Open mike 29/04/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:45 am, April 29th, 2014 - 175 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 …

175 comments on “Open mike 29/04/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. felix 1
    29 April 2014 at 7:05 am

    Pete laid down the law last night.

    Authors take note, you don’t get to tell him what he can or can’t do here. He makes the rules for the site now.

    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-28042014/#comment-805885

    • vto 1.1
      29 April 2014 at 7:41 am

      I think the problem with PG Tips is that everything is so bloody wishy-washy and qualified that tedium rises instantly to the surface leading to complete and utter frustration. It is like the ultimate fence-sitting, discussing discussions, and never actually achieving anything. Or even ffs, never actually saying anything. Nothing is ever said methinks.

      There would seem to be no solution for these types, other than to banish them to local council ward board committee meetings about whether pansies or petunias should be planted in the roundabout.

    • mickysavage 1.2
      29 April 2014 at 7:55 am

      Yep. He seems to be on a one man crusade to wreck the left’s chances in the next election. His behaviour improved for a while but I agree that he is back to his disruptive worst.

      The problem is his control of the politicheck website. He has come out with a doozie this morning claiming that all land speculators do pay capital gains tax. The amount paid is exceedingly small and the number of transactions caught is also very small. But by applying a rather extreme interpretation and taking a few very short comments out of context he claims that Labour is not telling the truth.

      This site works best when there is an unfettered sometimes robust exchange of ideas. But I have seen a number of discussion streams get wrecked.

      The politicheck reference is at http://www.politicheck.org.nz/factchecks/2014/4/29/property-speculators-are-taxed

      It may be time to factcheck the politicheck website.

      • Pete George 1.2.1
        29 April 2014 at 8:02 am

        “claiming that all land speculators do pay capital gains tax”

        I didn’t claim that.

        “The amount paid is exceedingly small and the number of transactions caught is also very small.”

        Facts would help your case.

        • mickysavage 1.2.1.1
          29 April 2014 at 8:06 am

          I thought you were the fact checker Pete. Or do you ignore the facts that do not support your world view?

          • Pete George 1.2.1.1.1
            29 April 2014 at 9:07 am

            You made the claims. You should back them up.

            Tax raised from Property Speculation and volume of cases nationally by tax year:

            Year Ending 30 June 2011 386 Cases and $33,817,271
            Year Ending 30 June 2012 232 Cases and $23,069,492
            Year Ending 30 June 2013 (to 31 December 2012) 115 cases and $12,025,889
            Cases closed at 30 June 2013 – 450 cases

            http://tvnz.co.nz/business-news/property-speculators-targeted-ird-5550971

            If a 15% capital gains tax was applied instead those amounts would approximately halve.

            Also from that article:

            Property speculators targeted by IRD

            Inland Revenue is cracking down on people who do not declare tax on properties they have made a profit on.

            Under New Zealand Income Tax law, if you intend to make a profit on a property transaction, you are required to pay income tax.

            “The urban myths that abound, if you own a property for six months, or 18 months or two years and you live in it as a family, then you are outside the net. Those are not true,” Tony Wilkinson, Buddle Findlay Tax Partner told ONE News.

            Inland Revenue is drawing a hard line on property speculators, receiving a $6 million annual funding boost to audit property transactions.

            IRD is doing something, and National appear to be boosting what they do.

            • Paul 1.2.1.1.1.1
              29 April 2014 at 9:10 am

              What % of your fact checks are made of National Party claims?

            • mickysavage 1.2.1.1.1.2
              29 April 2014 at 9:24 am

              Pete you should have done the research before making your claim doncha think? So a couple of hundred cases a year. And the figures are small when you compare them to the total tax take. Thanks for confirming my previous statement.

              The CGT will apply across the board apart from the family home. Over time it will raise significant amounts of money.

              And did you see how the number of cases is decreasing each year, interestingly at the same time that there have been cuts to IRD’s staff. National do not appear to be boosting what they do. It has put the process into reverse.

              • Pete George …
                29 April 2014 at 9:59 am

                “National do not appear to be boosting what they do. It has put the process into reverse.”

                In the link just above that you have just replied to:

                Inland Revenue is drawing a hard line on property speculators, receiving a $6 million annual funding boost to audit property transactions.

                The expectation is that this will recover about $45m.

                It’s impossible to know how much potential tax revenue is going into a black hole, but it is certainly substantial. A clue can be found in this year’s budget, which provided an extra $6.65m to chase property investment tax compliance. The expectation is it will return about $45m a year.

                Inland Revenue’s general reckoning is that the department will return in revenue five times the extra amount invested to investigate big-ticket areas such as property, the hidden economy and claimed losses.

                http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11118263

                That’s doing something, a boost. Not nothing, not “into reverse”.

      • vto 1.2.2
        29 April 2014 at 8:03 am

        the problem with property speculators and paying income tax in our country is that the vast bulk of rental property owners are simply dishonest lying bastards and bastardettes. They nearly all buy with a view to banking the gain in value and have little concern in the rent.

        Most NZ property investors simply lie about their intent when purchasing property. Liars.

        It is the single biggest rort in NZ and I think we need to introduce drug-testing on property owners and stop them from going to Australia, such is the cost to the taxpayer.

        • just saying 1.2.2.1
          29 April 2014 at 9:34 am

          I think we need to introduce drug-testing on property owners and stop them from going to Australia, such is the cost to the taxpayer.

          Lol.
          Ta.

        • Pete George 1.2.2.2
          29 April 2014 at 9:48 am

          Avoidance or evasion on property transactions has been a problem for yonks, and there’s a big grey area on ‘intent’ but governments have gradually been addressing it.

          Because proof of intent at the time of buying a property is central to whether tax should be paid, liability is not clear without some investigation and resources are always best directed to areas where the potential return is greatest.

          Investigators are more likely to be on the trail of dealers or speculators turning over several properties a year than the little guy who, over a lifetime, buys a couple of do-ups on rising markets and makes a nice little tax-free earner.

          However, don’t count on that so much in the future.

          The department receives data on every property transaction in New Zealand and says that after a few years focusing on education and awareness, it is moving to “a targeted audit response” with “increased risk assessment and profiling of cases along with developing a range of tools including complex data-matching, analysis, research and evaluation”.

          And it adds: “By improving our approach and techniques regarding compliance, we are able to better identify those who may be deliberately breaking the rules.”

          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11118263

          • vto 1.2.2.2.1
            29 April 2014 at 10:04 am

            Pete, it is only a problem of enforcement, not a problem of existence, as your quote indicates. My point stands.

            Bottom line though – government raises revenue by taxing people who make money. Problem is that they only tax some of the money-making, i.e. wage and salary and income earners. There are several other ways of making money which are not taxed, such as making money by capital. Example: Some make money by pouring all their income into the capital value of their farm and minimise their income. Why should they be exempt and bludge off the wage and salary earner? Another rort.

            If the government is to raise revenue by taxing money-making then all forms of money-making should be taxed. For consistency and credibility purposes ….

      • felix 1.2.3
        29 April 2014 at 8:06 am

        I don’t think anyone is ever going to read ScrittiPolitti.

        But yep, Pete is on a mission to make this site unreadable. I have no idea why he is tolerated. He has no interest in or sympathy for the labour movement whatsoever.

        When did thestandard become a free-for-all for right-wingers?

        • Rosie 1.2.3.1
          29 April 2014 at 9:52 am

          I like the Scritti Politti reference Felix.

          As for PG (Personal Grievance). I’ve been coming here on and off for two and half years and particularly enjoyed the time when PG was “on leave”. There was a time leading up to that “leave” where there was a loose consensus among commenters to simply adopt the 🙄 as a response to anything he said. Not only was it entertaining and humourous to see a huge line of 🙄 all down the page it also took all the power away from him and minimised the disruption.

          I humbly would make the suggestion that the 🙄 exercise is revived.

          Whaddya’s reckon?

      • karol 1.2.4
        29 April 2014 at 8:32 am

        Yep. As far as I can see, PG’s problem is a tendency to use slippery logic and very shallow analysis. It is why I rarely read or comment on his comments these days – waste of my time. More important things to focus on.

    • Pete George 1.3
      29 April 2014 at 8:00 am

      Ironic felix. You’re not trying to tell authors or moderators what to do are you? Sounds a bit like it. Contributing something positive is less stressful.

      • felix 1.3.1
        29 April 2014 at 8:02 am

        Where did I do that, Pete? Link or apology please.

      • mickysavage 1.3.2
        29 April 2014 at 8:05 am

        So Pete while you are here your latest politicheck post (http://www.politicheck.org.nz/factchecks/2014/4/29/property-speculators-are-taxed) is full of bunkum. Basically you are saying that because there is an obligation for speculators to pay capital gains tax they all pay capital gains tax. But if you had checked you would see that the number of transactions caught are exceedingly small and if someone buys a house to rent rather than immediately sell on then it is not payable.

        So you have twisted the words out of shape and then come out with an adverse conclusion.

        And looking at the site you are wrecking it. There is so much that could be analysed but you are mostly siding with the Government and bashing the opposition parties.

        Go on. Concisely justify your latest claim. Use figures and stuff. Then compare this with Labour’s draft figures from last time.

        • BM 1.3.2.1
          29 April 2014 at 8:35 am

          It’s true if you’re a legitimate property developer, spec builder etc you pay tax on any profit made.

          How else do you claim your building expenses, if you’re not legit.?

        • Pete George 1.3.2.2
          29 April 2014 at 8:47 am

          ” if someone buys a house to rent rather than immediately sell on then it is not payable.”

          That’s not correct.

          If you buy a property intending to:

          – resell it, or
          – you intend to sell it after making improvements to it
          you’re likely to be a speculator or a dealer. Renting your property temporarily doesn’t change your tax treatment either – you’re still a speculator or a dealer.

          How long do I need to hold the property to make it a capital gain?

          There is no time limit. If you buy a property with the firm intention of resale, it doesn’t matter how long you hold it – the gain on resale will be taxable (and any loss may be tax-deductible).

          Example
          You buy a property with a firm plan to resell it for a profit. The property market falls and you decide to hold onto it instead. You rent it out for 15 years and then sell it when the prices are again rising rapidly. Any gain on that sale 15 years later is likely to be taxable.

          http://www.ird.govt.nz/property/property-common-mistakes/mistake-dealing-with-investment/

          • mickysavage 1.3.2.2.1
            29 April 2014 at 9:17 am

            Um it is correct. If you buy the house intending to rent it then by definition you are not intending to resell it.

            • Pete George 1.3.2.2.1.1
              29 April 2014 at 9:22 am

              Um, you can buy a house intending to rent it and intending to sell it for a capital gain. Read the IRD link.

              Do you think speculators wouldn’t rent out a house if they intend to sell it? Unless it was a very quick flick that doesn’t make business sense much if not all what you gain in capital you would lose in cost of capital and non-earnings.

              • captain hook …
                29 April 2014 at 11:46 am

                what the fuck does that mean.
                you are just spouting nonsense.
                why dont you fuck off.

                • weka …
                  29 April 2014 at 5:07 pm

                  Lol @ hook. I reckon we should use that for Rosie’s suggestion rather than 🙄

                  Everytime PG says something, anything, respond with

                  what the fuck does that mean.
                  you are just spouting nonsense.
                  why dont you fuck off

                  Because it’s an appropriate response to pretty much everything he says.

                  • risildowgtn …
                    29 April 2014 at 6:13 pm

                    +1
                    I may not have been here long but I agree.
                    PG talks absolute crap

                    Dont feed it . it might go back under its rock

                  • Rosie …
                    29 April 2014 at 8:50 pm

                    Lol. By all means adopt that statement weka. My hazy memory tells me that the 🙄 was previously adopted because it was non verbal and non aggressive. Also, very it’s funny, a massive army of 🙄 marching on for miles down the page. It says so much.

          • lurgee 1.3.2.2.2
            29 April 2014 at 9:22 am

            From your own link, pete:

            If you’re an investor you buy a property to use it to generate ongoing rental income and not with any firm intent of resale. The property is a capital asset and any later profit or loss from selling the property is capital and isn’t taxable (apart from clawing back any depreciation, which is now recoverable).

            • Pete George 1.3.2.2.2.1
              29 April 2014 at 9:24 am

              Yes, that refers to an investor, which IRD clearly differentiates from speculators and dealers.

              • mickysavage …
                29 April 2014 at 9:33 am

                Pete have you actually read what you are typing? It makes no sense. My head hurts …

                I am sorry everyone I have sparked this totally unproductive complete waste of time debate. It is as if the protagonists are arguing in different languages …

                I am going back to performing paid work …

              • lurgee …
                29 April 2014 at 1:28 pm

                Yes, that refers to an investor, which IRD clearly differentiates from speculators and dealers.

                A few posts up thread, MS posted, “if someone buys a house to rent rather than immediately sell on then it is not payable.”

                You replied to that post, quoting those very words, stating, “That’s not correct.”

                With me so far?

                I quoted an extract from the IRD guidelines you quoted, showing that MS was correct and you were wrong – if someone buy a property to use it to generate ongoing rental income and not with any firm intent of resale the property is a capital asset and any later profit or loss from selling the property is capital and isn’t taxable.

                You comprehend that the words I have marked in bold (which are taken near verbatim from the extract I quoted) confirm that if someone buys a house to rent rather than immediately sell on then capial gains taxis not payable?

                Virtually the same words that MS used, and which you said were wrong and which you now say are right, but only for investors, even though that is clearly what MS means because what on Earth do you think “buys a house to rent rather than immediately sell on” means?

                • Pete George …
                  29 April 2014 at 1:36 pm

                  But “if someone buys a house to rent rather than immediately sell on then it is not payable” is not correct.

                  If someone buys a house to rent rather than immediately sell on then tax on capital gain may not be payable, or it may be payable, depending on other circumstances and intent.

                  As I showed, immediacy doesn’t matter, nor does an intent to rent.

                  • lurgee …
                    29 April 2014 at 1:50 pm

                    You understand what “if someone buys a house to rent” means, yeah?

                    It means the reason for buying the house was to rent it out. So “the property is a capital asset and any later profit or loss from selling the property is capital and isn’t taxable.”

                    Where as a speculator buys with the intention to sell it. that’s their purpose in buying the house, and their anticipated source of profit. Even if they don’t immediately realise that intention, due to the market collapsing or what have you it is still treated differently for tax purposes: “If you buy a property with the firm intention of resale, it doesn’t matter how long you hold it – the gain on resale will be taxable”

        • freedom 1.3.2.3
          29 April 2014 at 8:50 am

          ” There is so much that could be analysed but you are mostly siding with the Government and bashing the opposition parties.”

          To see the truth in that statement, scroll through the posts and look at the ratio of Politicheck articles that focus on the opposition parties and not the Government.

          OppositionCheck would be a more accurate title.

          But he is what he is and now, like many wiser heads, I will be doing my damnedest to step over every syllable he soils the site with. He has had so many chances to join in and help build the dialogue but he is a wrecker, and only wants to be the loudest voice at the table.

          Still wonder how his Budget for Poor People was shaping up though.

          bye bye Pete

        • lurgee 1.3.2.4
          29 April 2014 at 9:17 am

          But if you had checked you would see that the number of transactions caught are exceedingly small

          You appear to be talking about tax avoidance and evasion, i.e. lack of tax income, rather than a lack of tax code. That’s a different issue altogether.

          You can’t avoid non-existent taxes, after all.

  2. Ad 2
    29 April 2014 at 7:10 am

    Good stuff from Labour on the exchange rate. Plenty of commentators saying it’s not a populist issue. Clearly they don’t get the knowledge all our commodity producers (esp farmers) have of exchange rates and their personal financial interests.

    Looks like a great week for Labour, with a series of announcements and media hits.

    • karol 2.1
      29 April 2014 at 8:27 am

      As far as I can see the policy benefits the middle class property buyers/owners and export businesses. What’s in it for those on low incomes?

      • tinfoilhat 2.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 8:42 am

        “What’s in it for those on low incomes?

        More expensive everything.

      • bad12 2.1.2
        29 April 2014 at 8:46 am

        Lets see, for those on low incomes Labour is proposing a rise in the minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour, yay hurrah, but wait, there is more,

        Labour is also proposing ”compulsory” retirement savings which i will speculate will be at least 2% of income, so scratch any benefit low income workers will gain from any pay rise to the new 15 dollar minimum wage,(and the flow on effect in wages above 15 bucks an hour if any),

        i could go on, but why bother, it looks like business as usual from where i sit…

        • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2.1
          29 April 2014 at 9:41 am

          According to their website it’s 3% and increasing yearly to 9%. To get this across they’re going to have to raise the minimum wage to at least $17 per hour or go for a Universal Income.

          • cricklewood 2.1.2.1.1
            29 April 2014 at 10:12 am

            Ouch thats really going to hurt people’s day to day living even 17ph is barely enough to scrape by in Auckland with two incomes at this level.
            I can imagine that the employer contribution will be the effective pay rise for the next few years… unless they have some kind of abatement for a couple it will leave a large hole in take home pay.
            The other thing I am extremely wary of is political interference in the coming years who is to say the eligibility age won’t be pushed out further etc. I worry that in 20 years or so when substantial amounts of kiwi saver come due they decide the large amount of money entering the economy will be inflationary and seek to restrict access.

            • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2.1.1.1
              29 April 2014 at 10:19 am

              I worry that in 20 years or so when substantial amounts of kiwi saver come due they decide the large amount of money entering the economy will be inflationary and seek to restrict access.

              That wouldn’t surprise me 🙁

              That said, I don’t think saving does anything for the economy except slow it down and boost returns to the financial sector which results, inevitably, in the economy collapsing again.

              • cricklewood …
                29 April 2014 at 10:35 am

                Id tend to agree with that better to spend it now and the govt collects an appropriate amount of tax to fund super. Personal savings should be personal with the ability to use them as you wish

              • Stephanie Rodgers …
                29 April 2014 at 1:17 pm

                I was reading an article yesterday suggesting that we need to ‘encourage’ people to trade their KiwiSaver for annuities at retirement, because, in essence, we can’t ‘trust’ them to spend the money ‘wisely’. It’s an incredibly patronizing attitude.

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.3
        29 April 2014 at 8:47 am

        Pretty much nothing. In fact, it’sl to hurt them in the short term but over the medium to long term it should increase work here and highly paid work at that.

        Of course, the real problem is that our exchange rate is set incorrectly (it’s based upon speculation rather than actual trade) and that our entire economic system is bunkum to boot.

    • BM 2.2
      29 April 2014 at 8:49 am

      Yeah, massive increases in living costs, nice one Labour.

      • Draco T Bastard 2.2.1
        29 April 2014 at 9:38 am

        The massive increases are going to happen one way or another as we’ve been living well beyond our means due to the misaligned exchange rate. National are, of course, promising that we can continue to live beyond our means forever.

    • Skinny 2.3
      29 April 2014 at 11:28 am

      +1 Agree, however it’s early in the day of politic’s, let alone the week.

      The PR spin merchants within National will be plotting with bullshit snake oil ready to feed their gushing shill media fan-club. Just heard the Nationals Minister of War on Terrorism, Coleman just bait Goff into commenting on their huge military spend up announcement. By Coleman’s quip of the Government is just following through on the previous Governments commitment.

  3. phillip ure 3
    29 April 2014 at 7:39 am

    i am still reeling from the transformation of david cunnliffe into an animal rights activist..

    ..and am i silly to hope that the disgust expressed by cunnliffe on testing legal highs on rats/rabbits/dogs..

    ..that this will also apply/spread to the (approx) 370,000 such animals that are vivisected/tested to death..?

    ..(‘testing’ yr cosmetics/dishwashing liquids/makeup etc etc..)

    ..especially as as cunnliffe said..there is no need to test these on animals..when computer-models etc. can do the job..

    ..’cos..y’see that ‘no need’ also applies to most/all? of those over 370,000 animals that are tortured..and then killed..each and every year..

    ..computor-modelling etc would also do the job there..

    ..so why don’t they use computors then..?..i hear you ask..

    ..money..money..money..

    ..these vile excuses for human beings are part of a self-perpetuating industry..

    ..an unholy/bloody alliance between the torturers/breeders/’researchers’..

    ..a lot of money is made from being an animal-torturer..(they don’t want no computer-models messing with their gigs..

    ..it’s ‘a good little earner’..being a vivisecter..

    ..(the universities in nz alone vivisect 300,000 animals each and every year..’research/training’ being the reasons given for the/that need..)

    ..(what these stats/facts mean is that over 1,000 animals each and every day are killed after they have been used/tortured/vivisected..)

    ..so..as i say..i welcome the expected scrutiny/spotlight being shone on these torturing scumbags..

    ..by david cunnliffe/labour..

    ..in his/their reborn animal rights dudes roles…

    • Skinny 3.1
      29 April 2014 at 7:58 am

      A little harsh on Cunliffe Phil, it’s thanks to members of the Labour party like my vet nurse flatmate that campaign for animals rights and put forward well considered remits to be thrashed out. I give DC credit for responding to F/B private messages regarding another issue of concern to her, my opinion (which was ok anyway) of him rose as a result of his long thoughtful responses. Before a some fool (not you) fires a cheapshot that it was probably someone else, the typo’s & odd spelling mistake told me it was him, had the same lol.

      • phillip ure 3.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 8:16 am

        as i say skinny..i am optimistic the gaze (not only of cunnliffe) will now switch to this vivisection abomination..i do mean that..

        (see..!..i am blocking my usual/deep cynicism that the circus will move on..and this ‘deep’/important issue..will become yesterdays’ shane jones..and the torturing/killing will just continue..unabated..)

        ..and i don’t really mind how it comes about/who gets credit..

        ..and i tip my hat to those like yr friend..those active inside (blind/unthinking) organisations like the labour party..

        ..who are fighting for these same reforms this situation is calling/screaming out for..

        ..(trying to end the usual practice of green party bbq’s..when there..i am afraid burnt me out on that route..)

        • vto 3.1.1.1
          29 April 2014 at 8:36 am

          what are the alternatives …?

          ..testing on people.. ?

          .. a new role for those on Paula’s benefit .. perhaps …?

          • Jackal 3.1.1.1.1
            29 April 2014 at 6:07 pm

            What are the alternatives? Use products that don’t require animal testing. For instance there is a huge amount of information showing that marijuana is far safer than these synthetic substitutes…no testing required.

    • ianmac 3.2
      29 April 2014 at 9:43 am

      Animal rights. Mr Key slid by yesterday saying that the excuse for not acting sooner on legal highs was his concern that animals might be used for testing. Smart move. Appeal to the Animal rights people and lets him off the hook.
      But wait. Mr Cunliffe agrees that he has a concern for animal rights. Check. Your next move John?

    • Rosie 3.3
      29 April 2014 at 10:18 am

      Too right phillip. I hear that Massey Uni in Palmy is one of our worst offenders for animal testing. Is that correct?

      I also think that is the place where the HRT medicine is made from mare’s urine. The mares are kept permanently in stalls, they don;’t get out at all and are kept pregnant so the levels of oestrogen necessary for the production of the medicine remain high. A tragic life for an animal who is so sensitive and emotional. (I have a strong connection with equines)

      Sorry, no link for that. I just recall an article on tv about it years ago and it stayed with me

    • Clemgeopin 3.4
      29 April 2014 at 8:18 pm

      I think I heard some chap on Tv saying that they could get quite good results from testing this Sh*t on poor crustaceans! Poor crabs, prawns and snails! Oh dear. Next they will think of testing it on some bacteria and broccoli.

  4. Belladonna 4
    29 April 2014 at 7:49 am

    Quite agree Phil, it is a disgusting practice that needs to stop. These sick scientists who manage to convince themselves that it is unfortunate but necessary to torture animals need to be made to account for their actions. Good to hear David speaking up against it and informing the public it is possible to do this research using computers. This will win him votes.

    • Skinny 4.1
      29 April 2014 at 8:27 am

      Sure is Bella, I read some posts on facebook by some rat club people who were giving DC the voters nod after watching his interview on the tv news covering the issue.

      Got a laugh watching slippery Key who looked deceitful doing a flip flop, fronting the media with his bullshit ‘personally’ I’m uncomfortable with animal testing that’s the real reason for the hold up (funny he forgot to tell Dunne that porky, Pete didn’t utter a word about this to the press) umm not on rabbits, certainly not dogs, rodents yeah thats OK. A dog whistle to anymore nat rats thinking of jumping ship. Oh the pits, poor Johnny has to import dirty rats these days.

  5. phillip ure 5
    29 April 2014 at 8:06 am

    a question for the ‘strategists’ in labour..

    ..who is/are the einstein/s that decided that david parker appearing on a political talkshow on sunday..

    ..was not a good enough platform for the announcement of new economic-policy..?

    ..who decided ‘no no!..we’ll put out a press-release on tuesday…!.’…was the better option..?

    ..and i guess it is a byre the bye..that after parker ‘teasing’ about his big tuesday announcement..(yep..!..we’re all wetting our pants in anticipation here..dave..)..that then there was nothing..

    ..the ensuing vaccuum leaving plenty of time/opportunity for parker to be pulled backwards thru a blackberry bush..

    ..over his/labours’ epic-fail/vote-killing policy to raise the age of the pension..

    ..who was/were the einsteins(s) who made that call..?

    ..you don’t need to answer that question..

    ..but you really need to do what needs to be done..eh..?

    ..you are getting some really shit tactic-advice..from whomever…

    • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1
      29 April 2014 at 8:26 am

      “Nothing”, Phil?

      Are you sufficiently versed in economics to make that judgement?

      What were you expecting? It’s finance policy.

      Parker raised interest in the proposal on Sunday. Today it’s getting headlines and has induced another of Key’s trademark lies:

      “What will make a difference is Labour spending so much money, rates will rise faster.”

      Fact: rates have risen “faster” since 2009.

      Pretty sure the Oravida party is spending more too.

      • phillip ure 5.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 8:56 am

        no..oab..

        ..he had nothing to talk about..hence the blackberry-bush episode..

        ..did you see it..?

        ..tell me how i have got that wrong..

    • Tautoko Viper 5.2
      29 April 2014 at 8:50 am

      Perhaps the reason for not launching the policy on Sunday was so that the launching was controlled- an uninterrupted speed followed by question and answers. Political talk shows are very dependent on the line of questioning by the interviewer who can derail the launch. If you consider the quality and motives of most of the panellists who take part in the post interview discussion, then the wisdom of using a breakfast speech launch becomes much more attractive.

  6. fisiani 6
    29 April 2014 at 8:45 am

    David Parker effectively states that if elected he will dip into your paypacket and leave you worse off. Is he one of the ABC majority in caucus? Democracy needs a strong and competent opposition.

    • phillip ure 6.1
      29 April 2014 at 8:54 am

      concern-tr*lling there..fisi..?

    • Paul 6.2
      29 April 2014 at 9:08 am

      Fisiani, wouldn’t it be better if you concerned yourself with problems the Nats have, as you are one of their supporters?

      Is it a concern that they are taking on tobacco lobbyists?
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/polls/9984445/Ex-lobbyist-to-contest-Englishs-seat

      Is the government a competent manager of the economy having blown out the debt to over $60 billion?
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9380846/Public-debt-climbs-by-27m-a-day

      Just a couple of more important things for you to be concerned about…

      • fisiani 6.2.1
        29 April 2014 at 9:28 am

        Are you seriously claiming that ex-employees of a tobacco company are not supposed to be candidates? Should they be forced to wear a yellow star to let us know their sin.
        The government is a fabulous manager of the economy. Just watch for the Budget.
        On 20th September we have a stark choice.
        Forward to a brighter and brighter future or back to the seventies with a government that steals private land and steals from your pay packet to finance pet ideas.

        • Paul 6.2.1.1
          29 April 2014 at 9:29 am

          $60 billion debt and growing.
          Wonderful.

        • vto 6.2.1.2
          29 April 2014 at 9:43 am

          “back to the seventies with a government that steals private land and steals from your pay packet to finance pet ideas.”

          like the Central Plains Water scheme, backed by your government, stealing private land and using my pay packet to finance pet irrigation ideas (which are so woeful in terms of financial return that they cannot raise the money to pay for it within their dear private sector, hence steal from taxpayers. Total failure of your political philosophies fisiani. fail fail fail)

        • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.3
          29 April 2014 at 9:54 am

          The government is a fabulous manager of the economy.

          The fact that you believe that shows just how disconnected from reality you are.

          Just watch for the Budget.

          Has the 170,000 jobs from National’s budgeting turned up yet?

        • Stephanie Rodgers 6.2.1.4
          29 April 2014 at 1:19 pm

          Thread officially Godwinned. Recommended course of action: nothin’ but 🙄

    • Skinny 6.3
      29 April 2014 at 9:09 am

      Hey wingnut, listening to RNZ morning report, Slugger Bill Churlish saying NO to everything N-Spinner is front footing him on . Copped a bit of stick comparing the LP policy of raising to 9% super contribution, Bill got a hiding when comparing to the Ozzies 13%. Nice.

      Key-Joyce and their spin merchants will be sitting slumped in their chairs cursing English’s poor showing.

      Expect cheerleaders Hooton & Shrillands to turn up to try prop up PG who is already getting a pasting on here.

      • ffloyd 6.3.1
        29 April 2014 at 9:39 am

        English was as usual very predictable. Had to turn him off. Good to hear Cunliffe putting espiner in his place. GE got quite cross.

    • phillip ure 6.4
      29 April 2014 at 9:24 am

      “.. Democracy needs a strong and competent opposition..”

      let’s hope national are up to the task..eh..?..

    • aerobubble 6.5
      29 April 2014 at 3:18 pm

      Exporters see their profits disappear as printed money comes crashing through the NZ dollar door.

      Where have National been, we’re not talking about what may happen in the fruit loopy way National declares all Labour’s policies as awful, we’re talking how they failed in the housing market, failed exporters, failed children.

      And National are worried, Labour are aim full square at craving off exporters from the National party.
      Retailers are next when they realize Key’s aiming the economy at an almighty housing crash, with his high govt debt, do nothing and wait for thr GFC to have worked through and watch while milk, timber, are all sourced elsewhere.

      You have to pretty dumb to think that hot money isn’t holding up our economy.
      That hot money needs exchange goods, and so is buying up the cheapest bulkiest
      items on the economic menu and hurting our added value sectors.
      And t will all stop when the global banking system rights itself, then the banks
      will come for our homes.

  7. wyndham 7
    29 April 2014 at 9:07 am

    Most days I wake up feeling just fine, have a good breakfast, attend to my ablutions and then turn to The Standard for my daily share of intelligent comment (especially from karol) on matters political.
    Why is it that time and time again I then find the whole morning ruined by comments, if they can be called that, from someone called Pete George? There is something so snide, so dog-whistling about this person’s contributions that I end up having my day shattered. There is no end to his self-assumed expertise on everything, his implied criticisms disguised as something unbiased and apparently reasonable.
    Please, Pete George, for the sake of at least one person’s sanity – – – go away!

    • Paul 7.1
      29 April 2014 at 9:11 am

      +100
      He ruins this site.

      • phillip ure 7.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 9:40 am

        i see him as being the legal-high of political-dialogue..

        ..imitating the real thing..

        ..and getting it so so wrong…

        ..what particularly grates with him is the bullshit concern-tr*lling..the many ‘faces’..

        ..’faces’ dependant on the audience/issue being faced at that moment..

        ..if he came here and vigorously argued rightwing ‘ideas’..fair do’s..

        ..but it is the faux-concern/centreist poses he constantly strikes..

        ..and his never answering reasoned-challenges..

        ..in short..his outright/wholesale dissembling..

        ..(and this is kinda off the wall..i dunno a lot about astrological-profiles..but from what i do know/have observed in others..i reckon he is a virgo with taurus rising..

        ..or some such swamp-person mix…

        ..any other guesses..?..)

        ..and to end on a positive-note..

        ..like with the legal-highs..there will come a breaking-point..

        ..the queues of complainers will get too long/rowdy..

        ..we can but hope that comes soon..eh..?..

        ..’cos credit where credit is due..

        ..he is quite good at it..

        ..that dissembling..

        ..he is like an energy-sucking black hole on many threads..

        ..his paymasters should be rewarding him well..

        ..(and what’s with that edwards-the-younnger seriall=linking/being a fanboy of georges’ drivel..?

        ..and here is the scary bit..

        ..that edwards-the-younger moulds young/impressionable brains..

        ..at a university..(!)

        ..whoar..!..eh..?..

        ..does he have the unmentionable one as a guest-speaker..?

        ..does he scar their minds this way..?..

        • Rosie 7.1.1.1
          29 April 2014 at 10:23 am

          Yes, why does Bryce Edwards link “Your NZ” in his weekly round up. Not sure of the motivation or reasoning for that, but it does reduce his credibility.

    • Molly 7.2
      29 April 2014 at 9:41 am

      +100

      Have had the same reaction, but am trying now to use the glimpse of his avatar to practise empathy and compassion for those that are “without”.

      Will keep you updated on how I go…

    • ianmac 7.3
      29 April 2014 at 9:49 am

      I can never understand why the debate with Pete continues. He is as slippery as John Key. And the issues he seems to raise are never resolved. I tend to skip all the comments and replies after his name. Must be too old to bother.

    • Rosie 7.4
      29 April 2014 at 10:04 am

      Don’t let PG ruin your morning wyndham. There’s too much good thing going on, on this site. I share your frustration, however I when I see his name and a giant disrupted thread trailing in his wake. I just scroll- on- by until I get to something relevant . I have made a suggestion to readers and commenters at 1.2.3.1 at 9.52 am above.

      I would love to see the 🙄 response reignited.

  8. Paul 8
    29 April 2014 at 9:27 am

    Open mike is rapidly degenerating into the Pete George hour.

    • ffloyd 8.1
      29 April 2014 at 9:35 am

      Totally. Is he related to m hooton?

      • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 10:00 am

        To be honest, I think that may be an insult to Hooton.

      • David H 8.1.2
        29 April 2014 at 9:09 pm

        Naa Hooten writes Hootens Horse shit on NBR.

        Petey writes Horse shit where ever he goes. He’s like a Puppy dog He just can’t help pissing on the carpet.

    • JK 8.2
      29 April 2014 at 9:56 am

      Yes -i’ve noticed that Open Mike has become a PG hour and its booooorrrrrrrrrring. Boring, Boring.
      Not at all what it was a few weeks ago. Is it time for the moderators to step up and put a ban on him for a while ? ?

      • Draco T Bastard 8.2.1
        29 April 2014 at 10:04 am

        Banning him for awhile doesn’t make any difference – you just feel the same pain when he comes back.

      • blue leopard 8.2.2
        29 April 2014 at 3:35 pm

        That seems a little unfair JK, I note that the first comment was by felix today, fairly well inciting PG into making a comment. Yesterday’s (was it yesterday, can’t be arsed going to check) Open Mike was all about PG and he hadn’t even commented!

        I don’t agree with all Pete George says or his tactics at times, however a lot of the noise recently has been to do how people are responding to him, rather than due to PG. Some of his comments do assist some pretty important debates.

        It would be good if those responding to and inciting PG got a grip and thought a bit about how their own actions are affecting this ‘issue’…because it is starting to look more like a schoolyard dynamic that bring to mind a certain statement that Dick Emery was famous for more than anything else.

        There are some pretty important events occurring in this country, if you wish to focus on them – focus on them.

        • weka 8.2.2.1
          29 April 2014 at 8:06 pm

          I think you underestimate how distruptive many people find PG. For those that don’t mind him so much, your comment makes sense. For those of us that see him as an out and out tr8ll*, then the upscaling of antagonism to him recently also makes sense.

          • blue leopard 8.2.2.1.1
            29 April 2014 at 10:17 pm

            I don’t mind at all when people call bullshit on bullshit, it is good to do that.

            Sometimes DFTT is in order.

            Sometimes that doesn’t cut it but…

            I think it is getting a bit rubbish to incite him to comment and then complain about Open Mike being dedicated to him, when he hasn’t even started the subject. JK @ 8.2 didn’t do this – but this is what has occurred twice now on Open Mike.

            • weka 8.2.2.1.1.1
              30 April 2014 at 5:03 pm

              DFTT implies that he is in fact a tr8ll. Which means the normal rules of discourse don’t apply.

              “I don’t mind at all when people call bullshit on bullshit, it is good to do that.”

              Everything PG does and says is bullshit. Even on the occasions that his comments make sense, it’s still bullshit because it’s part of the whole centrist, I’m more of a reasonable person than anyone else persona that masks the fact that he is right wing and undermines the left at any opportunity he gets. That persona does damage. He is not someone I am willing to take a face value, comment by comment, because every commment he makes is part of a larger context of clusterfucked communication and bullshit.

              • Pete George …
                1 May 2014 at 6:12 am

                All that amounts to is you don’t tolerate views you don’t like so make things up to try and discredit. This demonstrates your intolerance and nastiness towards alternatives and helps highlight the issues being raised. It doesn’t seem to be a very smart approach but may reflect frustration at a lack of success with your own agenda. If you had a good case to argue that’s what you’d do instead of lashing out at different views and approaches.

                Anger doesn’t make a good argument. It’s curious to see such bitter anti-centrists.

                • felix …
                  1 May 2014 at 7:13 am

                  1) No, it shows that weka understands you very well. Probably better than you do.

                  2) It’s not your “views”, it’s your behaviour, The only views you have ever put forward are the occasional bit of racism.

                  3) You have never, ever offered an “alternative” to anything.

                  4) You’d be hard pressed to find anyone who has observed your behaviour online over a couple of years who wouldn’t agree with weka. You’ll always be able to fool a few noobs though.

                • weka …
                  1 May 2014 at 10:10 am

                  “All that amounts to is you don’t tolerate views you don’t like so make things up to try and discredit.”

                  Pretty strange coincidence then that of all the people on this site that I disagree with, the only person I call a tr*ll is you.

  9. The Al1en 9
    29 April 2014 at 9:29 am

    Breaking news on TVNZ – The Government has announced it’s investing $100.9 million into strengthening the Defence Force.

    So what’s that then? Using not having money as an excuse to fund social welfare projects or night classes and the like, and after running the military down to save costs, they find enough to stump up enough to buy some nod doubt American made nonsense or half a wing of one of the Australian fleet that doesn’t work properly.

    Can’t wait for the spin show to start. My guess is Key hides the US request to curb the yellow peril in the pacific, in the style of drunken cabaret crooner.

    • Paul 9.1
      29 April 2014 at 9:31 am

      China won’t like that.
      We are being caught in a vice between two powers trying to control the Pacific.
      Key’s subservient approach to both will cost us big time in the future.

      • The Al1en 9.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 9:36 am

        And they will grip hard too. My best suggestion would be to declare NZ neutral, failing that, and the opposite of Key, choose the winning side at the UN and have productive trade negotiations minus the taste of corruption lingering on the lips of cabinet ministers.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.2
        29 April 2014 at 10:11 am

        NZ’s only real option at this point in time is to declare ourselves completely, totally and utterly neutral. Nothing less will do.

        • Colonial Viper 9.1.2.1
          29 April 2014 at 8:29 pm

          There are some strong advantages to remaining allied to the west, albeit we need to bolster our reputation as fair and honest brokers in all international affairs.

          • Draco T Bastard 9.1.2.1.1
            29 April 2014 at 8:37 pm

            There are some strong advantages to remaining allied to the west

            I can’t think of any. Did you read this? I have a tendency to agree with him about our Western allies.

    • Draco T Bastard 9.2
      29 April 2014 at 10:09 am

      Probably buying Australia’s F/A18’s after they buy the new F35 JSF.

      Doesn’t really matter what it is though as the end result will be more dependence upon the US for defence and a totally useless defence capability.

    • vto 9.3
      29 April 2014 at 10:20 am

      what’s happened to our benign strategic environment? (one of Helen Clark’s most gob-smackingly silly utterances, and there weren’t too many of those..)

      • The Al1en 9.3.1
        29 April 2014 at 10:33 am

        I’ve not googled it yet, so I don’t know. But milk, food and kiwi ingenuity to all who come in peace sounds better than the mess trying to butter both sides of the bread will make.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.3.2
        29 April 2014 at 12:54 pm

        what’s happened to our benign strategic environment?

        The global economy is collapsing and, yeah, it was a rather stupid thing for Clark to say.

  10. Jenny 10
    29 April 2014 at 9:41 am

    ‘

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/9987907/US-braces-for-more-tornados

    With more energy in the system, will Auckland see its third deadly tornado in three years?

  11. Bill 11
    29 April 2014 at 9:43 am

    Been coming across a lot of Pikkety lately. For those who haven’t, his book ” Capital in the Twenty First Century” has a central argument/observation that any democracy we have is inevitably devolving into plutocracy.

    Piketty’s argument is that, in an economy where the rate of return on capital outstrips the rate of growth, inherited wealth will always grow faster than earned wealth.

    http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/28/thomas-piketty-capital-surprise-bestseller

    • phillip ure 11.1
      29 April 2014 at 9:54 am

      pikettys’ book is the most important tome in a long time…

      ..put that together with the spirit level..

      ..and you have your rationales/a blueprint for a new/much better way of doing things..

      ..i consider myself an early-adopter of piketty..

      ..here is what i have found/collected…

      ..a (rough) primer/archive of his words/ideas..

      http://whoar.co.nz/?s=piketty

    • Draco T Bastard 11.2
      29 April 2014 at 10:15 am

      Yep, really need to read that one but, then, I’ve been saying that the biggest problem we have is the rich for years.

    • karol 11.3
      29 April 2014 at 11:08 am

      Thanks for the tip.

    • Ergo Robertina 11.4
      29 April 2014 at 11:47 am

      Piketty’s prescription includes (to quote from Bill’s link) ‘an 80% tax on incomes above $500,000 a year in the US, assuring his readers there would be neither a flight of top execs to Canada nor a slowdown in growth, since the outcome would simply be to suppress such incomes’.

      Labour and the Greens should adopt this as policy.
      It will not raise a lot in revenue in New Zealand, but that is not the point.
      These excessive salaries are immoral and extortionate.
      And even the CEOs themselves are starting to acknowledge the fact – The Warehouse boss Mark Powell recently described his $1.7 million salary as a ‘ridiculous amount’.

    • Colonial Viper 11.6
      29 April 2014 at 10:46 pm

      Piketty’s ideas are decent, but they are 25 years too late. We’ve actually moved far past the time the assumptions he uses will actually hold. Care of one of favourite websites Zerohedge:

      By Charles Hugh-Smith:

      The real problem with Piketty’s taxation/social welfare solution to wealth inequality is that it does nothing to change the source of systemic inequality, debt-based neofeudalism and neocolonialism. Simply raising more taxes to fund more social welfare programs leaves the unjust, rapacious, and ultimately destabilizing Status Quo entirely intact.

      I have laid out another path in my books: refuse serfdom, abandon participation in neofeudalism and neocolonialism, and build parallel systems of cooperation and wealth-building that are not debt-dependent.

      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-28/critique-pikettys-solution-widening-wealth-inequality

      And by James Kunstler:

      I doubt that the Warren Buffets and Jamie Dimons of the world will see their wealth confiscated via some new policy of the Internal Revenue Service — e.g. the proposed “tax on wealth.” Rather, its more likely that they’ll be strung up on lampposts or dragged over three miles of pavement behind their own limousines. After all, the second leading delusion in our culture these days, after the wish for a something-for-nothing magic energy rescue remedy, is the idea that we can politically organize our way out of the epochal predicament of civilization that we face. Piketty just feeds that secondary delusion.

      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-28/second-biggest-delusion-us-culture

      In relation to today’s conversations, my view is that Reserve Bank goals and interest rate settings are akin to trying to cleverly keep steam pressure up on the Titanic’s engines while the compartments are filling up with water. At this point nothing apart from getting ready for fossil fuel energy depletion, climate change, GFC II and permanent global economic contraction matters one whit.

  12. TeWhareWhero 12
    29 April 2014 at 9:52 am

    I don’t think that PG ruins the site. He’s a bit pompous – and his theme song could be ‘I can see clearly now the brain has gone’ – but I think he’s an excellent example of a right-whinger trying hard to prove that he occupies the political centre – and that’s always good for a laugh.

  13. vto 13
    29 April 2014 at 10:40 am

    Why do those survey firms who phone and ask for a portion of your day to answer their questions never pay for the service? I make a point of responding “yes sure, I can participate but like you we charge for our time, so if you can give me a name and address for sending an invoice we can proceed”

    the responses range from a laugh to a pause to a short no. it brings the call to a rapid end.

    can I recommend that others take such an approach?

  14. Rosie 14
    29 April 2014 at 11:01 am

    Surprisingly good editorial in the Dom Post today on Dunne’s actions re the Psychoactive Substances bill. A good read:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/editorials/9986208/Editorial-Dunne-drops-synthetics-ball

  15. Te Reo Putake 15
    29 April 2014 at 11:01 am

    Interesting article in the Grauniad about the difficulties of dealing to the racist party UKIP. One conclusion is very relevent to the upcoming election here; that attacking UKIP for being racist implies that voters attracted to them are also racist. The lesson for NZ? Attacking Key can be counter productive because it can seen as an attack on swinging voters who like him, even if it’s not in their interests to vote for him.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/28/ukip-european-election-accused-of-racism

  16. Jrobin 16
    29 April 2014 at 11:03 am

    Disappointing to see your negative comment on Monetary policy, Karol. As several Labour MPs noted recently, you have to generate income before you can redistribute it. I am making no aims as an economics expert but it looks like Parkers ideas are bold and very smart. Not more handouts or bleeding interest payments to foreign banks, instead he proposes to channel inflation control back into the local economy though kiwisaver. Note he has written in out clauses for low income earners Karol. Overseas banks will hate ths policy expect some vicious attacks by corporate interests. But the main thing is this will be great for higher wage employment and local industry. The guy is a genius and the miracle is that it didn’t get leaked. Key was left blundering around suggesting old hat mortgage controls. Well done Labour.

  17. robertguyton 17
    29 April 2014 at 11:04 am

    Southland Times editorial on new Nat Clutha/Southland candidate Todd Barclay (tobacco industry lobbyist)
    OPINION: The staff of legal high shops up and down the country might suddenly find themselves contemplating a change of career. Can we suggest they consider trying for a National Party candidacy somewhere?
    It worked for Todd Barclay.
    Hard on the news that all legal highs will be off the shelves in a couple of weeks, what with them being so harmful and everything, the Nats have chosen for one of their safest seats, Clutha-Southland, a man whose job it was to represent the interests of the tobacco industry.
    The one that kills about 5000 of us each year.
    Not that Barclay’s employer, Philip Morris, is denying any more that tobacco is a dangerous product. It now openly acknowledges as much.
    The thing is, this oh-so-slowly dawning self-awareness hasn’t stopped the company defending, as best it can, its right to keep making money from the stuff anyway.
    Because, after all, it’s legal.
    Can we at least muster a sharp intake of breath, perhaps followed by a wheezy cough, at the audacity of this candidacy selection?
    To be fair, Barclay has come and gone from Philip Morris in short order. He had his tobacco job for eight months and says he joined the company to learn about corporate politics. In fact, he says he doesn’t condone smoking. (Small point: if you don’t condone something you really shouldn’t make money in its service.)
    There are things that an eager-to-learn young man should want to know about the tobacco industry even before he gets into it. And one of those, surely, would be the legitimacy of that whole “millions of dead people” kerfuffle. Was he really untroubled by that? Does he know something reassuring the rest of us don’t?
    Before this, Barclay was a Beehive insider. A 24-year-old who grew up in the south, he has worked for Cabinet ministers Bill English, Gerry Brownlee and Hekia Parata. Make what you will that after those three Big Tobacco seemed an agreeable next step.
    The extent to which his electorate will be willing to set aside this poisonous background remains to be seen. It’s up to Clutha-Southland voters to determine what significance, if any, to afford the fact that Barclay chose that career move, however temporarily. But it must be said that for a man barely in his mid-20s, he has a past to live down.
    In the meantime that hoary old line that a gumboot could get elected in Clutha-Southland if it was a National gumboot should be revisited on the basis that a gumboot would have a more benign public safety record.
    As for Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne’s announcement that, come to think of it, by golly it would be better if all legal highs were taken off the shelves and returned only once their safety was proven — that’s a case of better late than never. But not nearly as good as getting it right the first time.
    The grace period that had allowed 41 legal highs to keep being sold before the new testing regime was in place was far too long and intense public unhappiness resulted.
    Dunne’s insistence that had his hand not been forced by Opposition pressure the law change would still have gone ahead, but without warning and therefore without stockpiling, may be true. But the Opposition can hardly be blamed for preparing its own policy to do something the public wanted but the Government had not displayed any interest in doing.
    And something, we might and, that it had previously portrayed as pretty much impossible. Turns out where there’s a will, there’s a way.
    – © Fairfax NZ News

    • toad 17.1
      29 April 2014 at 11:49 am

      In the meantime that hoary old line that a gumboot could get elected in Clutha-Southland if it was a National gumboot should be revisited on the basis that a gumboot would have a more benign public safety record.

      Plenty of campaign fodder here. Has a Green candidate been selected for Clutha-Southland yet?

      I see another tobacco industry lobbyist, Chris Bishop, is contesting Hutt South for the Nats. Wonder if they will throw Carrick Graham a seat as well?

      • bad12 17.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 12:58 pm

        Lolz, i lived in Clutha-Southland for a couple of years, Greens are more than frowned on down there, i remember walking into the post-shop the morning after 9/11 and one old bloke had to be quieted by the postie as he started whining in a loud voice that i was ”one of them”…

        • weka 17.1.1.1
          29 April 2014 at 7:26 pm

          All the old hippies are coming out the wordwork down there, so I think things have changed a bit in recent years. Robert Guyton’s just been elected to his second term on the regional council and he doesn’t seem to hide his green light under a bushel 😉

      • fisiani 17.1.2
        29 April 2014 at 9:41 pm

        Chris Bishop has not been selected. The National Party has a lot of potential candidates and not one is a union hack and no one cares about their sexuality.

        • McFlock 17.1.2.1
          29 April 2014 at 10:03 pm

          indeed.
          But in Clutha-Southland, national selected a corporate tobacco salesman and Labour selected a specialist in public health.

          Says it all, really.

        • Murray Olsen 17.1.2.2
          30 April 2014 at 1:39 am

          “no one cares about their sexuality”
          Well, apart from hoping that none of them will breed……..

        • Draco T Bastard 17.1.2.3
          30 April 2014 at 6:12 am

          Of course National is full of union hacks – they’re just called business associations instead. National are quite fine with their own unions, they just don’t like the workers having theirs.

  18. Draco T Bastard 18
    29 April 2014 at 12:47 pm

    Here’s something that needs fact checking:

    “This significant investment in our defence force, combined with the savings and reinvestment achieved through recent reforms, means the Government is addressing the long term funding gap which we inherited,” Defence Minister Jonathan Coleman said.

    Because I’m pretty sure that Labour ramped up defence spending after National ran it down in the 1990s. It’s why we have the LAVs, the new aircraft and the new patrol boats. I’d heard that National had run it down from their first budget this term as well.

    • greywarbler 18.1
      29 April 2014 at 1:00 pm

      NACTs have just announced that they are obtaining more defence infrastructure “which Labour had ordered”. Like spending is something that Labour does, the profligate wasters, whereas the high-minded wisearses of NACT make considered investments when they spend the taxpayers money in a very tight-fisted manner. Such poseurs.

      • dv 18.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 1:11 pm

        “”“which Labour had ordered”.

        So why did we bother to change to NACTs?

        • greywarbler 18.1.1.1
          29 April 2014 at 1:26 pm

          dv
          Are you trying to make sense of it all? If you haven’t so far then don’t think too hard, it can seem like the tea party in Alice in Wonderland where they all shift around one place every so often. At least that seems to have been the case in the recent past. Now we might change the scenario, and myself I’d prefer to move away from Alice’s arena this time.

    • Stephanie Rodgers 18.2
      29 April 2014 at 1:22 pm

      Allow me to answer for Pete: ‘National didn’t completely de-fund the defence force when they got in to power so it’s inaccurate to say they ran down the budget. And Labour didn’t completely fund every single thing the defence force wanted with a few spare million on top, so it may be accurate to say they left a funding gap.’

    • McFlock 18.3
      29 April 2014 at 1:46 pm

      if only there were an impartial,/i> fact checking website for NZ political claims…

    • Draco T Bastard 18.4
      29 April 2014 at 3:46 pm

      Labour’s response

      “Today’s pre-Budget announcement shows the Government has been forced to admit the damage it has done in Defence. Minister Jonathan Coleman’s cuts have put our Defence Force at risk and seriously undermined our armed services.

      “Funding of about $134 million a year is less than half the amount the Government sought to cut from the Defence Force with its cost cutting target of $350 million a year.

      Yeah, that’s what I thought – National, despite always going on about having a decent defence force, had been cutting the defence budget again.

      • blue leopard 18.4.1
        29 April 2014 at 3:53 pm

        +1 DTB

        National have been like rats in the pantry busy eating away at things behind the scenes.

        Quietly cutting spending on everything desperately in order to make up for the fact that they haven’t got enough revenue to achieve the targets they promised re returning to surplus – due to their stupid tax cuts and asset sales.

        It is a great pity people didn’t vote for a left-wing government last time around – who were making more conservative promises- that they most-likely would have achieved – and without doing the damage that National have done and are doing to our country.

  19. greywarbler 19
    29 April 2014 at 12:56 pm

    Politicians – WTF
    In the discussion on synthetic marijuana moves I heard John Key say he was uncomfortable about something. Was that reported in the MSM? I realised a simple fact about the PM.
    He works on a simple binary principle – comfortable/uncomfortable!

    And the good old USA is stirring up controversy and commenting from its superior high ground on both the Russian/Ukraine afffair that the USA has had some effect on warming up through its activities along with its NATO sidekicks, and now on the China-Philippines argument over sea area control around their coastlines. UbiquitoUSA.

    • freedom 19.1
      29 April 2014 at 1:55 pm

      and John Kerry is saying Israel is at risk of becoming an apartheid state.
      Past tense must mean something different in the northern hemisphere

  20. Rodel 20
    29 April 2014 at 6:14 pm

    Great comment from John Banks a few minutes ago on TV3 news, re: testing synthetic drugs on animals….”rats need to live in dignity too” While to some extent I agree with him I think he should know best.

    • Belladonna 20.1
      29 April 2014 at 6:31 pm

      I didn’t hear it but am somewhat cynical. He has been in a position for years when he could have done something about it but hasn’t.

      • phillip ure 20.1.1
        29 April 2014 at 6:47 pm

        banks is an example of the premise that nobody is all bad..

        ..he had tears in his eyes when speaking opposing this bill..

        ..and on the grounds of his objections to dogs/animals being tortured/overdosed to death..

        ..testing this crap..

        ..so i don’t doubt his sincerity on that/then..

        ..and auckland has a lot of dog parks..

        ..and that is down to banks when mayor..

        ..(but that’s pretty much all i’ve got..)

        (oh..!..and i know he has given money to/supported animal rights groups..in a variety of ways..)

        ..but funny thing..i think he still eats them..(maybe not dogs..)

  21. CentreOfLeft 21
    29 April 2014 at 6:44 pm

    From the Herald today:

    New Zealand infant formula exporters are having to take “corrective actions” over issues ranging from a dirty computer keyboard to factory air quality and temperature control in order to comply with strict new Chinese import regulations, a top official says.

    The Government announced last week that 12 of this country’s 13 baby milk manufacturers had to carry out changes at their production facilities before they could become registered for export under the rules that come into force on Thursday.

    The 13 manufacturers include Fonterra, South Island dairy processors Westland Milk Products and Synlait, as well as Auckland-based exporters Sutton Group and New Image. A ministry spokesman declined to name the one manufacturer that had been immediately able to comply with the new regulations.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11245825

    Who is the one manufacturer that met with the new regulations? Are there any ties to a certain company staring with “O” and linked to a compromised cabinet minister?

  22. Penny Bright 22
    29 April 2014 at 7:07 pm

    FYI – Just posted this on Kiwiblog in response to this article:

    “Crime reduction targets on track

    April 29th, 2014 at 10:00 am by David Farrar
    Judith Collins announced:

    Justice Minister Judith Collins says the latest Justice sector Better Public Services results for reducing crime and re-offending, are the best quarterly results since the targets were set.

    The Better Public Services (BPS) targets set a goal of a 15 per cent reduction in total crime by June 2017, compared to baseline figures from June 2011.

    “It’s fantastic news that our latest Justice sector BPS results show the total crime rate has reduced by 14 per cent between June 2011 and December 2013,” says Ms Collins.

    “The latest results for this period also show the youth crime rate has dropped by 27 per cent, violent crime is down 10 per cent and overall re-offending is down by 11.7 per cent.

    “New Zealand now has the lowest crime rate since 1978 but most importantly, the results mean New Zealanders are experiencing around 56,000 fewer crimes a year, leading to fewer victims of crime. ….”

    MY COMMENT:

    Where are the ‘white collar’ crime statistics?

    Are there any?

    How about ‘bribery and corruption’ statistics?

    How come on the watch of Minister for CORRUPTION (oops!) Justice, Judith Collins , New Zealand has STILL not ratified the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC)?

    How come Minister for CORRUPTION (oops!) Justice, Judith Collins promised Transparency International last year, that her ‘Organised Crime and Anti-Corruption Legislation Bill’ would be presented to Parliament in 2013, and it STILL has yet to surface in the NZ Parliamentary legislation ‘sausage machine’?

    (I double-checked with her Parliamentary Office).

    http://www.transparency.org.nz/UNCAC-Ratification

    Most Recent Report on UNCAC Ratification:

    New Zealand Almost Ready to Ratify UNCAC!

    Ten years after signing UNCAC in 2003, New Zealand appears almost ready to ratify the United Nations Convention against Corruption. New Zealand’s failure for a decade to take action to ratify the UN Convention disappointing for a country that prides itself on its clean international image. TINZ has actively encouraged ratification for the last 10 years as noted in our letter to several ministers in August.

    In a much welcomed development in a letter to Transparency International New Zealand dated 7 August 2013, the Hon Judith Collins, Minister of Justice, states that she has “announced a package of legislative reforms that will allow New Zealand to ratify UNCAC.”

    The necessary amendments to make New Zealand’s domestic law compliant with the treaty obligations will be included in the Organized Crime and Anti-Corruption Bill. Once passed, the minister has confirmed that “officials will promptly take steps to deposit New Zealand’s instrument of ratification of UNCAC.”

    http://www.transparency.org.nz/docs/2013/UNCAC-Letter-%20to-Hon-Ministers-McCully-Collins-Groser-30-May-2013.pdf

    http://www.transparency.org.nz/docs/2013/Hon-Judith-Collins-Minister-of-Justice-Letter-to-TINZ.pdf

    Has Transparency International New Zealand had anything to say about the recent developments involving Minister for CORRUPTION (oops!) Justice, Judith Collins and her (in my considered opinion) CORRUPT conflict of interest, in TOADYING for her friends and husband’s private company – Oravida?

    Has Transparency International New Zealand had anything to say about the recent developments involving Minister for BRIBERY (oops! ) Foreign Affairs – Murray McCully, with his, in my considered opinion offer of a job ( errr…. BRIBE) as ‘Pacific Economic Ambassador’ to shifty Shane JUDA$ Jones – treacherous, whopper waka swapper?

    After looking at the Transparency International New Zealand website – I see nothing covering these developments.

    I guess that if Transparency International New Zealand starts doing some REAL anti-corruption ‘whistleblowing’ – they might lose their Government funding from a variety of sources?

    Of which there seems to be a considerable amount?

    http://www.transparency.org.nz/Partners-and-Sponsors

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption / anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’.

    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz
    www,dodgyjohnhasgone.com
    http://www.occupyaucklandvsaucklandcouncilappeal.org.nz

    • North 22.1
      29 April 2014 at 9:41 pm

      Actually if you work with police prosecutors on a daily basis as I do you’d know that the word from on police high is that now people gotta be given ‘warnings’ first off rather than charging and proceeding to court.

      Don’t really want to say – ‘unless you’re young, black and scum’ – but that’s the guts of it.

      The Milky Bar Krud is cooking the books. While keeping the confidence of Serco’s shareholders more or less

      Edit: sorry, this was meant to be a response to DTB below.

  23. Philj 23
    29 April 2014 at 8:20 pm

    xox
    Did you know NZ has an arrangement for 1000 young Chinese to stay/work in NZ for one year? This has been going for a few years now. I spoke to one last weekend. Most illuminating. The offer is online in China and is snapped up in 5 minutes! I was lucky to talk about what is happening in China from a well spoken, albeit with an American accent, young guy about global and internet issues. A real highlight of my visit to Christchurch.

  24. Draco T Bastard 24
    29 April 2014 at 8:41 pm

    Ah, Serco, the little big company that just couldn’t.

  25. North 25
    29 April 2014 at 9:20 pm

    Aue ! This lady is pissed off…….wonder why ? That it might simply be ‘balance’ is a horrible thought.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/9989399/Legal-highs-about-face-a-mockery

    Hahahahaha ! What a Dork Dunney ? Gets nothing right. Except the salary and the super’ and the spot at the trough. And lay preacher at some bilious bastion of anal white privilege white wooden church somewhere out Karori way.

    Nearly sixty years ago there was a fulla used to turn up at Ellerslie Primary School where I started my education. Called the ‘Funny Doctor’ – wore a bow tie, clown’s nose, drove a little round mudguards Austiny thing – magic tricks – bold checked pants – we loved him us easily pleased five year olds.

    Reckon Petey’s the dodgy remittance man of that family.

  26. North 26
    29 April 2014 at 10:43 pm

    Paul Henry. TV3. Tonight. Vicious Old Visceral Tory Queen ! On 3 Hundy. Couldn’t give a fuck about ChCh. Where he and his darling ShonKey Python don’t live. But Oh How They Care ! Piece of shit is that Old Queen.

  27. North 27
    29 April 2014 at 10:56 pm

    Dull Old Parker. Had VOQ backing off a bit there. Well done DOP. Sad for you VOQ. On two and a half hundy now darling.

  28. vto 28
    30 April 2014 at 12:46 pm

    This is a likely story http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9992233/Immigration-controls-to-dampen-house-prices

    … a New Zealand government using immigration to keep house prices low? Yeah right. Everyone knows that every government opens the immigration taps 12-18 months out from an election. Helen Clark did it. John Key is doing it right now. As long as immigration sits at around 30,000 p.a. then we have upward pressure on house values, and that keeps everyone voting for the incumbent government no matter what.

    I just do not believe that a Labour government would not again open the immigration taps to enhance their chances of re-election in the future.

    It is the oldest trick in the book.