If National wins ...

[Sgt Pepper]

You are right EZ. I knew he was alive (my editing before posting made the mistake with the extra word, now corrected) but yes I thought they were brothers, not cousins. Doesn't change though that I can't really see what the problem is with companies supporting various local MPs. It happens all around the country with most parties, probably not much to The Greens though.

20 years ago the President of the Labour Party was Michael Hirschfeld, who owned Mico Wakefield industries. Highly intelligent, humane man who was a lifelong Labour supporter. Sold Mico Wakefield for about $80million. Died far too young

[elZorro]

20 years ago the President of the Labour Party was Michael Hirschfeld, who owned Mico Wakefield industries. Highly intelligent, humane man who was a lifelong Labour supporter. Sold Mico Wakefield for about $80million. Died far too young

He'd be worth knowing a bit more about, Sgt P. There was a big Labour bequest a few years ago.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...arty-donations

Found this article, Gallagher Group the only big donation recently for National (although multiple donations under $30k wouldn't show up). Looks like the Greens aren't as poor as they'd like us to think, at the moment.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/arti...ectid=11694864

[blackcap]

He'd be worth knowing a bit more about, Sgt P. There was a big Labour bequest a few years ago.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...arty-donations

Found this article, Gallagher Group the only big donation recently for National (although multiple donations under $30k wouldn't show up). Looks like the Greens aren't as poor as they'd like us to think, at the moment.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/arti...ectid=11694864

The greens have plenty of cash in the bank. Its Labour that are a bit short of moolah.

[elZorro]

The greens have plenty of cash in the bank. Its Labour that are a bit short of moolah.

It would be hard for anyone to know, Blackcap. Labour relies on lots of small donations, generally. It worked for Obama.

I thought that more of interest is that Alan and Jenny Gibbs appear to be bankrolling the ACT Party. A bit of realistic background on Alan Gibbs, the 'free-market' merchant banker who needed Telecom to be protected from market forces, so he could make a big fortune.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10824121

Like FP, he was supportive of Roger Douglas. Not because the neoliberal policies were all good for the general public, but because a fortune could be made if he was close to the action.

Here's what happens when enough jobs are cut in the name of profits for a few people at the top.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/aucklander...ectid=11823445

It would appear that homelessness in Auckland has been a deliberate policy of the National Govt, to the benefit of rentiers.

[Baa_Baa]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/aucklander...ectid=11823445

It would appear that homelessness in Auckland has been a deliberate policy of the National Govt, to the benefit of rentiers.

It's hard to fathom one could read that article and arrive at the conclusion that homelessness in Auckland is a "deliberate policy of the National Govt".

Credibility that was waning is all but lost, that is just nonsense.

[elZorro]

It's hard to fathom one could read that article and arrive at the conclusion that homelessness in Auckland is a "deliberate policy of the National Govt".

Credibility that was waning is all but lost, that is just nonsense.

It wasn't just that article, it was a follow-on from previous posts, Baa Baa. The govt has a control over net immigration figures. It also is the largest affordable rental home provider by far, and it is in control of policy by WINZ etc. Therefore if the best it can now come up with is to buy motels and put people in emergency rental situations using grants for the short term, where are we heading? Note John Key didn't mention anything about housing or the housing crisis in his valedictory speech. Given the strong years-long link between net immigration and house price increases in Auckland, this was a known outcome, designed to increase inequality and benefit those likely to vote National, the rentiers, and an older generation who already own property.

[artemis]

..... It would appear that homelessness in Auckland has been a deliberate policy of the National Govt, to the benefit of rentiers.

Well over 3000 Auckland properties for rent as of this morning. And that is just those on Trademe. Then there is the Accommodation Supplement based on household size and income.

So why are people homeless?

[craic]

As to homelessness, there was a tv programme about people living in their cars in one of the US cities and the select tree-shaded areas where they congregate in multiples. Britain had always had droves of them. A recent visit to Melbourne reveals that they are a feature of that city with a shower truck and a laundry truck provided by the council (visit them after hours and the blankets and gear are in place but no resident present) Singapore picks them up off the street and puts them into basic accommodation, whatever that is and gives them work for the dole (collecting cardboard on a barrow or the like) and they are not seen on the streets. Here in Napier the beggar problem is compounded by the Hastings ones coming here, probably to cash in on the regular cruise ships. Go to Singapore and see what they did, then come back here and do the same.

[Bjauck]

Well over 3000 Auckland properties for rent as of this morning. And that is just those on Trademe. Then there is the Accommodation Supplement based on household size and income.

So why are people homeless?

Perhaps they have been bad tenants or have bad credit records that landlords are not wishing to deal with? And single people are at the end of the queue for social housing.

I am not a landlord, but maybe some of those who advertise their houses for rent, are mainly investing for the tax free capital appreciation; maybe they can advertise their properties at a high rent as they do not need to rent out the property for a full year to be able to claim certain expenses for tax purposes? Maybe someone who has investment real estate can comment.

[Sgt Pepper]

Another incredible and slanderous post from EZ where facts don' t matter.
Little made the comments in April last year. Soon thereafter the Hagamans gave him an ultimatum to fully withdraw the comments and apologise. He did neither. In September the Auditor General cleared them and found NOTHING to support Little's claims. But only last week did Little offer his "unreserved apology" but told the media before the Hagamans. Little has handled this very badly and will pay the price (or the Labour Party probably) as he deserves.

Regarding litigation, I wonder when the Enimen/ National Party breach of copyright case will be before the Courts. Should the Courts decide in favour of Enimen it may be very costly for the National Party.