists Kelvin; they’ll love you while you’re in your white knight “it’s all men’s fault” phase, but as soon as you follow the facts, look at the bigger picture and hold women to account for their part in these problems you’ll realise what a poisoned chalice you hold.
Get that people? This person thinks that women help perpetrate violence against themselves.
Guess who made the comment?
JT?
Hmm, let me see….dumb-arse connection of disparate dots by means of bald assertion followed by the wise council to ‘follow the facts’. Gee, Mickey, give us a clue while I away for a wee cuppa made from bagged up factory floor sweepings, will you? 😉
I know the answer! And thanks for the copy-and-paste, micky, when I saw a link to this on Twitter the comment had mysteriously vanished.
Is it destined to become (yet) another media distraction, perhaps timed to burst into life around the time of Parker’s speech?
Wow. He’s such a scum bag.
Also, men taking responsibility for male violence is that simple, that’s the entire point of….uh…..men taking responsibility for their role in perpetrating violence.
Let me guess. Is it old PG? seems like the kind of drivel Petey would say and then claim it’s a middle ground common sense conclusion.
Chocolate fish to cardassian!
please petey..!
..don’t explain…eh..?
(and should that purler be quoted endlessly back at that bottom-dweller..?
..yes..yes it should..)
Kelvin’s unequivocal response was great. No doubt PG will go through some weasel like contortions over this one.
edit: looks like he already is contorting, like I said, he is such a scum bag.
+1
On the upside, it’s linkable and likely to be a good archived example of what he really is about – both his politics and his weaseling.
Linked and screenshotted.
Love your work DTB
How very dare you! He’s a perfectly work-life-balanced specimen that works on logic and weighing up all the evidence in non-partisan FASHION. Furthermore – he’s a total legend (even IF in his own mind).
At least we have a point of measurement I ‘spose. Shame it’s a fossil.
OMG. pete george is a dirty bastard. Seriously, that comment of his makes me sick and is offensive on many, many levels.
sick’s right. Now he is telling lies and doing his usual clusterfuck of communication – see the Greville Whittle thread esp where he claims he was quoting someone, that they’re not his words, he wants to ‘promote engagement’ etc
Someone with a FB account might want to go over there and warn people that they’re dealing with a special kind of tr8ll.
Wow, just wow. Sometimes PG let’s the facade slip and shows what nasty reactionary racist and misogynistic little shit he really is.
It’s still up here, with Davis’ and others’ replies,
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=778279242203925&id=776784779020038¬if_t=wall
Mea culpa. I forgot I’d blocked Pete George on Facebook so as to avoid seeing his comments! 😀
rofl!
good move. why burden yourself with the irrelevant?
If I could, I’d do likewise – it’s only that I don;t subscribe to Facebook – or most other ‘supposedly social’ media.
Apparently I should be devastated because I haven’t signed up for twitter.
(The double breasted suit will soon be back in fashion – or so I hear …. oh – and cuffs on men’s strides – or so I hear – that’ll be so so so cool won’t it?)
I much prefer Twitter. It’s a weird situation: Facebook tends to be much more focused on interacting with people you already know and presumably share interests with, but a lot of people find Twitter far more engaging and personal.
“Wow, just wow. Sometimes PG let’s the facade slip and shows what nasty reactionary racist and misogynistic little shit he really is.”
+1 I take back every every gram of guilt I felt when I wrote something I felt was a bit mean to him.
The thing with PG is how he takes a perfectly good debate and drops deadshit all over it.
There is a kernel of a point in what he’s saying.
My partner and I are dealing with a neighbor we’ve gotten to know whose relationship with her boyfriend is unhealthy. Too much angry screaming and shouting. We’ve confronted it twice now.
We’ve made it clear – any hint of violence and things will be really simple; the cops will get called immediately. No compromise on that.
But actually dealing with the underlying causes and fallout is so much more complex than just ‘it’s all his fault’. And most people, from their own direct experience, know this.
If an alcoholic gets in a car and drives they take all the responsibility and blame. But figuring out why they are getting all fucked up, and off abusing alcohol is a whole different discussion in which blame isn’t helpful.
Sigh. I really hope we’re not going to get into one of those conversations again 🙂
Who, other than PG, has said “it’s all his fault”?
All the people I know that work with violence acknowledge and work with multiple causes.
PG’s framing is one that sets up a false premise that kind of sounds like it might make sense, as a way of introducing some pretty fucking dodgy theory – men are violent because Māori mothers don’t have husbands and beat their kids. And you’ve just bought into his racist, misogynist scam, not because you are like him but because he has such a good hook.
I doubt that you can ressurrect the perfectly good debate and try and talk about it in this context Red. Pretty sure there will be strong resistance to talking about domestic violence in the way you are suggesting, in the context of what PG has just done.
Plus 1 weka. I also hope that, I really do.
I agree with so much of what you say on the blog RL, but on abuse issues I feel you have something of a hair trigger (as do I).
On the paragraph Pete used I believe it’s not framed as a gender issue as such, but as a DPB issue – i.e. If women have kids and leave the fathers (because those fathers would be good role models) the ones who incite young men to violence can only be women. If the DPB was denied then women would have to stay with the men who fathered their children and the problem of kids learning violence from their mothers would be solved. Moreover this is a Māori problem.
In this framing it’s not a case of whether men or women are responsible for domestic violence (obviously both are, because the author admits boys will grow up to hit women). It’s that domestic violence is a result of:
1. Sole parent Māori women
2. The availability of benefits to women with children.
I think you’ve missed the point by arguing about whether women commit violence against their sons (clearly, some do). Seeing we agree on that, is it possible to have a discussion about the framing of the piece?
It’s worth restating the common ground here: violence is always the responsibility of the person who lashes out. Regardless of gender, race, class, provocation or anything.
PG is indeed on very fucking dodgy ground by framing it as a race issue because it’s not.
Equally anyone framing it solely on gender grounds is on similarly thin ice considering that whereas men’s physical strength and cultural conditioning mean they are responsible for the most harm; women contribute to domestic violence and abuse stats in their own special way that cannot be ignored.
I drew a comparison with alcohol abuse because it’s a slightly less ‘loaded’ issue (bad pun intended … sorry). I think that was my sole point – to avoid the kind of bad conflation that PG has made it’s useful to be very clear about the distinction between an absolute, very simple responsibility for committing violence – and having a completely separate discussion about the root cause of why families degenerate into being so angry and dysfunctional with each other in the first place.
Ambulance, fence, cliff and all that.
I don’t see anybody framing violence ‘solely on gender grounds’. What Kelvin Davis has said is (the fact) that the majority of violence is committed by men against women and children, and his opinion that an important way to address this issue is for men like him to stand up and acknowledge the problem.
I don’t see anybody framing violence ‘solely on gender grounds
Fair enough.
hat the majority of violence is committed by men against women and children
But what are you doing just there?
The point is that while violence is a universal issue, neither is it a uniform one. The violence men commit is indeed the most dangerous, lethal and apparent. Women also commit violence that while it may be somewhat less dangerous, less lethal and far less apparent – frequently leaves emotional and psychological scars far deeper than physical ones. (On this point I speak personally.)
A similar point can be made if we look through the issue from the perspective of race; poor, marginalised and dysfunctional families (and for economic reasons also frequently happen to be Maori or Pacifica) have their own particular experience and patterns of domestic violence that is different to the less apparent but equally reprehensible violence that goes in in ‘respectable’, white, middle-class homes.
So yes I completely reject any attempt to frame this issue around race, gender or class. It may not be uniform in it’s manifestations, but it is universal in it’s harm.
Once again, you’ve taken my words to mean ‘no woman ever commits violence ever.’ Once again, no one’s saying that.
+1, apart from PG of course.
Well to be fair neither did PG say ‘no white person ever commits violence ever’ either.
(In fact a small mischievous part of me might argue that us whitey boys have a special talent for organised mass murder in the form of industrialised warfare – but that’s a tangent too far)
I’m thinking that maybe the left has drifted into this mistake before. Take the S88 Reform Bill debate. Now I died in a whole dozen ditches here defending and promoting that reform. There were of course the church fundies and die-hards who were not going to budge from their belief that it was their God-given/cultural prerogative to beat the crap out of their children if it so pleased them.
But they were a minority. Albeit vocal and organised – but still a minority.
The real problem were the big middle of New Zealanders, all of whom have grown up in a family or have children – and have an experience of the kids getting a smack or a bit of a whack or two. Most of it probably harmless enough. And most people could a good day get their heads around the idea that smacking kids was probably counterproductive and they might be able to raise them without resorting to it. With a bit of encouragement.
Yet the way the debate was framed we fell into the trap of making too many of these middle New Zealanders feel wrong and guilty about it. And it was that which stirred up so much emotional resentment. And probably lost the 2008 election for that matter.
Now where I am in Victoria (Australia is a decade behind NZ in this domestic violence issue) there have been a string of grotesque family murders. Virtually every woman my partner makes friends with has some appalling story. I’m not seeking to minimise this issue one tiny bit.
But here’s the rub. Along with many men, while I’ve never, ever, slightly assaulted a woman, my only personal brush with domestic violence was when a woman rather badly kicked me. (A long time ago.) And most men, while willing to take responsibility for their actions, willing to stop the violence, even if needing a fair bit of encouragement – at the same time are very resistant to the idea that somehow the cause of it was always their fault and they are ones who are always guilty and shamed.
Even if that message is not the intended one, when we focus just on men’s violence it is too often the only message heard. And it provokes the same counterproductive resentment encountered over the S88 Reform. We do that when we conflate responsibility for stopping the violence – with responsibility for the root cause of the anger and dysfunction leading to it.
The counter is to frame the issue in universal terms. When we said “The law does not permit us to assault adults for any reason, why then should it make an exception for children who are even more in need of protection” the heat would go away. Because that argument made sense, and ultimately was why almost every Party in the House voted for it. (Except the execrable ACT Party. It was the beginning of the end for them.)
“at the same time are very resistant to the idea that somehow it’s all always their fault and they are one who are always guilty.”
How about you stop buying into that false framing then. And stop promoting it.
Was it my fault that a woman kicked me? Did I deserve it?
(I did need to edit the bit of my comment that you have quoted for clarity.)
I don’t feel in any way qualified to have an opinion about that situation where you were assualted Red.
You do seem to be mixing things up. Neither myself, nor Stephanie, nor Kelvin Davis, nor most of the commenters on his FB thread have said that men don’t ever experience violence at the hands of women. Or that all violence is soley the fault of men. So I am at a loss to know what your point is.
I will say again, no-one is saying that it is all men’s fault (apart from PG). If you see people saying that, then I can only suggest that you check out what they really mean and see if it fits what you are thinking.
Please stop supporting PG’s false framing and racist/misogynistic framing.
(I don’t understand your edit sorry).
I don’t feel in any way qualified to have an opinion about that situation where you were assualted Red.
Well if hypothetically I had been the one doing the kicking would you then feel qualified to have an opinion?
Or that all violence is soley the fault of men. So I am at a loss to know what your point is.
My point boils down to this:
“Even if that message is not the intended one, when we focus just on men’s violence … too often is is the only message heard. And then it provokes the same counterproductive resentment encountered over the S88 Reform. We do that when we conflate responsibility for stopping the violence – with responsibility for the root cause of the anger and dysfunction leading to it.”
Please stop supporting PG’s false framing and racist/misogynistic framing.
It would help if you stopped reading demons into little isolated fragments of what I’m saying. Please feel free to ask for clarification if I am unclear.
“I will say again, no-one is saying that it is all men’s fault (apart from PG).”
I’ve never said that, so it’s ironic you’ve (weka) claimed that at the same time as accusing me of “false framing”.
Redlogix makes a very good point. I think he’s right about S88, I had a lot of experience debating against smacking children but it became apparent that many decent parents felt very confronted and shamed by “smacking is illegal”.
And the same thing applies in wider debates about violence. I’ve debated extensively against violence, especially on Kiwiblog, but I can confirm what Redlogix suggests, it’s counterproductive to blame violence on men and traget men specifically.
Men are obviously a major factor in violence but far from the only one. Many women can also be violent, and some even defend violent partners over the wellbeing of children.
But the key point on this (and some could take a lesson on it in politics too) – if you single out and attack groups, whether they be Maori or men or beneficiaries or whatever, you are far more likely to alienate than engage. It’s often counterproductive.
I think what weka means is you were the one accusing others of holding that view when no-one had actually expressed it Pete. As you said here:
“Well if hypothetically I had been the one doing the kicking would you then feel qualified to have an opinion?”
Of course not.
“It would help if you stopped reading demons into little isolated fragments of what I’m saying. Please feel free to ask for clarification if I am unclear.”
I don’t know what you mean by ‘reading demons into little isolated fragments’. When I asked you to stop supporting PG’s framing, I meant that the act of trying to have a conversation about domestic violence, in the context of what PG did (racist, misogynistic framing to a Māori man in a community that will include many Māori including Māori mothers), and where you believe at core PG has a point… that act is supporting bullshit irrespective of what your actual argmuent is.
“Even if that message is not the intended one, when we focus just on men’s violence … too often is is the only message heard. And then it provokes the same counterproductive resentment encountered over the S88 Reform. We do that when we conflate responsibility for stopping the violence – with responsibility for the root cause of the anger and dysfunction leading to it.”
Don’t know who you mean by ‘we’ in that statement, who exactly focuses ‘just on men’s violence’? Who is conflating responsibility for stopping violence with responsibility of the anger and dysfunction leading to it?
“I will say again, no-one is saying that it is all men’s fault (apart from PG).”
“I’ve never said that,”
Yes you did,
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-27042014/#comment-805301
@weka.
Unless someone is trolling, drunk or emotionally wound up – it’s rare for someone to make a statement in a blog that is completely right or wrong. I’ve read a fair portion of the 800,000 comments here on TS over the years, and if there is one thing I have learned it is that discussions are generally more fruitful and satisfying if you look for those points you can agree on and work from there.
Even the most superficially obnoxious and upsetting comment (and yes they still do) is worth trying to a deep breath on and having a bit of a think about before launching into an angry, testosterone-poisoned rebuttal. Or maybe I’m just getting old and boring and I don’t have it in me anymore 🙂
So if you thought I was 100% backing PG’s position – you have it wrong.
However I’ve spent much of the last four hours reading The Hand Mirror. Lots of great articles – but nothing relating to my experience. Four hours isn’t long and I may well have missed something, but the tag cloud didn’t lead anywhere obvious.
What happened to me was a quite serious assault. A close friend of mine who witnessed it 35 years ago still recalls it clearly. (It was at a party.)
Of course at the time I never reported it. It never occurred to me at the time, I simply would not have defined in my mind that what happened was wrong. Until very recently I would have told you it was my fault. And because of that denial my next really big mistake was in marrying that person. The many consequences of that error still echo in my life to this day.
I’ve been blogging here since 2008 and this is the first and only time I’m going to refer to it. Because if you cannot tell that one person seriously kicking another (regardless of gender or ‘circumstance’) is domestic violence – then frankly I’m out of this discussion.
Red, please take this kindly… you are really missing what I am saying in my comments. To try and clarify,
Of course women can be the offender in domestic violence. That’s a given. You will never have seen me say anything to the contrary, and I don’t think I’ve seen any of the feminist minded people here on ts say that either.
I didn’t feel qualified to have an opinion about either of the situations you put forth, simply because there was no information. You said she kicked you hard, in my response I called that assault. I didn’t know if it was domestic because I didn’t know what the relationship between you and her is, but it was obviously assault. Someone assaulting someone at a party doesn’t in itself equal domestic abuse (as opposed to other kinds of assualt), but I wasn’t assuming anything, I just said I couldn’t comment. There was nothing in anything I have said that even implied that women can’t be violent towards men. I also didn’t, and still don’t know what you wanted me to say in response to
Was it my fault that a woman kicked me? Did I deserve it?
I suspect part of the problem is that you are thinking in terms of blame and guilt and, from the sounds of it, misapplied responsibility. I don’t really think about it in those terms.
The last time I was around physical violence, it was the neighbours yelling at each other in their backyard. It was at night, and I listened for a bit to get a sense of how serious it might be. Then something changed (he picked something up and hit her with it), and she started screaming at him. I drove my car up their drive and talked to them from the rolled down window but with the doors locked (I didn’t know either of them well enough to feel safe). I asked her to come over and talk to me on her own, which she did and she said she would be ok and I believed her. He was apologetic and shame-faced.
I wasn’t sitting there thinking ‘it’s all his fault’. I was thinking about my own safety, whether she would be safe, whether I would need to call the police etc. None of that had anything to do with assigning blame or guilt. It was simply that he lost control of his anger and stepped over a line and I responded by taking action (as did his partner).
I didn’t know her, but I did know him from around the community and certainly knew people who knew him. Later in the week she came over and had a cup of tea and I felt reassured that things were not that out of control (she left him some time later). I saw him round the community over time and was open and friendly to him in the same way I had been before. I told one other neighbour what happened because I thought someone else in the vicinity should know, but I told it neutrally, a recounting of what happened. I didn’t assign blame other than to say that it was him that did the hitting (that’s not really blame that’s just responsibility). I didn’t tell anyone else what had happened, but if someone had talked about him to me in terms of violence I would have considered telling the story or not based on the context.
So, I made a whole bunch of judgement calls in that situation, based on wanting things to be good for all people. If he had done things that suggested he thought it was ok to hit her or tried to blame her for his actions, I would have no doubt made different judgements, not because those things make him evil, but because they lessen significantly the chances of him not hitting her or someone else again. They also would have suggested he had some fucked up ideas about human relations and women, which would have affected my opinion of him as a person.
I can understand with the kind of experiences you have had that your situation has had many effects on you, including probably quite complex ones around being male and violence and where the boundaries are in terms of your own safety. I also understand that men have unique challenges in this because of the roles that the kyriarchy place on them. It’s to our society’s shame that for someone in your situation there is mainly the MRA groups instead of positive, affirming places to go to get support.
I need you to understand that in this conversation my points are political and I’m not speaking about personal experiences. I think both are valuable, but I also think you are responding from your own experiences not to what my actual politics are.
So when I say that PG has done something despicable, what I mean is that he told lies about the people he was speaking to, and he told them in such a way that clouded the issues which enable him to then put forth some fucked up theories of racism and misogyny. None of the people in the conversation that started on Kelvin Davis’ FB page appear to believe the idea that ‘it’s all mens’ fault’. Nor does feminism in general believe that (talk to feminists raising sons and you will understand how much women have a vested interest in not demonising men). Pete’s whole approach told lies about Davis, feminists, and subsequently a number of us. The problem for you is that you tried to have a conversation about personal experiences of violence in a context that was already too fucked to be repaired (which is why I suggested to not do it).
Beyond that, I can understand why some men think that some women think that ‘it’s all men’s fault’ despite it usually not being true. I saw that you didn’t see the difference between that and what Stephanie said for instance. I think there is useful dialogue to be had here that is more focussed on checking things out rather than assuming. It’s possible that we might even get some shared understanding. However I also note that some of your politics clash with mine (and others) on this… I think getting to point where we understand what each others’ politics actually are before we argue about them might be useful. Not sure that now is the right time given the PG Tips effect.
…. see 12.6 above
Problem is that it’s not even ‘the kernel’. It’s usually some manky, insect-bitten, rodent shat-over, Hooton pissed-over crust.
Evocative … 🙂
No, not my comment, here is where it came from.
but they had a ‘point of view’ you agreed with..
..eh petey..?
So Pete do you agree or disagree with what you posted?
BTW your link does not work.
I asked Martin to provide proof to back up what he said, as you may have seen (I presume you checked things out). I think it’s likely some truth to at least some of what he says, family violence has many complex causes. Male violence is a major, but it’s not isolated. There seems to be a high number of Maori solo parents, I think close to half of those on the DPB are Maori.
Violence isn’t limited just to those on benefits, but a lack of money, a lack of support, a lack of a positive father figure, revolving boyfriends, disinterested fathers and disinterested boyfriends are all factors in awful levels of family violence. This is complicated by the fact that violence is an inter-generational problem deeply embedded in some parts of our cultures.
The link: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/04/davis_priorities.html#comment-1311863
There are two options here Pete, although they’re not mutually exclusive. One is that you do believe, pretty much, with what you posted. The other is that you are a complete imbecile when it comes to online communication. Either way henceforth you will be known for espousing some pretty fucked up views on Māori, women and violence.
You would think he at least would know how to use quotation marks and paste a link with all the copy pasting he does. Why is there no link to the source on his Facebook post I wonder? Didn’t want to expose Kiwiblog to the bad press?
but this old chestnut raised its head pretty quickly “To push the whole message you need evidence and statistics. Is anything substantial available?”
He is still wanting everyone else to do his fact-checking work for him
We know that he does know how to use quotation marks, so the reasonable assumption is that he either wanted to confuse people or he wanted to weasel his way out of his opinions while expressing them. or both.
“Rhys Dwyer Is this the same Pete George who is Editor in Chief of the fact checking site Politicheck?”
😉
“Why is there no link to the source on his Facebook post I wonder?”
Because he thinks “as someone said” carries more weight than “as some hateful bigoted imbecile on kiwiblog said”
To be fair, that’s a good assumption. If Pete had been honest about his sources, most people would have reacted by saying ‘why should we dignify racist, sexist commentary from the sewer?’
And whether you believe him when he says he wants to ‘promote engagement’, or whether you think he just wants to stir up anger and upset in order to high-mindedly opine about it on his own blog later, it would’ve failed either way.
I’m sure the high-minded opining will happen, anyway 🙂
Genuinely, Pete, I felt like you’ve been unfairly picked on around these parts.
I take that back.
Because your actions today have been ghastly and horrible. To use such a sexist comment to try and simulate some debate is simply reprehensible.
Is it sexist to suggest some women are responsible or partly responsible for our massive problems with violence? If you think it is do you think it’s sexist to single out men on violence?
No one, no one is saying that domestic violence is 100% a male caused problem. It’s a complex issue with many causes. However, it is predominantly a male problem and Kelvin Davis is making the point that males should step up and help stop it and not just leave it to “Hand Mirror feminists” as your quoted friend likes to put it.
But let me quote the quote that you were happy to use to try and get some engagement and debate going:
“being beaten up by their (solo) mother until they got old enough to leave home”
“because the DPB allows resource to flow from men to women without reciprocation so women have kids alone”
“Feminism and the erosion of mana tane (male honour and prestige) is the colonisation that dare not speak its name.”
“Good luck with those Labour Party Hand Mirror feminists Kelvin; they’ll love you while you’re in your white knight “it’s all men’s fault” phase, but as soon as you follow the facts, look at the bigger picture and hold women to account for their part in these problems you’ll realise what a poisoned chalice you hold.”
“their mums prioritising getting drunk over having healthy kids.”
If you don’t think those aren’t the words of a toxic misogynist then I cannot help you and I’m not going to engage with someone so out of touch.
And if you can see that they are the words of a deeply sexist position, then why on earth were you granting them legitimacy by using it as the platform for debate.
mr George,I’m just dipping my toes on this blog,but o’dear me.you may just find…that…… (to with an inch of your life)you have no hand to hold it.Now enough of the toilet jokes.You must try not to prove the point about being educated beyond your intellect.
I see a pattern.
Pete pokes the borax. Usually based on a valid point but phrased in a contentious manner.
Standard readers swarm and attack Pete.
Rinse repeat.
Yes it’s wasting precious time and energy.
Just a big fail all round there Pete George. However it’s this sentence that is most troubling to me:
The paraphrasing here is that women should no longer receive the DPB because it encourages them to have children alone. This is the same old argument that we’ve seen a million times from the idiot neoliberals that don’t want to pay their taxes.
Btw, women also pay taxes in New Zealand, so there is no “flow from men to women without reciprocation”. Whoever wrote that is a very sick individual.
The problem is that without welfare which allows solo mothers to survive independently, they and their children are more likely to be forced to reside in violent situations. Restricting finances is one of the ways in which an abuser tries to trap their victims so that they cannot escape.
Is that what you want Pete George…for woman to not have a financial means of escaping the abuse?
I think it’s worse than that. The implication is that women should find and stay with a man and be dependent on him.
And the assumption is that any two-parent heterosexual family setup must be better than a solo-mother set up (it’s also funny how the staunch defenders of men like to ignore the solo dads out there!)
As I was reading through this thread, that was my first guess, too ms. And behold.
Pete the Weasel seems to be claiming that it’s a quote from somewhere else (he doesn’t say where) to stimulate discussion. I used to find him amusing. Now I almost vomit in disgust.
One wee thing that puzzles me about PG’s facebook offering is that he preludes what you’ve cut and pasted with (paraphrasing) “here’s a quote in response…”, but then doesn’t use quotations or ascribe the (supposed) quote to anyone.
Maybe somebody who can be bothered with him would care to have him clear that one up? I mean, are they his words or not? If he doesn’t agree with what’s being said, then why post it with no qualifying commentary? etc
Just before that bit he says,
“Men should take responsibility for male violence but it isn’t that simple.”
I take that to mean that he agrees with what he then cut and pastes. But of course the way that he is communicating this means he has an out. He can express reprehensible ideas but he doesn’t have to take responsibility for that.
“If he doesn’t agree with what’s being said, then why post it with no qualifying commentary? etc”
Because that’s his modus operandi? To let everyone react to something he can then deny. Someone said the other day that it’s all about attention. This is starting to reach pathological proportions.
Besides, google returns only one hit from a random sampling of the ‘quote’, and that’s the FB page. It’s possible that he could have typed it out from hard text but it would have been so easy to attribute it too, so either way he’s just being his usual disingenuous, tr*lly self.
What text would mention the DPB and the Hand Mirror and not be linkable?
Perhaps he records and transcribes talkback radio in his spare time?
Whatever, it just looks like yet another attention-seeking gesture.
Perhaps he wants to be the centre’s answer to Cameron Slater.
“transcribes talkback radio in his spare time?”
lolz, perfect.
yeah, there is this
“Good luck with those Labour Party Hand Mirror feminists Kelvin”
Would it be on FB? Do FB comments end up in google searches? That it’s addressed to Kelvin suggests it was on his FB page.
I guess if the comment was on a private fb page it wouldn’t be visible to Google.
Either way it’s another “Weasel Words Disrupt Debate Again” moment.
This is what pete says, “I’ve posted here (it was a quote, I didn’t say it) to promote engagement.”
I hope pete is kicked from his factfinder general role and wins a darwin award too – I am so over that wanker pete george.
I imagine Rory has some serious thinking to do. We have to believe Rory is aware of Pete’s behaviour today, indeed of this past week.
I sincerely want a site like Politicheck to not only exist, but succeed and proudly stride towards its ambitions. How can it with Pete George shackled to its ankles.
I just had a look at poliwannacracker today to see how it’s evolving. It seems to be nothing more than another Pete George blog.
The “facts” being checked include items of conjecture like “Will NZ First only decide after the election?” and “Will party members decide on Mana/Internet Party alliance?”
In other words, utter trivia. Pretending to answer the questions no-one is asking. Might as well check “What does Pete feel like waffling about today?”
Verdict: Business as usual for Pete. Not looking good, Rory.
yeah I had a similar reaction.
Pity.
The stated goal of Politicheck is: … to analyse all statements made during the election by all parties and say whether or not, based on evidence available, they are telling the truth.
Yet they have so far done:
4 checks on Labour statements
4 checks on the Internet Party (one about Mana/Internet, one about Clare Curran joining the IP)
1 about ACT
1 about a Campbell Live poll
2 about Simon Bridges – one of which about the troubling question ‘have the Greens ever been in government?’
1 about Labour claims about National policy – involves taking 1 tweet from David Cunliffe and saying ‘the government isn’t technically doing nothing’
1 about John Key claims about Labour policy – verdict: he was obviously wrong but we’ve asked for him to verify it
To be honest, that’s not a particularly impressive list (and there’s no tagging/categorising of posts so you have to scroll through the whole list to check what they’ve covered!)
But he also responds to criticisms of his original comment by saying this:
I think Karol answered that the other day when she described his links (you could hardly call them comments) as “bait”.
PS: Google returns one hit for quotes from the comment. *snap Weka
If the editor of a factchecking site cannot put quotation marks in or provide a source they are a complete fake. I suspect that the non use of the quotation marks was deliberate rather than a display of utter dim that usually encompasses petes comments and I say that based on his numerous postings to date.
I think it’s very convenient for Pete to phrase his contributions in this way. It allows him to disown any responsibility for the terrible things he writes by claiming (as he does on Facebook) that he’s just trying to ‘promote engagement’ and of course it’s ‘not his opinion, it’s just a quote’.
“but then doesn’t use quotations or ascribe the (supposed) quote to anyone.”
Yes, very bad form from someone who professes the technical skills of an editor. I’m pretty sure he’s been pulled up on quoting skills before on TS.
You forgot this bit Micky. God forbid I have to support PG but you did leave this paragraph out and it’s pertinent.
No word on fetal alcohol syndrome? That would be a good place to start, by stopping kids futures being stolen before they’re even born by their mums prioritising getting drunk over having healthy kids.
Unfortunately when my partner was Pregnant, we used to see the young teen mothers to be coming to anti natal classes hung over, and some were as young as 17. So to me Drinking when pregnant is just another form of child abuse. The babies just start getting abused earlier.
edit: Come to think on it this is probably the most sense he has made in all my time here about 3-4 years.
Looks to me like the Green Party has taken over Labour.
No wonder Jones quit.
What a shambles.
Job killers who say they’re for the workers.
What a message that sends to voters.
[How about you actually back up your claims with the odd fact? There is nothing more annoying than having to deal with inane comments that have no basis in reality – MS]
Looks to me like the Green Party has taken over Labour.
Oh good. At last.
lol
I note their housing insulation policy required work to be done. Job creators. I further note their giving confidence and supply to a government that achieved the lowest unemployment rate in New Zealand history.
I further note that an example of a “Green” practice is riparian planting which increases per-acre yield.
Whereas you don’t know what Green policy looks like other than vague references to the bogeyman. It’s not unusual to find this sort of fear-mongery in a right-winger, with your engorged amygdallae and so-forth.
All a bit pitiful really. My deepest sympathy.
“Job killers who say they’re for the workers.”
Yes, National should stop doing that – people will eventually work out what type of jobs and working conditions National encourage; degenerate ones if any at all.
[How about you actually back up your claims with the odd fact? There is nothing more annoying than having to deal with inane comments that have no basis in reality – MS]
Fair enough. (The left though would be in serious trouble if their comments were filtered by that same criteria).
I’ve written a blog post to substantiate my opinion.
http://truebluenz.com
Nah, you didn’t write that: it was your amygdala.
All you have supplied is an extended opinion. Your article is devoid of justification – that is, you haven’t provided any information as to how your opinion is based in reality -I can see why you are having severe problems achieving that aim.
I must have missed the meeting where the Green Party operatives walked in and announced that Labour was being taken over …
Sriously?
i understand baseball bats were involved..
..(followed by some healing-oils..)
(ol’ red has a particularly fervid imagination..eh..?..)
..everything is in garish/cold-war colours…
..in his world..
Why on earth do Labour bother running their Red Alert blog. Last posts that I could see are back in March. If they cannot keep it up to date and topical then they should close it
they would brook no deviation from the ‘message’..
..they censored with the fury of a single-armed paperhanger..
..everyone yawned..and walked away..
..not so much red alert..as red snooze..
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/2593805/exceptions-to-the-rule
Wallace Chapman interviewed Far From the Tree author Andrew Solomon on RNZ this morning.
I read this incredibly thorough and sensitive book recently, and can’t recommend it too highly.
Solomon interviewed hundreds of families with children who are different from them – by virtue of disability, prodigy, mental illness, criminality, gender identity – and revisited some over several years. There is also a chapter about children born after rape.
Every story is told with sensitivity and humour, and each chapter gives an overview and history of the historical/medical/social issues of the identity.
WHY I WILL NOT VOTE NATIONAL
A good post/article/view on Stuff Nation. The over 200 comments are quite interesting too, being overwhelmingly in support of the article as far as I could see. That pleasantly surprised me.
Have a read if you are interested.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/assignments/what-issues-will-get-your-vote/9974809/Why-I-will-not-vote-National
& those comments that are pro-National are spinning some awfully familiar fact-free slogans.
That’s all they have slogans.
Keep the debate on the issues and drop the personality driven agenda the media will attempt to foist on the debate.
Remember how Robert Reid dealt to the media’s agenda.
A thought for Sunday:
When Judas betrayed his leader for thirty pieces of silver and left, none of the other disciples followed him.
Aha! But other hand when his leader flung himself on a sort of cross none of the remaining others in his team joined him there either.
True that! People are such fearful creatures! Anyway, they did follow him and sing his praise when he rose again and proved who was!
Oh shit, another bloody technical problem when a post disappeared.
I want to say… blah blah blah
Jesus, I’m sick of this crap.
OK… actually, nope, I can’t be bothered, last straw and all that. Fuck it. Goodbye.
lol I do hope that is just a momentary I’ve-lost-patience goodbye, and not meaning that you’ve completely given up on overcoming these technical issues you are experiencing….
An evaluation on the effects of privatisation of schools in US shows us the importance of voting out this current government.
“From 2010 to 2013, Rocketship increased it assets from $2.2 million to $15.8 million. And while it posted impressive test scores at its first schools in California, over the last four years, test scores have fallen at every Rocketship school. All seven Rocketship schools failed to make adequate yearly progress according to federal standards for the last school year.
“Given that Rocketship places such a strong emphasis on standardized testing, it is telling that, even by this measure, the company has faced struggles and disappointments,” Lafer writes.
While Rocketship is a nonprofit, its business model enriches its directors through a deal with a licensed software company called “DreamBox,” supplied by for-profit vendors, who happen to also sit on Rocketship’s board.”
https://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/25-2
This is the path that Act would drag our education along!!
A lot of comment here and elsewhere viz Jones, Tamihere, Pagani, Trotter suggesting the Labour Party no longer represents them. Would be interesting to know which party they will vote for come September. Or will they join the 800,000…?