Wee gripes: Cop attacks, whaling, dr shortage

Written By: - Date published: 1:15 pm, February 22nd, 2010 - 26 comments
Categories: Conservation, crime, health, wages - Tags: ,

1) Does anyone really think that increasing sentences for assaulting cops would change anything? Do you know the maximum sentence for assaulting a cop? No. Do you know the typical sentence? No. And you’re relatively intelligent and well-informed (and good looking). No chance some gang f#ckwits would be deterred by longer sentences.

Same with idea of increasing sentences for young killers. Longer sentences aren’t a deterrent. These crimes are not committed based on a rational weighing of costs and benefits. Offenders don’t have the information for that anyway.

2) National is being dragged kicking and screaming into legal action against Japan on whaling. Wonder if Australia’s sudden keenness has anything to do with improving relations with China. No love for Japan in China.

What happened to that plan of Key’s to end whaling? Looks like it was the cycleway of the Southern Ocean.

What’s going through Key’s head when he makes one of those stupid announcements. Does he seriously think he’s going to follow through?

3) Ryall on doctor shortage. All about ‘non-financial’ inducements to keep doctors from emigrating. Translation: ‘we’re not giving you pay rises’. The doctors’ representatives say pay is the big issue. Trouble ahead there.

How are we ever going to have a high wage economy when National opposes each and every wage rise?

26 comments on “Wee gripes: Cop attacks, whaling, dr shortage ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Pascal's bookie 1
    22 February 2010 at 1:39 pm

    “What happened to that plan of Key’s to end whaling? ”

    He was talking about an Australian plan.

    • M 1.1
      22 February 2010 at 3:14 pm

      ahahaha stop it already. too much laughing at work is bad for my ‘i hate work downer’ that I am currently on

  2. gobsmacked 2
    22 February 2010 at 2:18 pm

    Keyism explained:

    1. At the weekend, there is News. Usually, it’s bad (because that’s what news is).

    2. On Monday morning Key is interviewed by Hosking, Lush, Henry, etc. They ask him about the News. Key says Something Will Be Done, about the News.

    3. (optional) Policy work is done, on a response to the News. This might involve research, analysis and awkward conclusions. If so, Policy work is ignored. So Step 3 is superfluous.

    4. Either – a) the subject is quietly dropped. The media don’t bother asking about this.

    or b) A law is proposed, and probably passed. ACT don’t really think it will work, but support it anyway. Maori Party are not really interested, but they support it anyway.

    The News could be anything. Whales, gang patches in Whanganui, sow crates, dangerous dogs, Ed Hillary and Auckland Museum, the rugby. It doesn’t matter.

    It is the News. Therefore, John Key must respond, expressing a firm view that he has held since about yesterday. And will no longer hold next week.

    Keyism. The doctrine for our times.

    • MikeG 2.1
      22 February 2010 at 2:27 pm

      You forgot the step: ‘Check curia polling on news subject, depending on result do 4a or 4b’

    • Pete 2.2
      22 February 2010 at 3:00 pm

      I think you missed a step between 2 and 3 where Key n Pals determine which way the wind is blowing (ie sound-bite polling e.g ‘Step-change speech’ – it’s SO HARD to make a decision) and figure out which 1990s Policy to attach the potential ‘output’ from said News item to it.

  3. Rex Widerstrom 3
    22 February 2010 at 5:46 pm

    Re 1. The same applies to idiot judges who increase sentences because they claim it has “deterrence” value. As though a junkie hanging for their next fix thinks “Hold on, Justice So-and-so just gave someone five years on a first offence for holding up a chemist with a vial of blood. Nahhh… I’ll just go cold turkey”.

    If crime were committed with a rational mind, all we’d ever get was a few assassinations and some bank robberies.

    Re 2. I strongly suspect you’re right, and that Australia’s hardening of attitude to Japan is because they’ve annoyed China by refusing permission for the State-owned steel producer to simply buy up all the companies that own iron ore mines rather than having to buy the ore itself, and because China reacted by arresting and holding without trial several BHP executives. It’s a “nothing personal, please don’t stop sending us money” message.

  4. Brett Dale 4
    22 February 2010 at 10:02 pm

    It may not stop attacks on the POLICE. But it sends a clear message to society.

    • Killinginthenameof 4.1
      22 February 2010 at 10:30 pm

      WTF?

      Is this some kind of variation on the Glenn Beck “believe in something, even if it is wrong, just believe in something”

      Or do you mean, it won’t work, but will be good for putting some poorbrownyoung people in jail?

    • Marty G 4.2
      22 February 2010 at 10:32 pm

      what’s the message, one that we don’t already know? If it doesn’t do anything, it’s pointless. I’m interested in results, not ‘clear messages’ and other such horseshit

    • Rex Widerstrom 4.3
      22 February 2010 at 11:01 pm

      Yeah, the message it will send will be received by Police, who will take it as approval to behave like this.

      But while eminent people within the legal system keep warning against the extension of police powers, you go on defending them Brett. Right up to the moment that the person on the receiving end is you or one of your family.

  5. Armchair Critic 5
    22 February 2010 at 10:17 pm

    What got me scratching my head in bemusement was the proposal to require law firms that receive government contracts to undertake pro bono work for charities.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10627707
    First – isn’t the National party and ACT against telling business what to do? Can you imagine the sewer if Labour had tried this?
    Second – what if the law firm is a specialist and there are no charities that could realistically use their services?
    Third – what about other types of services provided to government under contract? Will we see companies that do polling for government departments, for example, required to do pro bono work for charity, too?

  6. Mac1 6
    22 February 2010 at 10:24 pm

    AC, it fits in beautifully with getting contracts from government which are then used to lever further services such as polling and campaigning advice. Farrar and Boag come to mind.

Links to post

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.