Open mike 30/08/2019

118 comments on “Open mike 30/08/2019”

• Comments are now closed

1. phillip ure 1

   30 August 2019 at 7:19 am

   (hugh grant is not that keen on boris johnson – eh..?..)

   'Hugh Grant

   @HackedOffHugh

   · Aug 29

   You will not fuck with my children’s future. You will not destroy the freedoms my grandfather fought two world wars to defend. Fuck off you over-promoted rubber bath toy. Britain is revolted by you and you little gang of masturbatory prefects'.
   • Dukeofurl 1.1

     30 August 2019 at 8:54 am

     So HG is  all worked up because The Boris has decreed that parliament  will sit 3 days LESS in October than originally planned. ( its party conference break time)

     He fails to see the the bonus of a new session of parliament, after the Queens speech its standard for MPs to vote on a no confidence motion on the government.

     If its a majority against its bye bye Johnson.

     They can even do that next week. but its a bit more difficult procedurally
     • James 1.1.1

       30 August 2019 at 9:15 am

       ”If its a majority against its bye bye Johnson”

       no. 

       Its more ore that it will end in a general election. Luckily for all right thinking people labour is lead by corbyn who is unelectable- this it will result in happy Boris with an increased majority. 

        
     • phillip ure 1.1.2

       30 August 2019 at 9:20 am

       yeah – i know – luvvie throws a tanty – who cares..?

       but i liked the air of exasperation..

       and the creative-heft that went into: 'you over-promoted rubber bath toy'.

       (and the tory-definition:..)

       'little gang of masturbatory prefects'.

       (sez it all – really..)
     • Anne 1.1.3

       30 August 2019 at 10:12 am

       I saw an item on either BBC or the Guardian yesterday where Johnston was poised to make an announcement on Education budget – or some such subject. Maybe a distraction from Brexit? I think that might be what HG is responding to.
       • greywarshark 1.1.3.1

         30 August 2019 at 10:54 am

         I think you are all missing the bigger picture going forward that Hugh is foaming about.     People seem so fixated on procedures that they forget about the effects on the UK politicians and financials treating the country's doings as if it was a reality show, dropping off the unwanted. Is anyone a follower of the Alex cartoons I have mentioned before.   He is such a twisted character, always sorting out a way of profiting from any setbacks, wholely money and status oriented.    The creators are so clever they will cut themselves.
         • Dukeofurl 1.1.3.1.1

           30 August 2019 at 5:00 pm

           Well said.
     • Gabby 1.1.4

       30 August 2019 at 7:05 pm

       Fewer, dookydooky. A fairly strategic three days.
   • Agora 1.2

     30 August 2019 at 1:24 pm

     A corporate raider like Brierley would undoubtedly approve Boris Johnson's raid on Britain in the best traditions of Caesar, Scandinavians, and Normans.
2. Cinny 2

   30 August 2019 at 7:21 am

   Good morning, I've a question please……

   Just seen in our local paper requests for nominations for the national party for candidates for the the West Coast/Tasman electorate for the 2020 election.

   Does national do this every election cycle, it's just I've never noticed it before.  Or is it an indication that nat members are unhappy with their current list MP who stands in that electorate?
   • Rapunzel 2.1

     30 August 2019 at 8:58 am

     I wish they would do it here in Tauranga as we have the one clinging on to everything like a limpet – it saying that though I had a local Labour branch one yesterday outlining the local body candidates, all of them not specifically how they were backed and many say they are "independents" so a lot of careful reading to do to see who to back.
   • veutoviper 2.2

     30 August 2019 at 9:09 am

     Seems to be normal practice under National's rules and procedures for the selection of electorate candidates.

     https://www.national.org.nz/national_2020_candidate_selection_process_begins

     Rapunzel, apparently this has already taken place in Tauranga during the two weeks, 12 – 26 August.
     • Rapunzel 2.2.1

       30 August 2019 at 10:28 am

       There are obvious reasons why I wouldn't know that but it is rather a surprise I haven't seen a thing in the news to suggest, at this stage anyway, it would be anything other than the incumbent. 

       Anyway I hopped onto another roll when it was open last year just because I could and because my candidate vote will now matter.
       • veutoviper 2.2.1.1

         30 August 2019 at 11:52 am

         Neither did I but found that press release in a quick google.  I have now had a better look at the National Party Constitution and Rules etc and the latter are quite specific in the process for selection of candidates – in particular Rules 86 -118.

         Rule 87(c) specifies in a general way that the Electorate Committee must advertise for candidate and Rule 92 is then much more specific, ie:

         Electorate Committees shall give to members not less than 14 days notice, by newspaper advertisements and other means, of the place, date and time fixed for the receipt of nominations. In the case of by-elections, the notice shall be not less than 7 days. In special circumstances these time limits may, with the approval of the Regional Council, be reduced.

         Lots more specific information about the full process in the Constitution and Rules here for anyone interested …  (I'm not except on an academic level, LOL)

         https://elections.nz/assets/Party-files/national-party-rules-and-constitution.pdf
     • Cinny 2.2.2

       30 August 2019 at 1:46 pm

       Thanks VV. 
3. gsays 3

   30 August 2019 at 8:45 am

   Last night The Chairman raised the issue of the state of affairs in our Emergency Departments.

   He raised a couple of good points: lack of insightful questioning by journalists and a perceived lack of action by the minister.

   Because it was TC a pile-on ensued.

   The issue remains, causing stress for staff and the public and a high turnover of workers.

   From a senior emergency nurse in Mid Central DHB area I have 4 things that can be done alleviate the strain.

   A mandatory patient care ratio of 3 patients per nurse (currently it can get up to 6, and some can be very sick).

   Increase the capacity on the surgical, medical and orthopedic wards by 5 beds each.

   On the night shifts increase the number of doctors on from 3 to 4.

   Put 10 more beds in the department. At Palmy, they are in a newish department, one that was woefully under prepared for the growing needs of its population.

    

   Yes, it costs money (cough cough surpluses) so it seems to be a lack of will is where the problems start.
   • Dukeofurl 3.1

     30 August 2019 at 9:05 am

     The answer  is to devote MORE resources to Primary Care ( GPS) as its the people  who DONT need emergency care that are clogging up the ED.

     Lower cost general practice visits

     We have changed things to make visits to general practices more affordable for you, your family and whānau.

     https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/primary-health-care/primary-health-care-subsidies-and-services/lower-cost-general-practice-visits

     Especially good news for children

     "All enrolled children aged 13 and under won’t be charged a fee for a standard visit with a doctor or nurse, or:

     • an after-hours fee at participating clinics or pharmacies
     • the regular $5 prescription fee.

      Putting the extra money where its needed is better than funding the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.

     The Chairman is just pushing the employment case for Junior doctors .

     As for Nurses in the ED ,   maybe some people are better suited for  the steady rythyms of  wards  or clinics  rather than the busy peaks  and  slow troughs of the ED
     • The Chairman 3.1.1

       30 August 2019 at 10:19 am

       @Dukeofurl

       When Jacinda was vying to win the elections she touted 8 dollar GP fees while National were promising 18 dollar visits. 

       Labour have yet to deliver on that $8 charge.

       Knowing more resources to Primary Care is needed but failing to deliver it's no wonder ED's are overflowing and doctors are speaking out.

       As a result, clearly Labour haven't put a sufficient amount of funding where it is initially needed. Moreover, due to Nationals under funding haven't put a sufficient amount into hospitals themselves. Keeping them on the back foot and under pressure while ensuring (by failing to deliver on cheaper GP visits) growing numbers, thus further pressure with larger workloads. Putting lives at greater risk.     

       I'm not merely pushing the employment case for junior doctors. As indicated last night, I was highlighting there is an actual problem which the Minster hasn't denied and in fact acknowledged. 

       If this was National doing this, I'm sure the outcry here would be massive, but as it is occurring under a Labour led Government it seems it's OK and I'm the problem for highlighting it. If we want better, we can't continue to defend Labour's shortfalls. We need to put the acid on them and let them know we won't accept their shortcomings and failure to deliver.
       • Drowsy M. Kram 3.1.1.1

         30 August 2019 at 12:38 pm

         National’s Health spokesperson Michael Woodhouse press release
         https://www.national.org.nz/dhb_performance_going_backwards_under_clark (29 August 2019)

         National’s mental health spokesman Matt Doocey says the Government has moved too slow on mental health.
         https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/115386600/government-moving-too-slow-on-mental-health–national (29 August 2019)

         Excerpts from The 'lefty" "more left than most" Chairman's comment today @3.1.1 – from one comment FFS. If is wasn’t for The Chariman‘s self-declared ‘friend of the left‘ status, one could be forgiven for forming the impression that they were in cahoots with the National party!

         "Jacinda… touted"

         "Labour have yet to deliver"

         "failing to deliver"

         "clearly Labour haven't put a sufficient amount of funding where it is initially needed"

         "[Labour] haven't put a sufficient amount into hospitals"

         "Keeping them [hospitals] on the back foot and under pressure"

         "failing to deliver"

         "ensuring… growing numbers, thus further pressure with larger workloads"

         "Putting lives at greater risk."

         "Labour's shortfalls"

         "put the acid on them [Labour]"

         "their [Labour's] shortcomings and failure to deliver"
         • The Chairman 3.1.1.1.1

           30 August 2019 at 12:46 pm

           Knowing more resources to Primary Care is needed but failing to deliver it's no wonder ED's are overflowing and doctors are speaking out.

           When are Labour going to deliver on those $8 charges, Drowsy M. Kram?

           Moreover, when will they sort out the trouble in our hospitals and reduce the lives currently being put at risk?  
           • Drowsy M. Kram 3.1.1.1.1.1

             30 August 2019 at 12:56 pm

             National’s Health spokesperson Michael Woodhouse press release
             https://www.national.org.nz/dhb_performance_going_backwards_under_clark (29 August 2019)

             Spot the difference between Woodhouse’s 29 August press release and The Chairman's comment @3.1.1.1.1.

             "more resources… needed"

             "[Labour] failing to deliver"

             "ED's are overflowing"

             "When are Labour going to deliver"

             "when will they [Labour] sort out the trouble in our hospitals"

             "when will they [Labour]… reduce the lives currently being put at risk?"

             Party vote Labour/Green for a more progressive tax system to better fund NZ’s excellent public health service.
             • The Chairman …

               30 August 2019 at 1:15 pm

               Got no answers, Drowsy M. Kram. Funny that, because neither have Labour so it seems.

               Just because I (and others such as a number in the health profession) are concerned about this and are seeking answers doesn't mean we are part of National.

               And Labour need to understand this. People (i.e. voters) have a genuine concern about this. Any one of us could at anytime get caught up in this, having our lives put at risk.

               Claiming they/we are Nats does Labour no favours. Hence you are doing Labour no favours taking this attack approach.

               And seeing as National played a big part in creating this mess, thus risk, their press release is a bit rich and a joke if it weren't so serious.  
               • Drowsy M. Kram …

                 30 August 2019 at 1:26 pm

                 Keep digging

                 Party vote Labour/Green for a more progressive tax system to better fund NZ’s excellent public health service.
                 • The Chairman …

                   30 August 2019 at 2:40 pm

                   A more progressive tax system 

                   Where, when?

                   All we got from this lot is more regressive tax.  
                   • Louis …

                     30 August 2019 at 5:56 pm

                     You mean the last lot as that describes National.
         • Gabby 3.1.1.1.2

           30 August 2019 at 3:24 pm

           You think Chemmy might not be a stranger to the Woodlouse's office?
           • Drowsy M. Kram 3.1.1.1.2.1

             30 August 2019 at 7:36 pm

             Don't know – it's a curious coincidence.  If I wanted to avoid suspicion, I'd wait more than one day before replicating a National party spokesperson's talking points here.  So maybe he is a genuine "lefty" – but there's so little evidence.

             "Fuck off clown.
             I'm sick of your fucken bullshit.
             You can all get fucked.
             I’m out of this shit hole so fuck the lot of you."
             http://www.thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-01-08-2019/#comment-1642639
       • Ed1 3.1.1.2

         30 August 2019 at 5:33 pm

         I'm sure you are not just interested in what should happen, "The Chairman", but also in what needs to happen to enable more money to be spent. After all, we all know that money does not grow on trees. Now there are a few things that do have to be considered first. You have talked about a "promise" by Jacinda; I am not familiar with it, but you have not provided any evidence that it was indeed a promise – remember that Labour was not elected to govern alone – budgetary aims may well be influenced by other partners in government.The second is that we are only two years into a three year term – clearly any government will assess priorities, as after all, money is not limitless. Now we do know that a lot has been allocated to the health budget – directly settlement of nurses pay negotiations, and some advances on doctors pay. Also there are payments for mould found in some hospital wards – the millions required had to come from somewhere. Then there have been costs in increasing staffing in various areas, but perhaps particularly in mental health, and costs of children;s visits to GPs have been reduced. The recent announcement of meals in schools is relatively small, but could be regarded as assisting both health outcomes as well as education goals. So the question back to you "The Chairman," is where is the money coming from? We can be thankful that National's tax cuts were not allowed to reduce government income; and it is a shame that capital gains taxes were left unchanged. Overall there has been a big increase in health spending over that of the previous government, doubtless funded in part by not having given the cuts to income tax planned by National, and also by increased tax receipts by the improvement in business profits following the increase to minimum wages and benefits. So while your question may be reasonable, it is partly answered by saying that priorities will have affected different areas of spending, but also it is fair to ask you, and the National Party spokesperson raising similar issues – what spending would you defer to achieve this aim more quickly, or how would you raise additional money to enable the higher level of spending?
   • The Chairman 3.2

     30 August 2019 at 11:35 am

     Thanks for not being scared to speak up, gsays.

     

     You are the only one thus far. 

     This is a major issue that is putting lives at risk, therefore I'm sure there is more out there that hold concerns over this. Leading me to suspect a good number here get put off by the detractors and don't want to come under attack from this mob running wild. Thus, remain silent.
     • marty mars 3.2.1

       30 August 2019 at 12:09 pm

       yeah that mob has a real UN look about it I agree
       • The Chairman 3.2.1.1

         30 August 2019 at 12:27 pm

         It's not their looks or nationality that is of concern, Marty. It's that they are shutting down genuine political discussion putting others off from partaking.  
         • Incognito 3.2.1.1.1

           30 August 2019 at 1:17 pm

           It's that they are shutting down genuine political discussion putting others off from partaking. [my emphasis]

           Who are “they” and how are they shutting down debate and putting off participation?

           Is this an attempt at irony? If so, it almost succeeded, almost …
           • The Chairman 3.2.1.1.1.1

             30 August 2019 at 1:25 pm

             Witnessing the pile-on that ensued turns others off IMO. Why do you think no one but gsays thus far has partaken (in support) in this serious discussion.

             Do you really believe no one on this site has a concern about this apart from us two?

             “They” can be found in the pile-on that ensued.
             • Drowsy M. Kram …

               30 August 2019 at 1:30 pm

               Never fear, The Chair is here – and ‘concern’ is building.

               Since the vast majority of NZers rely on the NZ public health service for their medical needs, I would think that the vast majority of NZers would have some interest in the state of that service and whether it has been and is being adequately funded/resourced.

               I remain unconvinced that the current government are doing an awful job on public health, but this critical service certainly faces increased challenges.
             • Incognito …

               30 August 2019 at 1:36 pm

               This the second day running this ‘topic’. I gave it a shot yesterday on Daily review but it was an exercise in futility. All I can see is your anti-Labour bias that comes through strongly in almost every comment of yours. Others can see this too and hence the ‘pile on’.

               For some reason you cannot accept that your MO is the main obstacle for serious discussion.

               As Rosemary would say, SSDD.
               • The Chairman …

                 30 August 2019 at 2:04 pm

                 This the second day running this ‘topic’. I gave it a shot yesterday on Daily review but it was an exercise in futility.

                 Ditto.

                 All I seem to get from you is defence of Labour's shortcomings.

                 With Labour failing to live up to their namesake coupled with all their shortcomings, of course I have a bias against them. They no longer really represent the left and haven't really since 84. They haven't even apologised for that, let alone done much to correct it. You get more real lefties over at the daily blog than you get here.

                 Instead of piling in on me for highlighting Labours failures (my MO) you lot (if you are genuine lefties) should be piling in with me against them to help bring about change for the better.

                 Do you support and want this risk of life in our health system? Doctors are speaking up, why aren't the left here joining in? 

                 All the people on the left I know do have a bias against Labour apart from the so-called left here. What is up with that? 

                 As for Rosemary's unsubstantiated, bold assertion the other day, I have a post coming that will clearly show she is incorrect.   

                 This place is like the twilight zone, where poverty has nothing to do with suicide and doctors speaking out about lives being put at risk musters no support, bloody unreal. Come on you lot, surely you lot are better than this. 

                  
                 • Incognito …

                   30 August 2019 at 10:52 pm

                   All I seem to get from you is defence of Labour's shortcomings. [my italics]

                   Assuming that was directed at me, you are incorrect and have missed my point(s). I was not defending Labour – and with you it always is just Labour – against your criticism, I was criticising your criticism of Labour, the way you go about it, i.e. your style.

                   At last, we have some clarity about your bias, which is helpful indeed. Unfortunately, your bias is so strong, it has become a binary of polar opposites of either pro- or anti-Labour. Many (of us) are still somewhere in between these two extremes and view it as a spectrum rather.

                   So, please don’t box in people based on whether you judge them pro- or anti-Labour (or Left or Right, Black or White, et cetera). It gets you nowhere, evidently.

                   The rest of your comment is trying to reduce “[t]his place”, i.e. the people who write here, to a collection of simplistic souls without any acknowledgment of nuance and context. This may fit and suit your one-eyed single-minded view of (NZ) politics and this political blog but it is grossly inaccurate and does the TS community no justice.

                   So, instead of trying to pull or force us into your rabbit hole you may want to reconsider your contribution and presence here because something has got to give.
               • Stuart Munro. …

                 30 August 2019 at 2:45 pm

                 It may be there – the anti Labour bias – he never seems to make criticisms of the Gnats. But most of his critiques are pretty solid, unlike the run of trolls. I think he's playing the game functionally, which is more than can be said for Shadrach, James, or the entire Opposition come to that.

                  
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   30 August 2019 at 7:02 pm

                   The Chairman has racked up 1000s of comments on The Standard.

                   If he could cite half a dozen of his comments made during the last long period of National-led ‘governance’ that were critical of National party policies/MPs, then I'd be less triggered by his modus operandi.

                   But he can't, because those comments don't exist.

                   Just to be clear: 1000s of comments by The Chairman on this site during that period, ALL exclusively critical of left-leaning opposition parties/MPs.  His comments here comprise a broken record, IMHO.
                   • Stuart Munro. …

                     30 August 2019 at 8:21 pm

                     Yeah I know.

                     But he doesn't commit the major troll faults – putting words in people's mouths, RW wishful thinking (except for a few spurious criticisms that won't fly), outright lying, or personal abuse.

                     He finds pointed but often real grounds to critique the coalition – there is a place for it.
                   • Incognito []

                     30 August 2019 at 10:23 pm

                     Again, I disagree. Misinterpreting other’s words coupled to a strong bias can lead to comments that essentially have the same effect as deliberately putting words in people’s mouths. The Chairman does come close to this, on occasion, and I moderated (warned) him recently for telling people how they should or should not feel about something they disagreed on with him. I don’t believe he does these things deliberately, unlike malicious trolls, because he would have been long gone if that were the case.

                     You see, I don’t want him gone here, I want him to change his communication style that he seems so fond of …

                     As far as I am concerned, The Chairman can criticise the Government all he likes, hold them to account, and foster serious debate here. But he’s not accomplishing that if he keeps up his style!
                 • Incognito …

                   30 August 2019 at 10:02 pm

                   I disagree.

                   For example, yesterday Drowsy M. Kram said:

                   … if National rather than Labour/NZ1st/Greens had been (re-)elected in 2017?

                   https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-29-08-2019/#comment-1650763

                   The Chairman replied quoting verbatim and then responded with a straight-out attack on Labour!

                   https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-29-08-2019/#comment-1650824

                   This happens all the time! When the Government does something wrong or fails to do something right or at all in the eyes of The Chairman, it will trigger an attack on Labour and on Labour only. Generally. Often.

                   Although he does occasionally offer good points, the overall impact of his comments is heavily geared towards negative and they kill any serious discussion. Thus, in practice, the impact is as bad as of trolls.

                   The sad thing is though, and I give The Chairman the benefit of doubt, he does not intend to troll us but to force (?) the Government to do (much) better, if I may paraphrase The Chairman. Unfortunately, his MO is largely counter-productive to the cause he wants to promote …
                 • Stuart Munro. …

                   31 August 2019 at 2:28 am

                   @Incognito fair enough – sorry if I queered the pitch. I do think TC overdoes it, with consequent loss of gravitas, but some of his stuff is surprisingly good.
                   • Incognito …

                     31 August 2019 at 9:14 pm

                     Thank you for the useful feedback, Stuart, and no need to apologise for that.

                     I’m trying to look at the bigger picture and figure out whether and how, on the balance of their comments, a commenter is or makes a positive contribution to serious and robust debate on this site or not. If not, I’d like find a way to improve the situation so that we all can reap the benefit of their contribution. I believe everyone has got something to offer and some commenters blow me out of the water at times (in a good way) …
             • weka …

               30 August 2019 at 1:48 pm

               Witnessing the pile-on that ensued turns others off IMO. Why do you think no one but gsays thus far has partaken (in support) in this serious discussion.

               Personally and as a moderator watching patterns of behaviour (yours and others'), it's very obvious that a big reason others don't partake is because your style of arguing is incredibly frustrating to engage with. I don't like the tone of the pile on and will keep an eye on that, but ime generally they happen because regulars in an online community are at the end of their patience with someone behaving badly.

               This has been a long standing problem with how you present your arguments.
               • The Chairman …

                 30 August 2019 at 2:08 pm

                 I see, it's all my fault, of course. Next you''l be saying it is better for the site to remove me.

                 I don't accept that at all. 

                 What exactly is wrong with the way I present my arguments in your mind?
                 • Incognito …

                   30 August 2019 at 2:23 pm

                   As a suggestion, let’s do an experiment. You choose a new pseudonym and start commenting with a clean sheet (track record). If you get no traction with serious discussion on your comments, we could assume that the TS community does not agree with you and/or that your MO is the reason. To suggest that only hardened Labour sycophants frequent TS who won’t want to hear anything bad about Labour is pushing it but you’re free to have that opinion and stick with it, if you must. In fact, there are quite a number of commenters here that are less enamoured with Labour.
                   • The Chairman …

                     30 August 2019 at 2:29 pm

                     In fact, there are quite a number of commenters here that are less enamoured with Labour.

                     Yes, and they tend to cop it too 

                     Regardless if I changed my handle, my writing style is unique, hence identifiable, so that is a no go. Thus, I’ll stick with it, thanks. 

                      
                   • Incognito []

                     30 August 2019 at 9:35 pm

                     Yes, your comments are idiosyncratic but it never seems to occur to you that your style could be the issue. I thought I’d give you a suggestion to overcome the stalemate but you stubbornly refuse to change your ways. In fact, you ignore your role in any pile on saying:

                     I don’t accept that at all.

                     However, you do follow immediately with this question:

                     What exactly is wrong with the way I present my arguments in your mind?

                     Indeed, we have been over this so many times and nothing changes.

                     His constant barking-at-every-passing-car and relentless negativity (without proposing alternative solutions) is problematic and his hyper-critical, carping style is a major turn-off with voters.

                     https://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/2019/08/30/national-and-petrol-taxes-when-journalists-gets-it-right/

                     I was thinking of you when I read that.

                     I am not suggesting you should not comment here or criticise the Coalition Government (not just Labour). Though I am suggesting that you change how you do these things. It is a subtle difference in the way you communicate the same thing.

                     FWIW, I do believe you genuinely consider yourself a leftie. However, this does nothing for your MO here.
                 • Sacha …

                   30 August 2019 at 2:38 pm

                   This says it more succinctly than most of us can muster: https://wondermark.com/1k62/
                   • Drowsy M. Kram …

                     30 August 2019 at 7:12 pm

                     Ha!
                 • weka …

                   30 August 2019 at 4:57 pm

                   "I see, it's all my fault, of course."

                   Is it? I thought I just described a dynamic I am observing that involves multiple people in a community.

                   "Next you''l be saying it is better for the site to remove me."

                   The site is a machine, have a look at the Policy and hope Lynn isn't reading the comments.

                   What can remove you is moderation, and that is done by real live people. You've now had two moderators give you feedback and do that with the courtesy of comment rather than bolded moderation. I'm not aware of anyone saying you should be removed from the site.

                   Where banning tends to happen is when someone is causing blatant problems for the site owners (eg posting something defamatory), or causing problems for the community or authors (see the bit in the Policy about tone and exclusion, also flaming), or causing problems for moderators (wasting our time, or behaving in ways that use up our time).

                   "What exactly is wrong with the way I present my arguments in your mind?"

                   We've been through this too many times in the past for me to spend more time explaining it. What I'm not seeing is you taking *any responsibility for your part in the dynamic. When I see that change I'll be more willing to engage.

                   If you genuinely want to not have a negative impact here (I'm not talking about your politics), then try listening to what people are already saying about how you debate.
   • McFlock 3.3

     30 August 2019 at 2:20 pm

     TC was using it for political gain to blame Labour.

     There is serious need for more nurses, residents, and specialists. There is serious need for more space in ED around the country. There is serious need for better facilities in those spaces – from management systems to radiology. There is serious need for ward space to admit patients from ED. There is serious need for reviewing whether or not we really want residents working 18 hour shifts, or paying off $80k loans while they do it.

     There is serious need for increasing access to primary health care so people don't end up at ED.

      
     • The Chairman 3.3.1

       30 August 2019 at 2:33 pm

       TC was using it for political gain to blame Labour.

       No.

       I was highlighting a problem (one of many) we need to press Labour on. 
     • gsays 3.3.2

       30 August 2019 at 2:42 pm

       I acknowledge all those clear needs, and with there being surpluses I come back to a deficit of change.

       While not wanting to fan flames, I have some empathy for TCs criticism of inaction.

        
       • Sacha 3.3.2.1

         30 August 2019 at 2:50 pm

         As do I but I already raised yesterday that the govt has commissioned a major health system change process, so what can we reasonably expect them to do in the meantime before they know where to best put the investment?

         It seems likely to be in primary care rather than more big hospitals, and hopefully in proper joined-up IT systems rather than only more people and machines that go ping.
         • gsays 3.3.2.1.1

           30 August 2019 at 3:18 pm

           "so what can we reasonably expect them to do in the meantime before they know where to best put the investment?"

           From a senior emergency nurse in Mid Central DHB area I have 4 things that can be done alleviate the strain.

           A mandatory patient care ratio of 3 patients per nurse (currently it can get up to 6, and some can be very sick).

           Increase the capacity on the surgical, medical and orthopedic wards by 5 beds each.

           On the night shifts increase the number of doctors on from 3 to 4.

           Put 10 more beds in the department. At Palmy, they are in a newish department, one that was woefully under prepared for the growing needs of its population.

           That is straight forward, simple to introduce solution for a local hospital that can happen in very short time, before the current review meanders to its conclusions.
           • Sacha 3.3.2.1.1.1

             30 August 2019 at 3:26 pm

             I saw that earlier, thanks. I respect the hard work you all do in our hospitals but the usual questions arise when we take a broader view:

             – How long would it take to get the extra staff?

             – How much would that extra capacity cost across all the hospital wards in NZ?

             – Are there other improvements in the health system that could rapidly improve the population's health more for the same money?
             • gsays …

               30 August 2019 at 5:44 pm

               The staff are needed, having to know how long it takes is kind of irrelevant.

               Employing them is better than delaying or  not employing them.

               The cost of increasing capacity is the cost needed to do the job.

               As for other initiatives, sure give them a go, it doesn't have to be one or the other.

               Perhaps see it as a workplace safety issue or responding to society's needs rather than an accounting issue.
           • weka 3.3.2.1.1.2

             30 August 2019 at 4:58 pm

             Wouldn't that be for the DHB or hospital to sort out?
             • gsays …

               30 August 2019 at 5:46 pm

               True, I am not able to speak about their motivations/priorities.

               Our local DHB is in the red.
               • weka …

                 30 August 2019 at 5:54 pm

                 I'm sure most issues in the health system are impacted by inadequate funding (and managerial approaches, I've heard of some really daft stuff). I was meaning more that the govt can't really do much about the situation at your local hospital in terms of staffing and capacity, that would need to be part of the funding round.
                 • Sacha …

                   30 August 2019 at 9:31 pm

                   Workforce planning is handled nationally but yes any extra budget would have to be allocated through the DHBs, PHOs and NGOs who fund and provide health services. Alphabet soup. 🙂
                   • weka …

                     30 August 2019 at 9:34 pm

                     Is that good that workforce planning is done nationally? Why do they do that?

                     Can extra funding be allocated at any time if there is sufficient need?
                   • Sacha …

                     31 August 2019 at 12:13 am

                     The whole of NZ is the size of a medium world city so having 20 DHBs do their own planning at that level makes little sense. Hence, https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/health-workforce

                     Funding needs to be in a Budget appropriation approved by parliament. Expect more next year.
       • McFlock 3.3.2.2

         30 August 2019 at 2:55 pm

         Which takes us back to the fiscal responsibility pledge, which was part of getting elected in the first place.

         NZ did not elect a revolutionary government. It elected an incrementalist change government, with a significant social conservative streak and fiscal constraints.

         You want more change? Get enough people to vote so we have a labgrn government.
         • The Chairman 3.3.2.2.1

           30 August 2019 at 4:19 pm

           Which takes us back to the fiscal responsibility pledge, which was part of getting elected in the first place.

           While their fiscal responsibility pledge has curtailed them somewhat so has their unwillingness to tax the top 1%.

           Additionally, it also comes down to spending priorities. $20 billion on defence in a wellbeing budget doesn't bode well when New Zealanders lives are being put at risk in our hospitals.  
           • McFlock 3.3.2.2.1.1

             30 August 2019 at 4:38 pm

             No, don't try to play government departments off against each other. NZDF saves lives as well, and protects our EEZ. So does housingNZ, while we're at it.  Surprise surprise, everything is underfunded. Has been for years if not decades. This isn't going to be fixed in three years, even if funds were unlimited.
             • The Chairman …

               30 August 2019 at 4:52 pm

               No, don't try to play government departments off against each other.

               It's about prioritisation of expenditure and what (in a wellbeing budget) will better increase our wellbeing. $20 billion being spent on defence isn't going to do anything for the wellbeing of your average New Zealander.

               And seeing as we agree there has been massive under funding, clearly that money needs to be spent here on improving the deficit thus our wellbeing, even if it doesn't go far enough in 3 years. It's a far better start than blowing it on defence. 
               • McFlock …

                 30 August 2019 at 4:56 pm

                 In an alternate reality you're complaining that our severeignty and ability to honour international agreements are compromised because NZDF equipment is falling apart and the government is doing nothing about it.
           • The Al1en 3.3.2.2.1.2

             30 August 2019 at 4:49 pm

             You have some very unreal expectations where this government, given it's composition, is concerned. McF has it correct, in that if you (we) want more socially conscious governance, you (we) have to vote for it.

             Having said all that, and even though we're not getting the type of outcomes we may want, life is considerably better than it was/would be, under a national party led regime. Remember what that was like?

             2 years is never going to be enough time to reverse 9 bollock ones, so instead of the $8 jobs, I'll settle for the $18, down from $45 doctor visits I use to have and wait for the country to mandate any sweeping changes most of us genuine left voters want but realise can't happen and retain electability without one.

             On a personal note, I still don't believe you're very left at all.
             • The Chairman …

               30 August 2019 at 5:02 pm

               If you (we) want more socially conscious governance, you (we) have to vote for it.

               We did. National are out but unfortunately a number of their policies remain (such as the defence spend and no CGT)

               Now that Jacinda is in charge she changed their stance (opposed to Little's position) and decided to blow the funding on defence. Moreover, through away a CGT (delivering on National’s promise in Labour's year of delivery) that would have produced a massive increase in tax revenue. It was only forecast to be tax neutral for the first 5 years. 

                

                
               • The Al1en …

                 30 August 2019 at 5:10 pm

                 No we didn't, we almost did, but have to rely on NZ1st to take over the reins.

                 Next time, without the need for Winston, things could get much better for the left as a genuine mandate would have been given.

                 Change the numbers in that new coalition to 60:40 red/green, instead of 90:10 and the mandate for real change, from the people, would be undeniably one to turn left and fast.

                 This is just simple common sense stuff.
             • Rosemary McDonald …

               30 August 2019 at 5:24 pm

               2 years is never going to be enough time to reverse 9 bollock ones,

               You're surely not forgetting the nine bollock ones before the last nine bollock ones?

               Simply put, undoing the last two decades of 'let the shit trickle down' policies is going to take more than the aspirational SSDD twaddle this lot is going to be remembered for.

               The mood was right for real transformation…boat missed, ship sailed.
               • weka …

                 30 August 2019 at 5:26 pm

                 Two decades? Isn't it three and a half? (since the mid 80s).

                 SSDD?
                 • Rosemary McDonald …

                   30 August 2019 at 5:51 pm

                   SSDD?

                   Same Shit Different Day

                   Like déjà vu only smelly.

                   It really stinks.

                   And yes…it is three and a half decades but I fear many here don't have memories going back that far.
                   • weka …

                     30 August 2019 at 9:31 pm

                     Lol, true. They need reminding.
               • The Al1en …

                 30 August 2019 at 5:29 pm

                 Without appearing selfish, I did alright out of HC's term in office. Student free loan, a job starting at $10 an hour which was enough to live on and start a family, then a 100% mortgage with kiwi bank when the family thing didn't work out as intended.

                 Compared to the near 20 years of Thatcher and Major I had before Helen, it was fucking dream.
                 • The Al1en …

                   30 August 2019 at 5:31 pm

                   Can't edit.

                   Interest free student loan.

                   20 years of Thatcher and Major I had before I came here.
                   • weka …

                     30 August 2019 at 5:42 pm

                     This is the thing about Labour. They *do do good things too.  This is why I disagree with the line that they're the same as National. They're really not.
                   • The Al1en …

                     30 August 2019 at 5:59 pm

                     Yep, of course they're not. Sure they're nowhere near perfect, and far from the old union days, flat caps and full on socialism, but they're certainly not the same as national.

                     It's a harsh reality for some to take, but we don't live in the 60s and 70s anymore. Our political leanings may, but the majority of the rest of the voting public obviously doesn't. There's a left of labour party right now, and they only pull 6%. I party voted them the last two times and probably will again, but expecting labour to start going for the hard left vote is unrealistic when the reality is it's the centre who currently decide elections, and if the left greens can't pull the numbers, why would labour?

                     I'm sure, with climate change the driver, when the realities hit home for mum and dad, there will be a real movement for radical change, but until that happens, if it has to be incrementally, then so be it.

                     Win when you can, but ffs, don't give the game away by knee capping yourselves.
                   • weka []

                     30 August 2019 at 9:37 pm

                     I see it similarly although I think a faster way to get there is ore people voting Green. A L/G govt with more Green MPs than now will be quite different from what we have now.
                   • The Al1en …

                     30 August 2019 at 9:51 pm

                     Back to the beginning, but that's what people have been saying to the chairman for quite a while now, how if you want the left stuff you have to vote for it.
                   • Sacha …

                     30 August 2019 at 9:57 pm

                     Win when you can, but ffs, don't give the game away by knee capping yourselves.

                     Exactly. The perfect is the enemy of the good, etc.
           • Ed1 3.3.2.2.1.3

             30 August 2019 at 5:50 pm

             "so has their unwillingness to tax the top 1%."   

             Well done "The Chairman" for advocating a way of funding an $8 fee for GP visits (which has been more than met for those up to 13 of course) – to break a pledge made by one of the government parties not to raise income taxes in the first term (I don't have the exact wording, if that's wrong I'm sure someone will correct).  I guess advocating meeting one election aim by breaking another is a value judgement you think the government should do, but at least you must appreciate that it is not clear-cut. Righting the wrongs on nine years of neglect by the previous government may take some time – all we can do is point out the reasons why difficult decisions can affect outcomes, and keep voting for a Labour/Green government next time. 

             And while it is not directly relevant to the thread, "The Chairman," can I ask what you are the Chairman of? or perhaps why you chose that name?
             • Dukeofurl …

               30 August 2019 at 6:38 pm

               A sacked  resigned former chairman of a DHB  comes to mind. Werent there a few that  got the jobs for mates scheme Key and   Ryall was running
               • Sacha …

                 30 August 2019 at 9:36 pm

                 You'll recall Ryall leaving in a hurry..
             • Sacha …

               30 August 2019 at 9:37 pm

               so has their unwillingness to tax the top 1%

               The 1% who can buy elections? Damn straight they won't be taxing them fairly.
         • gsays 3.3.2.2.2

           31 August 2019 at 4:30 pm

           Don't take this personally…

           Do you get that while what yrself  and Sacha are saying isn't incorrect, it comes across as being apologists.

           Especially to those of us with our nearest and dearest bearing the brunt of chronic underfunding. To hear 'just wait, we will do a review', 'get more people to vote Green', and the excuse I despise the most – 'fiscal responsibility'.

           That last one is all about getting re-elected. Because clearly as they are being fiscally responsible business confidence is sky high. #sarc.
           It really reeks of drinking too much of that neo liberal raro

           People are really hurting: health professionals, public, police and ambos.

           Rant over, again, not personal.
       • Incognito 3.3.2.3

         30 August 2019 at 10:25 pm

         Thank you, well said.
   • Rosemary McDonald 3.4

     30 August 2019 at 4:58 pm

     Hiya gsays.  Agree…more nurses. More experienced HCAs.  Doctors with enough time to get a bit of a patient history rather than assuming… or worse…judging. My recent trip via ambulance to the local ED was an eyeopener.  Hopefully, now I have a stash of Trammies in case The Pain returns, I will never have to impose on them at ED again.

     There are efficiencies that could be made in the system…especially around the availability of ultrasounds and other diagnostic scanning…but hey, keep giving out the opioids and send those pesky patients on their merry way.
4. gsays 4

   30 August 2019 at 9:24 am

   You are correct to say less non-emergency patients in EDs by using GPS.

   Yes poverty is one of the drivers of the high numbers presenting.
   So are the co-morbidities the elderly are living with.

   You are simply being insulting or proroundly ignorant  to suggest the nurses aren't up to it. The idea of a trough on a night shift shows how ill (see what I did there?) informed you are. 

    
   • Dukeofurl 4.1

     30 August 2019 at 9:48 am

     Not insulting nurses. ED  have busy and quiet periods. I know Ive been at 3 am.

     Clinics and wards   are more steady , but of course patients needs can vary at any time.

     Highly paid professionals in difficult jobs…its never going to be any different
     • greywarshark 4.1.1

       30 August 2019 at 10:57 am

       DukeofUrl –

       Travels NZ, surveys everything, knows everything.   Been there, done that, you all know diddley-squat.
       • Incognito 4.1.1.1

         30 August 2019 at 11:00 am

         Please move on; this is not helpful in any way.
         • greywarshark 4.1.1.1.1

           30 August 2019 at 11:18 am

           Sorry but it helped me.  I am so sick of hearing dukeofurl's opinion on everything that actually doesn't add to the topic.   However I will give you a break from my opinion.
           • Incognito 4.1.1.1.1.1

             30 August 2019 at 11:43 am

             Ok, I wish you a good weekend and hopefully we’ll see you soon again here.
     • gsays 4.1.2

       30 August 2019 at 2:20 pm

       highly paid profeessionals….so, in denying an insult you add a barb. 
       • Dukeofurl 4.1.2.1

         30 August 2019 at 4:53 pm

         get over your self . Are you one of those outsiders the review of the Nurses Union said piled on in  on social media trying to upset the apple cart.
     • McFlock 4.1.3

       30 August 2019 at 2:31 pm

       Maybe a Tuesday night, was it?

       There will always be busy periods. The issue is whether overloaded staff redlining themselves to exhaustion is becoming the norm, and the quiet periods are becoming fewer and fewer.
5. Formerly Ross 5

   30 August 2019 at 1:00 pm

   The only people disappointed will be the doom and gloom merchants saying “well, that wasn’t so bad after all. Y2K? No problem. 

   https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/Y2K-bug/

   [I don’t allow climate change denial under my posts. See older posts for statements on this – weka]

   [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]
   
   • Formerly Ross 5.1

     30 August 2019 at 1:12 pm

     The Australian Government spent $12 billion on Y2K and took it very seriously.

     https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/howard-government-feared-slow-y2k-bug-preparations-cabinet-documents-reveal-20181230-p50ot1.html
   • weka 5.2

     30 August 2019 at 1:25 pm

     mod note above for you.
6. Incognito 6

   30 August 2019 at 1:03 pm

   For some much-need counter-balance: Child and Youth Strategy a good start – Plunket, College of Midwives

   http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/5/346630
7. SHG 7

   30 August 2019 at 1:39 pm

   The thing of value to learn from what Māori did and experienced is to think through what it would be like living on an island and watching your food sources disappear slowly over time when there is literally no other way to replace them. Māori adapted.

   Yeah nah, resorting to cannibalism probably isn’t a vote winner

   [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]
   
   • joe90 7.1

     30 August 2019 at 2:04 pm

     Yeah nah, resorting to cannibalism probably isn’t a vote winner

      

     Best you familiarise yourself with cannibalism and the great famines in Western Europe, the New World Jamestown famine cannabilism and cannabilism during twentieth century famines in Eastern Europe and Asia. 

     /
     • Barfly 7.1.1

       30 August 2019 at 2:17 pm

       Siege of Leningrad pops to mind
     • McFlock 7.1.2

       30 August 2019 at 2:37 pm

       Read a thing about the Donner Party (settlers in the US 19th century who got trapped in the Sierra Nevadas over winther and et each other).

       The local First Nations tribe repeatedly tried to give the Donner Party food, but as soon as they got in sight the settlers would open fire. They took to leaving food at night, but eventually pulled back when the settlers started eating each other. So yeah, bad situation made worse by racism…
8. Buster12 8

   30 August 2019 at 1:55 pm

   I dont particularly  like Winston..but even i think this is a bit much..https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2019/08/30/so-what-would-happen-if-a-political-leader-suddenly-died-lets-say-winston/
   • McFlock 8.1

     30 August 2019 at 2:41 pm

     lol Winston tweeted a video yesterday…
     • Rapunzel 8.1.1

       30 August 2019 at 4:31 pm

       I've just been reading this and besides an earlier reference to Winston this said all and confirms everything NZers owe him in the past and now

       Political Animals – Jane Clifton pages 260-261 (2009)
       "Tamihere is almost the anti-Winston. Where Winston is paranoically scrupulous in his personal, financial and political dealings, Tamihere seems reckless. Where Winston would rather wear a polyester shell suit from Postie Plus than accept a golden handshake, or any lump sum, tax-paid or otherwise, Tamihere seems unabashed about his right to be given money, cars, jobs, attention – whatever. Where Winston hyper-researches everything, and be-labours his work rate as a towering virtue, Tamihere rejoices in the impression of coasting, winging it, not getting into a lather because, hey, life is easy for him. He's a natural. Winston is alive, to the point of mania, to any hint, suggestion, situation which might make him look venal or assuming. "
       • Dukeofurl 8.1.1.1

         30 August 2019 at 6:54 pm

         Theres rumour/bullshit around that Tamiheres real aim is to stand for Tamaki Makaurau  for the Maori party next year, win or lose and even  be Mayor/MP at the same time ?

         That maybe his svengali, Matt McCartens big dream
   • alwyn 8.2

     30 August 2019 at 2:57 pm

     Martyn does seem to be stretching things a bit lately doesn't he? On another posting he seems to be claiming that he alone was responsible for getting Peter Dunne to retire.

     "I worked hard on pushing the Feed the Kids Bill and not getting it through Parliament because of Peter Fucking Dunne is the greatest regret of my life (although the strategy to remove him from Ohariu in the 2017 was the perfect vengeance),"

     In the case of Winston I think he is simply copying Trotter's story about Ardern dying.

     With Winston I am tempted to paraphrase Dorothy Parker's quip about Calvin Coolidge.

     If someone was to tell me that Winston was dead the appropriate comment would seem to be "How could they tell?"
     • Dukeofurl 8.2.1

       30 August 2019 at 6:48 pm

       Dorothy Parker ?

       Many times  other people have said she said that, but  she doesnt seem to have done so. 

       Wilson Mizner , a raconteur seems to be the real origin

       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilson_Mizner
   • weka 8.3

     30 August 2019 at 5:01 pm

     Good grief, that's a low point for Bradbury.
     • phantom snowflake 8.3.1

       30 August 2019 at 7:40 pm

       This was the real low point, to which (little brother) Martyn was merely paying homage:

       What If Jacinda Was Suddenly Taken From Us – Like "Big Norm"?

       https://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2019/08/what-if-jacinda-was-suddenly-taken-from.html

        

        
       • weka 8.3.1.1

         30 August 2019 at 7:44 pm

         that was bad too. I think Bradbury's was worse.
         • Sacha 8.3.1.1.1

           30 August 2019 at 9:42 pm

           At least Colonel Trotter has an excuse for misty nostalgia..

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS