Open mike 28/04/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:31 am, April 28th, 2014 - 246 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

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

Step up to the mike …

246 comments on “Open mike 28/04/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    28 April 2014 at 6:38 am

    Over the next couple of weeks the country is going to witness significant stockpiling of synthetic drugs by individuals, many of them young. No doubt use will go up for a while until personal stashes are used up.

    Who should be blamed for this? Peter Dunne and the government. They could have let Labour make its announcement, which obviously needed a positive government response for it to be effective, and released their response much closer to the next sitting day. They would have suffered some political embarrassment. Instead they decided to make the announcement early for political gain.

    Shame on them.

      • aerobubble 1.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 3:22 pm

        There’s an easy way to fill the gap. Marijuana pills. They are safe. Take some weed stock pile at the Police station, turn them into pills.

        Oh, that would be the sane way forward, but the legal high industry are making far too much money and must be protected.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2
      28 April 2014 at 7:18 am

      “Do you really think the government would have given you a victory on this?”

      National Party tr0ll and Associate Minister of Harm Peter Dunne.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.3
      28 April 2014 at 7:26 am

      Instead they decided to make the announcement early for political gain.

      But at least they gave the shop owners plenty of warning to get rid of their stocks so that they won’t lose any money on them. /sarc.

      • Mainlander 1.3.1
        28 April 2014 at 3:30 pm

        Whats more shocking is Cunliffe pretending to have policy on banning legal highs the same day as its announced Dunne is shutting them down, DC is shameless

        • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 3:54 pm

          Oh, get your head out of your arse. Labour obviously had the policy long before Dunne did and Dunne was obviously reacting to what Labour were doing.

    • freedom 1.4
      28 April 2014 at 7:27 am

      So to avoid a period of panic buying that would only occur if there was knowledge that an amendment to the law was coming, Peter Dunne announces an amendment to the law is coming. If they had held off the announcement of the amendment until the amendment was passed then the panic buying would never occur. Pure reactionary games from the Government to Labour’s announcement. Then there is the questionable use of Parliamentary urgency to play games with your vote. All in all, pretty sickening

    • Tinfoilhat 1.5
      28 April 2014 at 7:44 am

      Couldn’t Dunne just have phone Cunliffe and told him what was in the pipeline and to hold off on his announcement until just before parliament reopened or is that too obvious a solution for dunne to think of ?

      • Pete George 1.5.1
        28 April 2014 at 7:55 am

        I wondered that too but it’s politics in election year rather than common sense at play.

        Stephen J said last night:

        I don’t think this is our finest hour, to be honest. We should be aspiring to evidence based policy that aims at harm minimisation. There has been a moral panic based on nothing more than a few horror stories in the press.

        It’s worth reading Stephen’s other comment as well. He’s not quite right, it’s the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority that “may, at any time, by notice in the Gazette, revoke an approval of a psychoactive product granted under section 37 if the Authority considers on reasonable grounds that the product poses more than a low risk of harm to individuals using the product.”

        http://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2013/0053/latest/DLM5043062.html

        But instead we have politicians, as Ross Bell at the Drug Foundation said, “playing silly buggers”. I haven’t heard any suggestions yet on how the addiction problems will be addressed, especially as supply of synthetic highs goes underground.

        • mickysavage 1.5.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 8:21 am

          You did not answer my question Pete. Dunne had three options:

          Consider Labour’s proposal and do nothing.
          Consider Labour’s proposal and agree to enact it urgently later on so there is only a short time for stockpiling.
          For political advantage announce a change early to try and head off Labour’s announcement even though it will mean there is increased stockpiling.

          So what do you think of Dunne’s choice?

          • Pete George 1.5.1.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 8:52 am

            He had more options than that. For example he could have put evidence based decisions ahead of reactive politics. Perhaps he has but it hasn’t looked like it.

            I don’t think Dunne has handled it well. He was dragged out of his comfort zone by Campbell last week and has been bombarded by mayors, parents and probably by some Government MPs.

            And he seems to have reacted politically to a political play by Labour. No credit to either side there, but as others have said Dunne is ultimately responsible for what happens with this, he’s the Minister.

            It’s not a disaster, yet. We’ll have to wait and see if the ban bandwagon works and if the expected and unintended consequences are manageable and are not any worse than the situation we have now.

            • vto 1.5.1.1.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 8:59 am

              You don’t have to wonder and wait PG, there is ample evidence of what happens when bans and prohibition are put in place.

              That is what will happen.

            • freedom 1.5.1.1.1.2
              28 April 2014 at 9:17 am

              “And he seems to have reacted politically to a political play by Labour.”

              I find it hilarious that in an Election period you try to criticise Labour for releasing Policy.

              lame lame lame you are,
              spinning in a dream
              terribly terribly terribly wrong
              your drivel makes us scream

              and another has week gone by,
              so how is the Budget for Poor People coming along Pete ?

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                28 April 2014 at 9:22 am

                Not even wrong: deliberately dishonest at every level. No purpose other than conscious disruption.

                Do not feed the tr0ll.

            • Disraeli Gladstone 1.5.1.1.1.3
              28 April 2014 at 9:42 am

              Peter Dunne also could have quoted an anonymous source that blamed synthetic cannabis on single mothers, but only so people could debate the point and not that he believed it.

              Eh?

              • Pete George …
                28 April 2014 at 9:55 am

                Over-reactions here are to be expected but where it mattered the point was acknowledged and understood by Kelvin. He was one of the few prepared to think and discuss.

                • Disraeli Gladstone …
                  28 April 2014 at 9:59 am

                  I read Kelvin’s response as the biggest eye-roll but knowing he’s soon an MP and shouldn’t engage in internet fights.

                  He basically acknowledged the exact same thing I did yesterday and then stopped to not look like an internet troll.

                  Which as of yesterday, I can only assume you are.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  28 April 2014 at 10:19 am

                  Yes, the number is becoming vanishingly small. Soon you’ll be on your own 😀

                • NZFemme …
                  28 April 2014 at 11:03 am

                  Kevin’s response to you was as follows:

                  ” Mate, no violence is acceptable by any gender towards any gender, but if you think that some bloke smacking over the missus all comes down to his solo mother beating the crap out of him when he was a toddler you are a fool. The reasons for sexual, physical and emotional abuse are many and varied, and I’m not going to change the whole world, but as a man I can stand up and tell men to keep their bloody fists to themselves and their dicks in their pants.”

                  https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kelvin-Davis/776784779020038?fref=ts

                  Perhaps your ongoing obsession to somehow be “relevant” is what blinds you to your utter irrelevancy and how people actually view you. i.e. A fool. Or perhaps you simply have a masochistic streak, and enjoy public humiliation.

                  • Pete George …
                    28 April 2014 at 11:04 am

                    I’ve had other communication with Kevin. He’s willing to listen and engage, which is a good sign.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    28 April 2014 at 2:07 pm

                    You’re right Weka. Pete George is a habitual relentless liar.

                    • Pete George …
                      28 April 2014 at 2:13 pm

                      Says a habitual relentless liar.

                    • weka …
                      28 April 2014 at 2:20 pm

                      Was that a habitual lie Pete?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      28 April 2014 at 2:23 pm

                      Link or it didn’t happen.

                    • Pete George …
                      28 April 2014 at 2:27 pm

                      Is that a joke or unintentional irony? Very funny anyway.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      28 April 2014 at 2:38 pm

                      Oh, you need examples? “He was one of the few who was prepared to think and discuss” “I’m working with the Greens” “Bill is trying to choke discussion” “Micky Savage has been well briefed”.

                      That’s just off the top of my head. The full picture, your body of work as a whole, gives a far more rounded account. Deliberate, calculated dishonesty, every single day, and you don’t have to take my word for it: anyone can see it to draw their own conclusions.

            • Clemgeopin 1.5.1.1.1.4
              28 April 2014 at 3:53 pm

              So do you think that dunne should take responsibility for his ineptness, show some integrity and honour and resign immediately?

              • Pete George …
                28 April 2014 at 4:15 pm

                Why? The Bill passed through Government 119-1 votes last year. It was working much as many people expected it to work. The number of products wee substantially reduced, the number of outlets were substantially reduced. It’s been reported that ED harm has reduced.

                Labour have just seen fit to announce an urgent amendment yesterday – why not a month ago? Six months ago?

                Should David Cunliffe resign immediately? If it’s been such a problem for so long why hasn’t he done anything about it until now?

                • Ant …
                  28 April 2014 at 4:27 pm

                  No one would have expected Dunne to be that inept with its implementation, a new low of incompetence even for him.

                  I suppose it gave sonny-boy a good chance to cash a few cheques in the process though…

                • Ant …
                  28 April 2014 at 4:29 pm

                  Oh and the supposed reduction in ED harm was based on claims by the MoH based on anecdotal reports, perhaps you should FACTCHECK that.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.5.1.1.2
            28 April 2014 at 8:55 am

            🙄

            Every syllable dripping with bad faith and deceit. No life-signs at Politicheck.

          • Jim in Tokyo 1.5.1.1.3
            28 April 2014 at 11:11 am

            Dunne had three options

            He had more options than that.

            I’m afraid that Pete George has it right on this one, a truly strange state of affairs and one which just goes to show how quickly sensible people lose their heads once a good’ol media fueled drug panic sets in.

            I believe the correct option would have been for Dunne to make some appearances explaining the legislation (it’s pretty clear that most of the people commenting on these threads could do with a refresher) and reiterating that as soon as some evidence of adverse effects is collected through the medical practitioner reporting scheme, the offending substances will have their interim licenses revoked on a case by case basis as per the original intention of the law.

            Of course there’s a strong chance that Dunne’s branch of the ministry botched the implementation of the legislation and that the adverse effects reports are piling up on some understaffed public service desk. In which case the opposition could have dined out on “Dunne killed my Kid” headlines from now until the election. But that would have taken the opposition to show the guts to stand behind the original legislation they all voted for.

            I think anyone who has ever smugly dropped a [citation needed] on a right winger should take a deep breath, do some background reading on the 2013 Psychoactive Substances Act, and take a moment to reflect on this clusterfuck.

            http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/regulation-health-and-disability-system/psychoactive-substances

            • mickysavage 1.5.1.1.3.1
              28 April 2014 at 1:18 pm

              I believe the correct option would have been for Dunne to make some appearances explaining the legislation (it’s pretty clear that most of the people commenting on these threads could do with a refresher) and reiterating that as soon as some evidence of adverse effects is collected through the medical practitioner reporting scheme, the offending substances will have their interim licenses revoked on a case by case basis as per the original intention of the law.

              I agree with you Jim that on the face of it the system looked like it was reasonably robust and should have been able to handle problem drugs. But I cannot reconcile what was happening on the ground with what the Health Ministry thought was happening. There may be a big pile of reported adverse effects sitting on a desk somewhere waiting for a damn back office public servant to deal with but for whatever reason the legislation was not working.

              • Pete George …
                28 April 2014 at 1:33 pm

                “The Authority has received anecdotal reports demonstrating the number of severe presentations to emergency departments has reduced since the Act came in.”

                Nicola Kean, a producer for The Nation, asked the Ministry of Health last week:

                “What’s the trend (if any) for people presenting at A+E for problems with psychoactive substances since the law was introduced?”

                A written reply on Thursday said:

                “While it is early days the Authority has received anecdotal reports demonstrating the number of severe presentations to emergency departments has reduced since the Act came in.

                The Authority monitors approved products received from the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring (CARM), and calls from the public to the National Poisons Centre on a regular basis.

                These reports also show a reduction in the number of severe issues being reported. Where severe adverse reactions are reported the Authority has the power to act and has already removed products from the market where reports to CARM identified they posed more than a low risk of harm”.

                So again the evidence is only anecdotal, but the official line was that if anything reports of severe harm caused by legal highs was DOWN since the law was introduced.

                Only it made for bad optics; the public didn’t like what it saw. The political risk to the government became too high. Hence the de facto ban via councils becomes a temporary ban via a government-mandated product recall.

                http://www.pundit.co.nz/content/legal-highs-leave-mps-dazed-confused

                This suggests that harm has been actually reducing, the visible impact has just been concentrated around the far fewer retail outlets.

                Politicians seem to have been spooked by bad publicity and are set to change something that appeared to be working more or less as intended.

                Sure, any drug harm is bad, but I’m not sure that ditching an approach that seems to have been working is the best approach, including for election jitters.

                • mickysavage …
                  28 April 2014 at 2:47 pm

                  Ok …

                  You still have not answered my previous question. Dunne’s announcement smacks entirely of political expediency. If he was serious about a ban and on there being no stockpiling he would have held off from his announcement.

                  So I am waiting for you to say that his decision was wrong and that the timing is cynical politics.

                  And instead of saying they are all wrong just remember that Labour are in opposition and do not have the power to change the law.

                  • Pete George …
                    28 April 2014 at 3:02 pm

                    I don’t agree with Dunne’s decision, time will tell if it was wrong or not. And I don’t think he’s presented himself well, there does seem to be political expediency involved (but not entirely).

                    It also seems that Key is onside with him. I don’t know what sort of advice he’s getting, MP or polling seems most likely.

                    Labour haven’t handled it well either but I agree they have less responsibility.

                    The NZ First response was awful from Lole-Taylor.

                    I have seen one MP so far who gets it and has responded sensible. @KevinHague

                    Interim prohibition will fuel black market, increase harm, make treatment harder and may undermine full regime. #119-1

                    just saying a visible, regulated drug market is vastly preferable to an underground, uncontrolled one.

                    Even from opposition it’s possible to talk sense.

                    • freedom …
                      28 April 2014 at 3:58 pm

                      “Labour haven’t handled it well either but I agree they have less responsibility.”

                      Remembering Pete, this discussion is about current events, not last year’s votes in the House or a press conference from Chesapeake circa 1908.

                      The current events are (in case you get confused) are as simple as 1,2,3:

                      1 April 22: Cabinet made a decision to introduce a new amendment and planned to abuse Parliamentary process yet again when parliament resumes, it is reported most likely to occur on May 8 .

                      2 April 27: Labour announced it was about to release some policy, you know as political parties are asked to do before before an Election.

                      3 April 27: 20 minutes after Labour’s press release, Dunne had a brainfart

                      So you said

                      Labour haven’t handled it well either but I agree they have less responsibility.

                      Remembering that I am unlikely to be a Labour voter, so really don’t have a dog in this fight, my question is this:
                      What does Labour have to defend?
                      What could they or should they have done better, exactly?

                      Specifics please. i.e: not in Petey-speak if you would be so kind.

              • Skinny …
                28 April 2014 at 2:18 pm

                Meanwhile Key out smarts us with ‘the delay was due to the animal testings issue rodents yes, but rabbits umm nah’. End result thanks for coming we will mop up these soft animal rights votes. Simple & smoothly played again!

            • Bill 1.5.1.1.3.2
              28 April 2014 at 1:47 pm

              Correct me if I’ve got this wrong. But since synthetic substances are able to be tweaked at the molecular level, any banned substance invariably just comes back around in a tweaked form.

              Way I see it is that there are possibly going to be severe repercussions from withdrawal symptoms for many users. And banning these piles of shite, without legalising the natural product they’re an alternative to, is a hiding to nothing.

              So, ban them. But make absolutely damned sure that withdrawal services are up to speed and in place first. (They are currently fucking woefully inadequate).

              And, don’t just legalise the drug we’ve used for thousands of years, but encourage the development of different strains vis a vis the ratio of THC to other cannabinoids present. (The reason for that last bit is that the ratio determines the experience in the user. If I’d the time, I’d hunt out the study where subjects were given pure THC and then another cannabinoid and the reactions compared. The conclusion was that THC ‘out of whack’ with other balancing ingredients was responsible for feelings of debilitating paranoia in the subjects tested)

              • Draco T Bastard …
                28 April 2014 at 2:08 pm

                But since synthetic substances are able to be tweaked at the molecular level, any banned substance invariably just comes back around in a tweaked form.

                Which is why we need a blanket ban.

                But make absolutely damned sure that withdrawal services are up to speed and in place first.

                Considering that our addiction health services weren’t up to scratch to start with I suspect bringing them up to scratch would be damn near impossible in a reasonable amount of time especially for a once off surge. People are going to hurt – not much we can do about that now.

                And, don’t just legalise the drug we’ve used for thousands of years, but encourage the development of different strains vis a vis the ratio of THC to other cannabinoids present.

                Putting standards in place would be part of the legalisation process.

              • weka …
                28 April 2014 at 2:13 pm

                Bill, yes, this is why herbal medicines in the form of the whole plant affect the body quite differently than drugs made from parts of the plant. In that sense cannabis is a safer drug thatn legal highs.

                I heard a bit of the discussion on nine to noon this morning, and I do think that many people don’t realise that this is about the synthesised outside of the whole plant issue AND there is other shit in the high too (eg amphetamines). I’m guessing that makes withdrawal nasty not least because no-one know what is being detoxed.

                I’m also not sure that cannabis would work as a replacement to prevent withdrawal, except where it is a pleasure inducing drug to soften the blow ie the cell receptors for cannabis are different than those for speed etc. I totally agree that cannabis should be legalised first though, or at least be made available on prescription to people who have been using legal highs.

                Re the ban and why they thought they couldn’t ban before (tweaking turnaround is a matter of weeks or a few months). Why not just ban sale of any synthetic substance being sold as a psychoactive, unless the substance is registered and deemed safe?

                “but encourage the development of different strains vis a vis the ratio of THC to other cannabinoids present.”

                I think there are many people in NZ waiting in the wings for decriminalisation who will be more than happy to release their special strains.

                • Bill …
                  28 April 2014 at 2:42 pm

                  Why not just ban sale of any synthetic substance being sold as a psychoactive…

                  Just off the top of my head, I’d imagine there is plenty of leeway for manufacturing a substance for sale that is not psychoactive until you add or do ‘x, y or z’ to it.

                  Or to manufacture a product that has dual use, and selling it, ostensibly on its benign, non-psychotropic use.

                  Just legalise natural recreational drugs we have used for thousands of years – all of them – and provide high quality, non-alarmist info for users and potential users within a regime that ensures high levels of purity.

                  Won’t solve the problem of people using synthetics if they want to, but the incentive would be (I think) largely gone. I mean – they’re manufactured to mimic the effects of age old recreational drugs, no? So why punt for second rate chemical trash when you can get the real McCoy? Some will, but hey…

                  • politikiwi …
                    28 April 2014 at 4:12 pm

                    I’ve had a lot of people say to me “The only reason I use legal highs over cannabis is that there’s no chance of a life-destroying conviction.”

                    It’s anecdotal, but it tells me a lot about the mindset of users.

                    Keeping cannabis illegal is doing more harm than good.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 1.5.2
        28 April 2014 at 8:09 am

        No need: Labour isn’t the government. It was Minister Dunne’s announcement that did the damage.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.5.3
        28 April 2014 at 8:44 am

        Of course not, that would have required that there be something in the pipeline.

      • aerobubble 1.5.4
        28 April 2014 at 3:24 pm

        Unlikely. Dunne is damaged goods. Key needs to protect him at all costs. Another of Dunne’s high points in politics comes down in a shambles. Dunne needs help. Send to rehab.

    • Jim Nald 1.6
      28 April 2014 at 8:34 am

      A bloody cock-up by the government. Absolutely outrageous.

      • The Al1en 1.6.1
        28 April 2014 at 11:31 am

        The best thing, apart from finally getting the synth rubbish out of our shopping precincts, is the total humiliation deservedly heaped on Dunne.
        Claiming for more than a year and a half that nothing could be done about the products, only for the cabinet to cut him off at the knees and totally undermine him with the upcoming total ban policy announcement.

        Dunne’s biggest anti kiwi failure yet and a fitting political legacy of a career of incompetence and self serving bauble chasing.
        I hope he never gets to be forgotten as the minister who did so much damage to NZ society.

      • alwyn 1.6.2
        28 April 2014 at 12:11 pm

        Damn right it is.
        The Government could have announced it when they agreed to do it, two weeks ago I understand. Instead they tried to bring it in in a well-organised way, only to have it leak to an ignorant opposition who decided to jump in and claim the credit for something they were stealing from another parties policies.
        Oh well, what can one expect. The Labour Party hasn’t had an original idea since about 1988..

        • Draco T Bastard 1.6.2.1
          28 April 2014 at 12:17 pm

          Oh, BS. Neither PD nor National had any plans around it two weeks ago. They learned that Labour was going to make an announcement and, due to the fact that they’ve been getting torn about their inaction on this, panicked.

        • Lanthanide 1.6.2.2
          28 April 2014 at 12:33 pm

          On the radio this morning Key admitted the cabinet decided on Tuesday. That is 6 days ago, not 2 weeks.

          • The Al1en 1.6.2.2.1
            28 April 2014 at 12:41 pm

            And since then Dunne been on TV saying he did his best and nothing else could be done about it. In anyone’s book that’s called being hung out to dry.

            To be fair, Dunne does flappy wet really well, so all seasons flag maybe a new career opportunity for him post election.

          • alwyn 1.6.2.2.2
            29 April 2014 at 1:21 pm

            You are right, I misread Dunne’s press release.

            The decision appears to have been made a week earlier, not two weeks. I read Dunne’s statement and confused the statement that they would “be banned within two weeks” with the one week since Cabinet had agreed to the proposal.

            Gee, my mistake is at least as serious as DC claiming his Grandfather was a war Hero I suppose.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.6.2.2.2.1
              29 April 2014 at 1:26 pm

              His grandfather and his great-uncle. Get it right.

              • Pete George …
                29 April 2014 at 1:31 pm

                Get it right.

                His grandfather served and received service medals. Heroism unknown.
                His great uncle served and was awarded a Military Medal for valour (and will have received service medals).

                • mickysavage …
                  29 April 2014 at 1:38 pm

                  Are there any other members of Cunliffe’s extended family dead or alive that you want to insult for political purposes?

                • lprent …
                  29 April 2014 at 1:40 pm

                  One of my grandparents and many of my extended cousins of his generation were in WW2. Most of them have medals and I was astonished about what they were when I went to the war memorial museum to figure out what they were.

                  None of them would tell me a damn thing until after I’d been in the army. My great-aunts and other family who did tell me about those bits of ribbon and metal were dead wrong.

                  Such is life and the veracity verbal family histories. A rather pointless wankfest for useless gunwaving fools like Cameron.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  29 April 2014 at 1:41 pm

                  🙄

                  War heroes, you petty asshole. And fuck off – I’m not interested in any response you might vomit up, because you embody deceit and bad faith like a maggot embodies decay.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.6.2.3
          28 April 2014 at 1:41 pm

          “I understand”.

          No, you don’t.

          Where did you get the mistaken impression that the decision was made two weeks ago? Have you been duped, or did you invent that all on your own?

          Either way you’re untrustworthy, and your bitterness is showing.

          • alwyn 1.6.2.3.1
            29 April 2014 at 1:22 pm

            There, there diddums. Time for your tranquiliser and a good rest.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.6.2.3.1.1
              29 April 2014 at 1:28 pm

              I see you admitted your “error”, but immediately made another one. Keep trying, but.

    • Skinny 1.7
      28 April 2014 at 9:17 am

      Well I have to say Micky is this any real surprise to you?

      Obviously they are going to react swiftly to any issue in society that will get votes, or cost votes. I heard Iain Lee-Galloway harping on like chicken little this morning. Is this not a repeat of the Governments U-turn on lowering of the drink driving level?

      Dunne had to react to keep his thin dream alive of retaining his seat in parliament, as did National.

      Where a real opportunity went begging was not bringing in the cruel animal testing element of the whole issue. Do we have a Nationwide campaign committee planning events? Christ I have members here ready and rearing to get stuck in on rallies/demonstrations. We should have had a nationwide day of action, expanding on the legal highs issues to include animal testing. The amount of animal lovers that couldn’t give a hoot about politics, but would be soft enough to support any party that is out to protect their precious little pooch or fluffy cat etc. What a start to the week.

    • tc 1.8
      28 April 2014 at 9:37 am

      It’s all about clinging to power with Dunne and the nats, social consequences are irrelevant to them.

      The hairdo has been consistent and at least honest admitting to be a willing seller with something for a willing buyer.

      NZ’s very own Krusty the clown of politics where it’s not so much what he’s endorsing but rather the act of selling out he can’t resist as it’s in his DNA.

      • Rosie 1.8.1
        28 April 2014 at 10:19 am

        +1. Exactly tc – it IS all about clinging to power with Dunne. What a cheap shot this announcement was, and so cynical. Playing games of one upmanship comes first before anything. I wonder if Dunne is starting to feel uncertain about his future as an MP?

        I bet this week’s edition of the Independent Herald will be full of praise for the man who came to save the day. He loves to get his propaganda in the local paper has much as possible

    • TightyRighty 1.9
      28 April 2014 at 2:45 pm

      shame on labour for not being able to control it’s caucus members, or it’s party officials. Which is it mickey? selling secrets to the enemy. not a good look for unification.

  2. dave brown 2
    28 April 2014 at 8:05 am

    There has been an obvious answer to drug addiction since the days of prohibition of alcohol.

    Banning drugs means that most addicts end up getting ‘treatment’ in jail.

    The only reason we have a high rate of drug addiction is the war on drugs designed to criminalise the working class and justify a police/penal state.

    Legalise dope and this will reduce the harm from both dope and alcohol addiction.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1
      28 April 2014 at 8:19 am

      Not necessarily.

      Substance abuse is linked to inequality. Higher levels of inequality, higher levels of substance abuse. Legality is more-or-less irrelevant.

      • bad12 2.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 8:33 am

        Disagree OAB, throughout history humans have found psycho-active substances and used them with regularity,

        Us humans rich or poor just love to change our reality, obviously those who are more monied can more afford their habits than those who are less so…

          • bad12 2.1.1.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 8:56 am

            Karol, i am not sure i would rest anything on the research of Bingham Dai, i did tho notice the quote about the ”disorganized” druggies and their low socio economic status,

            Show me a Lawyer or Doctor, a Manager, or your local Linesman who is willingly going to involve themselves in a ”drug study” let alone admit to using any illegal drug on a regular basis, from personal experience tho i know that plenty of professionals regularly use illegal drugs,

            Obviously the lower down the economic pecking order drug users are then the worse the effects on their lives drug use/abuse are going to be…

            • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1.1.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 9:12 am

              It’s a common misconception that the effects of inequality only apply to those “lower down the economic pecking order”. Or a right-wing false frame – I’m not sure of the exact provenance of the misconception.

              In any event, the socio-economic status of substance abusers is a red herring.

            • karol 2.1.1.1.1.2
              28 April 2014 at 9:19 am

              Well, in my experience of middle class people, their drug of choice is alcohol – I suspect they over-indulge that more than may on lower incomes, largely because of affordability.

              From the stuff I’ve read so far on legal highs, it is a major attraction to many because it is legal and available in their area.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1.2
          28 April 2014 at 8:43 am

          Bad, your remark is entirely consistent with mine.

      • phillip ure 2.1.2
        28 April 2014 at 12:02 pm

        “..Substance abuse is linked to inequality..”

        i agree in the sense of the despairs of poverty often driving people to seek a/any escape/respite..

        ..(been there..done that..)

        ..but i’ve done too many drugs with to many wealthy-folks to accept the other possible interpretation..(ie..that rich people don’t get out of it..?..).

        ..the only inequality in that sense being that their drugs are usually of the highest quality..

        • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.2.1
          28 April 2014 at 2:21 pm

          Inequality increases stress levels across the board: the poor person doesn’t have enough to live on, the rich person has to work harder to maintain position, the rungs of the socio-economic ladder are further apart.

  3. Chooky 3
    28 April 2014 at 8:40 am

    Bomber Bradbury on why Marijuana should be legalised…i agree it should …….(personally i dont smoke it because the few times i tried it in my youth it gave me red eyes and a woolly head for several days, not good for university essays …but i know for some people it is their drug of choice for many years and above alcohol and it does agree with them better than alcohol )

    ….While I do think anyone under the age of 20 should be very wary of it …and it should be prohibited for school age children ( because their brains are developing and they arent the full biscuit)……i think it is way better than the synthetic stuff

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/27/and-the-winners-of-banning-synthetic-cannabis-will-be-organised-crime/

    ….and on whether Trevor Mallard is up to the job

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/28/is-trevor-mallard-really-the-best-person-to-lead-drug-reform/

    • freedom 3.1
      28 April 2014 at 9:06 am

      I had a quite serious FB chat with a nephew in Oz this weekend on a range of issues and that under 20 topic was raised. I always had a strict R18 policy with him consuming anything anywhere. My nephew, who is almost 30 and runs his own business, is watching many of his friends who started young lose their way. He actually thanked me for repeatedly ignoring his youthful pleas and being such a general pain in the arse whenever I caught him out. 🙂

      • Disraeli Gladstone 3.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 9:48 am

        I’m not always sure a strict R18 policy works on consumption (at least with alcohol). My family has always operated with a very mainland European relationship with alcohol. I was allowed very, very weak shandies on special occasions as a boy. And once I got to 14-15, I was allowed the odd half-glass of wine or beer (once every two or three months) as long as it took me several hours to finish it.

        It meant when I got to 18, I had a pretty decent relationship with the stuff and I can say that in several decades, I’ve never once been properly “drunk”. True for all my family. The one who does have a problem with her drink was never allowed to drink until she was an adult.

        • freedom 3.1.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 10:05 am

          That is a sensible process and I wholly support it. It is a supervised attentive scenario which builds good relationships with the substances and within the family unit. I would look to the parents, if they said it was ok for him to have the odd beer at a bbq, that was their decision, (and he can drink their beer 😉 ). If they weren’t around to confirm it, he missed out.

          p.s. just joking about being a stingy uncle, if his folks said it was ok, my beer was in the fridge alongside everyone else’s. 🙂

      • Chooky 3.1.2
        28 April 2014 at 9:51 am

        Yes agree freedom…..caregivers walk a fine line….because kids with peer pressure will likely experiment …. for some alcohol abuse and tobacco addiction is far worse in the end than marijuana…and some of the more reckless will experiment with anything that is going ….including doctor prescriptions…..and get caught in a web of addiction

        ..it is best to keep young people away from drugs of any kind if possible ( except perhaps a glass of wine with family …my children generally dont like wine) and give them emotional support and coping behaviours for peer group pressure , anxiety disorders/depression , problem solving and sensible decision making… if you can …..until their brains are developed ( 25yrs!)and they are adults sensible enough to have made their own way and make their own decisions

        imo depression is a major issue in New Zealand …and this feeds drug addictions…. as distinct from experimentation or sensible social use

        very good interview with Kathryn Ryan with toxicologist (09:10 With Dr. Leo Schep from the National Poisons Centre.)on toxicology side effects of of synthetic marijuana ….sounds far far worse than marijuana!!!! .. also very good discussion on depression

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2593876/government-move-to-stop-the-sales-of-all-legal-highs

        • tc 3.1.2.1
          28 April 2014 at 9:57 am

          ‘ imo depression is a major issue in New Zealand …and this feeds drug addictions as distinct to experimentation…’

          With alcohol as a major depressant readily available in cheap nasty spirit, RTD and Tui sized servings.

          Those RTD’s are particularly nasty the way they are manufactured with a large brewer done a few years back for using the beer process as the alcohol base they added flavouring to.

          • Chooky 3.1.2.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 10:33 am

            RTDs?…are these alcopops?…if so, agreed!….young teenagers love them…..and yes alcohol is a depressant and insidious in its effects with long term overuse …i wonder how many people know this?

          • Rosie 3.1.2.1.2
            28 April 2014 at 10:41 am

            RTD’s. The insidious thing about them is they were launched on to the market around the same time as the minimum purchase age was lowered to 18.

            Brightly coloured sugary flavoured soft drink styled drinks that appeals to young undeveloped taste buds that don’t have to go through the learning stages of becoming accustomed to the adult taste of beer and wine. Just straight into it, no training wheels required. Easily marketed in bright packaging for teens. Easy money for the booze industry. Ca Ching!

            PS: Oh, a double up on the word insidious with Chooky. Yes, Chooky, these are drinks are alcopops

            • Chooky 3.1.2.1.2.1
              28 April 2014 at 4:03 pm

              yes alcopops or RTDs re very questionable when marketed at the very young …probably the reason for many youth alcohol abuse problems

    • tc 3.2
      28 April 2014 at 9:51 am

      Drugs are fine in moderation and individuals need to consider their own physical and emotional toll on a case by case basis with each drug. Personal responsibility can’t be legislated for.

      The legal ones do the most damage to society, such as alcohol tobacco as big pharma products and these have the spin, lobbying and power to keep themselves entrenched.

      We should be decriminalising first not removing all illegalties, this removes the criminal elements ability to profit from it and allows the dust to settle for a considered review down the line.

      As one expert on drug abuse stated, taking ecstasy is safer then riding a horse in terms of coming to harm. That line cost him his job despite it being statistically accurate due to the emotive and self interests at play.

      • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1
        28 April 2014 at 9:55 am

        We should be decriminalising first not removing all illegalties, this removes the criminal elements ability to profit from it and allows the dust to settle for a considered review down the line.

        No it doesn’t. Decriminalisation only means that people won’t be charged for possession of it but selling it is still illegal which means that the only supply chain for most people will still be through organised crime.

        What we need is full legalisation.

        • tc 3.2.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 10:08 am

          I said we shouldn’t remove all the laws. This would create an open season, just engineer it so if people want to indulge if they desire it’s not illegal.

          Making it legal to possess but not legal to procure is just idiotic if you want to drain the revenue streams the crim’s get from it.

          Seems to be working well in other parts of the world.

        • MaxFletcher 3.2.1.2
          28 April 2014 at 11:05 am

          “Decriminalisation only means that people won’t be charged for possession of it but selling it is still illegal”

          It doesn’t mean that at all – it means whatever the terms of the decriminalisation are.

          Alcohol, for example, doesn’t have full legalisation. It is still a criminal offence to sell to under 18 year olds, to sell it without a license etc. Alcohol is a decriminalised substance.

          • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1.2.1
            28 April 2014 at 11:22 am

            No, alcohol is a legalised substance. There are serious regulations around production and sale. Decriminalisation effectively leaves the illegality in place while making it so that you won’t be charged for possession.

            • MaxFletcher 3.2.1.2.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 12:52 pm

              “Decriminalisation effectively leaves the illegality in place while making it so that you won’t be charged for possession.”

              No it doesn’t. Decriminalisation doesn’t automatically mean anything. You could decriminalise it and make possession and the sale of any amount under 20grams legal for example. Or possession and sale could both result in a fine instead of prosecution.

              Alcohol doesn’t have full legalisation. And if you think it is does try to start selling it yourself out of your home, to the public.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                28 April 2014 at 1:04 pm

                Alcohol doesn’t have full legalisation. And if you think it is does try to start selling it yourself out of your home, to the public.

                Yes, that would be what legalisation means – full regulation.

  4. vto 4
    28 April 2014 at 8:56 am

    That nutty Texan rancher who has been at odds with his government spouted off the other day about how negroes were better off as slaves, he thought, than they are today….

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2612095/The-shocking-racist-rant-Nevada-rancher-Cliven-Bundy.html

    … of course there have been all kinds of uproar about the racist angle of what he said, but the most important aspect of his rant has flown right over everyone’s heads. And the silly old fool didn’t even realise himself what he said…

    …which was that yes, most working people today would be better off as slaves. This applies equally in NZ where it is in fact cheaper to pay minimum wage, which is insufficient to support a family, than it is to keep a slave. This fool of a man has highlighted the biggest failure of all of the capitalist / ‘free’ market system we have been operating under, namely that it is no better than slavery. Cliven Bundy has unwittingly highlighted the complete failure of the system he bows down to – he is right – the lot of poor working people in NZ and in the US today is no better than that of the slaves of the past.

    I wonder if Bundy and his tea party extremists can appreciate the abject failure of the capitalist / free market system that he has highlighted. Srylands would be another to do well to think on it too.

    • Will@Welly 4.1
      28 April 2014 at 11:39 am

      You can argue any viewpoint if you’re determined/ biased. I am still amazed at the amount of racialism still prevalent in parts of the US. In South Africa, much of that racialism has reversed, or the “hatred” has reverted back to a tribal basis.

  5. Rosie 5
    28 April 2014 at 10:33 am

    Seen this web based series? Here’s the one minute intro

    NZ IDLE: Friends with unemployment benefits is made by Poor Sailors Art Collective and is funded by NZ on Air.

    It’s a satirical series about an unemployed artist. In the intro you’ll meet Able Twerk, benefit reformer who works for LOSE: Labour Office of Sustainable Employment.

    Satire, the missing piece of gentle dissent. Enjoy.

  6. Bearded Git 6
    28 April 2014 at 10:46 am

    Notice the way Espiner cuts off Cunliffe when he mentions credit should be due to Labour MP Ian Lees-Galloway on the legal highs issue. Would he do this to Key?

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2593848/labour-leader-responds-to-government's-move-on-legal-highs

    Though on the other hand Sarah Ferguson does a good job with Key making it clear that this is a u-turn, National’s hand was forced by Labour and she pings Key’s “some time ago” as being actually only 5 days ago. Key lying again and pinged. Well done that woman!

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2593862/pm-defends-timing-of-legal-highs-decision

    • greywarbler 6.1
      28 April 2014 at 11:40 am

      Have you noticed that both eSpinner and Susie are using the stake in the ground approach in their interviews. Everything stops while they wait for a yes or no answer on some point they have raised, which gets repeated continuously as the interviewee keeps on with his/her other thoughts.

      It can be useful to tie some flip-floppy speaker down to something definite, and on the way extract some unintended information to arise, but it can also close down interesting flows for the sake of some irrelevant point so that it seems just a way for eSpinner to assert himself as dominant – ‘Look at me Atlas of the Airwaves’.

      @ BG
      Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York!
      Susie Ferguson, Radionz Morning Report.

    • Rodel 6.2
      28 April 2014 at 12:48 pm

      BG -I marvel at Cunliffe’s patience with Espiner, calm, unflustered , in possession of the facts and focussed- Good PM material, unlike the other guy.

  7. karol 7
    28 April 2014 at 11:17 am

    McCready & Bright going after McCully for corruption – bribing Jones to destabilise Labour.

    • Chooky 7.1
      28 April 2014 at 11:39 am

      Lol …Go Penny Bright and McCready!

    • Skinny 7.2
      28 April 2014 at 11:44 am

      I got a bit of a laugh reading Penny Bright’s formal complaint paper that she posted on here. However reading on and seeing the good work she done to get John Banks in the docks made me stop giggling. Good for her, McCully and the Nats should be drawn over the coals for plucking a job out of thin air, in what a lot of the public must see as political interference/job offer bribery.

      I loved her optimism when someone queried her success rate, pretty much whack the numbers through and the odd one sticks lol.

      • srylands 7.2.1
        28 April 2014 at 12:26 pm

        The premise of the complaint is wrong. Jones will be appointed under the Foreign Affairs Act, NOT the State Sector Act. That Act is clear that the Governor General appoints overseas representatives on the recommendation of the Minister.

        • Skinny 7.2.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 1:07 pm

          Oh the tax payer union spokesperson pipes up. Yes that is how it rolls Shrillands, however public opinion, should the MSM give Bright and co coverage should do the trick. People see it for what it is. Plucking a job out of thin air, politicals games on the taxpayers ticket. I’m very disappointed your outfit isn’t putting out press realeases admonishing the blantant abuse of the taxpayers purse.

          • srylands 7.2.1.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 3:32 pm

            Sorry are you saying he won’t be appointed under the Foreign Affairs Act? Or are you saying that the job is a poor use of our foreign aid budget? What exactly are you saying? Or are you simply frothing away?

            • Skinny 7.2.1.1.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 4:21 pm

              Yes McCully reverts to his old form. Shall I start quoting passages of his ‘old form’ from Hollow Men or shall I stick to Muzza getting cracked and demoted for previous sketchy/dodgy appointments. Well aware as Minister of International Holiday he can recommend any sap he wants to be paid on the taxpayers dime.

              I can just picture Matua Muzza & King Dick Jones being carried aloft by natives sitting in high chairs like 2 Budda gods surrounding by topless beauty queens.

          • srylands 7.2.1.1.2
            28 April 2014 at 3:33 pm

            Also you know full well I am not a spokesperson for the Taxpayers Union. Stop lying. And stop being rude.

            • Skinny 7.2.1.1.2.1
              28 April 2014 at 5:16 pm

              Strange for some reason I thought you were, my sincere apologises.

              Ok I will show a smidgeon of empathy for you Shrillands, knowing your crews pinup boy ‘Bent Bankie’ is off to the old bailey soon. Just refresh my memory again please what date is that? Oh can understand your fretting and all about a possible by election?

              Anyway I’ve cut you enough slack with niceities above. Now in the event of a by election in the leafy suburb of Epsom. Pondering the idea think I might have to suit up and go house to house door knocking on behalf of the National Party. You know canvassing the Candidate vote. All I need is a party rosette, just to look the full dapper part. The snake oil pitch will be that much easier for the local toffs to digest after the incestuous comments your leader made recently. Don’t worry the party vote is yours, if that is part of the deal. Any hints?

        • bad12 7.2.1.2
          28 April 2014 at 2:40 pm

          Are you lying to us again SSLands, put up a link to your latest little squeal or have it disbelieved like everything else of supposed fact that you have ever posted here that has been proven to be utter BS…

          • srylands 7.2.1.2.1
            28 April 2014 at 3:30 pm

            Don’t be so stupid. He will be an ambassador. He will be appointed under the Foreign Affairs Act.

            http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1988/0159/latest/DLM138725.html

            Funny that. Why would the Minister of Foreign Affairs not appoint someone under the Foreign Affairs Act? Which you will see explicitly exempts such appointments from any appeals mechanisms that apply under the State Sector Act.

            And stop being rude and hyperbolic. It is ridiculous the way you carry on when I post something completely factual.

            • Chooky 7.2.1.2.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 4:10 pm

              surely professional diplomats should become the ambassadors (not wanna be politicians who have burnt their political bridges)?

              …otherwise Foreign Affairs has been corrupted…just like appointing non trained men/women off the street to be teachers ..it undermines education and the professionalism of the teaching profession…not to mention the NZ Education System

              …are we becoming John Key’s NACT haven Banana Republic?

            • freedom 7.2.1.2.1.2
              28 April 2014 at 4:29 pm

              It’s not the appointment to the post, but the actual creation of the post that needs some questions answered. Are there not processes in place for the creation of Foreign Affairs posts? What quite a few people want to know, is were these processes correctly followed ?
              Is there the expected trail of reports and considerations and costings and proofs that such an investment by our Government would be expected to meet in the creation of what is a not insignificant role in the Pacific theatre.

              From back here in the cheap seats, it all looks pretty dodgy.

              Hopefully, those that know of these things will clarify it all.

  8. greywarbler 8
    28 April 2014 at 11:33 am

    A good political discussion this morning well refereed by Kathryn Ryan.

    Matthew H not on instead someone who has passed the speed-talking, confident, know-all speaker test, hardly needs to breathe between the flow of her divinely-sourced oration –

    Mike Williams and Trish Sherson, a former journalist, former press secretary for the ACT party and now runs a PR company.

    • Bearded Git 8.1
      28 April 2014 at 11:42 am

      Yes Grey but when Sherson said Labour was in “a shambles” Williams should have jumped in and said just one old MP of dubious value had been bribed to leave the party in a devious manner by McCully, meanwhile 14 MP’s are leavng the sinking National ship. So which party is in a shambles?

      If the narrative is allowed that Labour is in a shambles (which it isn’t) it will stick.

      • Skinny 8.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 12:06 pm

        What a wet blanket Williams was, fancy running down the handful of MP’s that had the guts to be critical of Jones exit style. Thought his bob each way on the matter was weak, it got insulting when he rambled on about supporters commenting negatively through social media as ‘kamikaze
        stuff’. While he may agree that Jones can go untested slamming the Greens with what is ‘his opinion’, in effect backing National’s narrative of the loony Left.

        I’m affaid it was you that asked to be my F/B friend and quite frankly you have now abused that friendship so on ya bike Mike your deleted.

        • phillip ure 8.1.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 3:40 pm

          williams supported jones in the leadership race..

          ..he only flipped in the home straight..

          ..to make sure he voted for the winner..?

          .and i have noted before..that the only times williams turns left..

          ..is when he comes out of his driveway..

          ..he is a neo-lib-apologist trout..

      • Jim Nald 8.1.2
        28 April 2014 at 12:08 pm

        Mike Williams did jump in with a sweet message to some of you lovely souls out there:

        “.. I’d also say to the people who went online saying ‘good riddance’, that is kamikaze stuff, that’s just dumb!”

        14’43” @
        http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/ntn/ntn-20140428-1105-political_commentators_mike_williams_and_trish_sherson-048.mp3

        • Skinny 8.1.2.1
          28 April 2014 at 12:33 pm

          Jim tell me this, does Labour need the Greens support to form a Government or does Labour need a retiring MP (considering taking a job offer by National) to form a Government?

          Simple question Jim which is it?

          • Jim Nald 8.1.2.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 12:54 pm

            Quite simple. The former. That would be obvious to Mike Williams?

            Thanks for not ‘kissing’ the messenger (it would have been helpful @ 8.1.2 if the messenger’s facial and vocal expressions could be conveyed online) 🙂

        • blue leopard 8.1.2.2
          28 April 2014 at 12:45 pm

          I would just like to remind Mr Mike Williams that those posting their opinions on this website are not political parties that have to keep to a disciplined line – please discern the difference; they are not political parties they are potential voters. And on this site I am guessing the majority are likely voters of left-wing parties.

          Last time I checked democracy was about representatives noting the viewpoints of ones constituency and taking that into account with ones policies and these days this includes factoring opinion into how one presents ones policies to the public.

          Telling your constituency to shut up doesn’t play any valid part in this important process. Expressing opinion does.

          • Jim Nald 8.1.2.2.1
            28 April 2014 at 1:09 pm

            Some of the people who are supposed to be commenting ‘for or from the Left’ would do well to be put through and pass the test consistent with Pascal Bookie’s advice.

            Sorry for posting the link again, but here it is … which should be read in full and a key bit is reproduced as follows:

            “In the media, you are the left. Don’t tell activists or blog commenters what we ought to be bloody saying to make your job easier. Your job, is making activists jobs easier. Our job is just being citizens. If you can’t convince us to vote for you, then you have no bloody show of changing swing voters minds (emphasis added)

            “You are not, (if you are a pundit), an academic analysing the left. You are the bloody left as far as the average punter sees things. So you should be attacking the right by highlighting the ways in which the right is out of step with the centre. One fucking job.”

            http://thestandard.org.nz/josie-pagani-replies/#comment-753124

            • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 8.1.2.2.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 1:21 pm

              What a pity Mr Jones didn’t follow such advice.

          • Chooky 8.1.2.2.2
            28 April 2014 at 1:52 pm

            +100 blue leopard…and many of the opinions expressed on this and other blog sites are the equal if better than Williams and Hooton

            …after all the contributors here do not have direct appointment /job vested political or monetary interests…because they are generally under pseudonyms…and not broadcasted

          • Ant 8.1.2.2.3
            28 April 2014 at 3:54 pm

            Blaming blog commenters (not even the bloggers LOL) is weak as.

            Almost as laughable as those who try and tell you not to comment negatively because “our enemies are reading” and will use it against the left, 9 times out of 10 it’s the bloody left pundits using it against the left.

      • Mary 8.1.3
        28 April 2014 at 12:14 pm

        Sure, but Williams is Jones’ mate so he wouldn’t say that.

        He was exceptionally bad this morning, though. Every answer was as usual prefaced with an “I’m an expert on this so what I say is the truth” but today when asked about the Jones fiasco he said “I’ve actually had time to think about this.” That has to be something straight out of Monty Python. I often wonder when RNZ is going to cut Williams loose for being such an idiot but I guess if they did that we wouldn’t be able to hear gems like that. You could probably get a script for an entire political comedy series just by going back over interviews with Williams.

      • greywarbler 8.1.4
        28 April 2014 at 12:57 pm

        Bearded Git
        Yes I wasn’t actually looking at Williams. Seems that the elastic that holds him together has loosened and his pants are falling down. Fix that small problem and perhaps he can concentrate and sharpen up his act.

        How do we make application to Radionz for someone better? Surely there is someone sharp and incisive and really interested in the left who will defend and support it when it is trying to do good, and explains it when it falls on its nose. At present it’s a bloody disgrace – the type of comment that is. Labour itself is showing signs of vitality. Hold that mirror close to the face-book!

        As for Mike Williams and kamikaze commenters – there was some film called Dumb and Dumber wasn’t there? He must have been thinking of that.

        • Anne 8.1.4.1
          28 April 2014 at 3:46 pm

          Surely there is someone sharp and incisive and really interested in the left who will defend and support it when it is trying to do good, and explains it when it falls on its nose.

          Gordon Campbell would be my pick. Not afraid to speak the truth and to do it intelligently and cogently.

  9. The Al1en 9
    28 April 2014 at 11:49 am

    Finally got my work disciplinary hearing today.
    Ready to respond to my bosses imaginary tales of subordination, disobedience and breaking employee/employer good faith.
    I have this bloke for falsifying wage date records, claiming I was off sick when I wasn’t, supplying false statements among many other things, all proven and supported by a qualified paper trail, yet I will be ‘due processed’ and no doubt in my mind, dismissed some time after 3.30 this afternoon.

    Shameful stuff, but makes the full hearing more exciting when it eventually happens.

    Party X, the woman who was sexually harassed by the boss is awaiting her date for full hearing after he turned down mediation, so plenty more to come when not bound by confidentiality.
    I’ll do an update when able.

    🙂

    • Rosie 9.1
      28 April 2014 at 1:22 pm

      Good luck with your disciplinary hearing The Allen. Yes, do let us know how you get on.

      • The Al1en 9.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 1:37 pm

        Thanks for that Rosie.
        My lawyer is busy elsewhere today, so I’ll be unrepresented, though I will have a note taker, and as the outcome of today is already known, hopefully it will be quick.
        I’m not arguing points, other than to deny his version of events. I’ll save that privilege and the several ‘gotcha’ moments for my guy in front of a judge, not him and his legal pitbull, forewarning them of the coming poostorm headed his way.

        • Rosie 9.1.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 1:56 pm

          Go get ’em! 😀

          You know, it never ceases to amaze me how often socially impaired and unscrupulous people (and even criminally accused) end up as employers in NZ. I seem to have come across more than my fair share of them.

          • Anne 9.1.1.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 3:52 pm

            Me too Rosie. They don’t like strong women who aren’t too afraid to speak their mind and most of them are psychopathic. My experiences were inside the public service and they knew how to pull the wool over their superior’s eyes.

            • Rosie 9.1.1.1.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 4:30 pm

              Interesting Anne. My work and the observations of others experiencing inept, bullying, sociopathic managers/bosses have all been in the private sector, mainly SME’s.

              Yes, agree, the male bosses that cause trouble seem to be quite threatened by women who break their stereotype of how a woman should act. They are unsettled by strong and on to it women.

        • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.2
          28 April 2014 at 5:45 pm

          I’ll be having a quiet pint in your honour tonight, mate.

    • freedom 9.2
      28 April 2014 at 1:43 pm

      all the best Al1en, sounds like you are in a good head space to deal with it all.

    • Te Reo Putake 9.3
      28 April 2014 at 2:07 pm

      Good luck! You know you can postpone till lawyer’s ready? And tape it to make sure the notes are accurate. Don’t talk too much and concentrate on the issues in front of you, not other battles. All the best.

    • The Al1en 9.4
      28 April 2014 at 6:54 pm

      “Go get ‘em!”

      Grrr said the Bulldog breed, chewing at their ankles. 🙂

      “I’ll be having a quiet pint in your honour tonight, mate.”

      Have two and be damned with the calories. Cheers Tat.

      “all the best Al1en, sounds like you are in a good head space to deal with it all.”

      I am now, thankfully. Had a while to stew on it and get the facts listed, but there’s an end in sight now and I can move on with my head held high, what ever happens.

      “+100” And infinity and beyond.

      “Good luck! You know you can postpone till lawyer’s ready? And tape it to make sure the notes are accurate. Don’t talk too much and concentrate on the issues in front of you, not other battles. All the best.”

      Cheers TRP, means a lot.

      Got out at 6.15. No decision yet, but betting is closed on the result.
      My boss sat there and never said a word as I had to respond to his bs. At least I got the chance to call him a perverted dirty old man again as I relayed the contents of one of our discussions. Don’t know if it was anger or embarrassment as he turned red, but not unnoticed by the two women present, even if one is ‘on his side’.

      Any one in Hamilton got a 20 hour a week job going? Ask my ex wife, I’m cheap. 🙂

      • McFlock 9.4.1
        28 April 2014 at 7:05 pm

        good work, and good luck 🙂

      • weka 9.4.2
        28 April 2014 at 7:05 pm

        “At least I got the chance to call him a perverted dirty old man again”

        😀

        You’re an inspiration mate.

        • The Al1en 9.4.2.1
          28 April 2014 at 7:16 pm

          I said it three times during the meeting, and when asked by his disgruntled lawyer if I thought having a quiet word with the owner of a subletting business, responsible for the well being of his mainly young female employees left alone in the building after closing time was more important than breaching the employer employee relationship? I said of course it was, and I’d have done the same if were my father, brother or son who was the sexual predator. Adding, ask every dad of those girls what they think what I did before condemning me on this man’s hurt feelings. My conscience is perfectly clear.

          Inspiring? More just a day in the life, but nearly all done and dusted now.
          Waiting for the the Dear Al1en email tomorrow.

          • Rosie 9.4.2.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 8:20 pm

            Awesome! Love ya work 😀

            • The Al1en 9.4.2.1.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 8:41 pm

              You mustn’t be talking about me songs then. 😆

              I feel a bit sorry for the person who clicked my Alien link today and got ‘Little bird I’m a worm’ for their wanton clickery.
              Just hope their speakers were turned way down low and I don’t get a subpoena for earhole gbh.

              I do appreciate the sentiments and comments here, and of course, the opportunity for a bit of anonymous venting on my part.
              Cosmic love to you all…. Except PG 😆

      • miravox 9.4.3
        28 April 2014 at 8:42 pm

        If people always got what they deserve your manager would be out of a job, not you worrying about yours, Al1en. All the best for the next few weeks as this plays out.

        • The Al1en 9.4.3.1
          28 April 2014 at 9:00 pm

          The manager is the owner, and if people really got what they deserved, he’d be in stocks in the town square for a week and on a pervo register for life, banned from employing female staff.

          I have just had a mail from my lawyer tonight, in reply to the allegation he made a week or two ago, whilst I was on sick leave, they forgot to ask about in this afternoons meeting.

          Q. Did I give the finger to him as our cars passed at approx 8.20am, outside my daughter’s school?
          A. No, of course not, but if I’d actually been there as claimed, I would have waved, though an angincourt long bowman’s response could have also been a valid option.

  10. Bill 10
    28 April 2014 at 12:29 pm

    A while ago I asked my doctor if they could script me nicotine. They checked and found that they couldn’t. (Only able to script highly subsidised, pharmaceutical profit generating, gum, patches etc) I vape. I import the nicotine and mix my own liquids (~2% nicotine, 10-15% food grade flavouring and the rest made up of vegetable glycerine). Total weekly cost is about $2. Health benefits? Feel a lot better.

    Meanwhile, I’m constantly coming across shit in newspapers and elsewhere claiming that vaping is not a way to get off tobacco and nicotine.

    In NZ, ASH and just about every agency decries vaping. Meanwhile, in the UK….

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/28/e-cigarette-users-triple-ash-survey

    The anti-tobacco charity Ash (Action on Smoking and Health) says the number of e-cigarette users has tripled from 700,000 in 2012. Nearly two-thirds of users are smokers and the other third are ex-smokers, Ash says, while use of the devices among non-smokers is negligible, at only 0.1%

    “While it is important to control the advertising of electronic cigarettes to make sure children and non-smokers are not being targeted, there is no evidence from our research that e-cigarettes are acting as a gateway into smoking.”

    A study from University College London earlier this month had similar findings. The Smoking Toolkit Study carried out in England found that e-cigarettes were taking over from nicotine gum and patches as an aid to giving up smoking.

    The leader of that study, Professor Robert West, said: “Despite claims that use of electronic cigarettes risks renormalising smoking, we found no evidence to support this view. On the contrary, electronic cigarettes may be helping to reduce smoking as more people use them as an aid to quitting.”

    • blue leopard 10.1
      28 April 2014 at 1:01 pm

      Ta for the links Raa, they look great!

      • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 10.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 1:30 pm

        Weird, sorry Bill, that comment of mine clearly was put in the wrong place 🙂

    • just saying 10.2
      28 April 2014 at 2:42 pm

      Laurie Penny:

      http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/12/its-not-harming-anyone-so-why-brussels-trying-remove-my-robot-cigarette

      The idea that e-cigarettes should be subject to the same restrictions as the leaf-burning variety once again confuses ethics with petty moral panic. To encourage addicts not to indulge their addiction where it might cause harm to children or the sick is ethical. To claim, as some do, that evidence of addiction is itself offensive and unsightly is simple prudishness. I find it unsightly when otherwise attractive young men grow ridiculous hipster moustaches but I would stop short of regulating public display of facial hair. I just avoid certain bars during Movember.

      You can take my fake smokes from my warm, blood-beating hands. No, really, you probably can take them, if “you” are the EU, or the state of New York. We cannot have a compassionate, effective policy on drugs and addiction without starting from a place of compassion, and if our stance on smoking stops with an idea of moral weakness, we have forfeited compassion. Now, stick that in your flashing electronic pipe and smoke it.

      edit: what I find weirdly inconsistent is those anti-smoking fanatics who find e-cigarettes so offensive, aren’t bothered if nicotine is chewed in gum. They just can’t seem to get their heads around people wanting to smoke and being able to do so relatively safely – for themselves and those around them. It offends their snobbish sensitivities.

      • weka 10.2.1
        28 April 2014 at 6:01 pm

        E-cigs are not harmless. The exhaled vapour can be problematic for people with chemical sensitivities. I find it probably as bad to be around as cigarette smoke (albeit in a different way). I think vaping is an excellent alternative for smokers, but let’s not pretend that it doesn’t have effects including secondhand ones.

        Unfortunately the person whose story you linked to doesn’t know what she is talking about when she says

        And that’s where the prospect of a ban on e-cigs, whose vapour is lighter than tobacco smoke, and rarely reaches the lungs of another person, makes no sense. It’s not about public health. It’s about morality.

        She might be right about who is lobbying against vaping in terms of morality (I don’t know, haven’t looked at what the ban is about), but that degree of ignorance about health makes her whole argument suspect.

    • Stephanie Rodgers 10.3
      28 April 2014 at 7:56 pm

      I have a co-worker who vapes, and I find the process fascinating. It’s certainly counter-intuitive to me to suggest that vaping would normalise or encourage leaf-smoking – the whole taste/smell experience is completely different.

  11. Raa 11
    28 April 2014 at 12:44 pm

    Meditations on a rock star as prime minister

    Is he copying Mick Jagger’s moves ?

    No one seems to have read Ehrenreich’s demolition of positive political psychology …

    http://getebook.org/?p=6353

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113758696

    http://kickass.to/bright-sided-how-positive-thinking-is-undermining-america-ideusex-t7809713.html

    http://www.ebook3000.com/Bright-sided–How-the-Relentless-Promotion-of- Positive-Thinking-Has-Undermined-America_113335.html

    (video ~ 1 hr.).

  12. Raa 12
    28 April 2014 at 12:58 pm

    Amid Devastation of Aleppo, Syria, Archaeological Museum Fights to Preserve Heritage

    Curators at Aleppo National Museum Struggle to Protect Ancient Heritage From Civil War’s Destruction

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304626304579507231417505084?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304626304579507231417505084.html

  13. Rosie 13
    28 April 2014 at 1:30 pm

    Can’t disagree with what Le’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor from NZ First has to say about Dunne’s lack of action on legal highs and the call for his resignation. (Not that he would go mind, he will cling on desperately, even if his fingers are bleeding as he slips away from the centre of power to the edge).

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1404/S00409/dunne-should-resign.htm

    • Pete George 13.1
      28 April 2014 at 1:41 pm

      “The number of people using legal highs is now vast and families, communities, police and hospitals must now deal with a new stream of addicted users.

      Do you agree with this claim?

      • freedom 13.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 1:47 pm

        The number of people using alcohol is now vast and families, communities, police and hospitals must now deal with an ongoing stream of addicted users.

        Do you agree with this claim ?

        • Pete George 13.1.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 2:00 pm

          Yes, but the problem there is not just with addicted users, there’s vast problems caused by casual users as well.

          Over the weekend locally one young person killed in a drink related car accident and one died after an assault in a bar toilet.

          This problem is much larger – and more difficult to find solutions to. There’s no ‘safer natural alcohol’ option that’s being kept illegal.

          • freedom 13.1.1.1.1
            28 April 2014 at 3:20 pm

            Why do you think those deaths were linked to casual use? How do you know they were not problem drinking related? If they were linked to casual use, then surely that only suggests alcohol is very unsafe.

            so you know the question that comes next….

            Why have you not stood up and called for the complete banning of alcohol sales until it is fully tested, found to be safe, and proper resources for the treatment of its addicts and victims can be established?

            A call for sense and reason, like you sort-of-almost posted on your blog.
            http://yournz.org/2014/04/28/not-our-finest-hour-on-drugs/
            (folks might like to scroll down the home page too for a pithy little posting about The Standard’s 14k posts)

            why can’t we see Collins in the emergency room on a Saturday night looking at the alcohol damage?

            -note how he quotes it, but won’t say it himself.

            I know it is not an appetizing destination on a cold wet Monday, but thought the opening line of his post also deserved a little direct attention.

            Stephen J goes against the political flow at The Standard on the sudden rush to ban currently legal psychoactive substances, saying “there has been a moral panic based on nothing more than a few horror stories in the press”

            Quite the unsubstantiated claim there Pete George. And no external links of course.

            • Pete George 13.1.1.1.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 3:40 pm

              I didn’t say those incidents were due to casual use, obviously there’s a potential problem with both of them. Everyone knows alcohol can be unsafe. In the vast majority of cases it’s used safely, but with the number of users (80% of the adult population from memory) there’s a big number of problems compared to other drugs with smaller numbers of users.

              Why have you not stood up and called for the complete banning of alcohol sales until it is fully tested, found to be safe, and proper resources for the treatment of its addicts and victims can be established?

              Have you? Has anyone recently?

              I haven’t because it wouldn’t work and would have major adverse effects to our society. And most people are responsible and safe users of alcohol.

              Depending on the threshold it may not be found safe enough (for significant numbers of users) if it was a new product. But trying to compare something that has been entrenched in human societies for thousands of years to products created in laboratories this century is ridiculous.

              I don’t know what your point is. Should I only speak up on one thing if I also speak up on anything that someone suggests might be remotely related?

              Why are you challenging and questioning me when you aren’t challenging and questioning everyone else here? Aren’t you being a bit selective?

              • freedom …
                28 April 2014 at 4:07 pm

                Most others don’t carry the same stink of sanctimonious hypocrisy.

                The only thing more easily quantified than the lack of integrity in your statements for a better world, is the apathy of the spirit within them.

              • felix …
                28 April 2014 at 7:14 pm

                “I don’t know what your point is. Should I only speak up on one thing if I also speak up on anything that someone suggests might be remotely related?”

                Depends. Are you interested in ends?

                Or only in means?

                • felix …
                  28 April 2014 at 7:34 pm

                  Also, the other day when I raised the matter of how our culture glorifies and encourages the ritual of weekly wreckings, you pretty much denied it was that big of a deal.

                  So it’s a bit fucking rich of you now to start whinging about the death and violence surrounding our socially acceptable drug abuse.

                  I eagerly await you shoving it all back on the individuals involved and denying, as usual, any interconnectedness and any context.

          • Rosie 13.1.1.1.2
            28 April 2014 at 4:32 pm

            Pete. Somehow my reply to you ended up as a reply to me. My reply is at 13.2

      • Skinny 13.1.2
        28 April 2014 at 2:04 pm

        What a stupid question Pete. Obviously this was going to happen, where was the prevention is better than cure mentality? This should have been put to bed years ago at the start of this dirty trade? And low and behold it’s an election year and the National Government finally act. Where was their coalition partner the Maori party, while all this was allowed to happen? You know the one so strongly opposed to that other (legal) drug tobacco.

        Now Key-National are taking the piss at us by trying to mop up soft votes by blaming the delay on ‘the animal testing issue.’ After performing rather badly this morning when interviewed Key comes out with this gem. I knew for the cruel animal testing reason they should have banned them altogether. Be little arguments there.

    • Rosie 13.2
      28 April 2014 at 2:44 pm

      Whoah. You talking to me Pete? We don’t talk, that’s the arrangement, no matter how provocative you are.

      I guess you are trying to lead me down one of your traps with your question. If you ask me if legal highs are damaging people’s lives, relationships and health then I would say yes and yes I want them banned.

      It’s also bleeding obvious that the announcement to ban them is cynically timed and is a platform for a game of one upmanship – that is the issue with Dunne and the Government. Nothing more than race to be “The Good Guy” and a pathetic grab at a diminishing vote come election time.

      • freedom 13.2.1
        28 April 2014 at 4:38 pm

        “We don’t talk, that’s the arrangement, no matter how provocative you are.”
        Do you give lessons Rosie? Are there slow release patches? a mantra? a tonic ? anything . . .

        • Chooky 13.2.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 4:58 pm

          lol…just dont do it…unless you feel like doing it…no arrangement needed

          ( he is mad anyway…all the Petes are mad imo…. and he cant spell…and tangling with him is like tangling with br’er rabbit in the briar patch…difficult to extricate oneself)

        • Rosie 13.2.1.2
          28 April 2014 at 5:00 pm

          No, freedom, mi amigo, just a brick wall placed firmly in front of my eyes when I see his name appear. I admit it was difficult going past the Kelvin Davies FB stunt PG pulled, especially as a dear friend of mine is in a long term abusive relationship. I was personally offended by PG in that circumstance.

          No, I just scroll -on- by to the tune of walk on by. Usually I hear one of three versions:

          Dionne Warwick

          The Stranglers:

          Or Jo Jo Zep

  14. Red Rosa 14
    28 April 2014 at 2:15 pm

    Maybe this has been missed. Apologies if pointed out above.

    The Nats are gifting one of the safest seats in the country to a brat fresh from lobbying for Big Tobacco.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11245502

    Even for them, this has to be a low point. Don’t they have any values at all, even economic?

    Tobacco is costing the country millions, maybe hundreds of millions, each year in direct healthcare costs. Lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, etc. All costly to fix, if they don’t kill you.

    Plus premature deaths as above, innocent passive smoking victims…well… all that aside…

    He must be a slick customer. And Key and Collins must be proud of him.

    • thechangeling 14.1
      28 April 2014 at 2:21 pm

      This is clear evidence of the connection between the National Party and big Tobacco corporations that I would have thought they would stay clear of:

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/polls/9984445/Ex-lobbyist-to-contest-Englishs-seat

      Todd Barclay has blood on his and now (if they didn’t have it before which I seriously doubt) the National Party’s hands.

      • Jim Nald 14.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 2:32 pm

        Ex-Gore High Sch Boy and Karori resident’s intern. Been doing the rounds for Office of the Prime Story-Maker, the immensely talented multitasker Brownlee, and was last Paratised at the Beehive. He was out and about in the corp comms world the past year or so. Now shepherded into the MP-in-absentia’s seat.

        He is a fine puppet chap.

        • Anne 14.1.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 4:24 pm

          Now let me tell you what I detect based on his photo.

          Arrogant, conceited, snotty nosed spoilt brat only a few years out of nappies. Knows nothing about anything and never will. Would steal the last blanket from his old grandmother’s bed and leave her with none in the middle of winter. Has a mediocre brain but plenty of guile and cunning. Perfect attributes for an up and coming Nat. political star.

            • Rosie 14.1.1.1.1.1
              28 April 2014 at 4:50 pm

              Oh FFS! Look at that smarmy kid. I bet you’re right in your assessment of his personality Anne.

              • Colonial Viper …
                28 April 2014 at 6:08 pm

                The only way you get to be corporate affairs manager for a major firm like Phillip Morris at 24 years old, especially with only public sector parliamentary experience on your CV, is through personal networks, mentors and sponsors.

                • Stephanie Rodgers …
                  28 April 2014 at 8:00 pm

                  I find it interesting his CV has nearly two years as “intern” in English’s office. Was this an unpaid internship? There’s a lot of discussion going on in the US at the moment, where it’s a far more common practice, about how unpaid internships are really only available to the kids from wealthy families who can afford to work for free. (There’s another thread, about how many organisations now use unpaid internships as a permanent source of free labour and very few genuine opportunities for interns to move into paid positions, but that’s obviously not the case here.)

                • anker …
                  28 April 2014 at 8:07 pm

                  @CV I will add one further criteria to how you get toTodd B, position. Be without a conscience and we all know what that means. It begins with P

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    28 April 2014 at 8:18 pm

                    Yes, these kinds of organisations deliberately screen for, and fast track promote, those particular kinds of people.

          • Not Petey 14.1.1.1.2
            28 April 2014 at 8:20 pm

            [deleted]

            [lprent: Let me tell you what I detect from your comment. It is pointless abuse. Do it again and you won’t be able to comment here for some time. This is your warning.

            Read the policy. ]

          • greywarbler 14.1.1.1.3
            28 April 2014 at 10:03 pm

            Anne
            Very percipient not to say prescient. And he probably doesn’t know what either means because neither of them start with $.

    • karol 14.2
      28 April 2014 at 7:20 pm

      From the Blingish-Brownlee-Joyce school of economics, business and politics.

      Stat-skewing, bully-boy, smarmy cronyist approach to politics.

    • Clemgeopin 14.3
      28 April 2014 at 10:01 pm

      Will be interesting to see how many of the Dipton voters will give their votes to this young lad of 24.

      At the last election, of 29,365 electorate votes, English got 19,726, a big lead of 14,915.
      There were 773 informal votes!

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/election-2011/6041227/Clutha-Southland-update

  15. phillip ure 15
    28 April 2014 at 2:28 pm

    this one is kinda interesting..

    ..a former australian tory prime minister..fraser..

    ..is now urging australia to cut all military ties with america..

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article38345.htm

  16. thechangeling 16
    28 April 2014 at 3:31 pm

    Another attack by a messenger of the right-wing on the validity or otherwise of the Living Wage:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/9985312/Living-wage-reinvents-the-wheel

  17. phillip ure 17
    28 April 2014 at 3:33 pm

    and it’s been an intense few days..wot with shane/legal-highs..

    ..a little bit of light-relief is called for..

    ..here are ten well-written/funny demolitions of crap..but over-rated albums from the 90’s..

    ..this on red hot chilli peppers:

    “..George Clinton and the Minutemen alchemically combined by completely talentless frat rock morons –

    into bone dumb funk punk – minus the funk.

    As usual the ballad (“Breaking the Girl”) goes above and beyond in its remorseless pursuit of maudlin tuneless shittiness –

    and emo-tough gibberish ..”

    http://www.salon.com/2014/04/26/the_10_most_overrated_albums_of_the_90s/

  18. Pete George 18
    28 April 2014 at 4:38 pm

    Some discussion points.

    Schedule of inaccuracies in David Parker interview on The Nation – April 26 2014

    1. “Export prices are going down”

    Export prices in fact rose 13.8 per cent in the year to December 2013 (Statistics New Zealand).

    The ANZ NZD Commodity Price Index rose 11.6 per cent in the year to March 2014 and is just 6 per cent below its all-time March 2011 peak.

    2. “We are not covering the cost of our imports (and interest)”

    Statistics New Zealand reported a merchandise trade surplus for New Zealand in the year to February 2014 of $649 million (1.3 per cent of exports).

    January and February’s merchandise trade surpluses were the highest ever for their respective months.

    3. “We are losing jobs in the export sector”

    The number of people employed in the agriculture, forestry, fisheries, mining and manufacturing sectors has increased by 16,100 in the last twelve months.

    Total New Zealand employment increased by 66,000 in the last year or 3.0 per cent in one year. This is the fastest employment growth since December 2006. (Statistics New Zealand Household Labour Force Survey December 2013).

    4. “This challenge of getting New Zealand’s current account deficit under control”

    New Zealand’s balance of payments deficit is currently 3.4 per cent and has averaged only 3.1 per cent over the last four years.

    Under Labour the Balance of Payments peaked at 7.9 per cent in December quarter 2008 and averaged 7 per cent over their last four years.

    New Zealand’s Net International Investment Position is currently down to 67 per cent of GDP after peaking at 85.9 per cent in March 2009.

    5. “Ridiculously high interest rates”

    Interest rates have just edged up above 50-year lows.

    Floating mortgage interest rates are currently between 6 and 6.25 per cent. They peaked at 10.9 per cent between May and August 2008.

    6. “Exporters…. Aren’t willing to invest in plant”

    Investment in plant, machinery and equipment by New Zealand companies was up 7.5 per cent in the December quarter and 3 per cent for the year. Investment in plant, machinery and equipment is now at its highest level ever (Statistics New Zealand – December quarter 2013 GDP release).

    Just yesterday, long term New Zealand forestry processor Oji Limited announced a $1 billion investment to purchase Carter Holt Harvey Processing assets.

    7. “House prices are up 40 per cent under them”

    House prices under this government have increased at around 5.7 per cent per annum, compared to 10.7 per cent per annum under Labour, according to REINZ figures. Total house price increases over the period is 30 per cent, not the 40 per cent Mr Parker claims. That compares with a 96 per cent increase in house prices under Labour.

    8. “You need to tax the speculators. They are not taxing speculators”

    Taxpayers who buy and sell houses for income are currently taxed at their personal income tax rate on their capital income.

    9. “They are not building any more houses”

    The actual trend for the number of new dwellings, including apartments, is up 95 per cent from the series minimum in March 2011.

    The trend is at its highest level since October 2007 (Statistics New Zealand February 2014 Building Consents Release).

    http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/parker-wrong-nine-times-one-interview

    I hope Parker responds to these counter-points. Some of those are disputable or subjective.

    • Tigger 18.1
      28 April 2014 at 5:40 pm

      PG your. ‘Facts’ need context. For example, 7. What figures are you quoting? One street, the whole country?

      • Ant 18.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 5:49 pm

        His whole right-wing spin factchecking bullshit would fall apart if he kept his ‘facts’ in context.

    • Te Reo Putake 18.2
      28 April 2014 at 5:42 pm

      Firstly, great to see confirmation of the right wing, anti-labour bias of the fuctchecker in chief. Secondly, Oji is not a NZ company. Look it up, it’s a Japanese group, named after a Japanese city, who happen to have a NZ arm. Guess where the profits go, Pete … c’mon, you’re a clever boy …. It’s just as likely to be buying the opposition with a mind to closing them down.

    • Colonial Viper 18.3
      28 April 2014 at 5:54 pm

      2. “We are not covering the cost of our imports (and interest)”

      Statistics New Zealand reported a merchandise trade surplus for New Zealand in the year to February 2014 of $649 million (1.3 per cent of exports).

      January and February’s merchandise trade surpluses were the highest ever for their respective months.

      Look mate, the chronic current account deficit is clearly what Parker is referring to here, don’t know why the fuck you would narrow it down to the “merchandise trade” balance.

      6. “Exporters…. Aren’t willing to invest in plant”

      Just yesterday, long term New Zealand forestry processor Oji Limited announced a $1 billion investment to purchase Carter Holt Harvey Processing assets.

      Purchase of existing assets is not new investment. It’s just moving existing assets around to someone elses balance sheet. Big fucking deal.

      • miravox 18.3.1
        28 April 2014 at 8:53 pm

        “Purchase of existing assets is not new investment. It’s just moving existing assets around to someone elses balance sheet. Big fucking deal.”

        Anyway, why would they invest in plant while people are so cheap?

    • Stephanie Rodgers 18.4
      28 April 2014 at 8:03 pm

      Don’t you think it’s a little dishonest to copy-and-paste an attack piece by Steven Joyce under the heading ‘Some discussion points’? Isn’t this the sort of thing Politicheck should be fact-checking instead of fodder for you to run off to another site and breathlessly report on people’s predictably annoyed responses?

      • Pete George 18.4.1
        28 April 2014 at 8:13 pm

        I think you’re getting a bit try-hard. It’s obviously a quote with an obvious link.

        How about you do what you want to do and not keep trying to tell me what you think I should do. This is Open Mike. Discuss or ignore is the standard practice isn’t it? Otherwise you are in danger of becoming yet another member of a tryhard tag team that disrupts threads with irrelevancies and then complains about the disruption.

        • Te Reo Putake 18.4.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 8:20 pm

          🙄

        • felix 18.4.1.2
          28 April 2014 at 8:43 pm

          Oh look, Pete George telling a Standard author what to do.

          🙄

          [lprent: OpenMike and not a particularly personal attack. Didn’t trigger the instincts. ]

          • miravox 18.4.1.2.1
            28 April 2014 at 8:57 pm

            “Otherwise you are in danger of becoming yet another member of a try hard tag team that disrupts threads with irrelevancies and then complains about the disruption.”

            Nah… That’s a self-deprecating joke, right? 🙄

        • marty mars 18.4.1.3
          28 April 2014 at 9:32 pm

          Learned to use quotation marks now eh pete – lol – what a dishonest wanker you are. You are yet another member of a tryhard rightwing tag team that disrupts threads with irrelevancies and then complains about people not liking it.

          • Pete George 18.4.1.3.1
            29 April 2014 at 6:00 am

            Very funny mm. What’s this supposed to be, a place to debate things or not? To some it is. Others seem more intent on attacking any message or messenger they don’t like in order to shut down debate.

            And it’s somewhat hypocritical for you to accuse of dishonesty. You make things up to try and disrupt and discredit. That’s called lying. You lie to try and shut down debate on things you don’t want talked about. That’s gutless. And it’s counterproductive. Thanks for drawing attention to things.

            that disrupts threads with irrelevancies

            The deputy leader of the opposition who wants to be Minister of Finance making false and/or misleading claims is irrelevant?

            • felix 18.4.1.3.1.1
              29 April 2014 at 6:20 am

              No actually Pete, this is not a place for you to debate anything you like.

              Read. The. Fucking. About.

              The purpose of this site has been pointed out to you many, many times but you still treat it as your own personal soapbox.

              The only possible conclusions are:

              1) you haven’t bothered to read it. which would make you an arrogant prick.
              2) you read it and didn’t understand it, which would make you an idiot.
              3) you read it and ignored it, which would make you a tr0ll (and an arrogant prick).

              My guess is 3. Also you’re an idiot.

              • Pete George …
                29 April 2014 at 7:50 am

                You should read About felix. Then try reading Rules.

                Rules

                We encourage robust debate and we’re tolerant of dissenting views. But this site run for reasonably rational debate between dissenting viewpoints and we intend to keep it operating that way.

                What we’re not prepared to accept are pointless personal attacks, or tone or language that has the effect of excluding others. We are intolerant of people starting or continuing flamewars where there is little discussion or debate. This includes making assertions that you are unable to substantiate with some proof (and that doesn’t mean endless links to unsubstantial authorities) or even argue when requested to do so.

                The bar is high because we like robust debate, but there is a bar.

                Some are more tolerant of dissenting views than others.

                • felix …
                  29 April 2014 at 8:00 am

                  Oh, you have “views”?

                  That’s odd, you’ve been saying for ages that you don’t necessarily agree or disagree with the tripe you copypasta from the National party and kiwiblog.

                  Guess you were lying.

                • Stephanie Rodgers …
                  29 April 2014 at 8:48 am

                  It’s interesting that you didn’t continue your bolding into the second sentence, which I would consider relevant to the discussion at hand.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 18.4.1.3.1.2
              29 April 2014 at 7:45 am

              🙄

              “…false and/or misleading…”

              You forgot “or true”, and your bias/dishonesty/bad faith is showing. Again.

            • marty mars 18.4.1.3.1.3
              29 April 2014 at 9:17 am

              “Thanks for drawing attention to things.”

              Thanks for thanking me but I don’t require any thanks from the likes of you.

              “You lie to try and shut down debate on things you don’t want talked about.”

              I think you’re talking to yourself there pete – pretty soon you’ll be moaning, “why doesn’t anybody take me seriously” and when people explain why, you’ll start your denial cycle all over again.

        • Stephanie Rodgers 18.4.1.4
          28 April 2014 at 10:21 pm

          Please don’t try to use slang, Pete, it’s a little sad. Especially when you try to use it twice to put me down.

          It’s very clear that you have not presented that quote in a transparent way. Like infomercials putting ‘results not typical’ in unreadably small type at the bottom of the screen, you have made a deliberate effort to get people to read your comment under false pretences. You are the person disrupting the conversation here and I am choosing not to ignore your obvious attempts to stir shit up.

      • felix 18.4.2
        28 April 2014 at 8:56 pm

        Pete is a non-partisan fact-checker who is only trying to stimulate discussion. In the interests of balance he copypastas National Party press releases and kiwiblog comments.

        • Draco T Bastard 18.4.2.1
          28 April 2014 at 10:01 pm

          😈 😆

        • North 18.4.2.2
          28 April 2014 at 10:08 pm

          Hey yous stop attackin’ PGTipsy on the Legals aye don’t ya know he the most araldite fulla un NooZilnd he the Dag of The Hair don’t ya know when ya feelin’ bit Psychoactive Psychoactive feelin’ they draggin’ ya ‘way from 35 year at The Trough shit stick to that fulla better than a blanket mate Jeez’ me glad that dairy closin’ tomoromoromoro awwh shucks thanks The Hair and PeeGee I owes yous guys………

  19. Philj 19
    28 April 2014 at 6:08 pm

    xox
    What legal or illegal substances can explain PG ‘s thinking(?)?

  20. joe90 20
    28 April 2014 at 6:35 pm

    The Mastersons – “Birds Fly South” – were great – Steve Earle & The Dukes – “Pocket Full of Rain” – were magnificent. That is all.

    • Tony Parker 20.1
      28 April 2014 at 7:30 pm

      In Wellington last night? It was good. Worth the trip down from Napier. Better than the last time I saw him. This band is probably his best for covering all his bases. Liked his little talk about noticing more and more American ideas/influences happening here now than when he was here before especially with regards to the environment. Got some applause for that but I bet half the people clapping will still vote for this current government.

      • joe90 20.1.1
        28 April 2014 at 7:55 pm

        Yup, last night and fortunately I brought earplugs so I was able to muffle the bass/double bass which was a little too unfiltered for my ears but a great show with Eleanor Whitmore’s voice a real highlight.

        As for the the audience and their reaction, rather uniform although I suspect I fitted right in, the Chris Masterton quip about the Texas filibuster went clean over most heads so I think you might be correct.

        • Tony Parker 20.1.1.1
          28 April 2014 at 9:46 pm

          I think the biggest culprit soundwise was the kick drum from where I was sitting. The bass was inaudible at times.

        • joe90 20.1.1.2
          28 April 2014 at 10:04 pm

          Sitting a half dozen seats left of centre in row L, around two thirds of the way back, and being just under the balcony was probably why the bass was so dominant. Drums were fine though and vocals from the left of stage crisp and sharp whereas Steve’s Pocket Full Of Rain (my favourite) vocals from right of stage were the only real low spot.

    • Tony Parker 20.2
      28 April 2014 at 7:30 pm

      In Wellington last night? It was good. Worth the trip down from Napier. Better than the last time I saw him. This band is probably his best for covering all his bases. Liked his little talk about noticing more and more American ideas/influences happening here now than when he was here before especially with regards to the environment. Got some applause for that but I bet half the people clapping will still vote for this current government.

    • Tony Parker 20.3
      28 April 2014 at 7:30 pm

      In Wellington last night? It was good. Worth the trip down from Napier. Better than the last time I saw him. This band is probably his best for covering all his bases. Liked his little talk about noticing more and more American ideas/influences happening here now than when he was here before especially with regards to the environment. Got some applause for that but I bet half the people clapping will still vote for this current government.

  21. Tony Parker 21
    28 April 2014 at 9:46 pm

    Sorry folks. No idea why that posted 3 times!

  22. ScottGN 22
    28 April 2014 at 9:48 pm

    Probably my excitable imagination but it seemed to me that in TVNZ’s piece on legal highs/animal testing tonight Key said ‘tha-lido-mide’ very carefully and very slowly. Can’t afford to trip up over the big words and have everyone think you’re a dummy?

    • ianmac 22.1
      28 April 2014 at 11:06 pm

      I really think that Mr Key has pronunciation problems for words more than 2 syllables. I have watched/listened carefully. As soon as he meets this problem he mumbles/slurs. No doubt he knows and understands all the words but has I think a sort of impediment. Sort of verbal dyslexia.

  23. Ron 23
    28 April 2014 at 11:09 pm

    News flash!
    Exciting candidate elected to represent Labour in the Upper Harbour electorate. Should prove great opponent for Benefit and the guy that doubts Moon walk.
    Details tomorrow

    • Jim Nald 23.1
      29 April 2014 at 12:15 am

      Sounds good. Looking forward to the announcement and hoping for a pleasant surprise!

      Btw, tomorrow is when Parker will speak about “monetary policy”?

      It would be really good if Cunliffe and his team also update and generate the kind of videos like the ones he did years ago, eg ‘Own Our Future’: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjyHctIljPM