Useless

Written By: - Date published: 10:33 pm, October 2nd, 2013 - 81 comments
Categories: you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

So John Key goes out into the world to represent our interests and what does he get?

His good mate David Cameron tells him to get stuffed when he asks for better access to the UK for Kiwis.

A meeting with the Queen that made us look like a bunch of hicks.

A “hard hitting” (though weirdly squeaky) speech to the UN urging them to do something they had already done (and don’t think his sucking up to the US will get us anywhere).

And now Tony Abbott has told him to get stuffed when he’s asked for some basic citizenship rights for Kiwis across the ditch.

After all that rolling on his back and showing his belly he couldn’t even get a little tickle. Not even a small symbolic concession from his overseas mates (although you know he’s quietly offered plenty of concessions on our behalf). What an embarrassing little prick.

81 comments on “Useless ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Alanz 1
    2 October 2013 at 10:48 pm

    “David Cameron tells him to get stuffed”

    “Tony Abbott is [sic] has told him to get stuffed”

    And more NZ voters are telling him to get stuffed!

    • Tracey 1.1
      3 October 2013 at 7:42 am

      This must be wrong because Wayne Mapp is saying we have status in the TPPA to negotiate terms and stuff for our benefit… and we arent just sitting there nodding for any scraps off the table.

  2. vto 2
    2 October 2013 at 10:51 pm

    Get stuffed Captain Useless

  3. Clement Pinto 3
    2 October 2013 at 11:04 pm

    Ha, but Key, not to be outdone, tells us to get stuffed too by ignoring the GCSB concerns, the asset sale opposition etc, etc!

  4. Colonial Viper 4
    2 October 2013 at 11:08 pm

    Sigh.

  5. Not another Sheep 5
    2 October 2013 at 11:26 pm

    “Key said he did not expect any “deliverables” from his meeting, but it was a chance to build up “chemistry and rapport”, which was already high because he knew Abbott well. ” Stuff.co

    “deliverables” used as a Noun…………….. is there such a word????????? Moron:- Or is a ‘deliverable’ a brand new word meaning another ‘big, hard, brown, job’ to drop on New Zillend people?

    “chemistry” eewww creepy. Did Key really need to go for a ‘quickie’ with Abbott?

    “rapport”, some sleazy deal in secret face to face because Key couldn’t use electronic digital media or the GCSB would find out.

    ” because he knew Abbott well.” So ….the moron didn’t really need to go to the exorbitant expense of an Airforce 757 for a quickie few hours to build “rapport” in the first place. Something stinks about this trip !

    Perhaps the cheaper option to New Zillend taxpayers would have had Key use the Copper cable that his Brighter Future is invested in ??

    RING,RING… ” Hey Tony, John here. How are yah? Got any deliverables for New Zillenders? No?? yep, yep…. appreciate your busy running a nation of 23million and it’s your first week on the job… okay I’ll catch up with you bouta sweet deal I’ve got for you. ” CLICK.

    Telecom International Conference- Price per minute
    Australia, USA, UK, Ireland, Canada
    $0.95

    • Colonial Viper 5.1
      2 October 2013 at 11:37 pm

      “deliverables” used as a Noun…………….. is there such a word????????? Moron:- Or is a ‘deliverable’ a brand new word meaning another ‘big, hard, brown, job’ to drop on New Zillend people?

      Yeah, it’s standard corporate/consulting lingo.

      • GregJ 5.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 5:50 pm

        Yeah, it’s standard corporate/consulting lingo.

        My personal most hated consulting lingo – “learnings”.

        FFS! 😡

        • Paul 5.1.1.1
          3 October 2013 at 5:53 pm

          Do you get paid more as a consultant if you invent new words?

        • Paul 5.1.1.2
          3 October 2013 at 5:53 pm

          Do you get paid more as a consultant if you invent new words?

          • McFlock 5.1.1.2.1
            3 October 2013 at 6:09 pm

            Do you get paid more as a consultant if you invent new words?

            Actually, yeah, indirectly. Invent a new buzzword as part of a “dynamic and innovative new training package”, glossy packaged presentation, and Robert’s your father’s brother.

            And if your bullshit presentation makes millions, your invented jargon percolates into the wider community as a variation of Cockney rhyming slang – it serves to differentiate clique members from outsiders (who either patently don’t understand it, or merely fail to maintain a straight face at the elevated bullshit levels).

            Of course, if our new learnings include a pre-engagement indication that an anthro-economic unit is verbally non-adaptive, then we can de-escalate the prioritisation of face-time interaction and divert them into an eDynamic relationship which hyper-streams the agreement of deliverables…

          • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.2.2
            3 October 2013 at 7:13 pm

            Yes. The usual approach is for someone to publish a new business bestseller which harps on about some new (i.e. old but renamed) concepts, and for the consultants to then make a mint selling projects based on this “new” jargon.

            TQM, TPM, Just in time, Business process re-engineering, world class best practice, core competencies, centres of excellence, mission/vision/values statement, blah blah blah

    • the pigman 5.2
      3 October 2013 at 12:55 am

      “RING,RING… ” Hey Tony, John here. How are yah? Got any deliverables for New Zillenders? No?? yep, yep…. appreciate your busy running a nation of 23million and it’s your first week on the job… okay I’ll catch up with you bouta sweet deal I’ve got for you. ” CLICK.

      Telecom International Conference- Price per minute
      Australia, USA, UK, Ireland, Canada
      $0.95”

      But who would have laid the wreath (to tap into some all-important trans-tasman-fraternity political capital)? Who would have laid the wreath?!

      Pretty good summary otherwise.

  6. Not another Sheep 6
    2 October 2013 at 11:49 pm

    So it’s just as well Key and cronies didn’t sell the RNZAF 757 then? Or there would have been no cargo hold for the “deliverables” he might have brought back at $111,521.26 per flight hour (2011)

    • the pigman 6.1
      3 October 2013 at 12:57 am

      Hopefully he had a glance out the window for that missing yacht while he was at it…

      • Not another Sheep 6.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 1:11 am

        The Wreath could have been laid by the “boat people” (who’ve already landed) in memory of the other “boat people”. You know the ones whose children/ families, human beings are in the missing yachts that can’t come to OZ now.

        Maybe Key went to Oz to launch his new book and sell it to his “brother prime minister” for ideas. It’s called
        “The John’s Way :How Politics Explains Poverty”
        Tony’s been reading it, he comments
        “I am impressed with the way the New Zealand Government has created economic growth, pursued very sensible economic policies without in any way engaging in what’s become known as austerity. ” Abbott

    • North 6.2
      3 October 2013 at 7:58 am

      Bloody outrageous. That’s close to $700K just to get to dinner. To schmooz with the whangae son of that racist old bastard Howard.

      So tell me, what was all that shit about Winston’s baubles as Labour’s Foreign Minister ? And what was all that SlaterPorn shit about Cunliffe, Robertson and Jones flying to various primaries meetings around the country ?

      This preening “yay everybody loves me” narcissistic schoolboy in the Beehive is acting like some addled rock star zipping down to St Tropez for a piss-up. Wonder if he took a bottle or two from the vineyard he knows nothing about ?

      Any links on that $111K per flight hour for the 757 ?

  7. ak 7
    3 October 2013 at 5:31 am

    (edit – handle typo in earlier note)

    chemistry…rapport…high….deliverables….

    Let’s hope that the line was fine, and it wasn’t just another case of editorial mending of Slippery diction: mild-mannered Lib-Natsy leaders talking about using chemistry on the poor and miserable while high has a worryingly familiar ring to it…..

  8. Psycho Milt 8
    3 October 2013 at 6:37 am

    I don’t get this idea that NZers have some kind of citizenship “rights” in Australia. We already have way more rights in Australia than any other foreigners, in that we don’t need visas or work permits to live and work there. Is there some reason they should be offering citizenship as well, other than that many of us apparently would like it?

    • IrishBill 8.1
      3 October 2013 at 7:02 am

      Australians have access to social welfare and can vote while in New Zealand. And New Zealanders used to have those rights in Australia until the Howard government shut them down in 2001.

      • risildowgtn 8.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 7:08 am

        It is high time we cancelled access for Australians having access to Social welfare etc etc etc……

        Tit for tat

        but agree this PM is a international embarrassment and a failure……

        • srylands 8.1.1.1
          3 October 2013 at 9:00 am

          “Tit for tat”

          Do you know how many Australians in NZ are on welfare? Stuff all. And if we did that the Australian government would simply say “fine with us”. Who are you are trying to punish?

          To reiterate – stopping access to benefits in Australia was a New Zealand Governnment proposal. That is why Australians here still have access to welfare.

          • Tracey 8.1.1.1.1
            3 October 2013 at 9:14 am

            “Do you know how many Australians in NZ are on welfare? Stuff all.”

            source please.

          • ghostwhowalksnz 8.1.1.1.2
            3 October 2013 at 11:44 am

            There are things like access to student loans, disability payments. Then there is things like natural disasters, your Aussie neighbour will get federal assistance you will get diddly squat.

      • Tracey 8.1.2
        3 October 2013 at 7:45 am

        yes, but other than that, WHAT have we done for the Australians (h/t to Life of Brian – Python)

      • srylands 8.1.3
        3 October 2013 at 8:54 am

        “Australians have access to social welfare and can vote while in New Zealand. And New Zealanders used to have those rights in Australia until the Howard government shut them down in 2001.”

        Whooaaa. You are doing a revisionist thing with history.

        It was the NZ Government of Helen Clark that proposed that the access be shut down. New Zealand had always reimbursed Australia for the cost of welfare payments for New Zealanders living in Australia. That had applied since 1975. But the cost was becoming too high. What New Zealand was willing to pay was not meeting the cost. Helen’s view was that the new Labour Government was interested in the welfare of New Zealanders living in NZ, not in Australia. Her view was that if NZers in Aus were unhappy they could come home.

        It was Helen that put the proposal to stop access to benefits in Australia on the table. The Australian government then said that suits us fine.

        • Tracey 8.1.3.1
          3 October 2013 at 9:00 am

          Here is an assessment from an editor on stuff.co.nz

          ” The anomaly arose 10 years ago when Australia took umbrage at an overstayer amnesty in this country which would have allowed people previously unwanted by New Zealand to enter Australia and gain access to Australia’s welfare system.

          The Labour government of the day misread the strength of feeling across the Tasman and pressed ahead with the amnesty. Australia responded by tearing up the agreement that had previously entitled New Zealanders residing in Australia to the same social assistance as Australians.

          Then prime minister Helen Clark described the ending of the reciprocal welfare arrangements as a win for both countries. Australia would not have to pay any more “Kiwi dole bludgers” to surf at Bondi; New Zealand would no longer have to contribute to Australia’s welfare bill as it then did.

          However, it was never a win for this country. New Zealanders testing their opportunities in Australia lost out and New Zealand itself loses out when Australian-based Kiwis who have fallen on hard times return home to claim assistance from a welfare system to which they have not contributed.

          Australia, on the other hand, benefits from what a former Australian MP, Bob Catley, once described as New Zealand’s “foreign aid programme”.

          It gets to use the skills of educated workers whose education it has not had to pay for, but reserves the right to effectively send them home when the work dries up or they suffer other misfortune.
          Ad Feedback

          A fairer apportionment of responsibilities and rewards between the two countries makes sense. In the meantime, however, Kiwis contemplating a move across the Tasman should bear in mind the downside as well as the upside.

          If they do not qualify as permanent residents they are likely, if disaster strikes, to find themselves denied the assistance that is taken for granted here. ”

          and from wikipedia

          “New Zealanders in Australia previously had immediate access to Australian welfare benefits and were sometimes characterised as bludgers. In 2001 this was described by New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark as a “modern myth”. Regulations changed in 2001 whereby New Zealanders must wait two years before being eligible for such payments.[46] All New Zealanders who have moved to Australia after February 2001 are placed on a Special Category Visa, classing them as temporary residents, regardless of how long they reside in Australia. This visa is also passed on to their children. As temporary residents, they are ineligible for government support, aid, emergency programmes, welfare, public housing and disability support in Australia; something that is not denied to Australians in New Zealand. Attempts by the Queensland Government to pass a law that would allow government agencies to deny support based on residency status without it being considered discriminatory were condemned by Queensland’s anti-discrimination commission as an attempt to legalise state discrimination against New Zealanders, claiming it would create a “permanent second class of people”

          • JonL 8.1.3.1.1
            3 October 2013 at 2:23 pm

            “If they do not qualify as permanent residents they are likely, if disaster strikes, to find themselves denied the assistance that is taken for granted here. ” I’ve been here (working), for 8 yrs….I’m too old to apply for permanent residency (over 50) without sponsorship etc, etc. Having paid about $180K in Aus taxes, if I hit hard times,I guess I’ll just have to sell up what I’ve got and move back to NZ – and welfare. Seems like a lose situation to NZ from my angle…..

      • Colonial Viper 8.1.4
        3 October 2013 at 3:11 pm

        Australians have access to social welfare and can vote while in New Zealand.

        Classic NZ sense of fair play. Which the Ozzies don’t buy into, in the slightest.

    • Tracey 8.2
      3 October 2013 at 7:46 am

      But, Australia gave us Srylands… or so he writes

      • North 8.2.1
        3 October 2013 at 8:08 am

        Not so much as gave, got rid of a big bucket of detritis rather.

        • srylands 8.2.1.1
          3 October 2013 at 9:22 am

          “Not so much as gave, got rid of a big bucket of detritis rather”

          More left rudeness.

          [lprent: More right wing nutter condescension. Arrogant fuckwits like yourself who want to define the rules for debate really are rude.

          If I see you attempt to usurp my role in setting the grounds for debate again then I’ll demonstrate what sysop rudeness is. ]

      • srylands 8.2.2
        3 October 2013 at 9:04 am

        “But, Australia gave us Srylands… or so he writes”

        And the red giant star Betelgeuse gave us Tracey.

    • RedLogix 8.3
      3 October 2013 at 9:00 am

      After an hour-long meeting with Key, Abbott said he was “very happy” with the situation as it stood and Kiwis who came to Australia were expected to work and pay taxes like everybody else.

      Abbott used his Wainuiomata-born wife as an example of how the arrangement worked for both sides.

      “I’m very conscious of the great debt I personally owe New Zealand – on the other hand [my wife] says that she owes something to Australia given that Australia has been a good home to her over the last 25-30 years now.”

      New Zealanders had better access to Australia than the citizens of any other country – “and that’s as it should be”, Abbott said.

      “What I admire about kiwis in Australia is their commitment to have a go. They are have a go people. I want everyone who comes to this country to work and pay taxes from day one and in delighted that’s exactly what Kiwis have done.

      “I’m very happy with the situation that exists right now which is that Kiwis coming here know that they are expected to work and pay taxes from day one as so many of them do.”

      After emerging from their meeting, Abbott addressed Key as his “brother Prime Minister” and talked about the strong bonds in the trans-Tasman relationship.

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9238539/No-change-to-Kiwi-citizenship-status-Aust-PM

      Abbott is being deeply dishonest by using his wife as an example here. Because she was resident in Australia well before 2001 and is married to an Australian her situation in Australia is fully protected. Access to citizenship and social welfare is a given for her. Using her as an example is utterly irrelevant.

      The problem that some NZ govt will eventually have to address, is that there are currently about 618,000 kiwis living in Aus under the SubClass 444 ‘Special Category Visa’. It is a temporary visa (it has to be renewed every-time you re-enter the country) and while it allows you to live and work, access Medicare or Reciprocal Health Care Agreements (in common with a number of other countries) .. there is no longer any easy path to eventually achieving citizenship for most. If you worked for a sponsoring employer for two years, or in a ‘regional’ area, then you used to be able to apply for a ‘fast-track’ visa … but even that door was shut in July 2012.

      This means that over time there are an increasing number of New Zealanders who will find themselves essentially stranded, eventually they will either retire, fall ill or will be unable to work. NZ Super (if available to them) will not sustain them and they will have zero access to any other support.

      Eventually these people will be forced to return to New Zealand. That’s the population of Wellington and Christchurch combined. It’s one of those slow demographic time-bomb things that no-one will do anything about until too late.

      Of course what is most repellent about Abbott’s line is the implied ‘you can pay your taxes but we won’t ever let you be citizens’ sneering. And then rubs it in with some blatantly insincere schmoozing about being ‘brother’ countries.

      • Tracey 8.3.1
        3 October 2013 at 3:30 pm

        did she take out citizenship???

      • srylands 8.3.2
        3 October 2013 at 5:31 pm

        “This means that over time there are an increasing number of New Zealanders who will find themselves essentially stranded, eventually they will either retire, fall ill or will be unable to work. NZ Super (if available to them) will not sustain them and they will have zero access to any other support.

        ”

        Many of them will have the benefit of Australia’s generous work based super schemes. If they have been working in Australia for 20-30 years they should be able to retire to NZ with nice retirement savings. Given that New Zealanders in Australia have high employment rates many will be racking up the savings (and at higher wages than NZ).

        I take your point – it is an issue that needs some attention, but more analysis would be required to determine whether it is indeed a time bomb.

        • McFlock 8.3.2.1
          3 October 2013 at 5:49 pm

          So how big would the problem of people being stranded in Aus without income or healthcare have to get before your care?

    • KJT 8.4
      3 October 2013 at 3:01 pm

      Happy about being able to live and work in Australia as a NZ citizen.

      I am not happy about paying taxes in Australia, when, myself and my kids, are denied many of the things those taxes pay for.

      In that current case it would be fairer if Kiwi’s working in Australia paid NZ taxes, and were exempt from Aussie ones. As it is the NZ welfare system they have to depend on if anything goes wrong.

    • Sable 8.5
      3 October 2013 at 8:08 pm

      I took out citizenship just before the law was changed. I don’t blame the Australian government, this country was being used as a back door by new migrants armed with a Kiwi passport who were rejected by the Australian immigration system first time around.

      Want to blame anyone blame the NZ government for its slack immigration policy which reflects its inability to provide sound economic guidance and social policy that provides a quality standard of living to its own people who keep on leaving. Hence the need to prop up the population stats with and I hate to say this but its true, low quality imported labour. How many times has the government said “don’t worry we have more people arriving than leaving”. What they fail to mention is the quality of education and ability of these new arrivals which in many cases is sorely lacking compared to those heading to the airport.

      When I lived in OZ I came across some very talented Kiwis who said they were not getting what they needed back home. Indeed a friend of mine who had his computer science degree could not find work in NZ. Within a month of arriving in OZ he had a good grad job with a top firm and now works as a senior network engineer. He will never come back to NZ he tells me and I can not blame him.

  9. Sanctuary 9
    3 October 2013 at 7:36 am

    “…And now Tony Abbott has told him to get stuffed when he’s asked for some basic citizenship rights for Kiwis across the ditch…”

    New Zealanders who move to a deeply racist country shouldn’t be surprised when they are themselves victims of that racism.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 9.1
      3 October 2013 at 7:49 am

      New Zealanders who move to a deeply racist country feel at home depending on their ethnicity.

      • Sanctuary 9.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 9:02 am

        John Key last night was busy blaming Helen Clark for the current arrangement, but the deal offered by the Howard government was the current one or one restricting access to Australia to only native born New Zealanders – a racist solution from a racist government that would see me (a native born New Zealander) being treated as better than my Chinese Malay work colleague (a New Zealand citizen who moved here twenty five years ago) that was rightly repugnant to the New Zealand government.

  10. srylands 10
    3 October 2013 at 10:00 am

    “And now Tony Abbott has told him to get stuffed when he’s asked for some basic citizenship rights for Kiwis across the ditch.”

    This is a ridiculous statement. Nobody on either side expected anything different. What are we going to do? Threaten not to sell them butter?

    I expect you will apply the same test in December 2014 when Missing-T goes to visist the Australian PM. I expect to see the same “Useless” cry when Silent-T changes nothing about the current trans-Tasman arrangements.

    • idlegus 10.1
      3 October 2013 at 12:00 pm

      fanny!

    • karol 10.2
      3 October 2013 at 12:09 pm

      Comments that use schoolyard smears, hinting at vaginas as some kind of dirty thing, without really stating as such, are not worth reading. Gutter-tripe. Won’t be reading your comments in future, smearlands.

    • Delia 10.3
      3 October 2013 at 12:27 pm

      Good lord Cryland grow up and take your foulness back to WhaleOil’s blog where it belongs I do not come to a Labour site to read crap like yours OK. So pack it in.

      [lprent: Read the about. It isn’t a Labour (ie NZLP) site, it is a labour movement site. It is a pretty important distinction that governs much of our site policies. ]

      • KJT 10.3.1
        3 October 2013 at 3:10 pm

        Actually we need the Srylands on here. To remind us of the cognitive dissonance, meanness, greed and callousness, endemic on the right.

        And some other RW commentators, who do have something useful to contribute, who remind us that “they” are not all like that. Some do have the same goals for NZ as us, they just believe, rightly or wrongly, in different ways of getting there.

        • Paul 10.3.1.1
          3 October 2013 at 5:58 pm

          Disagree.
          Knowing I’ll have to wade through his trolling to get to sensible debate makes me wish for his return to the sewer.

      • srylands 10.3.2
        3 October 2013 at 5:38 pm

        I don’t like Whaleoil.

        • Sable 10.3.2.1
          3 October 2013 at 8:16 pm

          Ahhhh shitelands, you and your kind bring out the worst in me. I swore I was going to ignore you but I find you so utterly offensive and lacking in basic human compassion and kindness I really cant help myself.

          You belong on whales slimy site. You are cut from the same poisonous, elitist, backward looking, self serving, callous cloth as the creep Slater and other misfits like Keys and co.

    • thatguynz 10.4
      3 October 2013 at 2:53 pm

      I’m guessing Shitlands (yes – a deliberate insult) that you don’t see your hypocrisy of crying about people deliberately mangling your name here to cause you offense (what you are calling “rude”) with your ongoing puerile “Silent T / Missing T” jibes? They are precisely the same no?

      Just saying…

    • Tracey 10.5
      3 October 2013 at 3:16 pm

      why would anyone expect left wing labour to get traction with right wing Abbott? Key on the other hand, the charming right-wing currency trader said Tony was nice and he likes him. Tony waxed ideologically about the surreal version of NZ that Key likes to paint… and still a NO.

  11. travellerev 11
    3 October 2013 at 10:41 am

    Useless little prick eh? Not to the Queen and her “firm” he isn’t. $ 30 million to Rio Tinto with her as a huge share holder comes in right handy. Him selling the TPPA on behalf of his bankster buddies is going quite well too. Total financial deregulation and bankers let loose to rip off Kiwi’s like they do Americans coming our way as I write this.

    John Key is not a useless little prick to them. No Sir! And his $ 50 million putting him in with the richest 202,000 people of the world tells me they really appreciate his endeavors on their behalf.

    And they think that you are the useless one so you might want to ditch that sense of superiority that makes you believe you’re actually smarter than John Key and his bankster mates.

    He was at Balmoral with the MSM making him look like a dip so people like you wouldn’t actually ask yourself why a scheister like him would be visiting arguable one of the most powerful people in the world. he came away from the place full of energy to promote the Queen’s descendents to be the hereditary heads of state of 54 countries including these Islands and if you think they don’t hold any power you are even more deluded.

    • Colonial Viper 11.1
      3 October 2013 at 12:16 pm

      Good points.

    • Ramsay 11.2
      3 October 2013 at 5:20 pm

      “Useless little prick…”

      Comments that use schoolyard smears, hinting at male genitals as some kind of dirty thing, without really stating as such, are not worth reading. Gutter-tripe. Won’t be reading your comments in future.

      • travellerev 11.2.1
        4 October 2013 at 4:26 am

        Actually the word prick was used in the actual post. I make the point that calling someone who belongs to the richest 202,000 people in the world a useless or embarrassing and little may be a bit of misnomer. A prick he may be. A Rich Prick he most assuredly is but useless, embarrassing?

        And feel free not to read my comments. Wouldn’t want you to feel too uncomfortable. What with the cognitive dissonance and all! 😆

      • karol 11.2.2
        4 October 2013 at 7:54 am

        Thank you for quoting me out of context, Ramsay.

        Actually, the equivalent to the female genital reference I was responding to would have been”useless little P.”

        And the words used for male and female genitals are not equivalent. Both are used in ways intended to put men down by attacking their masculinity – prick is used to attack masculinity by reference to small size. The term for female genitals has far deeper anti-woman associations, merely because it refers to female sexuality.

    • Crunchtime 11.3
      4 October 2013 at 11:43 am

      I’ve heard many reports that he’s doubled his worth to 100 mil since taking office. That puts him in an even smaller more exclusive club.

      Not bad performance for a blind trust eh?

  12. phillip ure 12
    3 October 2013 at 11:30 am

    i was gonna do one of these..

    ..now i can just link to yrs instead..

    (my rough-draft uses ‘fuck-off!’..

    ..but ‘stuff’ will do..)

    ..phillip ure..

  13. captain hook 13
    3 October 2013 at 2:13 pm

    Da troof iss we is a gang of hicks!
    I hope the Queen told him off for the crummy little dweebs in the Advertising Agencies mocking the royal family to sell their goods.
    If Doncoyote cant recognise that this sort of behaviour is deleterious to the country’s morale and standing in the world then he is a bigger moron than I thought he was.

  14. Zaphod Beeblebrox 14
    3 October 2013 at 2:32 pm

    ‘Deeply racist’- Just because 43% of us voted for Abbots drive the refugees into the sea policy does not mean everybody over here is ‘deeply racist’. We still take a higher percentage of refugess per head than any other country bar Canada.

    I’m actually confused as to why Key would be opposed to the current arrangements. I thought kiwis wanted more of its own back home. Did not Key campaign on the basis of bringing more home in 2007?

    • GregJ 14.1
      3 October 2013 at 6:11 pm

      While I don’t disagree with you that not all Aussies are “deeply racist” the anecdotal evidence from my extended family in Australia (some Australian born, others born in NZ) is that Australia has a deeply embedded vein of racism. New Zealand is by no means perfect but their opinion is that NZ is a long way ahead of Australia on race relations as well as gender & LGBT issues (not that we don’t have a long way to go).

      We still take a higher percentage of refugess per head than any other country bar Canada.

      A claim used by many who don’t actually want refugees in Australia that appears to lack some substance. Even if it was true it doesn’t excuse some of the worst aspects of the official Australian response & treatment of those seeking refuge in the country.

  15. Intrinsicvalue 15
    3 October 2013 at 5:25 pm

    Refusing to accept illegal immigrants is not “driving refugees into the sea”. Australia is a sovereign state and as such can determine it’s own immigration policies in the interests of it’s own people.

  16. Zaphod Beeblebrox 16
    3 October 2013 at 6:05 pm

    How else would describe the tow back the boats policy? Remember most of these boats barely make it outside Indonesia’s thin jurisdiction anyway.

  17. Sable 17
    3 October 2013 at 7:57 pm

    Serves the jumped up little twit right. Keys should be looking after his own people rather than selling out to a bunch of Poms and Yanks. Now he can see they couldn’t give two shits about him, he’s a nobody outside NZ. Worse still because of his appalling behaviour back home he’s now increasingly hated here too. Talk about shafting yourself….

    • travellerev 17.1
      4 October 2013 at 4:28 am

      He is looking after his own people. The richest 202.000 on this planet. You, I ques, are not in that group.

      • Sable 17.1.1
        4 October 2013 at 12:47 pm

        So I’m not entitled to push for a government that looks after its own people? I’m guessing that’s what you are implying, assuming you have a point…..