Open mike 30/10/2019

66 comments on “Open mike 30/10/2019 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Cinny 1

   30 October 2019 at 7:52 am

   I wonder why so many Fonterra farms don't want to open their gates…..

   “Fonterra’s farm open day has been labelled an “absolute nonsense”, with just 14 farms taking part and the gates all but shut to anyone still hoping to get a ticket.”

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/116986443/fonterra-accused-of-pr-stunt-with-open-gates-campaign
   • You_Fool 1.1

     30 October 2019 at 9:49 am

     The sooner we as a society stop believing Fonterra's advertising that all farmers are family #8 wire types, with the nice nuclear family living off the land with nice green fields, healthy cows and white wooly sheep the better.

     The problem farms are the big industrial farms, and they will not be the ones open anyway
     • greywarshark 1.1.1

       30 October 2019 at 9:53 am

       But I really like that nice farming picture you painted Y-F. You are destroying my dreams, and I want NZ farms to be like that.
     • OnceWasTim 1.1.2

       30 October 2019 at 10:53 am

       #8 wire types started dying out 30 years ago – apparently replaced by 'innovators' and 'disruptors' (going forward)

       They've become so efficient and effective that it means things like NZ Post are able to get mail to the lower regions of the Himalayas, or North America as quickly as they can less than 2km across town (about 11 days)
   • Jim 1.2

     30 October 2019 at 5:53 pm

     Maybe because its a Worksafe nightmare, everybody must be accounted for, supervised and made aware of the risks.

     Just having people and vehicles on the property increases the risk of M.Bovis type contamination.

     Not all people are farmer friendly, Vegans, Safe, etc all looking too video anything in a negative light.

     From the Farmers perspective, more hassle than reward, just not worth the aggrivation.
2. Jimmy 2

   30 October 2019 at 9:08 am

   If this article is true and they were already driving dangerously through red lights, it puts the police in a difficult situation. As they are not allowed to chase, but they need to get them off the road urgently.

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/117005490/fleeing-driver-allegedly-ran-at-least-three-red-lights-before-fatal-crash
   • greywarshark 2.1

     30 October 2019 at 10:17 am

     Edit
     This is not difficult to comprehend. When the police start the chase process, and scare and excite the driver causing him to drive worse than before, go faster and more recklessly, and drive through red lights. The line of controlled behaviour in the driver's mind is crossed, and it is fleeing and going faster that sweeps his remaining brain function.

     Anybody who thinks and talks to psychologists and experts in driver behaviour would know that. The police are bloody-minded, authoritarian, irresponsible, punitive and sanctimonious – their lack of intelligent thought is a repetition of thinking of Olde England with its savage response to rule and law breaking that resulted in Australia's convict settlement.

     The police desire to take severe action against the driver who may not cause harm to others, then ratchet up the probability by chasing him, secure in sanctimonious whitewashing of any damage they cause by mumbling that 'he should have stopped'. That reason doesn't cut it; in a modern era when we understand so much more, the police’s response is a primitive brain effect when chasing drivers like this.

     There is so much known that can explain the scenario – the effect of bad economic conditions, bad childhood experiences and lack of socialisation and self-control of the wanted driver, his or her use of drugs to bolster self-esteem if used will further decrease self-conrol, then the psychological effects that follow that all, and the effect on the body of adrenaline etc affecting both fleeing driver and chasing police. It's all known and for police to follow the same behaviour as a dog chasing a cat makes them appear simple-minded, lacking in intelligence and unable to learn from good research, and the experience of other police forces with better methods.
     • Herodotus 2.1.1

       30 October 2019 at 10:36 am

       There are many such as yourself GS who bring forward valid reasons why not to, yet what other solutions are there ?

       and when a case will surface (police observed a car being driven in a reckless fashion) no action resulting in a crash ?

       you already used the term “ may not” there is also the case “May Have”

       i cannot see anything better than a neutral:loss result by using game theory.
       • greywarshark 2.1.1.1

         30 October 2019 at 11:41 am

         Game theory says it all. This is not a game and we can’t just think about theories, we are talking about better ways of living our lives, and of trying to lessen risk. There is no such thing as risk free living, despite what the Transport Authority is trying to do, also Health and Safety – both of which tend to go OTT.
       • McFlock 2.1.1.2

         30 October 2019 at 2:48 pm

         Looking at it from a dispassionate math point of view, what we do know is that we lose several people a year to police pursuits. some of those pursuits are the result of minor offences or traffic infringements.

         If they can lower the rate of pursuits ending in a crash with better pursuit practises, fine. But at the moment it seems safer to get the driver on camera and pick them up the following day.
         • Andre 2.1.1.2.1

           30 October 2019 at 5:12 pm

           What's the success rate of trying to find them the next day and holding them accountable?

           Back decades ago when I had acquaintances that ran from police, the next day success rate was precisely zero, as far as I could tell.
           • McFlock 2.1.1.2.1.1

             31 October 2019 at 2:27 pm

             Yeah, but these days we have cameras as well as the reggo.

             A few years ago the usual followup was "he said he'd lent it to someone, so we can't do anything". Heck, impound the car for a bit. Just make it a reasonable likelihood of some manner of inconvenience, and eventually they'll figure it out.

             Besides, the success rate of actually catching them is pretty low with pursuits, anyway. Letting them go that night probably isn't too much less likely to get a result, but sure lowers the chances of a fatality.
             • Andre …

               31 October 2019 at 3:11 pm

               Or possibly a bigger factor in the lack of success for next day follow-up is it just doesn't happen all that much (and probably never did). From page 61 of the Fleeing Drivers report:

               Staff recognise that the inquiry phase can be beneficial for holding offenders accountable. However, the Review found that, in practice, there was variable engagement with inquiry phases and that there is a general culture within Police where investigating after a fleeing driver event is not afforded the same priority as investigating other criminal offences. There are possibly several reasons for this, with deficiencies in the accountability mechanisms for fleeing driver events likely to be a significant factor. At present, responsibility for a fleeing driver event is often not assigned to any staff after the pursuit has been abandoned. Therefore, there is no requirement for follow-up inquiries to identify and apprehend an offender.

               Unlike other incidents that Police attends, unless a fleeing driver is identified and charged as an offender, fleeing driver events are not consistently recorded in the National Intelligence Application (NIA). As a result, no file is created, which hinders follow-up inquiries and leads to intelligence gaps.

               (link near the end of this subthread or at 4.1 in today's Open Mike)

               But that report also says there’s not routinely cameras in cars, so there’s only the fixed traffic cameras. Apparently the cops would like to have car and body cams, though.
               • McFlock …

                 31 October 2019 at 4:03 pm

                 So cabs have better camera pickup than cop cars. 🙄 Sounds same old same old lol.

                 the cost of an HD dash cam and a cam on the back seat is pretty trivial these days, I would have thought. Meh.
     • Jimmy 2.1.2

       30 October 2019 at 12:08 pm

       Did you not read the article…he was already driving through red lights which means he may have killed someone on any one of those three previous times. It was fourth time unlucky.

       If he had hit and killed someone on the second red light he ran (instead of the fourth), and the police had seen it and done nothing, are the police at fault? I bet a lot of the public would be pretty angry at the police for doing nothing.
       • Darren 2.1.2.1

         30 October 2019 at 12:50 pm

         Hi Jimmy

         I've read the article twice now and can not see where it says he was already running red lights.

         It says "…allegedly drove through at least three red lights during the pursuit…"

         Could you point out where it says before the chase started?
       • mauī 2.1.2.2

         30 October 2019 at 1:02 pm

         "Stuff understands the driver of the fleeing car allegedly drove through at least three red lights during the pursuit before crashing into McCaul's car."

         As I read your article Jimmy and if it is indeed a true article, the car was being pursued through all the red lights.
         • greywarshark 2.1.2.2.1

           30 October 2019 at 2:15 pm

           It started with the teen driver seen driving erratically. That could mean a number of things. And he was ordered to stop and didn't. It might be better if the police had an emergency call out team available, and didn't cruise around looking for people to stop who aren't keen to be found with drink or drugs on their breath. I wonder if the road toll, accidents and deaths, would go down?

           Police earlier said the pursuit began when the driver of a black Toyota Caldina failed to stop for police on Papanui Rd, about 4am. The car, which had five teenagers inside, was signalled to stop due to the "erratic" way it was being driven, Canterbury police metro area commander Superintendent Lane Todd previously said…

           McCaul was the fifth person to die relating to police pursuits in Christchurch this year.

           The crash comes seven months after police and the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) released a review of police pursuits called Fleeing Drivers in New Zealand.

           It made eight recommendations to improve how police respond to fleeing drivers, and favoured a risk-averse approach to pursuits.

           "In general, the review found that there was a lack of understanding among staff about the risk officers create by initiating a pursuit and contributing to a fleeing vehicle," the report said….

           In Canterbury, there were 360 fleeing driver incidents from January to June 2019, with 268 of them being abandoned.

           During that same period last year, there were 208 fleeing driver incidents and 154 abandonments.

           (The stats for this year compared to the same period last year showed considerably more incidents than last year, and about double the number that were not abandoned, so continued. It seems that Christchurch has become over-zealous. And I think they have had trouble with boy racers this year, which could explain the attention. I think that a new game plan is required. What have they done in similar situations in other jurisdictions across the world, Australian states for a start, that are not just the hard-line, get tough approach; Scandinavia? Italy?)

           https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/117005490/fleeing-driver-allegedly-ran-at-least-three-red-lights-before-fatal-crash
           • Incognito 2.1.2.2.1.1

             30 October 2019 at 2:20 pm

             I think that a new game plan is required.

             🙂
             • The Al1en …

               30 October 2019 at 2:54 pm

               Mandatory 6 or 12 months with no parole for fleeing or failure to stop, running consecutively with any other sentence if a court case is held on other charges. No reductions for age, early guilty plea etc on this part of the total.

               The police don't always get it right, but it seems like if you drive like a wanker to get away from them, you just might succeed if they're expected to give up in the name of public safety.
               • greywarshark …

                 30 October 2019 at 3:05 pm

                 Well I would not be prepared to see that my good relative or friend was sacrificed by police chasing someone who hadn't stopped when ordered to help police with their enquiries. I think that there is a lack of balance in some people's responses to this matter on this post.

                 Good law helps the smooth and fair running of a country. When it isn't delivering those two aspects, it needs to be thought about and amended. Keep your had-line punitive approaches to yourselves. That sort of attitude in society ends up making everyone sour and eventually unhappy.
                 • The Al1en …

                   30 October 2019 at 3:39 pm

                   It's apparent that the reward of failing to stop is greater than risk of being caught because it's unsafe to be pursued, so something has to change. If you think it's fair some people who don't want to be spoken to by police can just nut off driving and put other road users and pedestrians at risk, then that's your case to make. I proffer that knowing once you're tagged, there will be a stinging consequence, whether the police chase you or not, is a better deterrent than senseless road tolls.
                   • McFlock …

                     30 October 2019 at 4:45 pm

                     It still relies on a rational calculation.

                     Teen is hooning around. Lights go on, he gets an adrenaline hit, puts his foot down. Even if he starts thinking during the chase, by that time he's facing your tough penalty so he's better off taking the risk, in his eyes.

                     Deterrents work on rational criminals. The ones who'll cop to half a dozen burglaries if they're caught outright for one or two, because the increase in sentence is trivial compared to the crimes they were caught for. The ones who'll put the knee in if it's just one or two people trying to detain them, but as soon as backup arrives they chill out because there's no point adding aggravated assault to the charge list for the night. Might even share some jokes, because none of it's personal.

                     But most teen fleeing drivers aren't as rational as you or they might think they are. Impulse control and thick as shit. Deterrence isn't a consideration for them.
                   • The Al1en …

                     30 October 2019 at 4:55 pm

                     @McFlock

                     I do get what you're saying and mostly agree with you, but I'd expect something other than no police chases ever has to be the start point. Isn't that just ceding the roads?
                   • Andre …

                     30 October 2019 at 4:56 pm

                     In addition to the two idiots mentioned below that successfully got away and went on to kill, I also had one acquaintance that tried running once. He crashed in under a minute and wrote off his family's car. He never tried running again.
                 • Andre …

                   30 October 2019 at 4:39 pm

                   How would feel about your "good relative or friend" getting killed by an idiot driver who had never been held accountable for his idiot driving because he had successfully got away every time when police attempted to stop him?

                   In my young and dumb and full of bravado years I had a couple of acquaintances that were in the habit of running from the cops. Both of them went on to kill innocents in crashes they caused through their idiot driving (no, the police weren't chasing them when they caused those fatals).
                   • The Al1en …

                     30 October 2019 at 4:49 pm

                     Sobering and pointed post.
                   • greywarshark …

                     30 October 2019 at 7:49 pm

                     The point is that the police chasing stupid usually young people, or who are criminals afraid of getting arrested, will be more of a risk when being chased. Can anyone get that through their heads. It is a matter of logical thinking rather than emotional ones by commenters. The police become another hazard to the innocent, on top of the fool drivers being bad.
               • Dukeofurl …

                 30 October 2019 at 3:43 pm

                 Thats what teenagers do " if you drive like a wanker to get away from them"

                 The point is before the sirens and lights went on it was only 'erratically' , which is a police nonsense word like 'suspicious'.

                 what they really were doing was 'late at night , an older car , 2 or more young people'

                 So a person is dead because a car driving was erratic?

                 Where are the words dangerous driving or known dangerous criminal that would justify a chase ?
                 • The Al1en …

                   30 October 2019 at 4:19 pm

                   I'm sure it's not only teenagers who do it, in fact I'd put money on it.

                   The actual point is when directed to stop, you have to stop, just like you have to give your name to a cop if they ask, or if you don't and speed off, it's genuine cause for pursuit. I don't accept police shouldn't chase, they should, there's obviously a reason someone flees, but if it's causing death, as it sometimes does, then an alternative approach is needed. My approach is one of 'if you run, then you pay', and once it gets through to the have to get away drivers there's always a 6 month consequence whether you're chased or not, then it may make some who are only running for stupid reasons, for example licence violations, wise up and think again before flooring it.
               • North …

                 30 October 2019 at 4:40 pm

                 'Aggravated' failure to stop for red and blue flashing lights while in the same act committing another driving offence, eg. speeding, dangerous driving and other offences, yields mandatory cumulative disqualification and heightened penalty – it's already in the law. At the very extreme end of the spectrum manslaughter is on.

                 Just saying…..(1) it hasn't worked, (2) heavier, heavier, heavier won't work either (car crushing?), and (3) it's a startling proposition that from time to time the paramountcy of public safety is best served by advised suspension of public safety. Proof that it's startling and unacceptable is that the police already employ a protocol which commands cessation of pursuit.

                 Slight correction to my "hasn't worked" assertion ….guess it might stamp out heinous failure to display rego/warrant if there were a mandatory order that the guilty party walk a mile in the fast lane of motorway busy hour. Public safety ?

                 Common sense dictates that there's a limit…..both ways. Going all Crusher ain't an answer. As well, it's ugly, stupid, and very spewy.
                 • The Al1en …

                   30 October 2019 at 4:46 pm

                   I don't think it's going crusher, at all, but am happy to see credible alternatives put forward.
                 • Andre …

                   30 October 2019 at 4:49 pm

                   It seems there's no jail time involved for failing to stop, just a hefty fine (irrelevant to those with no means to pay) and driving disqualification (no deterrent to those already driving illegally).

                   5.6. Offenders and charging practices In New Zealand, section 52A of the Land Transport Act 1998 administers penalties for failing to stop or failing to remain stopped for an enforcement officer. The maximum penalty for a first offence is a $10,000 (NZD) fine.96 A mandatory six-month disqualification is also imposed on those drivers convicted of a first offence of failing to stop while exceeding the applicable speed limit or operating a motor vehicle in an otherwise dangerous manner (which is cumulative on any other disqualification ordered in respect of the same incident). This is commonly referred to as an “aggravated failing to stop” charge.

                   it's from a pdf entitled "Fleeing drivers in New Zealand" by the IPCA. page 63. Comes up when you search for the title.
                   • The Al1en …

                     30 October 2019 at 4:51 pm

                     It seems there's no jail time involved for failing to stop, just a hefty fine (irrelevant to those with no means to pay) and driving disqualification (no deterrent to those already driving illegally).

                     Was thinking the same thing.
                   • Andre …

                     30 October 2019 at 5:03 pm

                     From that same pdf:

                     In contrast, all other Australian jurisdictions permit a term of imprisonment from the first offence of failing to stop, with Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) having the most significant penalties. In Queensland, a conviction for failing to stop carries a maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment and a fine up to $25,230 AUD. In the ACT, offenders on their second or subsequent offence can be imprisoned for up to three years and fined up to $63,000 AUD. In New South Wales, the penalties are more severe – offenders can be imprisoned for up to three years for first offence and up to five years for a second or subsequent offence.

                     Oddly enough, those praising the Australian approach haven't highlighted that difference.

                     (Didn't put the link in first time around cause it's a massive messy google search link. Let me know if the embed doesn't work)
     • OnceWasTim 2.1.3

       30 October 2019 at 1:38 pm

       "The police are bloody-minded, authoritarian, irresponsible, punitive and sanctimonious – their lack of intelligent thought is a repetition of thinking of Olde England with its savage response to rule and law breaking".

       Why pick on the Police @grewarshark?

       It's become a prerequisite for a sizable, if not all muddle to senior ranks across the public service. You missed out a couple of essential characteristics though. One is to lie (or in more acceptable terms: mislead, mis-speak, or be frugal with the truth or information) whilst keeping a straight face; and the other is to hide behind procedure and process – automated or otherwise.

       There are one or two other desirable characteristics, such as a proven ability to take credit for the successes of subordinates, whilst apportioning blame to them when necessary.

       A nice to have is a love of meetings, procrastination – especially when able to put it down to consultation with stakeholders; an ability to justify pay disparities between worker bees and their masters, and between the sexes; and political partisanship
       • greywarshark 2.1.3.1

         30 October 2019 at 1:51 pm

         That's an awful list of attributes OWT. Knowing it, how do you make any headway for better? It is said that the way to survive in quicksand is to lie down, which spreads your weight, and then what? Can you claw yourself along slowly towards something solid?

         What innovative ways can we adopt to get out of our present morass here in li'l ole NZ.
         • OnceWasTim 2.1.3.1.1

           30 October 2019 at 2:07 pm

           Hope IN Change @ grey :). (a play on Hope AND change).

           And a hope that voting for what we thought would be a progressive gummint will eventually come to pass in the fullness of time, going forward – such as Chippy's recognition that there needs to be public service reform – even if he hasn't yet realised where the roadblocks actually are.

           A good dose of cynicism is always good as well JUST AS LONG as we are equally as cynical and questioning of ourselves as we are about others. (Except me of course – I'm the perfect specimen)
           • greywarshark 2.1.3.1.1.1

             30 October 2019 at 2:47 pm

             Go on – you're outstanding. Keep slogging on there, thinking and putting forward ideas, a thorn in the backside to the complacent, those with the wrong compass points, and the over-optimistic utopians. We will get past the thorn stage and get to the blackberries or the roses eventually, and I hope it is quickly so we can get prepared for the coming times. At present going forward is a bit weighed down with heavy side issues.
             • In Vino …

               30 October 2019 at 6:59 pm

               I suggest we reintroduce violence, The Rotan. The lowlife types who steal cars and joyride, etc, are precisely those who despise civilised penalties because they do not hurt them. They are also precisely the types who will practise domestic violence upon their women and children. They believe that violence works.

               Fines and even jail will have no deterrent effect at all.

               So there is a positive idea to be considered. And if the Left proposed it, toughie-boysie Soimon would be totally out-manoeuvred!!
               • greywarshark …

                 30 October 2019 at 7:39 pm

                 Punishment and Reward. How do we break through the easy peasy attitude of young people who don't have long-term objectives to aim for, or long-term commitments to partners and children to anchor them, and bring out the being part of community thing?

                 The domestic violence has two sides too, one is the male thing of lashing out at the annoying other who is demanding of him and also vulnerable. The other is the role of the woman who has no clear future in mind except to find out about sex, get some sort of job and bring up kids without any definite ideas of principles. Materialistic values rule, and the children aren't taught to respect women as they watch their mothers talked down to, slapped around a bit, and perhaps both turn their self-disdain on their children. Who grow up without inner strength and little compassion.

                 You model yourself as on adult on your parents though perhaps unconsciously, or may aim to be totally different and be the opposite, but in either case resorting to authoritarian behaviour is likely to arise, and anger at disobedience arises also. Some parents think that when a baby is over say three months that it has brain capacity and when it cries it is deliberate and manipulating, and plans to annoy them and 'be naughty'.

                 There is so much wrong with the way we bring up youngsters, In Vino. How to teach a teenager the right behaviour that should have been modelled to them before age 7, it is said that by three the personality is forming I think? They need to go through perhaps a year of alternative family life, and feel the modelling, talk about their difficulties, and find themselves and a purpose for life. I am sure it has been tried somewhere, but we like to keep hitting our heads against brick walls, we have never been very clever with preparing children for adulthood and socialising them, even just teaching them basic sex education. This country gets more stupid about how to grow our children well, with every decade.
               • marty mars …

                 30 October 2019 at 8:12 pm

                 lol I got the cane at high school and those welts lasted for weeks – didn't really change much I think – I still swear. I'm sure the sadistic educator had nightmares for weeks though – having to stare at my bum as he whipped me 4 times. Still truth is there would be a queue for people willing to do the hurting via the stick to stop those people doing the hurting on others – a long one no doubt. All wanting to help by hurting. Seems a bit counter productive to me.
3. gsays 3

   30 October 2019 at 11:33 am

   I know it's naughty….

   I couldn't help but think the theme for images on posts on TS today was puppets and masters.
4. marty mars 4

   30 October 2019 at 12:35 pm

   A hero at age 16

   The Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg has refused to accept an environmental award, saying the climate movement needed people in power to start to “listen” to “science” and not awards.

   …She addressed the decision in a post on Instagram from the United States.

   “The climate movement does not need any more awards,” she wrote.

   “What we need is for our politicians and the people in power start to listen to the current, best available science.”

   While thanking the Nordic Council for the “huge honour”, she also criticised Nordic countries for not living up to their “great reputation” on climate issues.

   “There is no lack of bragging about this. There is no lack of beautiful words. But when it comes to our actual emissions and our ecological footprints per capita … then it’s a whole other story,” Thunberg said.

   https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/29/greta-thunberg-declines-award-climate-crisis
   • North 4.1

     30 October 2019 at 3:01 pm

     OMG SqHosking and Squawkesby will be having menopausal fits over this……be like refusing the Knight/Dame they've never been offered in the anxious face of all their hopes and aspirations. Poor wee ones.
     • In Vino 4.1.1

       30 October 2019 at 6:49 pm

       I think she would have done the same with the Nobel Peace Prize. All credit to her.
5. Chris 5

   30 October 2019 at 1:12 pm

   How is the government going to deal with the popular response sentiment like this inevitably receives? Such a difficult task yet crucial task.

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/117017482/national-promises-welfare-crackdown-and-return-to-social-investment-if-elected
   • SPC 5.1

     30 October 2019 at 1:46 pm

     They could welcome the support for easing the abatement on other income – but then Labour's plan is so slow paced National might be enacting it faster than if the government was re-elected.

     They could question the nanny state idea of government paying an under 20 beneficiary's rent and power out of their dole – or does National really mean a spending card for those under 20 (given they would place others 20-25 on this regime as part of sanctions a move likely directly related to term limits for those under 25)?
     • Chris 5.1.1

       30 October 2019 at 2:07 pm

       The public aren't interested in the detail around how governments deal to the poor. Heck, most people on TS aren't interested in that, either. I'm asking how do we create a climate of opinion where the standard response to what Bridges is saying is an eye-roll. Of course, it's the 64 million dollar question, but the task is a necessary one.
       • Anne 5.1.1.1

         30 October 2019 at 6:41 pm

         The public aren't interested in the detail around how governments deal to the poor. Heck, most people on TS aren't interested in that, either.

         Hang on Chris that's a little bit rough. Just because not everybody here comments on the state of poverty in NZ doesn't mean they don't care. I think you would find that people from all walks of life donate generously to organisations like the Salvation Army. In many cases and for many reasons that is the only thing they can do.
         • Chris 5.1.1.1.1

           30 October 2019 at 8:01 pm

           That's not what I said.
           • Anne 5.1.1.1.1.1

             30 October 2019 at 8:40 pm

             Happy to accept that but can't quite figure out what you mean. Genuine question – not trying to be a smart arse. 🙂

             Edit: Think I’ve got – sort of.
6. Peter 6

   30 October 2019 at 4:06 pm

   I just heard Simon Bridges say, "The evidence is clear." He was talking about withholding benefit payments from people who don't have their kids vaccinated.

   Every word he says adds to the clear evidence: he is an idiot who believes in cretinous approaches and knows he will have cretinous followers keenly supporting him.

   If he knew someone with half a brain maybe they could explain to him about evidence of effective ways for people (or animals for that matter) to learn. Are punitive approaches better?
   • McFlock 6.1

     30 October 2019 at 4:11 pm

     Does that means that gang members who don't get their kids vaccinated will end up owing money?

     Bridges is well into bullshit territory these days. Flailing about until Collins knifes him.
   • Incognito 6.2

     30 October 2019 at 6:01 pm

     The evidence is clear that Simon Bridges talks like a former Crown prosecutor but not as a Leader of the Opposition and potential Prime Minister.
     • Sacha 6.2.1

       30 October 2019 at 8:32 pm

       He must have made a crap lawyer.
       • ianmac 6.2.1.1

         30 October 2019 at 8:43 pm

         Winston reckoned in the House that Simon was never operating in the Courtroom but that he was an office worker. Not denied by Simon.
         • greywarshark 6.2.1.1.1

           30 October 2019 at 8:51 pm

           Isn't Simon the son of a preacherman – would have picked up some mannerisms from father perhaps.
7. Andre 7

   30 October 2019 at 5:44 pm

   Who coulda seen this one coming? It seems those ellipses in the "rough transcript" of Donny Dumpsterfire's call to Zelensky weren't signifying innocent pauses in the conversation after all.

   https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/10/and-now-ellipsesgate/
8. Eco maori 8

   1 November 2019 at 8:55 am

   Kia ora Breakfast they have blocked my other device
9. Eco maori 9

   1 November 2019 at 6:33 pm

   Kia Ora 1 News.

   The system needs a total overhaul to make it fair and just.

   The dangers of Global Warming are here and Now.

   That's good controller of opossum they kill a lot of our beautiful birds and other wildlife.

   Ka kite Ano.
10. Eco maori 10

    1 November 2019 at 6:53 pm

    Kia Ora Te Ao Maori News.

    Ka pai.

    Eco Maori ignores idiots

    I think that Iwi should set up small to medium Sawmill that will take the fluctuating export market out and provide a better price per cube and jobs for local tangata whenua. I know personally that it is not to hard to do.

    Ka kite Ano
11. Eco maori 11

    2 November 2019 at 10:30 am

    I think it's logical to pair Solar and Wind power together. I also think Aotearoa should have floating Solar power farms on all our Hydro dams this will have many cost savings and lower the evaporations rate of the dams.

    Long read: Solar + wind, the benefits of co-location

    Shared grid connections, complimentary resource availability, and more grid-friendly power are among the key advantages of pairing wind farms with solar arrays – and developers are quickly moving into the emerging space

    Ka kite Ano link below.

    https://www.pv-magazine-australia.com/2019/10/12/long-read-solar-wind-the-benefits-of-co-location/?utm_source=Bibblio&utm_campaign=Network
12. Eco maori 12

    2 November 2019 at 12:08 pm

    We need to change the way we live fast as possible. It's only took 30 years to pump the same amount of carbon into our environment that has taken 200 years to pump into our environment.

    We all have to do our bit to persuade our Papatuanuku government and businesses to change to a carbon neutral economy.

    Climate scientist James Renwick says global governments are too slow to act to prevent disastrous levels of global warming.

    says Renwick, sitting in his professorial office at Victoria University, where the Nobel Peace Prize certificate for his contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) is proudly framed on the wall.

    Like a conscientious climate scientist, Renwick takes public transport from his Kāpiti Coast home to the university and back. We're late for the 4.15pm train, but his 62-year-old knees won't brook running.

    But it's not his quirky persona that won him this year's Prime Minister's Science Communication Prize. While scientists sometimes become scientists because they're happier digging through data than interacting with humans, Renwick likes to talk and he's good at it. When Rotary invites him to meetings, he goes. And when the climate deniers troll, he hits reply rather than block.

    I try to politely engage in conversation, point out the science.

    Often he'll suggest chatting over coffee. That's usually the end of it.

    "It's never really about the science, the facts, the evidence. It's about their own world view."

    For 30 years, Renwick has been thinking, writing and talking about climate change, since writing the first report for the Ministry for the Environment about how climate change might affect New Zealand, in the 1990s. But in those three decades, the increase in carbon dioxide in It took 200 years to get to the first half and only 30 years for the second half," he notes carbon in the air has doubled.

    And still, the policy makers are dawdling, Renwick says. As a lead author on the fourth IPCC report, in 2007, he naively

    IPCC report announced that global CO₂ emissions had to almost halve by 2030 and reduce to zero by 2050 to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.

    "If the world is serious about 1½ degrees, 2020 is the absolute last year we can see any increase in emissions," Renwick says. "The corner has to be turned in the next year, and there just isn't any sign of that."

    "It's not down to the individual to solve this problem, because it's a global economy. We can't do it just by ourselves. We've got to persuade governments and businesses to change."

    Ka kite Ano link below.

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/116804801/climate-scientist-james-renwick-talks-the-talk-on-climate-change.
13. Eco maori 13

    2 November 2019 at 6:50 pm

    Kia Ora Te Ao Maori News.

    Its good tangata are going to get quick referrals to MRI scans to diagnose some ills faster the faster one correct treatment is started the better the chances of curing the illness.

    Ka kite Ano
14. Eco maori 14

    3 November 2019 at 8:11 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS