Open mike 30/03/2014

Written By: - Date published: 6:55 am, March 30th, 2014 - 111 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmike Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

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

Step up to the mike …

111 comments on “Open mike 30/03/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Philj 1
    30 March 2014 at 7:53 am

    Xox
    Wallace Chapman’s first program on National Radio. Covered the Government axing of funding Problem Gambling Foundation. The mechanics of how the Government managed this is similar in MO to the axing of TVNZ7. Dirty doo doos. The tone of the program is light with plenty of giggling, chuckling and froth. Early days but it’s looking/sounding more like breakfast tvnz. Yuck. Has ‘serious’ treatment disappeared from NZ public media? Dumbing down.

    • phillip ure 1.1
      30 March 2014 at 8:47 am

      yr rush-to-judgement is premature..

      ..chapman is now doing a considered take/interview on the origins of the state house..

      ..well worth the time/listen..

    • Bearded Git 1.2
      30 March 2014 at 11:08 am

      Disagree Philj-thought the programme between 7-10 covered hard issues with good questions asked and discussions held. Afghanistan, Problem Gambling Foundation, Housing. Of course Mediawatch was as good as ever, especially on the polls.

      Chapman has the great ability to ask really tough questions in what appears to be a lighhearted manner and then follow-up the answers given with tough questions in the same way. Superficially it sounds frothy, but its not.

      • veutoviper 1.2.1
        30 March 2014 at 11:33 am

        +1, BG. The first hour I thought he was finding his feet, but have been quite impressed, Actually finding him easier to follow/listen to than Laidlaw. Particularly agree with your last para.

  2. Awww 2
    30 March 2014 at 8:35 am

    In an election year, we should demand that any government will decriminalise abortion. I and many others are not criminals. This is a healthcare matter. And for Lent we should give up judgment.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11228832

    It’s time.

    • Awww 2.1
      30 March 2014 at 9:23 am

      This would be a referendum worth our time^^^
      Should abortion be decriminalised?

      • weka 2.1.1
        30 March 2014 at 10:15 am

        Should have been done a long time ago.

        • Stephanie Rodgers 2.1.1.1
          30 March 2014 at 2:09 pm

          I agree. It’s a pity the Herald on Sunday has gone with that snide “out of leftfield” label for these opinion pieces – it’s actually not radical at all to talk about how dysfunctional and condescending our abortion laws are.

          Edited to add: and it pigeonholes abortion law reform as a leftwing issue. It’s not at all!

  4. phillip ure 4
    30 March 2014 at 9:18 am

    both hone and dotcom just totally kicked arse on q & a..

    ..i’m picking a possible 8-9% support jump for the alliance-lite..

    • phillip ure 4.1
      30 March 2014 at 9:28 am

      and the only thing that wasn’t absolute shite from the panelists..

      ..was their agreement on what a masterful-performance it was from hone..

  5. ianmac 5
    30 March 2014 at 9:26 am

    Media National Radio just did the accuracy of polls item. Interesting.
    The Herald poll re voting chances of Brown (67% of elderly voters rubbished) critically examined. NBR fellow checking every poll since 1999 shows a plus bias for National and minus bias for Labour Greens.
    Waiting for it online.

  6. phillip ure 6
    30 March 2014 at 9:35 am

    and it’s night and day for norman..

    ..after his shocker yesterday..

    ..he is now demolishing the clown from act..

    ..who is just coming across as an arrogant/ignorant prick..

    • weka 6.1
      30 March 2014 at 10:29 am

      For those that didn’t see it, Norman was great yesterday too. What phil is referring to is the fact that Norman and the GP have chosen to be part of a NZ govt rather than taking bottom line stands on issues that are dear to phil and staying out of govt. But Norman’s handling of Gower being a dick was pretty good – he came across as relaxed, clear, not bothered by the political bullshit games etc.

      • phillip ure 6.1.1
        30 March 2014 at 10:45 am

        shine on..!..you craaa-zeey dia-mond..!..(pow-pow-pow..!..)

        ..you come here a lot..but all you can see..

        ..is the sun shining out – from normans’ where we can’t see..

        ..yr myopic vision..is a sight to see..

        ..but really..how can we believe – in thee..?

        ..so..!..(repeat chorus..)

        ..eh..?..eh..?

        ..by any view with more that one eye..

        ..yesterday was a disaster..

        ..today was ok..

        ..it was nite and day..

        ..mm-kay..?

        • weka 6.1.1.1
          30 March 2014 at 10:53 am

          I’ll just say it again – the only reason you think Norman was a disaster is because you want the GP to have bottom lines that will keep them out of govt. That is agin what the party wants, and seeing as how Norman works for the party not you, he did just fine. It certainly wasn’t anything close to a ‘disaster’.

          • phillip ure 6.1.1.1.1
            30 March 2014 at 12:12 pm

            u think i want the green party/movement to not gain power..?

            ..that wd b yr biggest lie/misrepresentation of me to date..eh..?

            ..in the 2005 election-campaign i worked 12-15 hr a day..for 3-4 months..

            ..on the green party campaign..(on the practical side of things..)..

            ..trying to paint me as some enemy of the greens..wishing them bad..

            ..is an utter fucken lie..

            ..unlike you..i look at things with two eyes..

            ..and if (in my opinion) i see could-do-better..i say so..

            ..if i see that-was-good..i say so..

            ..whereas you..?..

            ..i doubt you have a ‘critical’ bone in yr body..eh..?

            ..and by (whatever deity)..!..i hope you never climb the green party greasy-pole enough to ever be an mp in parliament..

            ..you would be a total disaster..

            ..wouldn’t you..?

            ..capable of mindless-parroting of official lines is pretty much it..

            ..eh..?..

            ..that and the mind/imagination of a bureaucrat..

            ..(shudder..!..)

            • weka 6.1.1.1.1.1
              30 March 2014 at 12:34 pm

              ad hominems, that the best you can do?

              I didn’t say you were an enemy of the GP (though it’s certainly interesting that you went there yourself). I said that what you propose (taking bottom line stances on certain issues) is akin to saying the GP is better outside of govt. Because that is what would happen if they did what you are proposing. If that’s not true, how about you describe the alternate strategy and how it would play out differently.

              • phillip ure …
                30 March 2014 at 12:58 pm

                have some bottom lines..

                ..how do/can you expect to inspire/appeal to the voters..

                ..(especially new voters..let alone retain yr own..)

                ..if there is nothing you really wouldn’t negotiate away..?

                ..and the green party is seriously underestimating the appeal out there for some sane/rational pot-laws..

                ..have they forgotten their own history..?

                ..and seeing as you asked..what dismays me about the greens..is how they so desire/strive to appeal to everyman/woman..

                ..there is political power/voter support to be had from stating yr position clearly..

                ..and holding that line..

                ..so the voters won’t see their reasons to vote/support you..

                ..just turn to dust..

                ..compromised right out the exit door..

                ..(or is that into the door of the bmw..?)

                ..what was it shakespeare wrote about ‘that lean and hungry man’..?

                ..who comes to mind..?

                • phillip ure …
                  30 March 2014 at 1:12 pm

                  but thinking more on yr original contention..you may be correct in one way..

                  ..in that..

                  given option A..greens..(if unable to get their bottom lines post-election from labour)..offering support for confidence and supply..and promised key roles that are ministers in all but name..(as referred to by fitzsimon..)..from the cross-benches..

                  ..and able to vote for or against labour policies based on their merits/greeness..

                  ..and option B..greens ministers in formal coalition..

                  ..and subsumed by the majority party..

                  ..and because of cabinet collective-responsibility..unable to even speak out against bad lab/govt policy..

                  ..let alone vote against it..

                  ..i wd go for option A..(heh..!..)

                  ..wouldn’t you..?

                  ..and if you wouldn’t..why not..?

                  ..

                  • weka …
                    30 March 2014 at 1:22 pm

                    It’s not about what I would do. It’s about what the GP as a whole wants. I agree with their general strategy, that gaining more power in parliament at this point in time is the right thing to do. How they manage that remains to be seen. I’m sure I will have some criticism at the time, but I don’t believe at this point in time the GP will be more effective out of govt than in.

                    But I do believe that this is what you are suggesting. See my comment further down, where I’m curious about how you see bottom lines playing out.

                    “cabinet collective-responsibility”

                    Why is this sacrosanct? Why can we not all be adults and say where we agree and where we disagree?

                    • phillip ure …
                      30 March 2014 at 4:00 pm

                      “..“cabinet collective-responsibility”

                      Why is this sacrosanct?..”

                      um..!..that’s the way they work..?

                      ..it’s part of the deal the greens wd be signing up for..

                      ..r u saying u didn’t know that..?

                      ..whoar..!

                    • weka …
                      30 March 2014 at 7:20 pm

                      So on the one hand the GP can tell Labour what to do, and on the other hand they have to accept all the rules that Labour demands? I know logic isn’t your strong suit, but even so that’s pretty bizarre.

                • weka …
                  30 March 2014 at 1:18 pm

                  Let’s say what you suggest is true – that if the GP came out with some bottom lines, non-negotiables, now, they would pick up more votes. Let’s say that at this point their bottom lines are fracking, deep sea drilling, and cannabis law reform. On election day they get 15% of the vote, this gives them 18 MPs out of 120. What do you think will happen next? Bearing in mind that Labour don’t support any of those 3 bottoms lines.

                  • phillip ure …
                    30 March 2014 at 1:26 pm

                    well..the answer to that is obvious..

                    ..they turn to the mana/internet party bloc..

                    ..and together..you all force labour to bend to yr will..

                    ..(leave them only a grand coalition with national option..

                    ..which would be their death-knell..)

                    ..unity is strength..

                    ..you are more powerful than you currently think you are..

                    ..and you must stop just marching towards ministerial bmws..

                    ..(speaking of german-baubles..)

                    ..each step you take..

                    ..lessens yr/our power…

                    • weka …
                      30 March 2014 at 1:42 pm

                      How would they force Labour to do their will?

                      What if Labour and NZF can govern without the GP/Mana? (I don’t think it’s realistic to expect the GP to plan election strategy around a party that has no candidates yet. Although I fully expect them to be thinking hard about the possible outcomes).

                    • phillip ure …
                      30 March 2014 at 2:01 pm

                      “..What if Labour and NZF can govern without the GP/Mana? ..”

                      a non-question really..’cos if that happens..and that happens..there will be nothing to be done about it..

                      ..it will be labours’ funeral..tho’..

                      ..and no..how those chips will fall won’t be known ’till post-election..

                      ..but to the outside eye..

                      ..the green party seems on a forced-march down into that garage..

                      ..where lurk those german-baubles…

                      ..and funny story..!.

                      ..bill maher has something relevant to say on the matter..

                      ..something to say to both the green party and the labour party..

                      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/29/bill-maher-blasts-democrats_n_5055452.html?ref=topbar

                    • weka …
                      30 March 2014 at 2:13 pm

                      “a non-question really..’cos if that happens..and that happens..there will be nothing to be done about it..”

                      It’s not a non-question, it’s a central reality of this election. If Labour have a choice between NZF and the GP, do you think they will choose the party that has bottom lines against its own policy and that is trying to force them to do their will? Or will they go with the party that wants to build a stable relationship based on mutual respect and overlaps of policy that are negotiated? In the past I would have said that Labour will do whatever, but if Cunliffe is genuine about wanting to shift the country left again, then an opportunity to work with the GP looks more likely to be attractive. If Labour choose NZF, that’s their funeral, but the GP will still have it’s policies intact and be able to work outside govt.

                      Besides which, the whole ethos of the GP is about building good relationship. One of the things I am most interested in is how the GP will manage this this time round during post-election negotiations. I still hold some hope that they will influence the culture of government formation, although I won’t be surprised if I am disappointed either.

              • Murray Olsen …
                30 March 2014 at 4:27 pm

                I commend your patience, weka. I can’t be bothered with the accusations every time I disagree with the latest rave. Funnily enough, I remember weka when I was young, darting in and stealing shiny stuff, yet you’re not the one being distracted here by all that glitters.

        • Pasupial 6.1.1.2
          30 March 2014 at 11:01 am

          phillip..

          You were the only one shocked by Norman’s Nation interview yesterday.

          Yes – cannabis legalisation is not a priority for him. I think the party policy is still to appoint a public inquiry ASAP (but probably not quickly enough for you). Rather than cursing one co-leader for allowing Gower to portray him as proTPP on the same day that the other coleader was addressing the country’s largest anti-TPPA rally, perhaps you could say; what party, who will have MPs after the election (ie not the ALCP), do you think offers better a policy on cannabis?

          • phillip ure 6.1.1.2.1
            30 March 2014 at 11:27 am

            dotcom said on q&a that the internet party will have a decriminalisation-policy..

            ..if they are smart/clever they will take it to the logical-conclusion of legalise/regulate/tax pot..)

            ..and do keep in mind it was the pot-vote that got the greens into parliament..

            ..in the first place..

            ..the pot-vote and young voters..

            ..(remember nandor/dreads/skateboards..?..)

            ..those same that the internet party is appealing to..

            (..and oh..!..how the media/pundits scoffed/scorned then..eh..?)

            ..history does have its’ lessons..eh..?

            • Bearded Git 6.1.1.2.1.1
              30 March 2014 at 11:36 am

              The “pot-vote” is electoral suicide for the Greens. They have gone to great lengths to develop excellent Green policies without giving the MSM a free hit on this issue.

              • phillip ure …
                30 March 2014 at 12:05 pm

                bearded git..

                ..u do know that a couple of days ago..the most conservative southern state in america..

                ..passed unamimously..and to a combined chant from all members of ‘pass the bill!..pass the bill!’..

                ..a medical-marijuana bill..?

                ..did you know that..?

                ..it is you who is wildly out of step..

            • weka 6.1.1.2.1.2
              30 March 2014 at 7:26 pm

              “dotcom said on q&a that the internet party will have a decriminalisation-policy..”

              Just like the GP does. What’s your point?

              • phillip ure …
                30 March 2014 at 8:53 pm

                they will push for that policy..?

                ..and not just bury it..

                ..and c’mon..!..how can we forget tureis’ shameful neglect of that medical marijuana bill..?

                ..she lifted not a finger/voice to advance that cause..

                ..and as i’ve already said..if the internet party comes out with a legalise/regulate/tax/colorado-model policy..

                ..they will hoover up all those young votes..

                ..and will take yr pot-support component too..

                ..i think you have been the only game in town for too long..

                ..and you have treated that constituency much the same way labour treat you..

                ..and at the moment they are like meerkats..

                ..up and looking where next to run..

                ..and it ain’t/won’t be towards you..

                ..it is away from you…

                ..and it is/will be all your own work..eh..?

                ..(or lack of it..)

                • weka …
                  30 March 2014 at 11:17 pm

                  How will they push for that policy? (the one they haven’t written yet, that we don’t know the details of).

                  • phillip ure …
                    30 March 2014 at 11:26 pm

                    y’know..yr getting more and more like pete george..

                    • weka …
                      31 March 2014 at 12:09 am

                      I’m just asking you for some substance. If you think that the IP will achieve more for cannabis law reform than the GP, then vote for them (assuming that’s all you care about). But don’t be suprised if you get challenged when you state that the GP should make it one of it’s main election policies.

                    • phillip ure …
                      31 March 2014 at 7:34 am

                      i’m a mana guy..i vote mana..(as you well know/i have stated..)

                      ..but i welcome the arrival of the internet party..

                      ..and the focus on the issues they will raise..

                      ..i hope that clarifies that for you..

                      ..and no..ending the madness that is cannabis prohibition is not ‘my only concern’..

                      ..it is part of a suite of ‘concerns’….(as you well know..)

                      ..as i noted above..you are becoming more and more like pete george..

                      ..q.e.d..eh..?

                    • weka …
                      31 March 2014 at 8:19 am

                      A suite of concerns, just like the GP has. You just seem pretty light on how to actually achieve your aims. The GP have huge experience in how to advance their aims. I’m good with criticism of the GP, but I don’t see much substance to your criticism, other than that you are disappointed in them.

                    • phillip ure …
                      31 March 2014 at 8:34 am

                      oh weka..!

                      ..you are opening a can of worms there..aren’t you..?

                      “..The GP have huge experience in how to advance their aims..”

                      ..ok..how about you list for us..

                      ..(alphabetically wd b easiest..eh..?)

                      ..the ‘aims’ the green party have actually achieved in their 17 yrs in parliament..?

                      (and wd you cite the efforts metiria turei put into the medical marijuana bill that was her care/responsibility..

                      ..as an example of that expertise in ‘advancing their aims’..?

                      ..and if so..

                      ..could you detail that for us..?

                      ..what she actually did..?

                      ..(i await yr response/’list’..with bated-breath..)

                    • The Al1en …
                      31 March 2014 at 8:45 am

                      Weka’s nickname should be Cadbury, ’cause she sure knows how to handle a flake 😆

                    • phillip ure …
                      31 March 2014 at 8:49 am

                      and how about you..?

                      ..i reckon yr name should be condom..

                      ..’cos yr a dick..eh..?

                    • The Al1en …
                      31 March 2014 at 8:57 am

                      I prefer Kernel Hook, ’cause I’m good at baiting nut jobs 😉

                    • weka …
                      31 March 2014 at 9:00 am

                      Here you go phil – https://www.greens.org.nz/history-green-party

                      I would add that the GP has also been a main player in shifting the consciousness and understanding within NZ of environmental issues. Simply having them in parliament and speaking up has changed the agenda on green issues. That is not to be underestimated, because it’s those cultural shifts that enable real change.

                    • phillip ure …
                      31 March 2014 at 10:07 am

                      no-one is going to wade thru that mountain of self-serving spin..

                      ..bullet-points will do..

                      ..c’mon..!

                      ..list them..(in yr own words..)

                      ..(the touchy-feely/aspirational-bullshit stuff to one side..eh..?

                      ..just the practical/real/able to be evaluated achievements..eh..?)

                      ..i’ll get you started..

                      ..there was the pink batts..

                      ..and..?

                      ..(and now the green master-plan is to sell out all yr bottom-lines..

                      ..in exchange for bottoms in bmw’s..eh..?..

                      ..it doesn’t inspire confidence..

                      ..on any level..

                      ..the greens seem to have finally achieved what they have strove for for so long..

                      ..to be accepted as part of the establishment..

                      ..well done..!

                      ..shame about all those bottom-lines you have shed like dandruff..

                      ..along the way..eh..?..)

                    • weka …
                      31 March 2014 at 11:14 am

                      Go fuck yourself phil 🙂

      • Foreign Waka 6.1.2
        30 March 2014 at 11:37 am

        I am a huge fan of Mr Norman, but I did not agree with his statements today. NZ does not have the capacity to be first in the world paying carbon tax without increasing poverty at the same time. Instead of giving the money to a carbon exchange bank it would be better to have a look at infrastructure and alternative energy supply (electric buses running at frequency, sun collectors etc). Right now, NZ needs to act on issues such as cattle grazing and pollution of waterways. Drinking water, fracking proposals and consequences. This needs to be done in conjunction, agreed – but not at the same time. Its like cutting the nose despite the face. Please tell me that Mr Norman has not lost touch with ordinary people living ordinary lives with less then ordinary incomes but disproportional stress of holding their lives together.

        • weka 6.1.2.1
          30 March 2014 at 7:23 pm

          Given that the GP say that this election will be fought on child poverty, I don’t think he’s lost touch. I think the answer to what you raise is in how the GP suggest changes to economic management ie emission solutions don’t equate to poverty.

      • newsense 6.1.3
        30 March 2014 at 10:35 pm

        Cunliffe could take note- in fact he should go round to Norman’s house for a few brewskis or whatever and have a bit of a chill out and a think about the things Labour and the Greens could do together…so that when he gets surrounded by the douche squad he can just do a bit of method acting, recall his chill place and be supremely not bothered about it whatever they’re flinging at him this week…

        body language is important- a bit more chill could be worth a few poll points. Be like a golfer- positive imaging…

    • Bearded Git 6.2
      30 March 2014 at 5:17 pm

      Just watched Norman’s “shocker” previously recorded. Disagree strongly with you Mr. Ure-thought he answered and argued his corner well, did not give away policy at all.

      It’s Gower’s interpretation of the interview later that is the problem-putting words into Norman’s mouth.

      Similarly later in the programme Gower stuck his ore in at the end of the panel discussion saying he thought the issue of asset sales is now a non-issue. Rubbish. Credit the electorate with some brains-they will remember this issue 5 months down the track, especially after Lab/Gr/Mana reminders.

  7. Lanthanide 7
    30 March 2014 at 10:26 am

    Nice little 4.0M rumbler in CHCH just now. That’s my guess on the size, lets see what Geonet says…

    Edit: Initial Geonet readings say between 4.2 and 4.4. I’m a little rusty it seems.

    Edit 2: Latest reading marked as Good for quality is 4.0. I win!

    • happynz 7.1
      30 March 2014 at 11:34 am

      Cantabs have become pretty good seismic scale predictors. I can remember lazing about the lounge when there would come a bit of a rumble from the east followed microseconds later by a bit of a shake. My partner would casually remark, “3.8.” I’d say, “I reckon it was 3.9.” The daughter would pop up with, “You’re both wrong, it was a 4.0!” Geonet would reveal that the reading was somewhere thereabouts.

    • greywarbler 7.2
      30 March 2014 at 12:14 pm

      You’ve rumbled it okay L. I’m due there soon. Probably saving the 4.5 one for me.

  8. Philj 8
    30 March 2014 at 11:02 am

    Xox
    PU. Did you notice Walace’s proud admission that he lives in an ex state house, and that they were well built and don’t leak. Ha ha ha. It shows that the government ‘back then, was capable of initiating and implementing effective policy! Wow, if only they acted progressively now!

    • phillip ure 8.1
      30 March 2014 at 11:43 am

      @ philj..

      ..aye..!..

      ..listening to it engendered a ‘let’s do a smart/green version of that again..!..

      ..what are we waiting for..?

      ..(and i want more of the tiny-house movement threaded thru it..

      ..their claimed lowest-cost for the current low-cost..is bullshit..)

      ..and the takeaway stat for me..was that at the peak of state-housing building way back then..

      ..they built 35,000 houses in a year..

      ..so the current figure of 10,000 a year is modest at best..

      ..and should be at least doubled..

  9. Once was Tim 9
    30 March 2014 at 11:48 am

    A message to Paddy Gower:
    Stephen Sakur or Tim Sebastian you’re NOT!
    For that, you’ll need a few additional ‘learnings’
    1. At least allow the interviewee to finish their point
    2. A bit more intellectual rigour and probably quite a few more brain cells
    3. Shedding yourself of your ideological biases for a few minutes at a time

    • phillip ure 9.1
      30 March 2014 at 2:15 pm

      i thought that was one of gowers’ better efforts..

      ..he systematicaly got answers to questions we wanted answering..

      ..surely that is the journalists’ role..?

      ..(however un-nerving those answers may be..)

      ..also..after those awkward questions..norman hit his stride..

      ..and was fine..

      • Once was Tim 9.1.1
        30 March 2014 at 3:59 pm

        Ure correct – it might well have been one of his better efforts – which says a helluva lot about his previous.
        He cut Norman off/over-talked a couple of times when we may well/would have got more detail.
        He also had a number of ‘examples’ he wanted to put to Norman – all of which would have been met with the same reply (which, hw didn’t get through0.
        He had an agenda from the start.
        Try watching it again maybe – and count the number of minutes/seconds down to Gower versus Norman. There really should be a huge imbalance in Norman’s favour IF it was his intent to get genuine answers
        Edit: if it was his genuine intent to get answers

        • newsense 9.1.1.1
          30 March 2014 at 10:40 pm

          It’s not really an interview or a conversation that is nice to watch on the weekend- it’s Patrick Gower’s shooting gallery- where he has to hit three targets for the 6pm news. He just keeps shooting until he gives up, or gets something which he thinks he can paraphrase into what he wants to say.

          It’s really deeply unsatisfying weekend viewing. It also focuses a lot on the horse trading aspect of politics.

  10. joe90 10
    30 March 2014 at 11:58 am

    Last week Leighton Smith made much of this piece published by Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight as a body blow to climate science and more importantly, the left.

    Well Leighton, Nate Silver has apologised to his readers for using deeply misleading data.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/28/fivethirtyeight-climate-change-dispute_n_5049279.html

  11. Clemgeopin 11
    30 March 2014 at 12:30 pm

    Excellent Q and A interviews with Kim Dot Com and Hone Harawira this morning:

    If you are interested, here are the video links:

    http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/watch-extended-kim-dotcom-interview-video-5879189
    http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/harawira-mana-internet-party-video-5879206

    • bad12 11.1
      30 March 2014 at 1:16 pm

      Yeah great stuff from Hone, an excellent outline of the 3 main planks that Mana will fight the upcoming election on and a good indication of where Mana is at vis a vis the Internet Party,

      (1), Feed the kids, in this land of milk and money there is no reason for ANY kid to miss out on ANY meal for ANY reason,

      (2), House the people, in the same land of milk and money there is no reason why anyone should not be living in a warm dry comfortable home that suits the size of both their family and their income,

      (3), Jobs for everyone capable of working,

      i cannot see anything there that the Internet Party could not agree upon, so, it comes down to the IP’s main policies, who they would front as proposed MP’s and the ‘biggy’ as far as a negotiation goes how the carve up of the % of vote at the election would go with regards to positions for each party,

      Hone pointed out that His view on Marijuana is not necessarily that of the whole party, he did tho point out with regards to kids accessing it in the Far North He has seen up close and personal the damage done,

      My view on the dope laws is perhaps we need manage a staged liberalization of the Law, decriminalize the penalties for possession and growing for personal use down to an instant fine like a traffic ticket while putting in place a system to measure the outcomes in terms of hospital admissions/crime statistics while intensifying penalties around supplying minors in the vein of even having kids raid your stash in an act of theft might see you in jail,(in other words no matter how a kid got hold of your dope its your responsibility),

      Food for thought Phillip Ure…

      • Clemgeopin 11.1.1
        30 March 2014 at 1:48 pm

        Yes, Hone has become a credible and articulate politician. Nice to see. Very impressive.

        I was also much impressed with the forthright interview with Kim Dot Com. It was a pleasure to see and hear that interview. He comes across as very honest and very sincere, a hundred times more so than what I feel about Key or Banks for example!

        He is new to politics but displays a huge intellect and great sincerity. A breath of fresh air!

        Wish I had two party votes! One for Labour and one for IP.

        • Rodel 11.1.1.1
          30 March 2014 at 10:16 pm

          Yes .Com was surprisingly impressively sensible and Hone too.
          Winston wasn’t bad either, telling Gower to behave himself.
          John Key seems even less sincere compared to these three.

          • Clemgeopin 11.1.1.1.1
            30 March 2014 at 10:50 pm

            Those stupid ‘quick fire shot gun’ type of questions are very unfair, particularly for someone who is an amateur new politician. Some political questions can not simply get a blunt yes or no answer as there are subtle issues involved that need careful consideration. Nevertheless, KDC did quite well here though he did not have enough time to think things through.

            ‘Regulation or deregulation ‘ for example. Some things need regulation or more regulation while some other things need deregulation. Mathew Hooten, the right mouth piece interpreted his answer, ‘deregulation’ to state Kim is right wing! What a stupid commentator! Kim was probably thinking of dope deregulation or something else! As I said, stupid Y or N questions. I suspect Hooten probably gave that list to the interviewer!

            My gut feeling is that this Internet party will easily cross the 5% threshold and Mana too will do quite well during this election.

        • newsense 11.1.1.2
          30 March 2014 at 11:19 pm

          It’s almost possible to get swept up in that. He seems to be intimidatingly shrewd, capable, fun-loving, motivated, charismatic with the gift of the gab, an entirely novel and interesting shake-up for our small wee country-town of a country.

          Would you say- calculating? He doesn’t appear to have that kind of careful weighing of each statement before he says it the way many politicians do. But I wonder what would happen if he didn’t get his way. Or if he was angry with something.

          We have seen many of his faces and they are refreshing and engaging. But…

      • phillip ure 11.1.2
        30 March 2014 at 2:26 pm

        re pot-plan..

        ..decrim wd be better than continued prohibition..

        ..but i think the internet party will scoop up a decent bong-full of votes..

        ..if they come out with a colorado-model..

        ..but decrim as a way-station to full legalisation/regulation/taxation..

        ..is a compromise i cd live with..

        (btw..as each day passes..i am more and more proud/certain of being a foundation member of the mana party..

        ..they are the party for real/serious change..

        ..and i am pleased to see a complementary-party like the internet party come along to stand alongside..

        ..and the cherry on this cake wd be the greens staunching up..and saying:

        .. ‘fuck the bmw’s!..let’s rock and roll..!”

      • Murray Olsen 11.1.3
        30 March 2014 at 4:06 pm

        I find it a bit weird that Hone talks about the damage done by electric puha in the north without putting it in context of the social and economic devastation wrought by successive governments, both national and local. I’d blame the environment in this case long before I’d blame the drug. In fact, many things might be worse up there without it.

        • phillip ure 11.1.3.1
          30 March 2014 at 5:16 pm

          ..i think he is sincere with his stand..

          ..my guess wd be that he is also talking to his conservative voting-pool/base..

          ..gathering maori party votes..?

          “..In fact, many things might be worse up there without it..”

          ..+ 1..

          ..especially compared to the damage alcohol does..

          ..you can’t go past the fact that young men/women use intoxicants..in most cultures..(esp. men..)

          ..and that cannabis is the safest intoxicant of all..

          ..it’s a no-brainer..really..

          • newsense 11.1.3.1.1
            30 March 2014 at 11:27 pm

            and yet you use cannabis too early and you damage your brain. And many kids are exposed to it early

            • phillip ure 11.1.3.1.1.1
              31 March 2014 at 8:46 am

              yes newsense..of course kids shouldn’t use dope..

              ..and regulation/licenced-growers/suppliers with id-age-restrictions wd help with that –

              to a degree..

              ..and if you are citing easy access as a reason not to legalise/regulate/tax..

              ..the reality/fact of life under prohibition..

              ..is that if you want to find out where the tinny-houses are..anywhere..

              ..you ask the kids/young-teens..

              ..they know where they are..

              ..and..no..those tinny-houses couldn’t care less how old their customers are..

              ..(and thank you for highlighting reason number 53 why cannabis should be legalised/regulated/taxed..

              ..a leaf-pin is on its way to you..)

        • bad12 11.1.3.2
          30 March 2014 at 5:38 pm

          Murray O, Hone tho addresses a big part of the problem you highlight with the 3 planks of the Mana election campaign,

          Two other points spring to mind, in a short sharp time slot on TV it’s pretty much impossible to be laying out such a large speech on the impoverishment of sections of New Zealand society, there’s just not the time, better to lay out the short sharp planks the Party plans on campaigning upon, simple bread and butter statements,

          The second point, Hone was talking about school kids getting hold of dope and the effect this has on their learning, i think most of us here would agree that its not good for kidsa to be smoking the stuff which is why i proposed above a staged decriminalization where the penalties for smoking and growing yer own are minimal but extra penalties would accrue to those who for any reason under-age kids get into and smoke up large on their stash…

  13. greywarbler 13
    30 March 2014 at 12:48 pm

    Some good listening this morning. Good is used facetiously. Dunne rumbling away about the Gambling Foundation trick – how you pull the rug from under something substantial and it doesn’t matter! Because the government is not paying a charity for advocating against gambling – only for treatment of the destroyed. And they probably haven’t been doing a good job at it either. And it seems that some zealous government officials let the Problem Gambling Foundation know that they were not wanted.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/240195/'threats'-to-former-anti-gambling-chair
    Peter Adams, associate professor of Auckland University’s Centre of Addiction Research, was involved in setting up the Problem Gambling Foundation 20 years ago and worked with the organisation for the following decade.
    He said government has a vested interest in profits from gambling and that during his time with the foundation there were many attempts to break it up. “We got very used to hostility from government officials,” he said. “I was threatened personally at one stage … one official said that he would work at ruining my career….

    Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne told the programme he has never heard of that, and suggestions by Mr Adams that the government has a vested interest in the gambling industry are not correct either….
    He said it was likely the foundation was not doing that good a job in helping problem gamblers. He said it is not up to the Government to pay for an advocacy service opposed to the gambling industry.”

    And this is the thing – the government does not want to hear a squeak out of the organisations it funds. It was back in them ol’ days of the 90’s when government stopped funding charities and started buying services from them. And why should it buy criticism or good advice from them. Talk about blighting, biting, the hand that feeds you.

    In NZ it is no longer possible for people to attempt to help those in need of help in the community, and ask the government for some cash to assist the unpaid volunteer work done. No you might appeal but narrow criteria must be met. That doesn’t include helping people manage in life. For foodbanks, people must have budget advice. For budget advice, that would include some hurdle they had to achieve. For children it had to be for education, it couldn’t be to take them to the seaside in a bus once a month, so they could have some joy and good times in the outside environment and outside their neighbourhood, as others take for granted. And so on.

    If you are dependent on the government, you’ve got to touch your forelock, because they are now your patron, not to be questioned about their sly and destructive behaviours. Thinking here of juggling pokie numbers, massaging the liquor industry, and refusing to attempt re-education of errant drivers. Keeping marijuana as a dangerous drug involving $millions of police time, and fun helicopter rides.

    (TPPA will be like this but on a massive scale. Probably a citizen that criticises any business will be sued. In fact in 1998 Oprah Winfrey was sued under food libel laws by Texan meat producers when she said something negative about meat.)

  14. greywarbler 14
    30 March 2014 at 1:07 pm

    A titbit from The Press Tuesday 25/Mar/2014. Two Nat MPs less than 6 months from their retirement, are on a 10-day taxpayer-funded tip to China costing $15,000 a head. Now this actually is probably not very expensive for the length of the trip, objectively. It could have been worse. We judge such expenditures differently now in this exciting free-wheeling world of international commerce. But why doesn’t National just make it clear to us all out there in Electorate-land, that China is a VIC and is ‘the new big thing’ and they’re off like greyhounds after a rabbit.

    And that there is a trip to China as a sweetener to any MPs they would like to stand down to make way for those who have passed the poise, pose and personality test and been done-over good by the PR, and human resource, and clothes and wardrobe and make-up – to the voters department?

    They have been included in an Mfat funded group building links in new areas (No province left behind thrust). It includes senior members of parties – political ones that is – Phil Goff, David Shearer and Winston Peters, I don’t know how many. (No mention of Russel Norman!)

    • PapaMike 14.1
      30 March 2014 at 2:28 pm

      It appears that in the past all retiring MPs get to go on a retirement joint.
      But as there are no Labour MPs quitting they are not included on this one.

    • Anne 14.2
      30 March 2014 at 5:39 pm

      …poise, pose and personality test

      You forgot the teeth test.

  15. Saarbo 15
    30 March 2014 at 1:22 pm

    New Zealand’s farm debt mountain is back on its way upwards…neighbour just purchased their 10th dairy farm for $50 per KG…expect bad things again in the dairy farming sector once dairy payout falls under long term average of $6.50 per KG MS…munting our little community…

    • greywarbler 15.1
      30 March 2014 at 3:07 pm

      I think MS stands for Milk Solids – basis of dairy payout. Is that correct Saarbo?
      10th dairy farm. Borrowed on farm with 10-20% deposit? What sort of deposit would be required to buy at $50 per kg. Is it all done on leverage? Till farm prices rise as high as Mt Aoraki? If there is a crash, how will the taxpayer step up and help out a la SCF? We’ll have to bankroll these high rollers to stop the country washing away into the sewage drain.

  16. greywarbler 16
    30 March 2014 at 3:48 pm

    I was just reading the Transport Blog on the HOP system. The difficulties with paying cash and how people don’t try to be ready with the cash. (One man was observed to check all pockets before bringing out a note, then pay with a note again the next day.) But everyone can’t afford a HOP card. What could be done is issue them with instructions on how to pay in cash effectively and charge them an extra 50% when they don’t pay with the right money, the nearest sized note, and have it ready when they approach the driver. Otherwise instant fine.

    Other people waiting with cards cannot get on bus till cash customer is dealt with. Perhaps card carriers go first? In some European countries the payment is made before getting on the bus, as with parking meter systems. You would be issued with a receipt for your cash and hardly any cash transactions on bus would be needed. But having only one entrance is a real bottleneck with that system.

    But systems like these are often designed by people who are a long way away from having only enough cash to last for the next few days. Their problems are at a different level than those who are au fait with the systems and have the wherewithal to match them to the profile of the perfect customer.

    • Olwyn 16.1
      30 March 2014 at 4:04 pm

      That sounds like so much hogwash, intended to increase the pressure on people to buy hop cards. For heaven’s sake – you cold hold up the by queue reaching into every pocket for your hop card. Admittedly, the driver doesn’t have to give you change, but you could still obstruct everyone else who was waiting to get on.

      • greywarbler 16.1.1
        30 March 2014 at 7:11 pm

        Olwyn
        I am sure that this situation has been observed, there are reasons for it, those reasons for holding up the bus another 1 minute at each stop mean that some people have trouble getting to work on time. And too much sympathy stops the effort to try and improve so the mass of people can be moved efficiently. In a big city people don’t expect others to go into a dream, or be constantly unprepared when their turn to perform some small everyday function happens.

    • Draco T Bastard 16.2
      30 March 2014 at 4:13 pm

      But everyone can’t afford a HOP card.

      It’s a once off $5, 25 cents for topping up and saves a minimum 28 cents every trip. It’s more correct to say that you can’t afford to pay cash.

      • greywarbler 16.2.1
        30 March 2014 at 7:05 pm

        It’s more correct to say that DTB always knows the answer and knows it is correct.

    • Murray Olsen 16.3
      30 March 2014 at 4:17 pm

      In some countries they have a driver and a cashier. As long as you don’t think profit is the motor of public transport, it has some real benefits. It helps employ people, and means that there are two on the bus in case of any problems, such as Tories like Aaron Gilmore misbehaving and needing to be forcibly evicted. The bus can also drive off while people are still paying.

      • Descendant Of Sssmith 16.3.1
        30 March 2014 at 5:18 pm

        Up taxes and make public transport free.

        Solves the problem immediately.

        • Murray Olsen 16.3.1.1
          30 March 2014 at 5:37 pm

          I’m not even sure that taxes would need to be increased. There might be enough savings from less road construction, freeing up of land used for parking, etc.

  17. amirite 17
    30 March 2014 at 5:18 pm

    Some TVNZ jonolists are tweeting right now that ‘there’s one big winner in the latest colmar-Brunton poll””, I guess it’s 110% for national. The more corrupt they get, the more (stoopid) people love”em.

    • Clemgeopin 17.1
      30 March 2014 at 5:32 pm

      I am guessing that it is the Internet Party.

      • bad12 17.1.1
        30 March 2014 at 6:29 pm

        Nah it was the usual stupid preferred Prime Minster rubbish, apparently David Cunliffe has slipped to 9% which isn’t quite where Helen Clark was when She became Prime Minister, so, if Cunliffe loses another 3% in that particular segment of the poll my opinion says He is ready to become the next Prime Minister,

        A pretty nothing poll that has Labour/Green going down where the Roy Morgan last week had Labour/Green gong up…

        • ianmac 17.1.1.1
          30 March 2014 at 6:35 pm

          Good practice should have had the number in the poll and the number of undecided. If undecided still on 11% then that is significant.
          Internet Party registered for the first time.
          Doesn’t Paddy hype up his version of figures let alone his version of what Greens, Labour said in interviews?

        • Clemgeopin 17.1.1.2
          30 March 2014 at 7:44 pm

          Based on recent polls including the two today, my estimate/calculation is that if an election was held today, the party votes would be close to the following figures:

          National……………..42.9
          Labour……………….31.8
          Greens………………10.6
          NZ First………………8.5
          Maori Party…………..1.1
          Mana…………………..1.0
          ACT……………………0.6
          Conservatives………..1.9
          Internet Party………..0.5
          United Future…………0.1
          Others…………………1.0

          • Colonial Viper 17.1.1.2.1
            30 March 2014 at 8:31 pm

            I think the Greens have a decent shot at breaking through 13% this year.

      • Draco T Bastard 17.1.2
        30 March 2014 at 6:46 pm

        The Internet Party won’t be in the polls released today.

        • ianmac 17.1.2.1
          30 March 2014 at 8:19 pm

          Internet Party did register today. Can’t get back into TV3 but was .3 I think.

    • Jimmie 17.2
      30 March 2014 at 6:27 pm

      Probably Winston First up 4% to 7%. Mind you TV3 has him on 4.9% down 0.8% so maybe they polled the outskirts of Tauranga a little too much?

      • Jim Nald 17.2.1
        30 March 2014 at 7:47 pm

        Winston may well be the obvious and clear party providing protection against Labour’s (and the National’s tacit) age rise for superannuation ?

        • Anne 17.2.1.1
          30 March 2014 at 8:48 pm

          Good point Jim Nald.

          Does Labour not understand by announcing a blunt “we’re going to raise the age to 67” they are committing political suicide? Has it not occurred to them that is probably the underlying cause of their current lack of traction? It doesn’t matter how many provisos they add it makes not one tot of difference. All people pick up is “they’re gonna raise it to 67… I’m not voting for them then”.

          It may be sensible but you have to do it over time and by stealth for God’s sake.

  18. Hami Shearlie 18
    30 March 2014 at 6:22 pm

    Who in their right mind believes the latest TV3 political poll – do we really believe that the Judith Collins disgrace has not had ANY impact on people? Literally UNBELIEVABLE!!

    • bad12 18.1
      30 March 2014 at 6:36 pm

      Gives us something to discuss tho, the big laugh was the item on RadioNZ National this morning discussing the fact that polling companies have signed up to a ‘new’ code of conduct which when outlined hollered vary loudly ”Business As Usual”

      i would suggest that the situation is really as close as it was three years ago, except, take out the Maori Party, the last rites for them have more or less already been performed…

    • srylands 18.2
      30 March 2014 at 6:51 pm

      What disgrace would that be?

  19. Poission 19
    30 March 2014 at 7:42 pm

    One of the recent problems that may emerge,and is overlooked in the MSM is the withdraw of support for windows xp on the 8th April.

    It seems that 95% of ATM run on XP and I suspect a substantive number of SME along with a lot of home users etc.

    http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/texting-atms-cash-shows-cybercriminals-increasing-sophistication