PDA

View Full Version : If National wins ...



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

fungus pudding
27-06-2017, 04:12 PM
EZ,hope I didn't offend you with my earlier comment. Was just tongue in cheek :-)

Some of us hope you did. :D:D:D:D:D:D

elZorro
27-06-2017, 05:26 PM
Some of us hope you did. :D:D:D:D:D:D

I wasn't offended personally, but when someone implies that Labour got the country into a mess or that they have forgotten how to be MPs, it has to be challenged.

FP, what do you think of Bill now? He looks very uncomfortable in front of the press. Is there a way out of this do you think? In this case, it's tongue in cheek..

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11882655

On TV1 tonight, the Debarclay issue had a few minutes, the McCarten programme got a few seconds.

BlackPeter
27-06-2017, 05:59 PM
On TV1 tonight, the Debarclay issue had a few minutes, the McCarten programme got a few seconds.

Clearly shows how biassed our media are - thanks for pointing that out.

The more surprising that the National led government is doing so much better in the polls than a NZ First led Labour / Green coalition. The incumbent government clearly must do something right ... and the opposition still has lots to learn. The usual mudslinging does not seem to do the trick.

elZorro
27-06-2017, 09:18 PM
Clearly shows how biassed our media are - thanks for pointing that out.

The more surprising that the National led government is doing so much better in the polls than a NZ First led Labour / Green coalition. The incumbent government clearly must do something right ... and the opposition still has lots to learn. The usual mudslinging does not seem to do the trick.

Yes, the media are very biassed, usually toward National of course. We've been watching for 9 years.

National is not always doing better than a Labour-Green Coalition. Keep an eye on the polls.

Labour don't need any lessons in how to run the country, they did fine last time.

Labour don't need to do any mudslinging, there is enough rubbish going on within National's ranks. We'll just stand back and watch I think.

What has Todd been up to in Queenstown? Guess we'll all hear about it soon enough.

dobby41
28-06-2017, 07:03 AM
Clearly shows how biassed our media are - thanks for pointing that out.

The more surprising that the National led government is doing so much better in the polls than a NZ First led Labour / Green coalition. The incumbent government clearly must do something right ... and the opposition still has lots to learn. The usual mudslinging does not seem to do the trick.

The Labour issue is one they are sorting. They owned up and dealt with it.
The Barclay issue is one National have tried to hide for 18 months and lied about - and continue to lie.
Billy has been found wanting big time.

iceman
28-06-2017, 07:08 AM
And true Labour people will sort it out. The students are now being billeted all around NZ and should have a much better experience from here on. So this issue should resolve fairly quickly for Labour.

National have to cope with the fallout from the police case against Barclay being opened again. I'm sure that the tape or recording will be long destroyed by now, which is probably why Bill was mentioning so often, that a case has not been proved. But in this event, Bill went and sent a text, he documented the existence of a recording. Not too smart. John would never have sent a text. So thanks Bill, on behalf of the Labour Party.. (or maybe Bill is indeed trying to be honest sometimes).

So its OK to have illegal immigrants used as slave labour as long as its done by the Labour Party !!

dobby41
28-06-2017, 07:12 AM
So its OK to have illegal immigrants used as slave labour as long as its done by the Labour Party !!

Of course not but they are dealing with it.
Is it OK to hide a criminal matter? Lie about it? Use tax payers money to try to buy your way out?

iceman
28-06-2017, 08:06 AM
Of course not but they are dealing with it.
Is it OK to hide a criminal matter? Lie about it? Use tax payers money to try to buy your way out?

They are "dealing with it" only because they were found out. Do you really believe Andrew Little did not know about this scheme, run from Labour's Auckland office which he admits he visited numerous times while this scheme was being prepared and run from there ? Hand me another Tui.

All your 3 questions have the same answer, NO.

dobby41
28-06-2017, 08:19 AM
They are "dealing with it" only because they were found out. Do you really believe Andrew Little did not know about this scheme, run from Labour's Auckland office which he admits he visited numerous times while this scheme was being prepared and run from there ? Hand me another Tui.

All your 3 questions have the same answer, NO.

So Labour was found out and came clean, dealt with it.
National was found out and tried to continue to obfusticate and lie.
I see a difference in approach there. Remember this came out a long time ago and they didn't come clean then - they paid (with tax payer money) to hide it.

craic
28-06-2017, 09:57 AM
The simple question of the recording is not being answered and so the police dilemma. Was the recorder switched on and placed to record conversations or was it a dictating device or recorder that was accidently left on? If the latter, it would be very difficult to prosecute the man who did not intend to record conversations that he did not know would occur. Another dilemma for the police is that there are several published accounts of recorders being placed on members of the public to record conversations with other members of the public to gain proof of crimes without revealing that they are being led or recorded. I sometimes used a recorder on report interviews, not to prove anything other than I have trouble reading my own handwriting.

westerly
28-06-2017, 11:05 AM
Today Andrew Little admits the slave labour scheme was indeed being run by McCarten while he was the head of Labour's Auckland office and they no longer are on speaking terms. And a Labour councl member steps down for his role with the scheme. Little also says Labour likely has to pick up the bill.

I hope posters on here are no longer saying this program had nothing to do with the Labour Party. It is 100% responsible for this (possibly illegal) mess.

Evidently only 2 had the wrong visa and they were sent home, which is more than National are doing with many in the country on a dodgy visa. Although the offer may not have been what they expected, they were volunteers and not slave labour as you and the media so picturesquely describe. As EZ says it appears the Labour hierachy have done their best to sort out the problems.
McCarten on the surface appears to have been inherited by Little when he became leader and now his contract is finished he has been let go.
The Right should be more worried about the PM exhibiting more sidesteps, left and right, than an AB back over the goings on down south. Especially with the police investigating.
But hey, I guess there is always the promise of more tax cuts. The voters won't be concerned that Govt. services already cut to the bone will be even more restricted.

westerly

winner69
28-06-2017, 01:07 PM
About time we had some real scandal like sex and drugs in politics rather than all that boring spying/leaking stuff.

Can't wait to hear what he/she was up to

craic
28-06-2017, 02:14 PM
The sad part is to see those who call themselves politicians actually trying to win an election based on this pathetic crap. It must have been wonderful to live in times when the real news took several days or weeks to reach the public and most of todays rubbish would have been discarded as a waste of ink.

macduffy
28-06-2017, 03:34 PM
The sad part is to see those who call themselves politicians actually trying to win an election based on this pathetic crap. It must have been wonderful to live in times when the real news took several days or weeks to reach the public and most of todays rubbish would have been discarded as a waste of ink.

....... don't forget, we had The Truth in those days. Came out once a week, if memory serves correctly.

;)

Or was it The NZ Truth?

fungus pudding
28-06-2017, 04:35 PM
Nice wee survey.

http://insights.nzherald.co.nz/article/labour-vs-national/

elZorro
28-06-2017, 05:01 PM
Nice wee survey.

http://insights.nzherald.co.nz/article/labour-vs-national/

Yes, except the biggest upset result was housing affordability. It's OK as long as interest rates stay historically low, for everywhere except the major cities.

GTM 3442
28-06-2017, 05:48 PM
About time we had some real scandal like sex and drugs in politics rather than all that boring spying/leaking stuff.

Can't wait to hear what he/she was up to

Yeah. Imagine what a Proper Gutter Press would make of the last week or so.

"Taxpayer-funded sex and drug orgies in Parliament with human-trafficked third world sex slaves"

And so on.

Now a more serious note -

Any word on what the navy got for the 3/4 million they are reputed to have spent with Fat Leonard?

Major von Tempsky
28-06-2017, 07:54 PM
From time to time EZ tries to sell the fiction that Cullen was a responsible Minister if Finance. Au contraire, he inherited a big Budget surplus and proceeded to heavily run it down year by year in a desperate attempt to keep Labour in.

Here is a review from Stuff NZ on 23 May 2008...


Talk about going out on a low note.
Michael Cullen was upbeat about his 9th Budget in the lockup in the banquet hall at the bottom of the Beehive*yesterday afternoon. He had just delivered a kitchen sink of a Budget that he hoped might get Labour re-elected. He assured us it was safe now to return a growth dividend because the economy was slowing and this was as big as it could possibly be because there was nothing left for him (or anyone else) to throw into the tax cutting pot.
Budgets might not win elections, but they can lose elections, he said. His focus was clearly*on not losing as he built this Budget. Everything was done in this Budget not to lose this election. Taxes were cut for those on low to middle incomes. Thresholds were increased. Health spending was increased. Education spending was lifted. Broadband spending was lifted. Perhaps under pressure from many an anxious young minister and one not so young but just as anxious Prime Minister, the reluctant doctor pulled every lever he could.
He even told us Cabinet looked at an even more aggressive package, but it couldn't be justified on the grounds it would blow out debt too much and unbalance the economy. Thank goodness some sanity prevailed.
The*result of pulling all the levers in the wrong direction (tax cuts and spending increases) was the destruction of the budget surplus that Dr Cullen had spent the last eight years building up and protecting. Blown in one last desperate act. Dr Cullen and Ms Clark have now said they will fund the cash deficit after investments by running down the Reserve Bank's reserves and issuing more bonds.
Whatever happened to their mantra that they wouldn't pay for tax cuts by running up debts? Their (quite powerful) argument that it wasn't right for National to pay for tax cuts with debt is now dead as the proverbial. Their rebuttal that the debt is only paying for infrastructure is, strictly speaking, true, but debt wouldn't have to be raised without*the tax cuts. There's no getting away from this. They are raiding the Reserve Bank's cookie jar and borrowing from foreigners for an irresponsible spending and tax cutting budget.
Also, their argument that only National will fund big*tax cuts*with big cuts in government spending is also dead. Buried in the budget is a line about unspecified spending cuts totalling NZ$1 billion over the next four years that Labour will have to find*to help pay for the tax cuts. Dr Cullen flat out refused to answer my question in the lockup about what type of*spending cuts they would be. The only answer he could have given is that he hasn't dreamt them up yet. We can be sure he won't enlighten us before the election.
Where will the cuts come? Not by trimming Wellington bureaucrats, as the minister was at pains to point out when he said National could not afford big tax cuts by just restricting growth of the core bureacracy.*National*would have to take a knife to education, health and police to fund such tax cuts.* So which of these government services will go in the NZ$1 billion of spending cuts Labour is planning?*If it's not*chicken feed for Labour it's not chicken feed for National.
Any of the last vestiges of Dr Cullen's hard-won reputation for fiscal conservatism went down*into that kitchen sink*of pre-election goodies. This is a tragedy for a finance minister who could rightly say until today that he had been one of the most level-headed and careful of economic guardians in our history.
The collective red card came quickly.*
Financial markets are greedy, reactive and selfish at the best of times. But they often cut to the nub of an announcement in a flash. Within minutes yesterday, they judged this budget*as*inflationary enough to make the Reserve Bank's inflation-fighting task more difficult and therefore likely to delay interest rate cuts.
The New Zealand dollar surged over 78.5 US cents and wholesale interest rates rose sharply. If you doubt me on this, have a look at what a couple of economists say.*

elZorro
29-06-2017, 06:32 AM
I wonder who wrote that review, MVT?

It looks like someone who had swallowed all of the Crosby-Textor junk that was being pushed around from 2004 onwards. Labour nearly lost the previous election in 2005 after a major swing change occurring from the use of a lot more marketing money by the Nats, and pushing the CT messages constantly.

All through the good years, the Nats were arguing for tax cuts, on message, and then this editor/commenter thinks that the end of the world is near when Dr. Cullen starts to promise just that. Don't forget that Labour built up the tax base quite a bit, by growing the economy properly. They had a lot more good work to do, but were pushed out in 2008.

Of course, we all know what happened when National got in. Excluding the earthquakes and the GFC, National was determined to increase pressure on wages by sacking some of the crown's public sector employees, they borrowed big-time to pay for tax cuts at the top end that weren't necessary or useful to the rest of NZ, and they also assisted the housing market to boom with immigration, while pulling back on SME assistance for R&D.

Put together, this was a damaging set of policies that have ensured NZ treaded water, probably went backwards over the last 9 years. We have some new motorways and some fibre, but we are still exporting commodities. Many of our bigger manufacturers have relocated overseas, or been bought out. Many school leavers are not prepared for work, have low aspirations, and are not finding a useful role in our dull economy.

But MVT, I will completely agree with you on your first preposterous sentence, if you could just show me the budget surplus figures that you've imagined in your head. Labour grew some massive budget surpluses on their watch. How do you think they were able to pay off over $30-$40Bill of old crown debt in the nine years?

iceman
29-06-2017, 06:54 AM
This from Vernon Small (and no doubt Crosby Textor) today:
"But how could anyone working for a party founded on workers' rights, led by a former union heavyweight, that has opposed low- and no-pay work and is campaigning to curb immigration and low-skilled work visas allow an 85 intern programme – and attendant "fantasy world stuff" (to use leader Andrew Little's own words) -–to go ahead."

elZorro
29-06-2017, 07:30 AM
This from Vernon Small (and no doubt Crosby Textor) today:
"But how could anyone working for a party founded on workers' rights, led by a former union heavyweight, that has opposed low- and no-pay work and is campaigning to curb immigration and low-skilled work visas allow an 85 intern programme – and attendant "fantasy world stuff" (to use leader Andrew Little's own words) -–to go ahead."

But the Labour Party has fixed this issue, for example our electorate is now billeting two of the USA students, and they are helping and observing what we're doing, under the wing of a retired university lecturer, a politics student, and the candidate. They'll get the experience they wanted.

BlackPeter
29-06-2017, 07:44 AM
I wonder who wrote that review, MVT?

It looks like someone who had swallowed all of the Crosby-Textor junk that was being pushed around from 2004 onwards. Labour nearly lost the previous election in 2005 after a major swing change occurring from the use of a lot more marketing money by the Nats, and pushing the CT messages constantly.

All through the good years, the Nats were arguing for tax cuts, on message, and then this editor/commenter thinks that the end of the world is near when Dr. Cullen starts to promise just that. Don't forget that Labour built up the tax base quite a bit, by growing the economy properly. They had a lot more good work to do, but were pushed out in 2008.

Of course, we all know what happened when National got in. Excluding the earthquakes and the GFC, National was determined to increase pressure on wages by sacking some of the crown's public sector employees, they borrowed big-time to pay for tax cuts at the top end that weren't necessary or useful to the rest of NZ, and they also assisted the housing market to boom with immigration, while pulling back on SME assistance for R&D.

Put together, this was a damaging set of policies that have ensured NZ treaded water, probably went backwards over the last 9 years. We have some new motorways and some fibre, but we are still exporting commodities. Many of our bigger manufacturers have relocated overseas, or been bought out. Many school leavers are not prepared for work, have low aspirations, and are not finding a useful role in our dull economy.

But MVT, I will completely agree with you on your first preposterous sentence, if you could just show me the budget surplus figures that you've imagined in your head. Labour grew some massive budget surpluses on their watch. How do you think they were able to pay off over $30-$40Bill of old crown debt in the nine years?

Never forget that it was the highly competent government of Bill English who brought us the America's Cup back, a trophy which we lost due to Helen Clark's inept reign (just check the dates - I am sure you don't need a graph :p).

Ah - you mean correlation is not causation? Hold on - but in this case why do you think that a government operating in a boom period and getting in that much money through an inflated world economy that even they can't waste it all is doing better than a government which had to govern through several huge crisis (GFC, ChCh earthquake) ... and doing better than nearly all other governments world-wide?

But at the end is all of that just snow of yesteryear. If Labour ever had capable politicians, than they kicked them out. What could Labour offer for NZ's future?

Sure - a NZ First / Labour / Green government would quickly turn the immigration stream around and Kiwis would queue up again at the departure gates (as they did under Clarks inept, arrogant and wasteful reign).

Though admittedly - this actually would get property prices down and might resolve the Auckland traffic problems. Just have a look at Canberra to find out how a town looks which is build for a million but occupied by only half of that. But honestly - I think most Kiwis would prefer a booming economy compared to the tranquility offered by an economic graveyard Labour could offer.

So, I agree EZ - Labour and NZ First would quickly fix our building crisis, and they would not even need a building program ... people would just vote with their feet. What a perspective ...

craic
29-06-2017, 08:06 AM
Yes Labour will get the experience they "wanted" or more likely deserve when they lose the next election.

elZorro
29-06-2017, 08:17 AM
Yes Labour will get the experience they "wanted" or more likely deserve when they lose the next election.

You shouldn't bet on that Craic. There's a bit more to run on the Debarclay affair.

blackcap
29-06-2017, 08:53 AM
You shouldn't bet on that Craic. There's a bit more to run on the Debarclay affair.

The Barclay affair is just a beltway issue. Will not gain traction with the voter ElZorro. My partner who is politically ambivalent (as are the vast majority of kiwis) does not even know what it is about, or even really know about it and does not care.

fungus pudding
29-06-2017, 09:00 AM
You shouldn't bet on that Craic. There's a bit more to run on the Debarclay affair.

Ohhh - goodee! Hope it's a bit on the sex and drugs stuff. Juicy - eh!

craic
29-06-2017, 09:31 AM
And what if the lady who complained was a labour "supporter" who switched on the machine herself? But that's unlikely - too much technology and way too much reasoning for a labour supporter.

elZorro
29-06-2017, 02:41 PM
And what if the lady who complained was a labour "supporter" who switched on the machine herself? But that's unlikely - too much technology and way too much reasoning for a labour supporter.

If that were true, our clever cartoonists, research writers, artists, academics, teachers etc would all be predominately right-wing. But they're not. They are generally the first to see through National's policies. Maybe they just have more empathy.

I don't think anyone who worked under Bill English in that office would be anything other than a card-carrying National Party member.

westerly
29-06-2017, 05:49 PM
Never forget that it was the highly competent government of Bill English who brought us the America's Cup back, a trophy which we lost due to Helen Clark's inept reign (just check the dates - I am sure you don't need a graph :p).

Ah - you mean correlation is not causation? Hold on - but in this case why do you think that a government operating in a boom period and getting in that much money through an inflated world economy that even they can't waste it all is doing better than a government which had to govern through several huge crisis (GFC, ChCh earthquake) ... and doing better than nearly all other governments world-wide?

But at the end is all of that just snow of yesteryear. If Labour ever had capable politicians, than they kicked them out. What could Labour offer for NZ's future?

Sure - a NZ First / Labour / Green government would quickly turn the immigration stream around and Kiwis would queue up again at the departure gates (as they did under Clarks inept, arrogant and wasteful reign).

Though admittedly - this actually would get property prices down and might resolve the Auckland traffic problems. Just have a look at Canberra to find out how a town looks which is build for a million but occupied by only half of that. But honestly - I think most Kiwis would prefer a booming economy compared to the tranquility offered by an economic graveyard Labour could offer.

So, I agree EZ - Labour and NZ First would quickly fix our building crisis, and they would not even need a building program ... people would just vote with their feet. What a perspective ...

"Prior to the America's Cup regatta, Prime Minister John Key made a series of comments which appeared both to trivialise the event, as well as playing down the chances of support for Team New Zealand if it did not bring the cup back to Auckland.

His government publicly announced that it was investigating whether it had to honour an agreement to provide $36m to the team, committed to by the former Labour government.

Only recently Key downplayed the economic spin offs the cup brought when it was held offshore. Asked at the start of the America's Cup if the payment was money well spent, Key said "come and ask me if they win", adding that it would be "much more difficult" to continue funding the team if they lost. "

Not sure whether Bill had much influence on the result but he will be in for the photo opportunities for sure. They refused to fund the 2017 cup giving $5m in 2013 to keep the team together.

westerly

iceman
30-06-2017, 12:17 AM
"Prior to the America's Cup regatta, Prime Minister John Key made a series of comments which appeared both to trivialise the event, as well as playing down the chances of support for Team New Zealand if it did not bring the cup back to Auckland.

His government publicly announced that it was investigating whether it had to honour an agreement to provide $36m to the team, committed to by the former Labour government.

Only recently Key downplayed the economic spin offs the cup brought when it was held offshore. Asked at the start of the America's Cup if the payment was money well spent, Key said "come and ask me if they win", adding that it would be "much more difficult" to continue funding the team if they lost. "

Not sure whether Bill had much influence on the result but he will be in for the photo opportunities for sure. They refused to fund the 2017 cup giving $5m in 2013 to keep the team together.

westerly

It is hardly the Government´s resonsibility to fund a very expensive racing/sailing syndicate and their multi million dollar salary packages.

elZorro
30-06-2017, 06:19 AM
It is hardly the Government´s responsibility to fund a very expensive racing/sailing syndicate and their multi million dollar salary packages.

That's correct up to a point. It would appear to have been a good investment overall though. A Labour govt would have been involved more heavily because they know how to grow the economy properly, and a promise is a promise.

What was the National Govt doing when they granted Peter Thiel NZ citizenship after he had visited here for just 12 days? Perhaps here is a clue.



“There is no limit on the amount that a New Zealand-based person or company can donate to a candidate or party, provided that they disclose their identity to the recipient. An anonymous donation or an overseas donation cannot exceed NZ$1,500.”
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/campaign-finance-regulation/newzealand.php





We've covered before how Peter Thiel made certain that he made a big financial return out of a Xero investment that he JV'd with the govt. Compared to that, $1mill to the Earthquake fund was not a big deal.

fungus pudding
30-06-2017, 07:57 AM
That's correct up to a point. It would appear to have been a good investment overall though. A Labour govt would have been involved more heavily because they know how to grow the economy properly, and a promise is a promise.

What was the National Govt doing when they granted Peter Thiel NZ citizenship after he had visited here for just 12 days? Perhaps here is a clue.



“There is no limit on the amount that a New Zealand-based person or company can donate to a candidate or party, provided that they disclose their identity to the recipient. An anonymous donation or an overseas donation cannot exceed NZ$1,500.”
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/campaign-finance-regulation/newzealand.php





We've covered before how Peter Thiel made certain that he made a big financial return out of a Xero investment that he JV'd with the govt. Compared to that, $1mill to the Earthquake fund was not a big deal.

Fairyland stuff. eZ. Say hi to Tinkerbell and the crowd from me.

winner69
30-06-2017, 03:31 PM
Bill doing much better on social media - Andrew a non-event

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/93861796/socks-pies-and-pizza-how-to-turn-the-prime-minister-into-an-everyman

Bjauck
30-06-2017, 05:28 PM
Bill doing much better on social media - Andrew a non-event ... They just need to get those who take notice of sm to get out and vote. However Post Trump & his fixation on and use of sm, is frequenting social media actually a positive thing for a politician?

elZorro
01-07-2017, 09:56 AM
Bill doing much better on social media - Andrew a non-event

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/93861796/socks-pies-and-pizza-how-to-turn-the-prime-minister-into-an-everyman

Just another example of National having more marketing spend, surely. It's made to look unprofessional, but it's not. They've just thrown some money at it.

"Affordable homes" still largely unaffordable in Auckland.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/94256129/auckland-firsthome-buyers-facing-increasingly-more-difficult-hurdles?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+1+ July+2017

Major von Tempsky
01-07-2017, 11:23 AM
You have at least 2 problems EZ (a) you want to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds (b) you don't understand (wilfully) that calendar years are not Budget years and vice versa.

The huge Budget surpluses you are so proud of claiming for Labour were in fact due to Roger Douglas (ACT precursor) from doing such things as flogging off Telecom and all the other Government corporations (and cutting subsidies) and their sale was counted as part of the Budget surplus. So, what do you want to do EZ, oppose the sale of Telecom && or claim credit for the resulting Budget surplus? You can't have it both ways!

(b) as pointed out Roger Douglas successors were busy running down his surplus with election bribes and when it came to the last Budget year, the surplus had gone! Vanished entirely! It's no good quoting the previous Budget year as if it was a calendar year and saying Surplus! Surplus! EZ. The last Budget of Labour was for a Deficit; Labour had spent all of Roger's good work and was now trying some sophistry, some year juggling SOME BIG LIES!

elZorro
02-07-2017, 10:40 AM
You have at least 2 problems EZ (a) you want to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds (b) you don't understand (wilfully) that calendar years are not Budget years and vice versa.

The huge Budget surpluses you are so proud of claiming for Labour were in fact due to Roger Douglas (ACT precursor) from doing such things as flogging off Telecom and all the other Government corporations (and cutting subsidies) and their sale was counted as part of the Budget surplus. So, what do you want to do EZ, oppose the sale of Telecom && or claim credit for the resulting Budget surplus? You can't have it both ways!

(b) as pointed out Roger Douglas successors were busy running down his surplus with election bribes and when it came to the last Budget year, the surplus had gone! Vanished entirely! It's no good quoting the previous Budget year as if it was a calendar year and saying Surplus! Surplus! EZ. The last Budget of Labour was for a Deficit; Labour had spent all of Roger's good work and was now trying some sophistry, some year juggling SOME BIG LIES!

MVT, maybe you are numerically challenged. The Labour govt was pushed out in September 2008, just three months into the 2008-2009 financial year. It would be unfair to attribute the rest of the nine months of that year to Labour's policies. National wasn't slow at changing policy settings. R&D credits removed overnight, state servants being sacked, etc.

Maybe Labour had prudently given advance warnings of harder times to come in their budget, but it was Treasury that stretched the data out for another 9-10 years and their worst-case scenario (which couldn't possibly be accurate) was snatched upon by National. That doesn't change the facts - that Labour grew the tax base along with the economy for nine straight years, always posting a strong budget surplus for each financial year, and they also brought through some great policy changes, still in place today.

They did all this while hamstrung with no ongoing dividend payments from the likes of Telecom, a former state-owned enterprise. That sale income was long gone, swallowed up by the following National term.


From the web, approx. 2010:

Many Kiwis are wary of asset sales due to their experience with Telecom, which was corporatised in the late 1980s and sold to US-based Bell Atlantic and Ameritech in 1990. Over the next couple of decades, the company was highly criticised for high pricing, monopolistic practises, excessive executive salaries and poor investment in broadband services.
In the last five or six years, the Government has forced Telecom to unbundle the local loop (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10415202), (that was Labour of course) lower mobile termination charges and open its network to competitors.
The difference with Telecom is that it was sold off in full – for now, the Government is only proposing partial privatisation.
But regardless, many Kiwis fear that the shares will end up in foreign hands, sending money that would previously been going to the Government or local investors, overseas.
Dr Norman last year said that within six years of being sold, Telecom's dividend payouts had tripled (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1111/S00466/national-set-to-repeat-telecom-privatisation-mistakes.htm).
"The taxpayer basically funded the construction of a state-of-the-art telephone network and then foreign-owned companies reaped all the profits from that public investment," said Dr Norman.

craic
02-07-2017, 11:32 AM
What utter rubbish from el Zorro and the WEB - "Foreign owned companies reaped all the profits from that public investment" I get a handsome dividend from Spark each year and I can and do buy and sell the shares at will. I can also buy and sell worldwide if I chose to - that is the nature of trade these days. I'm sure Kiwisaver has a few spark shares and others that were sold overseas. Next thing you will want to bring back the customs system that charged duties on anything a traveller had in his suitcase at the border that might have been purchased outside NZ.

elZorro
02-07-2017, 01:37 PM
What utter rubbish from el Zorro and the WEB - "Foreign owned companies reaped all the profits from that public investment" I get a handsome dividend from Spark each year and I can and do buy and sell the shares at will. I can also buy and sell worldwide if I chose to - that is the nature of trade these days. I'm sure Kiwisaver has a few spark shares and others that were sold overseas. Next thing you will want to bring back the customs system that charged duties on anything a traveller had in his suitcase at the border that might have been purchased outside NZ.

Craic, surely the point is that Telecom/NZ Post comms dept was built up over many generations, with taxpayer money. It was sold cheaply, like NZ Railways, and it was then plundered by private investors until Labour put the brakes on under Helen Clark's govt and made them split out Chorus. It doesn't matter that you now happen to be one of these investors, because the vast majority of taxpayers don't own many, or any, shares. That's also beside the point - MVT implied that Labour had some imaginary supply of easy cash coming through, from the likes of the Telecom sale. That Roger Douglas had provided them a windfall. Far from it.

Helen Clark's govt was all about bringing failing neo-liberal policies back into a sensible balance, and setting NZ up for the future. They achieved that, National had an easier ride through the GFC, they even admitted it when they took over. Didn't stop National making a pig's ear of the job of governing for all, though.

Bills' social media teamwork.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/celebrities/94182461/Alice-Snedden-Keep-up-the-good-work-Bill-English-Labour-thanks-you

This National Govt stands by the rules. If you don't like those, we have other ones..

iceman
02-07-2017, 07:08 PM
MVT, maybe you are numerically challenged. The Labour govt was pushed out in September 2008, just three months into the 2008-2009 financial year. It would be unfair to attribute the rest of the nine months of that year to Labour's policies. .

Are you serious ? No Government changes course the next day with immediate results to the Government accounts. The fact is that Labour under Clark and Cullen ran down budget surpluses and turned them into huge deficits in their desperation of retaining power at the end of their 3rd term. Of course their populist and very expensive polcies have been largely maintained under National as you have often pointed out, simply because voters think about little other than their own pockets and getting rid of policies that give people large amounts of money for nothing in return, would be political suicide. This applies particularly to Working For Families which is a crazy middle class welfare policy that gives people money they haven´t earned (in many instances) and don´t deserve. Much simpler and cheaper to reduce their tax rates and leave the money with those who earn it in the first place.

But of course this is all pretty irrelevant history now. You should be talking about Labour´s policies for the future. Sadly voters don´t seem to be listening to Little and Labour.

Baa_Baa
02-07-2017, 07:46 PM
But of course this is all pretty irrelevant history now. You should be alking about Labour´s policies for the future. Sadly voters don´t seem to be listening to Little and Labour.

Too true, focusing on the past has little bearing on the future which doesn't look bright for Labour.

Little and his entourage seem to be struggling, putting together a coalition before the election which will confuse and demean the Labour cause.

The result if one looks towards stable government isn't working out very well for Labour and its miss mash of cohorts and obscure policy, indistinguishable from National except in minor details.

elZorro
02-07-2017, 09:02 PM
Are you serious ? No Government changes course the next day with immediate results to the Government accounts. The fact is that Labour under Clark and Cullen ran down budget surpluses and turned them into huge deficits in their desperation of retaining power at the end of their 3rd term. Of course their populist and very expensive polcies have been largely maintained under National as you have often pointed out, simply because voters think about little other than their own pockets and getting rid of policies that give people large amounts of money for nothing in return, would be political suicide. This applies particularly to Working For Families which is a crazy middle class welfare policy that gives people money they haven´t earned (in many instances) and don´t deserve. Much simpler and cheaper to reduce their tax rates and leave the money with those who earn it in the first place.

But of course this is all pretty irrelevant history now. You should be talking about Labour´s policies for the future. Sadly voters don´t seem to be listening to Little and Labour.

Sorry, have a look at the actual real data and show me where Labour "ran down" budget surpluses, Iceman. They trended down a bit from a massive peak, they must have done at least twice as well as National did over their three terms beforehand, and they never went negative. National, on the other hand, had a massive dip into negative territory after they took over. They've been extremely lucky that interest rates internationally are so low, but even then, the interest the crown now have to pay on about $100,000mill of loans is about $3000mill, the size of a good budget surplus, which of course they're not posting. Those loans have to be repaid sometime, preferably soon.

If we judged a government on the ability to repay old debts and not just "borrow and hope" like Muldoon did, then this govt of yours gets an E, and Labour gets an A+ for their efforts.

iceman
03-07-2017, 12:12 AM
Sorry, have a look at the actual real data and show me where Labour "ran down" budget surpluses, Iceman. They trended down a bit from a massive peak, they must have done at least twice as well as National did over their three terms beforehand, and they never went negative. National, on the other hand, had a massive dip into negative territory after they took over. They've been extremely lucky that interest rates internationally are so low, but even then, the interest the crown now have to pay on about $100,000mill of loans is about $3000mill, the size of a good budget surplus, which of course they're not posting. Those loans have to be repaid sometime, preferably soon.

If we judged a government on the ability to repay old debts and not just "borrow and hope" like Muldoon did, then this govt of yours gets an E, and Labour gets an A+ for their efforts.

We will see whether voters agree with you in September. I suggest you're far out on a fringe compared to a large majority of voters and being stuck in historical arguments has little relevance to most voters this year. But your tone is the same as the tone Labour leadership is sounding, hence their dismal failure to connect. And with The Greens having all but disappeared in the media and nobody thinking or talking about them (inexperience with all the new trendy young candidates??), your dream of a Left wing Government later in the year is already doomed !

elZorro
03-07-2017, 06:07 AM
We will see whether voters agree with you in September. I suggest you're far out on a fringe compared to a large majority of voters and being stuck in historical arguments has little relevance to most voters this year. But your tone is the same as the tone Labour leadership is sounding, hence their dismal failure to connect. And with The Greens having all but disappeared in the media and nobody thinking or talking about them (inexperience with all the new trendy young candidates??), your dream of a Left wing Government later in the year is already doomed !

That's what I find most amusing about right-wingers - when their historical argument is demolished with facts, they revert to saying "that's all in the past, we're moving on", and then steadfastly refuse to comment about all the stupid stuff that a National govt is doing in the present. Then you're left with only one point of view, something along the lines of there being some sort of disorganised rabble on the left.

So let's take a look at National's chances at the moment. Todd Barclay has to step down in disgrace, who knows what's coming out on his actions in the near future. Bill English and John Key are knee deep in that one too. Those National party signs that are coming out, don't seem to feature any head shots of Bill English.

Labour, on the other hand, has a pretty useful line-up, as do the Greens. A swing of 2-3% in the polls will make a huge difference to the look leading up to the elections, and of late, NZ First has been much more aligned with Labour's policies and team than usual.

We're in with a very good chance this time.

blackcap
03-07-2017, 07:55 AM
Labour, on the other hand, has a pretty useful line-up, as do the Greens. .

Are you making me laugh? Bunch of imbecilles most of them. I mean Andrew Little... really? Whats his name the spokesman for finance? Jacinda who cannot handle the stress. And then Meteria of McGillicuddy serious fame who is a huge millstone around the green's neck and talks a lot of nonsense.
Do not get me wrong, I am in no way a Bill English supporter and think National can do better, also do not like the Labour Lite direction they are going but no way are the Labour Green coalition going to get enough to get over 50%. You can forget about Winston ElZorro, no way is he going with that bunch of rag tag.

fungus pudding
03-07-2017, 08:02 AM
That's what I find most amusing about right-wingers - when their historical argument is demolished with facts, they revert to saying "that's all in the past, we're moving on", and then steadfastly refuse to comment about all the stupid stuff that a National govt is doing in the present. Then you're left with only one point of view, something along the lines of there being some sort of disorganised rabble on the left.

So let's take a look at National's chances at the moment. Todd Barclay has to step down in disgrace, who knows what's coming out on his actions in the near future. Bill English and John Key are knee deep in that one too. Those National party signs that are coming out, don't seem to feature any head shots of Bill English.

Labour, on the other hand, has a pretty useful line-up, as do the Greens. A swing of 2-3% in the polls will make a huge difference to the look leading up to the elections, and of late, NZ First has been much more aligned with Labour's policies and team than usual.

We're in with a very good chance this time.

Yes, of course you are eZ. :laugh:

westerly
03-07-2017, 01:10 PM
Fairyland stuff. eZ. Say hi to Tinkerbell and the crowd from me.

You are well in with the faeries then?

westerly

Joshuatree
03-07-2017, 01:37 PM
It is hardly the Government´s resonsibility to fund a very expensive racing/sailing syndicate and their multi million dollar salary packages.

Can you verify that; it was run on a shoestring and arguably Dalton was the only one earning decent money.

Un/Fortunately for our PM he isn't a slippery/teflon/Key like individual who trained voters to lose int and stick with the status quo bro don't even think about it ; everything he did was simply to stay in power at least he was transparent there:). Don't mess with the housing situ just fiddle around the edges until the prob gets too big to fix; so many national faithful own rental houses Ayyy;). No our pm doesn't know how to coverup but gives it a go; theres the difference, between honesty and fake honesty exposed.

craic
03-07-2017, 04:35 PM
Voters like size. Who was the tallest PM and who was the shortest?

fungus pudding
03-07-2017, 04:42 PM
Voters like size. Who was the tallest PM and who was the shortest?

Lange wins hands down for size. Rowling was probably the closest to the ground.

elZorro
03-07-2017, 07:01 PM
Voters like size. Who was the tallest PM and who was the shortest?

Stop changing the subject Craic.. but I thought Muldoon was fairly short wasn't he?

Steven Joyce implies some MPs may have listened to the Barclay tapes, but not of course, in their ministerial capacity.. they were wearing other hats at the time.

https://youtu.be/bxnodApbNZY

Joshuatree
03-07-2017, 11:26 PM
. Thanks el.Watching The PM responding to Littles questions. My opinion. I can't believe the total lack of care or reponsibility.No credibility, , trying to be funny instead of responding; changing the subject, saying the same answer over and over about a totally different subject about 5 times!!. Evasive; refusing pointblank to answer. Little who was being calm , clear, rational, reasonable, asking for answers that we all need to know.. Talk about digging a bigger hole!!!.

iceman
04-07-2017, 06:33 AM
Can you verify that; it was run on a shoestring and arguably Dalton was the only one earning decent money.

Un/Fortunately for our PM he isn't a slippery/teflon/Key like individual who trained voters to lose int and stick with the status quo bro don't even think about it ; everything he did was simply to stay in power at least he was transparent there:). Don't mess with the housing situ just fiddle around the edges until the prob gets too big to fix; so many national faithful own rental houses Ayyy;). No our pm doesn't know how to coverup but gives it a go; theres the difference, between honesty and fake honesty exposed.

Verify what ? If you really think this campaign did not pay multi million dollars on salaries, you are entitled to that view. Regardless, it has nothing to do with the Government, nor should it. That's my point.

craic
04-07-2017, 06:57 AM
I will insist on the right to change the subject at will to get away from the heap of rubbish el Zorro keep piling up. Then I realised that they are probably building a mound for Little to stand on so that he looks tall enough to get into parliament without proving his age at the door.

Joshuatree
04-07-2017, 07:13 AM
Verify they paid multimillion $ on a shoestring or zip it; simple.
What i saw in parliament is coverup; spin, anything but the truth and the incumbents act like its a funny game, avoiding the truth. They made honesty and decency look like dirty things and Little stood tall through that performance. If only more public watched this ;they would want to vote and the turnout would be the highest ever.

BlackPeter
04-07-2017, 07:56 AM
I will insist on the right to change the subject at will to get away from the heap of rubbish el Zorro keep piling up. Then I realised that they are probably building a mound for Little to stand on so that he looks tall enough to get into parliament without proving his age at the door.

Craic, not sure Little's size is the problem - and lets face it, he clearly looks old (enough ;) ); His and his parties problem is that they believe their role is to lecture some outdated ideology instead of listen to the very people they want to represent.

Bjauck
04-07-2017, 08:22 AM
Interesting story...a real estate agent celebrates selling a house to a foreign (from PRC) buyer. Her justification being that she achieved the best price for the vendor. It sounds reasonable on the face of it - after all that is one of the reasons behind home owners' selecting a good agent. However with the number of increasingly wealthy people in China, without NZ having meaningful controls, there is nothing to stop Chinese or other foreign buyers from gazumping local NZ residents in owning NZ housing.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11885213

Is it something to celebrate that the government (I.e. National) is letting this continue to happen as home ownership rates fall and first home owners are increasingly shut out of the market?

Joshuatree
04-07-2017, 08:35 AM
They (Labour)know who they represent; the people. The Govt are being ANYTHING except honesty to try and keep their snouts in.Representing themselves stuff the people.Just watch the Parliament bull dust Elz put up.
(QUESTION 2.)

Joshuatree
04-07-2017, 08:41 AM
Interesting story...a real estate agent celebrates selling a house to a foreign (from PRC) buyer. Her justification being that she achieved the best price for the vendor. It sounds reasonable on the face of it - after all that is one of the reasons behind home owners' selecting a good agent. However with the number of increasingly wealthy people in China, without NZ having meaningful controls, there is nothing to stop Chinese or other foreign buyers from gazumping local NZ residents in owning NZ housing.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11885213

Is it something to celebrate that the government (I.e. National) is letting this continue to happen as home ownership rates fall and first home owners are increasingly shut out of the market?

Nope ; the chickens are coming home to roost thats for sure; what a slow motion train wreck they've created.

BlackPeter
04-07-2017, 09:01 AM
Interesting story...a real estate agent celebrates selling a house to a foreign (from PRC) buyer. Her justification being that she achieved the best price for the vendor. It sounds reasonable on the face of it - after all that is one of the reasons behind home owners' selecting a good agent. However with the number of increasingly wealthy people in China, without NZ having meaningful controls, there is nothing to stop Chinese or other foreign buyers from gazumping local NZ residents in owning NZ housing.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11885213

Is it something to celebrate that the government (I.e. National) is letting this continue to happen as home ownership rates fall and first home owners are increasingly shut out of the market?

Never works out well if the government is trying to control the market (and that's what you are asking for). As well - I assume these Chinese buyers had at least NZ residency? So what are we talking now - sell houses only to legal NZ residents with round eyes?

The options I see are:

a) Reduce demand - e.g. by driving Kiwis (and anybody else) out of the country. Just make it unattractive enough for people to live here. solves as well the "immigration-problem". Less demand for houses - lower prices. Comes though with less jobs, but who cares. Didn't work though for Labour under HC. While she was good in getting Kiwis to queue up at departure gates - she was not effective enough (lucky us, it was not due to her not trying hard enough). House prices still rocketed up under the reign of the last Labour government.

Sure - you can restrict overseas demand by making it harder for non residents to buy property. So far however I haven't seen any evidence that this would make a difference. Sure - there are some nice high country resorts owned by non residents, but would selling the to NZ residents really solve the Auckland housing crisis? And remember - not just Peter Thiel is a Kiwi :p; By promoting bad researched stories like above you are just doing the bidding of racists and populists. Just tell me - how many houses in NZ are owned by non residents (the only group you could exclude)? What difference would it make to remove them from the market?

b) Increase supply - this should be a no brainer. And while they haven't yet found a cost efficient method to make new land (well, the Dutch and Singaporeans are trying) - changing living habits would do. People all around the world are quite happy to live in (high quality) apartment blocks. It would be easy to 10-fold the number of units in Auckland (and likely improve the living standards in each of them) by building e.g. like in Singapore, or in Hong Kong, or in London, or in Frankfurt, or in New York, or in basically everywhere ...). However - we don't need that. A handful of well designed mid-rises would easily solve the Auckland housing crisis.

But yes, jumping on the populist train is obviously more - eh ... popular - isn't it? Just watch the US and the UK to see how this works out ...

Joshuatree
04-07-2017, 09:09 AM
Far too late; National fiddling around the edges doing nothing in fear of losing their populist national, rental owning followers and now affordable houses; whoops sorry don't know how many we've created as there is no measuring system for that. Lol,yeah right , pass me a tui and keep digging that hole.

BlackPeter
04-07-2017, 09:13 AM
Far too late; National fiddling around the edges doing nothing in fear of losing their populist national, rental owning followers and now affordable houses; whoops sorry don't know how many we've created as there is no measuring system for that. Lol,yeah right , pass me a tui and keep digging that hole.

Populist? So you are saying the Winston First will go with National? He is the only populist I know in NZ politics.

Bjauck
04-07-2017, 10:32 AM
Never works out well if the government is trying to control the market (and that's what you are asking for).
Just about all products, services and markets have regulations and controls, often including to whom and by whom the products/services can be sold.

Allowing overseas-based foreigners to have relatively unrestricted competition with NZers for NZ housing (especially existing housing stock) is inherently unfair for NZ-based residents (with round or other eyes!) insofar as foreigners can take advantage of foreign conditions, capital raising abilities and exchange fluctuations.


Just about all other countries control the residential housing market in some way. Including our commonwealth neighbours:
Australia: http://firb.gov.au/real-estate/
Singapore - http://www.sla.gov.sg/Services/Restriction-on-Foreign-Ownership-of-Landed-Property
Fiji - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-12/foreigners-face-strict-new-fiji-land-ownership-laws/5962152



As well - I assume these Chinese buyers had at least NZ residency? So what are we talking now - sell houses only to legal NZ residents with round eyes? LOL.
Why do you assume the buyers have NZ residency when the indications are to the contrary? The agent, who has residency, specifically said "these overseas buyers are the ones who are prepared to pay." They had just stepped off the plane. NZ allows overseas based foreign buyers (with round or other eyes!) to buy existing residential housing. It happens.


...
But yes, jumping on the populist train is obviously more - eh ... popular - isn't it? Just watch the US and the UK to see how this works out ... I am guessing that National may think that it is still more popular (among its potential voters) at the moment not to introduced measured and sensible controls on overseas-based foreign ownership.

Joshuatree
04-07-2017, 10:45 AM
Agree; there has been none more populist the National for some time. anything to stay in power. What a disaster they've knowingly created over a long time frame and now too little to late; leaving the mess to another Little to have to try and clean it up; what a legacy and to think key got a knighthood for that, offensive .

craic
04-07-2017, 11:53 AM
Key got a knighthood for being the Prime Minister of NZ - They all do, and fair enough, people get knighted for all manner of reasons, taking the leadership of the country is one of the better ones. Key was one of the most popular leaders in my fifty-seven years here. Key resigned in office at the height of his popularity - most leaders on both sides leave when they are losers. The only thing that I find offensive is that a losing party will try to get people to accept the leadership of a politician who has never been able to win a seat.

Bjauck
04-07-2017, 12:36 PM
Key got a knighthood for being the Prime Minister of NZ - They all do, and fair enough, people get knighted for all manner of reasons, taking the leadership of the country is one of the better ones. Key was one of the most popular leaders in my fifty-seven years here. Key resigned in office at the height of his popularity - most leaders on both sides leave when they are losers. The only thing that I find offensive is that a losing party will try to get people to accept the leadership of a politician who has never been able to win a seat.

Yep. Just about all the ex-PMs get honoured. The republican ones don't accept a title but join the ONZ. It would have been surprising if JK had remained plain citizen JK since he had reintroduced the horsey honorific!

Of the six rt hon ex-PMs who served as PMs since 1990 -
Three accepted titles:
Sir Geoffrey Palmer QC (Lab)
Dame Jenny Shipley (Nat)
Sir John Key (Nat)

and three remain untitled.

Blackrose
04-07-2017, 06:43 PM
What I'm finding interesting on this little corner of the internet, is that we really are letting fly with the comments around the up coming general election here in NZ.

It is not as one sided as say some facebook threads from News.com and comments around Paula Bennett which have been nothing but vitriolic anger. What I can get is that the current Blue Team under Bill English, is trying to resell a "steady as she goes" approach to governance. Which is jolly great stuff for share holders such as ourselves this has meant we've been left to passive income this **** which makes living in NZ worth it I guess.

But the gutted have nothings that have been under the Arnie "Wheel of Pain" stuff with low wages, skyrocketing uni fees, home ownership shot to hell, and the rise of an underclass that Bennett seems to think can be contained with precarious emergency accommodation/revolving credit line that makes a bad situation dire... there is an accounting to be had here.
(Here is that classic clip...from Conan the Barbarian https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5KYZ74OAak&t=131s)

Little is promising a trade union-y deal which could make life a bit more bearable work wise. The zero hours **** and the tinkering of **** under the blue team has killed lots of R&D and productivity. This means we can't afford high mortgages. Mr Morgan offers some useful stuff, and the Greens these days are stacked with pragmatic fund managers that did study accounting at Auckland Uni. No one gives a **** about pot anymore, and even some of their own core group of insane hippies have been counteracted by scientists that are concerned with rising C02 levels.

All things the Blue Team has ignored. Alot. So there's a lot of discontent really.

elZorro
05-07-2017, 05:54 AM
I'd missed that background historical info about Paula Bennett, most sites running scared but there is a bit still posted if you search for it. Can't say I'm surprised, if it's all true. The guy has put his name to it. Paula is threatening legal action.

I think it takes a lot of ego to be an MP, is it too much to hope that this ego is well founded, that they are all straight-up people?

BlackPeter
05-07-2017, 08:04 AM
I'd missed that background historical info about Paula Bennett, most sites running scared but there is a bit still posted if you search for it. Can't say I'm surprised, if it's all true. The guy has put his name to it. Paula is threatening legal action.

I think it takes a lot of ego to be an MP, is it too much to hope that this ego is well founded, that they are all straight-up people?

EZ, no idea what you are talking about .... are you now trying to imply there might be mud for Labour to throw so dirty that you are afraid to put your pen name to it? Labour must be really desperate - do they develop into a Trump 2.0 party, just less honest and more cowardly? Difference is - Trump managed to find enough useful idiots who voted for him, he seems to be more inspirational than Little :p.

fungus pudding
05-07-2017, 08:19 AM
EZ, no idea what you are talking about ....

Neither has he.

Bjauck
05-07-2017, 09:21 AM
EZ, no idea what you are talking about .... are you now trying to imply there might be mud for Labour to throw so dirty that you are afraid to put your pen name to it? Labour must be really desperate - do they develop into a Trump 2.0 party, just less honest and more cowardly? Difference is - Trump managed to find enough useful idiots who voted for him, he seems to be more inspirational than Little :p. It could be interesting to weigh up all the policies and tactics which may make either Labour or National into the more "Trump-like" party. However it may also be useful to assess which Party has the policies which would not result in the alienation, and/or disadvantage, of segments of the population and hence neutralise the appeal of demagogues and their (stated) agenda.

elZorro
05-07-2017, 09:30 AM
EZ, no idea what you are talking about .... are you now trying to imply there might be mud for Labour to throw so dirty that you are afraid to put your pen name to it? Labour must be really desperate - do they develop into a Trump 2.0 party, just less honest and more cowardly? Difference is - Trump managed to find enough useful idiots who voted for him, he seems to be more inspirational than Little :p.

I won't post any link to this, but I am talking about something all right, try googling..

"paula bennett allan legal action tutira" it seems to have a ring of truth about it.

BlackPeter
05-07-2017, 09:52 AM
I won't post any link to this, but I am talking about something all right, try googling..

"paula bennett allan legal action tutira" it seems to have a ring of truth about it.

Come on EZ - if you have something (and evidence), than just state it here. Truth would be a defence against any defamation claim.

It sounds however you have no clue what you are talking about - or worse, you know that you are just stirring. In this case - better shut up.

Whatever it is - has Labour really no better plan than to throw mud they don't even have? What about a better plan for the future then driving high performing Kiwis (just as under HC) out of the country? Elections are coming soon ... don't hold back ;);

Major von Tempsky
05-07-2017, 10:01 AM
My recollection is that Paula Bennett was a teenage unmarried Maori solo mother dependent on social welfare.

Now she is a successful overachieving National Party Cabinet Minister. No wonder Labour supporters hate her so much.

I would like to whole heartedly applaud her. She's a better human than I would ever have been.

She could have gone the Labour way and still be stuck in the mire moaning her head off. But she would never have had the chance to be a Cabinet Minister for obvious reasons.

fungus pudding
05-07-2017, 10:05 AM
I won't post any link to this, but I am talking about something all right, try googling..

"paula bennett allan legal action tutira" it seems to have a ring of truth about it.

Care to elaborate on 'it seems to have a ring of truth to it'? Reading that objectively it seems to have the stench of b/s sprayed liberally all over it.

elZorro
05-07-2017, 10:14 AM
Come on EZ - if you have something (and evidence), than just state it here. Truth would be a defence against any defamation claim.

It sounds however you have no clue what you are talking about - or worse, you know that you are just stirring. In this case - better shut up.

Whatever it is - has Labour really no better plan than to throw mud they don't even have? What about a better plan for the future then driving high performing Kiwis (just as under HC) out of the country? Elections are coming soon ... don't hold back ;);

If I post a link to someone else's open letter on this subject, it would be moderated. Just google and it'll get you there. I know nothing more about it.

You've mentioned before that under Helen Clark's government we had a net migration loss from NZ. I'm unsure if that applied across all or some of her terms, but in any case it would be much more strongly linked to healthy economies in Australia and UK for example, than what was happening here. You're being disingenuous in suggesting that a Labour govt scared them off.

The big picture is that far more noticeable climate change could be just around the corner. A few years, some think. A temperate and low-density country like NZ will be under increasing pressure from immigrants from many other areas of the world. Look at Peter Thiel for example, what's that all about? But as many are saying, when is our govt going to step up and plan for all this, set some proper rules or guidelines? In my opinion a Labour-Green coalition would be a much better fit for NZ, with the turbulent times that are coming for most countries around the world. We don't have the luxury of continuing on as before. That's what I honestly think.

BlackPeter
05-07-2017, 10:56 AM
...
You've mentioned before that under Helen Clark's government we had a net migration loss from NZ. I'm unsure if that applied across all or some of her terms, but in any case it would be much more strongly linked to healthy economies in Australia and UK for example, than what was happening here. You're being disingenuous in suggesting that a Labour govt scared them off.
...

EZ, I think the only one being disingenuous here is you.

Look - you have all the facts: Kiwis queued up at the departure gates (particularly in the second half of HC's reign), and yes, this was as well because other governments under the same global economic conditions (pre GFC) performed much better than the Labour government in NZ. Labour focussed at that stage on increasing taxes and employing unemployed clowns as Senior Policy Analysts while other countries made hay while the economic sun was shining. People voted with their feet against the HC government and at the end they did the same at the ballot box.

Since National is in government this trend has totally turned around. Kiwis are now coming back and we do have an immigration gain because people want to live here. New Zealand is performing much better than most other countries under the new post-GFC conditions. People are voting with their feet for this country and this government, and I am sure they will do the same at the ballot box.

BlackPeter
05-07-2017, 11:19 AM
Just one of the badly researched and unfeasible promises Andrew Little made: He promised to cut more work visas than are issued every year:

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/04/opinion-which-immigrants-will-labour-ban.html



What Andrew Little is proposing

He told The AM Show’s Duncan Garner that he wants annual net migration to be between 20-25,000 people. In the year to February 2017, net migration was 71,333, so to achieve his target he needs to cut back the number of immigrants by between 46,333 - 51,333. He says the bulk of those cutbacks will come from the work visa category.

Breaking down the latest immigration figures

The key figure to show immigration inflow is what’s called "net migration".

In the year to February 2017 it was 71,333 people - roughly the same size as the population of New Plymouth.

This figure is calculated by subtracting the number of permanent and long term departures (57,483) from the number of permanent and long-term arrivals (128,816).

In order for Andrew Little to achieve his target, he needs to cull at least 46,333 visas.

This couldn’t be done by abolishing all 43,025 work visas. But it gets even more difficult than that.


So - he must plan to issue a negative number of work visas - LOL

Just wondering EZ, whether you can sort out this mess? I guess it must be embarrassing to have a candidate who is incapable of even doing simple math. Though at second thoughts ... having an incompetent leader might be the other thing Labour have in common with the GoP :p?

Bjauck
05-07-2017, 12:35 PM
...
Since National is in government this trend has totally turned around. Kiwis are now coming back and we do have an immigration gain because people want to live here. New Zealand is performing much better than most other countries under the new post-GFC conditions. People are voting with their feet for this country and this government, and I am sure they will do the same at the ballot box.

Since JK has been in office, NZ productivity has increased from about 158 to 164. So a slight lift no doubt boosted by the bounce back from the GFC. However there has been a drop in productivity since the beginning of 2016.
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/productivity

As Kiwis-in-OZ fortunes have been adversely affected by both Australian policy towards them and the resource sector downturn, more Kiwis have yo-yo'ed back to NZ. That plus high immigration numbers have helped boost bottom line gdp numbers at the expense of straining infrastructure and increasingly inability to be able to provide affordable housing.

elZorro
05-07-2017, 02:28 PM
Just one of the badly researched and unfeasible promises Andrew Little made: He promised to cut more work visas than are issued every year:

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/04/opinion-which-immigrants-will-labour-ban.html




So - he must plan to issue a negative number of work visas - LOL

Just wondering EZ, whether you can sort out this mess? I guess it must be embarrassing to have a candidate who is incapable of even doing simple math. Though at second thoughts ... having an incompetent leader might be the other thing Labour have in common with the GoP :p?

You just need to read more carefully - Andrew said the work visas would be the bulk of the change, which could mean 51%, or even a bigger part of the total than anything else.

I note that net NZers leaving NZ reached some kind of a peak in 2012 (while National were in office). It's just getting a lot messier overseas, is a big part of the reason they are now staying. But look at the non-NZ citizen figures, a very unusual situation in being that high. Over the Clark years, NZers soon started returning, later moderate numbers of NZers left, a growing trend, but then the same thing happened under National in the term before that. The outgoing number was higher in 2012, under National. Maybe it's National policies that some don't like..

http://www.stats.govt.nz/~/media/Statistics/browse-categories/population/migration/international-travel-and-migration-articles/Kiwi%20factor%20migration/ann-net-pmt-86-16.gif

BlackPeter
05-07-2017, 02:31 PM
Since JK has been in office, NZ productivity has increased from about 158 to 164. So a slight lift no doubt boosted by the bounce back from the GFC. However there has been a drop in productivity since the beginning of 2016.
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/productivity

As Kiwis-in-OZ fortunes have been adversely affected by both Australian policy towards them and the resource sector downturn, more Kiwis have yo-yo'ed back to NZ. That plus high immigration numbers have helped boost bottom line gdp numbers at the expense of straining infrastructure and increasingly inability to be able to provide affordable housing.

So? I never talked about the NZ productivity ... and to be honest, this is something politicians hardly can influence without annoying their voters. I said that the National led government did obviously in NZ a better job than whatever government was running the last 9 years running Australia, the UK or any other country material for returning Kiwis to their homeland.

Compare e.g. EZ's hobby horse - the public debt load. NZ did very well (34% of GDP) compared to the UK (92.2%) or Australia (46%).

BlackPeter
05-07-2017, 02:45 PM
You just need to read more carefully - Andrew said the work visas would be the bulk of the change, which could mean 51%, or even a bigger part of the total than anything else.


Still - a massive cut in the number of work visas, hardly any left. Just help us to understand which parts for the economy Andrew plans to kill off? IT? Technology? Construction? Tourism & hospitality? Agriculture? Must be all of the above .... NZ would need to prepare for massive economic cuts if they go for Labour.



I note that net NZers leaving NZ reached some kind of a peak in 2012 (while National were in office). It's just getting a lot messier overseas, is a big part of the reason they are now staying. But look at the non-NZ citizen figures, a very unusual situation in being that high. Over the Clark years, NZers soon started returning, later moderate numbers of NZers left, a growing trend, but then the same thing happened under National in the term before that. The outgoing number was higher in 2012, under National. Maybe it's National policies that some don't like..

http://www.stats.govt.nz/~/media/Statistics/browse-categories/population/migration/international-travel-and-migration-articles/Kiwi%20factor%20migration/ann-net-pmt-86-16.gif

It takes typically 1 to 2 years from deciding to leave your country to actually going. I went through this process myself. Picking the right target country, finding a job, finding a house, deciding about children's education and similar does take time.

This means the 2011/12 peak are people who decided during Clark's reign to go. Your data prove my case.

Joshuatree
05-07-2017, 02:46 PM
So what apples with mangos or what.And whats this"to be honest '"spin , sounds like Crosby /Textor chapter 395.

fungus pudding
05-07-2017, 03:30 PM
If I post a link to someone else's open letter on this subject, it would be moderated.

Be bold eZ. Take a chance. If in the highly unlikely event it gets moderated well - too bad, no harm done.
Otherwise some of us might thing your all pith and wind.

macduffy
05-07-2017, 04:19 PM
Just curious - but why should an "open letter" be liable to be moderated?

elZorro
06-07-2017, 07:07 AM
Just curious - but why should an "open letter" be liable to be moderated?

The open letter to Paula Bennett is easy enough to find with google. I've noticed other sites like this being very careful not to post direct links to it. So I've done the same.

The press have certainly been gagged already, although some of their initial articles have been cached on the web. Regardless, it's not a good look for the deputy leader of the National Party, that she needs to threaten to sue over what just may be the gospel truth.

Dare I say it, that over on the Labour side, we always try to appoint erudite, hardworking people as our representatives.

fungus pudding
06-07-2017, 07:35 AM
The open letter to Paula Bennett is easy enough to find with google. I've noticed other sites like this being very careful not to post direct links to it. So I've done the same.

The press have certainly been gagged already, although some of their initial articles have been cached on the web. Regardless, it's not a good look for the deputy leader of the National Party, that she needs to threaten to sue over what just may be the gospel truth.




That last sentence does you no favours eZ.

BlackPeter
06-07-2017, 07:38 AM
Dare I say it, that over on the Labour side, we always try to appoint erudite, hardworking people as our representatives.

Maybe, but this is not the question, is it? It appears you are trying to insinuate that Paula Bennett did at some stage something wrong which you are not allowed to reveal. You are basically creating baseless malicious rumours. Not a good look for a Labour supporter who tries to imply that his party is in any way superior.

And while you are not able to come up with any credible claim or evidence for whatever Paula might have done - there are plenty of Labour politicians who stood at some stage on the wrong side of the law:

David Butcher (MP for Labour) - convicted for fraudulently claiming air fares he was not entitled to;

Taito Philip Field (MP for Labour) - jailed for bribery and corruption;

John Kirk (Labour MP) - convicted under the insolvency act in NZ and doing time in the US;

Ruth Dyson (Labour MP) - convicted for drink driving;

Trevor Mellard (Labour) - convicted for fighting in a public place;

Now - obviously - this list is not complete ... and Labour is not the only party who's MP's tend to be from time to time on the wrong side of the law.

However - it looks more like Labour has problems picking politicians with a clean slate ... and you lot are throwing the first stone?

artemis
06-07-2017, 11:36 AM
The guy that wrote the open letter comes across as seriously weird. Couple of folk I know looked a bit more deeply and found a conspiracy theorist and a guy with a very chequered past. Mental health issues would be my guess.

fungus pudding
06-07-2017, 12:12 PM
The guy that wrote the open letter comes across as seriously weird. Couple of folk I know looked a bit more deeply and found a conspiracy theorist and a guy with a very chequered past. Mental health issues would be my guess.

I'm intrigued. How did you find it?

RGR367
06-07-2017, 12:41 PM
I'm intrigued. How did you find it?

Wow! I thought I followed politics well enough but at this point, I'm at a loss what you guys are talking about. Sorry folks but gut feel says it's not really important then. But keep at it and who knows it will kick in sometime :p

elZorro
06-07-2017, 08:46 PM
Wow! I thought I followed politics well enough but at this point, I'm at a loss what you guys are talking about. Sorry folks but gut feel says it's not really important then. But keep at it and who knows it will kick in sometime :p

You're probably right. This is way more important.

http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2017/07/climate-change-big-danger.html

artemis
07-07-2017, 06:37 AM
I'm intrigued. How did you find it?

It was widely available in the beginning, but has since disappeared from most places I believe. Suppose the threat of legal action played its part.Certainly the copy I read has gone.

I hear that it is still out there on the interweb, but I haven't looked.

elZorro
07-07-2017, 07:27 AM
It was widely available in the beginning, but has since disappeared from most places I believe. Suppose the threat of legal action played its part.Certainly the copy I read has gone.

I hear that it is still out there on the interweb, but I haven't looked.

Yes, it's still there, the guy making the claims said he'd happily undergo a lie detector test, even if it's not admissible in court.

Not sure who it was that defended King Salmon's practices on here, but a year or two ago a low-flow site in Marlborough had an incident with fish mortality that required them to call in the boffins from MPI. 70% of all the salmon at the site, died over the course of a few days. That's why they want to move their farms somewhere else.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/aquaculture/94320845/new-zealand-king-salmons-inadequate-biosecurity-plan-criticised-following-salmon-death-investigation?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Friday+7+Ju ly+2017

craic
07-07-2017, 04:44 PM
There you go el Z. You got through a whole day on a bit of rumour and supposition without a single challenge! Maybe you will get confident, enough to listen to that clown - and I will have the pleasure of watching the egg run down your face. This is right in the middle of my patch and I suppose I should shut up now and be satisfied with the three or four winners I had on the horses and good figures on the market. I think your man will win in Napier so be satisfied with that.

fungus pudding
07-07-2017, 06:04 PM
Yes, it's still there, the guy making the claims said he'd happily undergo a lie detector test, even if it's not admissible in court.



Be a daredevil eZ. Tell us what this fellow alleges. Got to be good for a laugh.

elZorro
07-07-2017, 06:44 PM
Be a daredevil eZ. Tell us what this fellow alleges. Got to be good for a laugh.

FP, you'll have to do more googling, check back a few posts. It's a bit too involved to spell out on a tidy site such as this, and I'm not going to get booted off before an election that the Labour/Greens should win. His first name is Ashley. While some of the details about Paula relate to a Napier address, Ashley now apparently lives in Ohaupo, on the outskirts of Hamiltown. He does seem to be keen on posting amateur videos on various subjects.

Joshuatree
07-07-2017, 07:15 PM
Easy to google alright ; quite detailed, alleging 3 counts of fraud, very serious if there is any thing to it.:huh:

Baa_Baa
07-07-2017, 07:56 PM
Easy to google alright ; quite detailed, alleging 3 counts of fraud, very serious if there is any thing to it.:huh:

Yes easy to find and quite the revelation, if it's true. Given the number of places that it has been removed from, someone wants it suppressed, so perhaps there is some truth in it! Quite the scandal really, might be the end of Paula Bennett.

elZorro
09-07-2017, 05:20 PM
Yes easy to find and quite the revelation, if it's true. Given the number of places that it has been removed from, someone wants it suppressed, so perhaps there is some truth in it! Quite the scandal really, might be the end of Paula Bennett.

Here's an article from 2009 about Bennett, mentioning her workplaces.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/vote-08/news/722501/Bennett-big-mover-in-new-Cabinet

I'm sure there could be quite a bit of questioning in her direction, within the protected walls of the House.


Absolute freedom of speech in ParliamentIn New Zealand’s democracy there are limits on freedom of speech, such as those in the Human Rights Act 1993 and the Defamation Act 1992. However, words spoken as part of parliamentary proceedings are subject to absolute freedom of speech. Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 provides “That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedings in Parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.” This protects not only members of Parliament, but also witnesses and advisers at select committee meetings, from being sued for defamation or otherwise being held legally liable for what they say in a parliamentary proceeding. The Parliamentary Privilege Act 2014 (section 10) defines what “proceedings in Parliament” are, that is “all words spoken and acts done in the course of, or for purposes of or incidental to, the transacting of the business of the House or of a committee.”
However, if the words said in parliamentary proceedings (the House and its committees) are repeated elsewhere, the protection of parliamentary privilege does not apply. Procedures are in place for both the House and select committees to ensure natural justice (fairness of process) is observed. These allow right of reply to those who consider their reputation has been damaged by statements made under privilege. Arguments continue about whether there are enough protections against unfair allegations. This must be weighed against the need for the House and committees to be free to hear of any matters that may affect the business under consideration.
Elected representatives make important decisions and they are better able to do this where information and opinions can be disclosed without fear of legal consequences.
The privilege of free speech in Parliament carries an obligation to use it responsibly. The House has the ability to punish for contempt; an example of contempt would be to mislead the House or a committee deliberately (see below).

Major von Tempsky
10-07-2017, 07:57 PM
More and more nebulous and increasingly obscure.

I'm more interested in today's Poll results; Labour down 3% to 27% and Andrew Little down to 5% in 4th place behind Jacinda Ardern.

Another 3% down and they'll be at 24%, another 2% up and NZ First will be at 13%.

Greens are already at 16%. Sooner or later either Greens or NZ First will go higher than the Labour Party and sooner or later Labour will be displaced by either Greens or NZ First as the Official Opposition....

elZorro
10-07-2017, 08:28 PM
More and more nebulous and increasingly obscure.

I'm more interested in today's Poll results; Labour down 3% to 27% and Andrew Little down to 5% in 4th place behind Jacinda Ardern.

Another 3% down and they'll be at 24%, another 2% up and NZ First will be at 13%.

Greens are already at 16%. Sooner or later either Greens or NZ First will go higher than the Labour Party and sooner or later Labour will be displaced by either Greens or NZ First as the Official Opposition....

Well it is a poll, not a very big one, 1000 voters with a margin of error of +/- 3%. (https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/andrew-little-drops-fourth-preferred-pm-in-latest-1-news-colmar-brunton-poll-sees-both-major-parties-take-hit) You forgot a few salient points, MVT. National are down 2% on the party vote from last time, and even with their normal partners, couldn't rule the roost. They'd have to court NZFirst, who are getting the protest vote. But NZ First currently looks more like a centre left party.

As far as the leader's preferential vote goes, where is Paula Bennett? Labour has both of theirs in the top four. No-one is seriously considering Paula "Hyperbowl" Bennett as having PM potential. They've got that right. Paula is on shaky ground, no mistake. That could do National some more damage leading up to the elections.

I think Corin Dann is fairly keen on National, it sort of shows when he's up there on TV screens, and the fact is these "reporters" can sway the elections in the direction they want. Like iPredict tried to do for National, only with much more effect. I'd be much more impressed if these reporters had the guts to do a story on the Paula Bennett accusations, but they're running scared. It would seem that our National MPs can get away with almost anything.

Baa_Baa
10-07-2017, 08:44 PM
I'd be much more impressed if these reporters had the guts to do a story on the Paula Bennett accusations, but they're running scared. It would seem that our National MPs can get away with almost anything.

Hey EZ, why do you think the left leaning journalists and reporters aren't picking up on the Bennett scandal? Maybe it's all hogwash.

fungus pudding
10-07-2017, 09:01 PM
Hey EZ, why do you think the left leaning journalists and reporters aren't picking up on the Bennett scandal? Maybe it's all hogwash.

Yep. You can bet your bottom dollar they'd be in boots and all if these was anything there.

elZorro
10-07-2017, 09:17 PM
Hey EZ, why do you think the left leaning journalists and reporters aren't picking up on the Bennett scandal? Maybe it's all hogwash.

Who are these left-leaning reporters? They got John Campbell off TV and backed onto radio, at the best there might be plenty of left-wing political cartoonists, a few people like Nicky Hager, and some left-wing commentators. They underpaid Rod Oram and chopped his articles at the SST until he left. Shamubeel Eaqub is the only one left there who talks political sense. Plenty of other reporters and commentators pretend they are impartial but are far from it, the way they talk. Let's face it, almost all of the stations and channels run on advertising revenue, and who provides the bulk of that? Left-leaning business owners?

So the owners of the media outlets won't want to chase down the Paula Bennett accusations, for lots of reasons, including probable litigation. It would take more brave people to stand up and say what they know about her past, they would have to go on record.

There are other National MPs who are also on shaky ground. Too much of it is hearsay, but the point is that why are these stories there in the first place? Why would anyone sit down and make up stories about an MP? I know that anyone who wants to be an MP must have a pretty good ego, but why do they think they can leave their past behind, and even continue in their shaky ways while they are MPs?

fungus pudding
10-07-2017, 09:56 PM
Who are these left-leaning reporters? They got John Campbell off TV and backed onto radio, at the best there might be plenty of left-wing political cartoonists, a few people like Nicky Hager, and some left-wing commentators. They underpaid Rod Oram and chopped his articles at the SST until he left. Shamubeel Eaqub is the only one left there who talks political sense. Plenty of other reporters and commentators pretend they are impartial but are far from it, the way they talk. Let's face it, almost all of the stations and channels run on advertising revenue, and who provides the bulk of that? Left-leaning business owners?

So the owners of the media outlets won't want to chase down the Paula Bennett accusations, for lots of reasons, including probable litigation. It would take more brave people to stand up and say what they know about her past, they would have to go on record.

There are other National MPs who are also on shaky ground. Too much of it is hearsay, but the point is that why are these stories there in the first place? Why would anyone sit down and make up stories about an MP? I know that anyone who wants to be an MP must have a pretty good ego, but why do they think they can leave their past behind, and even continue in their shaky ways while they are MPs?

Peppered with paranoia there eZ, me old sauage..

elZorro
10-07-2017, 10:01 PM
Peppered with paranoia there eZ, me old sauage..

Do you mean sage, or suave, FP?

blackcap
11-07-2017, 07:35 AM
Why would anyone sit down and make up stories about an MP??

Really ElZorro? You ask that question and think you do not lose credibility?

winner69
11-07-2017, 03:02 PM
Labour to give the likes of me $700 a year to keep warm ....might need to vote for them to help them get in

But one needs to apply .....hope its not means tested


But Nats tax cuts might be better ...hope somebody does the sums for me

elZorro
11-07-2017, 07:26 PM
Labour to give the likes of me $700 a year to keep warm ....might need to vote for them to help them get in

But one needs to apply .....hope its not means tested


But Nats tax cuts might be better ...hope somebody does the sums for me

I'm sure the power discount/rebate idea from Labour will help a lot of people who are on low fixed incomes. Heaps of people in medium-waged households are not so keen on the idea, as they'll miss out a bit. It's not my favourite Labour policy. I like the KiwiBuild policy, that's positive everywhere you look at it. In general, I don't think we need any more tax cuts at the top end, though. Unless you'd like a capital gains tax with that, W69.

http://www.labour.org.nz/families_package_video?utm_campaign=170711_familie s&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour

blackcap
12-07-2017, 08:02 AM
I'm sure the power discount/rebate idea from Labour will help a lot of people who are on low fixed incomes.

The landlords will end up getting it anyway. This is not the way to help the population.

fungus pudding
12-07-2017, 08:38 AM
I'm sure the power discount/rebate idea from Labour will help a lot of people who are on low fixed incomes. Heaps of people in medium-waged households are not so keen on the idea, as they'll miss out a bit. It's not my favourite Labour policy.


Neither it should be. It's completely dopey. Desperado stuff. If they want to sort out the nonsense they should scrap working for families - currently the majority effectively pay no tax. Make the first 25k of income tax free for all, then two steps to maintain revenue with a top rate of 33%. Tax has become too complex.

BlackPeter
12-07-2017, 09:09 AM
Neither it should be. It's completely dopey. Desperado stuff. If they want to sort out the nonsense they should scrap working for families - currently the majority effectively pay no tax. Make the first 25k of income tax free for all, then two steps to maintain revenue with a top rate of 33%. Tax has become too complex.

Agreed - Labour proposes to make an anyway complicated tax system still more complicated. More money for bureaucrats to sort it all out leaves less money for all of us.

As well - if they think they must splash other people's money around to buy some votes .. why not putting the money into better home insulation and heating instead of giving beneficiaries $750 per year to buy more fags and booze?

Another Labour policy announced without analysis or thought. How desperate must they be.

blackcap
12-07-2017, 09:38 AM
Neither it should be. It's completely dopey. Desperado stuff. If they want to sort out the nonsense they should scrap working for families - currently the majority effectively pay no tax. Make the first 25k of income tax free for all, then two steps to maintain revenue with a top rate of 33%. Tax has become too complex.

Agree.. that is what I meant with my earlier comment about the landlords getting it. WFF is useless, it does not help those that are childless (who actually are helping the environment but that is another story) and WFF is also based on income etc and yes it is becoming too complex. I like the idea of no tax on the first 25k of income, that would eliminate tax from benefits as well (never understood that part) and simplify the tax code. Those paying tax on lower incomes get it all back currently in the WFF etc so its all a merry go round waste of time and resources.

RGR367
12-07-2017, 09:38 AM
And now, how would hiring an Aussie Ad Agency (Moss Group as per NBR today) to run Andrew Little's big election campaign win votes? A very BIG NO to his sort of policy of not hiring foreign workers. I'm not convinced eZ, I'm not :t_down:

fungus pudding
12-07-2017, 09:47 AM
And now, how would hiring an Aussie Ad Agency (Moss Group as per NBR today) to run Andrew Little's big election campaign win votes? A very BIG NO to his sort of policy of not hiring foreign workers. I'm not convinced eZ, I'm not :t_down:

We already know that eZ won't approve at all. We've had years of raving about National's advt. agency from Aussie. This may be enough to trigger eZ's resignation from the party I'd say.

BlackPeter
12-07-2017, 09:58 AM
We already know that eZ won't approve at all. We've had years of raving about National's advt. agency from Aussie. This may be enough to trigger eZ's resignation from the party I'd say.

don't hold your breath ... he might have some vision problems on his left eye ... ;)

winner69
12-07-2017, 10:58 AM
Some are asking at what point do the broadcasters decide to invite Winston instead of Little to the one on one debate with English

fungus pudding
12-07-2017, 11:42 AM
Some are asking at what point do the broadcasters decide to invite Winston instead of Little to the one on one debate with English

Winston is away on a magic carpet ride. Might not get back in time.

elZorro
12-07-2017, 06:51 PM
And now, how would hiring an Aussie Ad Agency (Moss Group as per NBR today) to run Andrew Little's big election campaign win votes? A very BIG NO to his sort of policy of not hiring foreign workers. I'm not convinced eZ, I'm not :t_down:

Andrew Kirton has given plenty of good reasons for Labour using Moss Group today, see this radio interview.

https://player.fm/series/nbr-radio-newscommentary/nbr-radio-best-of-the-week-ended-july-7th-with-grant-walker

They've set up an office in Wellington for it, and the vast majority of campaign purchases are made with NZ businesses. Labour probably needs the skilled advice from a left-leaning marketing outfit, and the Labour rank and file don't want to see another three years of National.

Andrew Little is getting heaps of stick about his polling as PM, but what did Paula Bennett get? It must be very low. There will also be a lot of undecided voters at this stage. If they're undecided, they are probably not that happy with the status quo. Labour just has to get them to care about that situation.

fungus pudding
12-07-2017, 06:58 PM
Andrew Kirton has given plenty of good reasons for Labour using Moss Group today, see this radio interview.

https://player.fm/series/nbr-radio-newscommentary/nbr-radio-best-of-the-week-ended-july-7th-with-grant-walker

They've set up an office in Wellington for it, and the vast majority of campaign purchases are made with NZ businesses. Labour probably needs the skilled advice from a left-leaning marketing outfit, and the Labour rank and file don't want to see another three years of National.

Andrew Little is getting heaps of stick about his polling as PM, but what did Paula Bennett get? It must be very low. There will also be a lot of undecided voters at this stage. If they're undecided, they are probably not that happy with the status quo. Labour just has to get them to care about that situation.

You may not know it but PaulaBennet isn't standing as leader. Adern gets a few ticks because no one sees Little as Labour's leader. There are only two possibilities for P M. English or Peter's as leader of a weird coalition.

craic
13-07-2017, 07:42 AM
And now, the two Hopefuls, Greens and NZ first are declaring their unwillingness to enter a government that has the other one in it. Still, that's all pie-in the-sky stuff.

BlackPeter
13-07-2017, 08:13 AM
And now, the two Hopefuls, Greens and NZ first are declaring their unwillingness to enter a government that has the other one in it. Still, that's all pie-in the-sky stuff.

No worries - at least we know that any theoretical coalition partner of Labour would be racist. The Greenies said that NZ First is racist (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11888053) - and hey, this is a point where I would agree with them and then NZ First said that the Greenies are racist (same link - and sadly I must admit that Winston First might have a point as well).

Given EZ's implication that Labour only recruits honest and hard working people standing on the moral high ground (EZ, please correct me, if I misunderstood :p), there is no way that these moral high flyers would work together with racists of any colour. Right, EZ?

fungus pudding
13-07-2017, 08:19 AM
And now, the two Hopefuls, Greens and NZ first are declaring their unwillingness to enter a government that has the other one in it. Still, that's all pie-in the-sky stuff.

Winston first will go into any coalition at all as long as Winston can be P.M. Coalition with Labour /Greens is right on the cards as neither party has a leader capable of the Prime Minster portfolio - and they both know it. (and so does Winston)

craic
14-07-2017, 08:47 AM
The few posts from el Z - seen against his usual machine-gun defence of Labour - lead me to conclude that he is working his ass off somewhere in the background - trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. And he's not getting much help from the party, or Uncle Winston.

Bjauck
14-07-2017, 01:35 PM
No worries - at least we know that any theoretical coalition partner of Labour would be racist. The Greenies said that NZ First is racist (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11888053) - and hey, this is a point where I would agree with them and then NZ First said that the Greenies are racist (same link - and sadly I must admit that Winston First might have a point as well). ..

Interesting item on WP and race:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11889155

The Green Party and race...I guess it is debatable whether ensuring indigenous rights is racist or not.

The emotionally charged labelling of an opponent as "racist" can often be a convenient way to try to win an argument or shut down debate on contentious topics. It often works!

craic
14-07-2017, 02:36 PM
I can't stand Irishmen. They are all a bunch of lazy, drunken gamblers. Still, its probably better than shooting each other like they do in some places.

fungus pudding
14-07-2017, 03:08 PM
I can't stand Irishmen. They are all a bunch of lazy, drunken gamblers. Still, its probably better than shooting each other like they do in some places.

They can't be that bad then.

winner69
14-07-2017, 05:55 PM
Leaks - internal polling shock for Labour

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/labour-s-confidential-polling-leaked.html

elZorro
14-07-2017, 06:03 PM
The few posts from el Z - seen against his usual machine-gun defence of Labour - lead me to conclude that he is working his ass off somewhere in the background - trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. And he's not getting much help from the party, or Uncle Winston.

I've been helping with signs in the electorate after hours. Going fine so far, plenty of helpers and lots of good feedback.

BlackPeter
14-07-2017, 06:07 PM
Leaks - internal polling shock for Labour

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/labour-s-confidential-polling-leaked.html

must be time to change the leader ...

elZorro
14-07-2017, 06:09 PM
Leaks - internal polling shock for Labour

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/labour-s-confidential-polling-leaked.html

The press aren't helping Labour much, but the trend before the last two polls was quite good. But it's only two polls, and there are two months to go.

Look how fast the press dropped the Barclay incident, and they didn't even start on the Bennett allegations. The deck is stacked for National really.

Anyway, the latest Roy Morgan poll, also out today, puts the Labour-Greens ahead of National. Howzat!

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7289-roy-morgan-new-zealand-voting-intention-july-2017-201707141612

fungus pudding
15-07-2017, 09:03 AM
The press aren't helping Labour much, but the trend before the last two polls was quite good. But it's only two polls, and there are two months to go.

Look how fast the press dropped the Barclay incident, and they didn't even start on the Bennett allegations. The deck is stacked for National really.

Anyway, the latest Roy Morgan poll, also out today, puts the Labour-Greens ahead of National. Howzat!

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7289-roy-morgan-new-zealand-voting-intention-july-2017-201707141612
That's wonderful eZ.

Major von Tempsky
15-07-2017, 03:39 PM
However Roy Morgan , a newish poll from Australia with distinct wobbles in its performance, usually proves to be the most left wing and least reliable poll. I, other Sharetrader readers and the media generally don't have a clue what these allegations/rumour/scuttlebutt against Bennett are....


The press aren't helping Labour much, but the trend before the last two polls was quite good. But it's only two polls, and there are two months to go.

Look how fast the press dropped the Barclay incident, and they didn't even start on the Bennett allegations. The deck is stacked for National really.

Anyway, the latest Roy Morgan poll, also out today, puts the Labour-Greens ahead of National. Howzat!

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7289-roy-morgan-new-zealand-voting-intention-july-2017-201707141612

Baa_Baa
15-07-2017, 03:59 PM
Who knows what to believe, it is the internet after all, a deep and tragic black hole with an interminable memory, populated by every kind of human behaviour. The original posting on Facebook is well and truely gone, but it echoes, if you listen carefully.

My point made earlier in this thread is that the media will absolutely certainly have been all over it, left or right biased is irrelevant, the media silence has to be more about the content and legals.

http://mediawhores.co.nz/2017/07/03/mp-paula-bennett-accused-of-multiple-counts-of-benefit-fraud-racism-child-abuse/ Scroll down past the bashing and you'll get to the content that was copied from Facebook.

https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/6kye5w/paula_bennett_threatens_lawsuit_over_online_post/ An interesting discussion on Reddit, colourful if nothing else!

fungus pudding
15-07-2017, 04:17 PM
However Roy Morgan , a newish poll from Australia with distinct wobbles in its performance, usually proves to be the most left wing and least reliable poll. I, other Sharetrader readers and the media generally don't have a clue what these allegations/rumour/scuttlebutt against Bennett are....

Just a few accusations about her being a pizzhead and drug user, as well as a prostitute and benefit cheat. I don't think many would believe it, not even eZ - and if there was an element of truth in it journalists would be creaming themselves all over it.

Bjauck
16-07-2017, 09:04 AM
must be time to change the leader ... I guess you can't accuse Labour or its leader of being populist/popular,. In NZ it seems National takes those honours.

BlackPeter
16-07-2017, 09:25 AM
I guess you can't accuse Labour or its leader of being populist/popular,. In NZ it seems National takes those honours.

There is a difference between populist and popular.

If somebody is popular it means that the people (lat: populus) do love this person.

If somebody is populist it means that this person tries to be popular by promising simple solutions to complex problems which don't work (but sound good, particularly for simple minds and brains under the influence ...).

Little is clearly not popular, but he often tries to be populist - though he obviously can't reach the NZ master in populism: Winston First, who is not just unchallenged in his populism but as well more popular than Little (though not as popular as English ;).

Clear as mud?

elZorro
16-07-2017, 09:47 AM
Just a few accusations about her being a pizzhead and drug user, as well as a prostitute and benefit cheat. I don't think many would believe it, not even eZ - and if there was an element of truth in it journalists would be creaming themselves all over it.

Well you said it FP, she was obviously adrift there for a while, was a young solo mother, was working the night shift at Stag Park, all that is documented by National Party sanctioned press releases. If you have a look at Stag Park online, it has cabin or motel-like accommodation for truck drivers. I think there could be more than an element of truth in the accusations. Govt records could hold the key to the rest of it.

And this is the best the National Party can come up with, as a deputy leader? They aren't setting the bar too high. Will National be putting her profile on their hoardings?

fungus pudding
16-07-2017, 09:52 AM
Well you said it FP, she was obviously adrift there for a while, was a young solo mother, was working the night shift at Stag Park, all that is documented by National Party sanctioned press releases. If you have a look at Stag Park online, it has cabin or motel-like accommodation for truck drivers. I think there could be more than an element of truth in the accusations.

Of course you think that. She's not a Labour MP, and therefore obviously guilty.

elZorro
16-07-2017, 10:14 AM
Of course you think that. She's not a Labour MP, and therefore obviously guilty.

Labour wouldn't be as lazy or arrogant in promoting someone who can bully the press, into a very senior position - without knowing the full background for certain. And only a born-to-rule person with that known and possible history, would put their name forward for the job, one which needs the highest standards to be achieved to represent NZ voters.

I am growing increasingly proud of Labour's links with the Green Party.

They had their AGM yesterday, releasing the policy of carbon neutrality for NZ by 2050. And unlike National's policy of predator free NZ by 2050, all done with a few million dollars (when billions are needed) it's not impossible. You could argue that we have to do it, this not a nice-to-have policy. It's no use pretending to save our special species here in NZ, when all around us the entire world is heating up, and we're recklessly helping the process along.

https://www.facebook.com/nzgreenparty/videos/10154553143081372/

fungus pudding
16-07-2017, 10:34 AM
Labour wouldn't be as lazy or arrogant in promoting someone who can bully the press, into a very senior position - without knowing the full background for certain. And only a born-to-rule person with that known and possible history, would put their name forward for the job, one which needs the highest standards to be achieved to represent NZ voters.



I've heard National relentlessly search the late night bars, the knock-shops, the drug and gambling dens and other drop in and drop out centres, desperately searching for new party members to promote to senior positions.
Have you heard that too?

elZorro
16-07-2017, 10:44 AM
I've heard National relentlessly search the late night bars, the knock-shops, the drug and gambling dens and other drop in and drop out centres, desperately searching for new party members to promote to senior positions.
Have you heard that too?

In this case, they probably succeeded.

Baa_Baa
16-07-2017, 11:12 AM
Of course you think that. She's not a Labour MP, and therefore obviously guilty.

Not obviously guilty or innocent, probably somewhere in between, though even as a National supporter I think these allegations should be tested and dealt with regardless of the outcome. It is a moral obligation and the right thing to do, otherwise leaving it to speculation taints the party and risks a festering sore exploding nearer the election, or after it.

Deal with it National!

BlackPeter
16-07-2017, 11:13 AM
In this case, they probably succeeded.

Better tread with care, eZ. While I have no insider knowledge into Paula's past and no desire to learn more about it, but if it is what you are insinuating, it sounds like she would be an amazing candidate to represent Labour's main clientele :p. Be very afraid ...

However - more importantly - the difference between Bennett and Little is that Little may not even make it back into parliament - just listen to the populist you hold in such a high regard - he might have another good point (after calling the Greenies racist ...):

https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/peters-promises-rail-northport-taunts-little-he-may-not-make-it-back-parliament-ck-205320

Not that I particularly like the man, but he looks from day to day better than Little (which is admittedly not hard to achieve).

Bjauck
16-07-2017, 11:19 AM
...
If somebody is populist it means that this person tries to be popular by promising simple solutions to complex problems which don't work (but sound good, particularly for simple minds and brains under the influence ...).
...

Under that definition, isn't national a populist party? It may support the status quo (and appeal to its voter base) by offering simple (do next to nothing) solutions to various issues. Its housing "policy" being case in point. Reform in several areas may be needed.

Modern USA and France were born in populism, populist solutions and consequent horrors? Not all policies provide immediate improvement.

BlackPeter
16-07-2017, 11:27 AM
Not obviously guilty or innocent, probably somewhere in between, though even as a National supporter I think these allegations should be tested and dealt with regardless of the outcome. It is a moral obligation and the right thing to do, otherwise leaving it to speculation taints the party and risks a festering sore exploding nearer the election, or after it.

Deal with it National!

Depends which of the accusations you talk about. If you are talking about the alleged fraud cases, than I agree. Should be as well quite easy to check. However - wouldn't it be the role of the police to sort that out? Just wondering why EZ is not just reporting his insinuations to the police instead of alleging that there might be mud he could throw if he would have the balls.

If she is found guilty (after a proper investigation and trial), than sure - lock her up. However - if this is just the next attempt of the Left to influence the elections by spreading false accusations (as they do), than I hope that the accuser will go behind bars. Too much unfounded mud throwing in our society.

BlackPeter
16-07-2017, 11:49 AM
Under that definition, isn't national a populist party? It may support the status quo (and appeal to its voter base) by offering simple (do next to nothing) solutions to various issues. Its housing "policy" being case in point. Reform in several areas may be needed.

Modern USA and France were born in populism, populist solutions and consequent horrors? Not all policies provide immediate improvement.

Look, it is easy to point to individual issues which could be still better. No matter who is in government - there are always things you can improve. As well - it is the nature of democracy that any party needs to implement a certain amount of populist policies ... problem is that the population typically does not vote based on past outcomes, but based on future pointing policies ... and this means the policies can't be optimised for good future outcomes, but they must be optimised for what the average voter (not understanding complex systems) thinks might be best (but is not).

However - if I compare the modern New Zealand with most other countries, than I must say that our current government did a pretty good job. As a country we have some of the lowest public debts, we have one of the best (and still affordable) health systems in the world (even if there is always something to improve), we have a reasonable education system, we have one of the lowest levels of corruption of all countries in the world, we have a very low rate of unemployment, we have a good legal system (again, despite much room for improvement), and our social system is (if we compare cost and benefits) actually quite good as well in comparison. You find us probably in all of these disciplines somewhere in the top 10 countries in the world.

Sure - we always like to moan, but if National / ACT / United / Maori party really achieved this enviable positIon (compared to other countries) by doing nothing, than maybe this was the best thing the government could have done. Why change something which is not broken? Not sure, though why you call this "populist"?

fungus pudding
16-07-2017, 12:09 PM
In this case, they probably succeeded.

I've found the problem eZ. You're getting Paula Bennett mixed up with the Greens deputy leader, Maturia Turei. She was obviously aware of your confusion, so admitted to benefit fraud at their annual meeting today. That should be enough for Mr. Plod to polish up the handcuffs.
No doubt you'll be ready, willing and able to accuse her of all those other things, e.g. prostitution, drunkenness, and pot smoking as well.

elZorro
16-07-2017, 12:24 PM
I've found the problem eZ. You're getting Paula Bennett mixed up with the Greens deputy leader, Maturia Turei. She was obviously aware of your confusion, so admitted to benefit fraud at their annual meeting today. That should be enough for Mr. Plod to polish up the handcuffs.
No doubt you'll be ready, willing and able to accuse her of all those other things, e.g. prostitution, drunkenness, and pot smoking as well.

There's probably a statute of limitations on this, Metiria is fairly safe.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/greens-co-leader-confesses-she-lied-work-and-income-claim-benefits-single-mum

She didn't use multiple frauds to help pay off a house or anything, she was doing a law degree. I expect she knows how to say hyperbole, that's also useful when representing NZ. As for there being a whisper out there that Paula Bennett, currently Deputy Prime Minister of NZ, may have been on the game at some stage - well that's a whole new saga.

Bjauck
16-07-2017, 12:49 PM
...
Sure - we always like to moan, but if National / ACT / United / Maori party really achieved this enviable positIon (compared to other countries) by doing nothing, than maybe this was the best thing the government could have done. Why change something which is not broken? Not sure, though why you call this "populist"? I did not say I was not going to vote for National (It remains my most likely party)...but I do think however that some of its policies, including its approach to housing, are "populist" (simple solution, which won't work, to a complex problem).

However if one thinks there is not a particular problem in a policy area then I guess any attempts at a solution will seem unnecessary.

BlackPeter
16-07-2017, 12:58 PM
There's probably a statute of limitations on this, Metiria is fairly safe.



And you really wrote that? EZ, are you a hypocrite or are you a hypocrite? Just remembering how bad benefit fraud sounded when you were insinuating that Paula Bennett could have committed it (remember - at this stage just an anonymous smear propagated by some Lefties). But of course, if one of your mates admits benefit fraud, than this is absolutely o.k., and there is certainly a statute of limitations.

Not sure, EZ, whether you ever had a lot of credibility, but consider it gone by now ...

fungus pudding
16-07-2017, 01:58 PM
There's probably a statute of limitations on this, Metiria is fairly safe.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/greens-co-leader-confesses-she-lied-work-and-income-claim-benefits-single-mum

She didn't use multiple frauds to help pay off a house or anything, she was doing a law degree.

Of course. Silly me. I forgot that it's okay to fraudulently obtain govt. funds for a law degree, but not for your mortgage.

Baa_Baa
16-07-2017, 02:43 PM
I've found the problem eZ. You're getting Paula Bennett mixed up with the Greens deputy leader, Maturia Turei. She was obviously aware of your confusion, so admitted to benefit fraud at their annual meeting today. That should be enough for Mr. Plod to polish up the handcuffs.
No doubt you'll be ready, willing and able to accuse her of all those other things, e.g. prostitution, drunkenness, and pot smoking as well.

You forgot to mention child abuse, which was amongst the accusations.

fungus pudding
16-07-2017, 02:55 PM
You forgot to mention child abuse, which was amongst the accusations.

I did forget child abuse. Sorry. No doubt though that eZ, a very fair man, will include it in his list of accusations against the Kermit lady.

elZorro
16-07-2017, 02:59 PM
Of course. Silly me. I forgot that it's okay to fraudulently obtain govt. funds for a law degree, but not for your mortgage.

Of course neither scenario is good, but in one case Metiria freely admitted her previous wrongdoing and the press happily wrote it up. Paula Bennett has gotten off scott-free because she didn't admit anything, and instead she has tried really hard to suppress it. Maybe the Greens are just clearing the decks so nothing can hurt them down the track. There are also degrees of fraud - possibly multiple cases in the case of PB and probably bigger amounts involved. She could be innocent of all accusations - fine. Why not sue Ashley and take him to court then?

fungus pudding
16-07-2017, 03:15 PM
Of course neither scenario is good, but in one case Metiria freely admitted her previous wrongdoing and the press happily wrote it up. Paula Bennett has gotten off scott-free because she didn't admit anything, and instead she has tried really hard to suppress it. Maybe the Greens are just clearing the decks so nothing can hurt them down the track. There are also degrees of fraud - possibly multiple cases in the case of PB and probably bigger amounts involved. She could be innocent of all accusations - fine. Why not sue Ashley and take him to court then?

Of course she could, and is entitled to be considered innocent unless proven guilty. It is your continued insinuation of guilt that will get you into trouble.

westerly
16-07-2017, 06:28 PM
However - if I compare the modern New Zealand with most other countries, than I must say that our current government did a pretty good job. As a country we have some of the lowest public debts, we have one of the best (and still affordable) health systems in the world (even if there is always something to improve), we have a reasonable education system, we have one of the lowest levels of corruption of all countries in the world, we have a very low rate of unemployment, we have a good legal system (again, despite much room for improvement), and our social system is (if we compare cost and benefits) actually quite good as well in comparison. You find us probably in all of these disciplines somewhere in the top 10 countries in the world.

Sure - we always like to moan, but if National / ACT / United / Maori party really achieved this enviable positIon (compared to other countries) by doing nothing, than maybe this was the best thing the government could have done. Why change something which is not broken? Not sure, though why you call this "populist"?

NZ doesn,t make the top 10

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/best-countries-to-live-in-a7654701.html

A few surprises in that list

westerly

elZorro
17-07-2017, 06:33 AM
National don't want to see the juvenile Todd Barclay back in Wellington, to face a horde of reporters. They don't even want him bailed up in Queenstown. There's an easy way out of this - Todd can disappear, and they can blame it on the press.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/94749708/whats-behind-the-strange-goings-on-in-southland

National's proposed Predator Free NZ by 2050? I heard this interview on Radio NZ last week. It'll need a lot more than $28mill - that's just a joke - and it's not really possible on larger forest-covered land masses anyway.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/201851072/predator-free-plea-we-need-more-than-just-a-rallying-cry

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 08:00 AM
National's proposed Predator Free NZ by 2050? I heard this interview on Radio NZ last week. It'll need a lot more than $28mill - that's just a joke - and it's not really possible on larger forest-covered land masses anyway.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/201851072/predator-free-plea-we-need-more-than-just-a-rallying-cry

EZ, you are poorly informed. While I am not privy to Nationals plans - there are a number of technologies which could easily resolve the predator problem within less than 30 years and at quite modest cost. Have a look at this wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_insect and do some research before calling the government's plans a joke.

fungus pudding
17-07-2017, 08:32 AM
EZ, you are poorly informed. While I am not privy to Nationals plans - there are a number of technologies which could easily resolve the predator problem within less than 30 years and at quite modest cost. Have a look at this wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_insect and do some research before calling the government's plans a joke.

I don't believe eZ will be poorly informed on possum controls. His paranoia will have had him searching for all relevant information since this policy was announced .eZ will be well aware of GM insects and other advances in pest control. But it doesn't suit his purpose or his selective memory to mention that.
Anyway, he's busy at present trying desperately to throw more mud at Paula Bennett. He will not be mentioning Materia Turei and her admitted benefit fraud.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 08:41 AM
NZ doesn,t make the top 10

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/best-countries-to-live-in-a7654701.html

A few surprises in that list

westerly

I didn't talk about the 2017 UN best countries to live in list - didn't I? There is a zillion of lists using lots of different and frequently highly subjective views, and no - NZ (nor any other country) ends up always in the top 10. Better check the criteria I did talk about: public debt, unemployment, health system, education system, welfare system. But sure, even these assessments are highly subjective - i.e. I am sure you will find no country which is in all existing hit lists in the top 10.

By the way - just google "best country to live in" and you will find that somebody puts us on place 8 :p:
https://www.thetoptens.com/best-countries-live-in/

Ah yes - and somebody put us on place 4:
https://www.lifestyle9.com/worlds-best-country-to-live-in-2017/

Oh - and here is another place 4:
http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-best-countries-to-live-in-the-world.html

Well, I could go on like that, but unfortunately, westerly, you are outvoted ... I guess that's what is always going to happen with the Left - trying to move forward with their eyes firmly at the rear mirror.

NZ is very well positioned and has a great government which brought it there. But sure - we could always have a bit more liberal influence - was this your point :p?

RGR367
17-07-2017, 09:53 AM
Okay. Both Paula Bennett and Metiria Turei are now both trending on Twitter. One is being accused of benefit fraud and the other one is self confessed benefit fraudster. Which one will you choose?
No wonder young people got no stomach for politics when our leaders above are the examples.

fungus pudding
17-07-2017, 10:14 AM
Okay. Both Paula Bennett and Metiria Turei are now both trending on Twitter. One is being accused of benefit fraud and the other one is self confessed benefit fraudster. Which one will you choose?
No wonder young people got no stomach for politics when our leaders above are the examples.

There is no evidence of Bennett defrauding, and she vehemently denies it, which I doubt she would do if it were true: simply because it would be the stone end of her if outed.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 10:16 AM
Okay. Both Paula Bennett and Metiria Turei are now both trending on Twitter. One is being accused of benefit fraud and the other one is self confessed benefit fraudster. Which one will you choose?
No wonder young people got no stomach for politics when our leaders above are the examples.

Paula Bennett is not more "accused" than anybody else in our society. Who knows - maybe EZ or you are benefit fraudsters? It could be, couldn't it -
who knows? Sure, there is no evidence, but if you deny it, then you must be guilty as charged. Can you prove that you are innocent? See, this is how a smear works.

Funnily - this is similar to the way Labour wants to develop our justice system. As soon as somebody accuses you, you are guilty unless you can prove that you are innocent. That's what Little and some other Lefties are asking for: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/05/labours_policy_remains_guilty_unless_you_can_prove _you_are_innocent.html

I agree that our young people have every right to be appalled by such a collection of sick minds and smearers. I hope that they will vote for openness, honesty and justice instead of for dirty smearers and supporters of lynch "justice".

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 11:07 AM
...
Funnily - this is similar to the way Labour wants to develop our justice system. As soon as somebody accuses you, you are guilty unless you can prove that you are innocent. That's what Little and some other Lefties are asking for: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/05/labours_policy_remains_guilty_unless_you_can_prove _you_are_innocent.html...

Labour wants to investigate law reform in relation to how rape cases are investigated and prosecuted to investigate if there can be improvements to ensure victims are not further victimised (i.e. they are looking forward and do not wish to be hamstrung by the past, if positive reform will improve the delivery of justice). Similarly, I believe they do not wish to victimise defendants/accused.

They are suggesting a serious review weighing up pros and cons. Review of how things are performed is part of being a civilised society.

When the defence of insanity is raised to a criminal charge there is a reversal of the onus of proof. I can imagine that the development of that defence had its conservative opponents. I don't think Labour is suggesting that the further development of the "defence of consent" should be recklessly pursued without caution and thorough legal reviews.

Part of the proposed Labour reform how rape cases were handled involved a possible change to an inquisitorial system (reducing the adversarial system's ruthless cross examinations of victims). A reform that I think Simon Power put to a commission, but which Collins rejected.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 11:27 AM
Labour wants to investigate law reform in relation to how rape cases are investigated and prosecuted to investigate if there can be improvements to ensure victims are not further victimised (i.e. they are looking forward and do not wish to be hamstrung by the past, if positive reform will improve the delivery of justice). Similarly, I believe they do not wish to victimise defendants/accused.

They are suggesting a serious review weighing up pros and cons. Review of how things are performed is part of being a civilised society.


Reviewing our justice system might be "part of being a civilised society". Proposing to change the onus of proof clearly is not. Interesting as well that you talk about the right of "victims". In the stage of the process we are talking about would this be "alleged victims". It is people who claim that they are victims of a crime and they may or may not be liars. I don't want to see a system where people alleging to be victims of a non existing crime get the right to throw others for 20 years behind bars, and exactly this is what some Labour candidates (including Little) asked for.

elZorro
17-07-2017, 11:46 AM
I don't believe eZ will be poorly informed on possum controls. His paranoia will have had him searching for all relevant information since this policy was announced .eZ will be well aware of GM insects and other advances in pest control. But it doesn't suit his purpose or his selective memory to mention that.
Anyway, he's busy at present trying desperately to throw more mud at Paula Bennett. He will not be mentioning Materia Turei and her admitted benefit fraud.

I think if you bother to listen to the radio interview, FP, you'll hear that there are major impediments to gene or CISPR technology. It may work fine in a secure lab, but would you want to release it outside? How long would it last, what other animals or species could it effect, and how long would it take to know for sure? There are plenty of scientists who would love to be involved in this research, because they'd be on the job for the rest of their lives, them and their teams. That's the name of the game - papers to publish, heaps of scientific work for the next decades or so, an unlimited funding drawdown. Just consider the birth rate of mustelids and rats when they have heaps of food available. If the gene doctoring attenuates at all, it can't work as an eradication. As that guy said, any serious talk about pest control in NZ will be about reduction of harm, keeping their numbers down, at a low cost per ha. So what National has proposed for $28mill is not science, it's science fiction.

I thought Metiria Turei did well on TV1 this morning, she'd thought long and hard about the ramifications of what she revealed, and is quite happy to pay back anything WINZ think is due. At least everyone knows that the Greens presented a new policy, and why they think it's important. It's probably not as important as the zero net carbon by 2050, but it's more immediate I guess, for voters.

macduffy
17-07-2017, 12:03 PM
Twenty-four years is probably about long enough to think hard about the ramifications, one of which is to finally ease one's conscience?

westerly
17-07-2017, 12:16 PM
I didn't talk about the 2017 UN best countries to live in list - didn't I?


Well, I could go on like that, but unfortunately, westerly, you are outvoted ... I guess that's what is always going to happen with the Left - trying to move forward with their eyes firmly at the rear mirror.

NZ is very well positioned and has a great government which brought it there. But sure - we could always have a bit more liberal influence - was this your point :p?

"No , you suggested your criteria would find NZ in the top 10 counties of the world.
I quoted a list from a reputable source in which NZ didn't figure.
Most of the so called disciplines you quote have been achieved by a do nothing Govt. who with a little more effort and less concern for reducing taxes and services could alleviate many of the problems NZ faces. Not so much liberal as more liberterian

As for looking in the rear mirror --- ""Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it."
Winston Churchill "

westerly

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 12:57 PM
Reviewing our justice system might be "part of being a civilised society". Proposing to change the onus of proof clearly is not. Interesting as well that you talk about the right of "victims". In the stage of the process we are talking about would this be "alleged victims". It is people who claim that they are victims of a crime and they may or may not be liars. I don't want to see a system where people alleging to be victims of a non existing crime get the right to throw others for 20 years behind bars, and exactly this is what some Labour candidates (including Little) asked for.

Yep...alleged victims and accused (alleged perpetrators).

But do you want to see a system where actual victims of rape do not report their rape as they think there is little point in doing so. They do not wish to subject themselves to the trauma of having to be subject to police questioning followed by lack of action as Police do not think a conviction is likely, or if it does get to court, having to relive the crime under an intrusive cross-examination in Court, at the end of which their attacker is likely to walk free anyway?

The least we could do is to conduct an enquiry under the guidance of experts. I think Labour wishes to review how these crimes are handled and pursued. All aspects of the process, legal and investigative, should be examined by a commission.

elZorro
17-07-2017, 01:24 PM
Twenty-four years is probably about long enough to think hard about the ramifications, one of which is to finally ease one's conscience?

What about the Todd Barclay or Paula Bennett sagas? Despite the possibility of evidence out there, they can just deny and have a cover-up done for them by the Party. Two inept people brought through as leading lights by National. I can only stand so much of this rubbish.

fungus pudding
17-07-2017, 01:35 PM
What about the Todd Barclay or Paula Bennett sagas? Despite the possibility of evidence out there, they can just deny and have a cover-up done for them by the Party. Two inept people brought through as leading lights by National. I can only stand so much of this rubbish.

Well, stop devoting your every waking moment searching every avenue for such details.

craic
17-07-2017, 02:08 PM
Two inept people brought through as leading lights by National. I can only stand so much of this rubbish.
Have you considered that nobody really gives a stuff about what you can and "cannot stand"? The only person suffering is you and if you cannot push a positive Labour barrow and can only resort to perceived negatives in the opposition you deserve to be on the losing side - again.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 02:54 PM
Yep...alleged victims and accused (alleged perpetrators).

But do you want to see a system where actual victims of rape do not report their rape as they think there is little point in doing so. They do not wish to subject themselves to the trauma of having to be subject to police questioning followed by lack of action as Police do not think a conviction is likely, or if it does get to court, having to relive the crime under an intrusive cross-examination in Court, at the end of which their attacker is likely to walk free anyway?

The least we could do is to conduct an enquiry under the guidance of experts. I think Labour wishes to review how these crimes are handled and pursued. All aspects of the process, legal and investigative, should be examined by a commission.

Bjauck, you will get no arguments from me that it is often difficult for a victim of a rape to provide evidence for the "missing consent", particularly if the offender is somebody they had already previously consensual sex with, like an Ex or a spouse or similar. And sure - if there is a sensible and fair way to make this easier for the victim (which is still fair to the alleged offender), than let's evaluate it.

However, this is not what Labour asked for. They (well, several high ranking MP's including Little) proposed to change the onus of proof. You don't need to be a lawyer to see that this proposal (guilty until proven innocent) is not just unjust, but dumb. It would mean that anybody who ever had a sexual encounter would be at risk that their sexual partner at that time could change their mind and say "it was not consensual". They would need no proof to bring their partner behind bars. Their word would be enough - guilty until proven innocent. Sure - most intimate partners we trust wouldn't do that ... but some would. Even intimate partners you trust can be liars and crooks.

No need to tell me how a sensible Labour policy could look like if they would have decent politicians. They don't (well, not enough) - and this is a discussion about what they said instead of about what you think they should have asked for. These politicians (including Little) clearly need to be kept away from power. They are not fit to govern the country, and they provided the evidence for this themselves.

However - what's the point to worry about Little - I am pretty sure he will be gone in 3 months from now ... well, make this 2 months plus whatever time the party needs to replace him with another pet of the union movement, but unloved even by the own party.

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 03:10 PM
...

However, this is not what Labour asked for. They (well, several high ranking MP's including Little) proposed to change the onus of proof. You don't need to be a lawyer to see that this proposal (guilty until proven innocent) is not just unjust, but dumb....

A proposal...as part of a review....

"Ms Williams said many victims of rape do not report it because they have little faith in the justice system.She said the country needed to have a discussion about how to address that power imbalance."

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 03:19 PM
A proposal...as part of a review....

"Ms Williams said many victims of rape do not report it because they have little faith in the justice system.She said the country needed to have a discussion about how to address that power imbalance."

from my earlier posted link (highlights added by me):


Associate justice spokesperson for sexual and domestic violence Poto Williams said only 13 per cent of the sexual assault cases reported to police ended in a conviction and something needed to be done to address the “power imbalance”.

Labour would change the system so that a victim was believed as a starting point, and that an accused would have to prove consent

Major von Tempsky
17-07-2017, 03:47 PM
However BlackPeter if there are no witnesses and no compelling DNA evidence then I think you have to revise what you have just said.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 03:52 PM
However BlackPeter if there are no witnesses and no compelling DNA evidence then I think you have to revise what you have just said.

Not at all. If there was sexual contact and the question is about consent - How are you going to prove that with DNA evidence either way? Sure - a witness might help, but how many couples would be happy to regularly employ a witness to make sure they can afterwards prove consent?

Ah yes ... and just in case you missed the start of the discussion - we are not talking here about current NZ law, we are talking about a proposal from Labour (supported by Little and Williams). Another good reason to keep them out of parliament.

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 03:56 PM
from my earlier posted link (highlights added by me):
If Labour introduce " the need to prove consent" without its being part of other reforms within a comprehensive review of process, thoroughly vetted by legal professionals, then I do agree that would be a step backwards.

I have read they are looking at more comprehensive and thorough proposals.

The approach described by Little in this 2013 item is more "nuanced" with emphasis to changes in the meaning of consent, the point of view from which consent is determined, and to court procedures when a defendant intends to introduce certain evidence.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9445554/Call-to-look-anew-at-rape-consent

fungus pudding
17-07-2017, 04:03 PM
Not at all. If there was sexual contact and the question is about consent - How are you going to prove that with DNA evidence either way? Sure - a witness might help, but how many couples would be happy to regularly employ a witness to make sure they can afterwards prove consent?


Shouldn't cost much. I reckon they'd get a heap of volunteers.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 04:09 PM
If Labour introduce " the need to prove consent" without its being part of other reforms within a comprehensive review of process, then I do agree that would be a step backwards.

i have read they are looking at more comprehensive and thorough proposals.

The approach described by Little in this 2013 item is more "nuanced" with emphasis to changes in the meaning of consent and to court procedures when a defendant intends to introduce certain evidence.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9445554/Call-to-look-anew-at-rape-consent

Your sources are four years old and precede the the Williams saga. Maybe Labour had at that stage still a somewhat more sensible and fair view and regressed since then.

Never heard a Labour politician worrying about the right of men not to be accused without proper cause, though. Did you ever hear Ms William worrying about innocent (wrongly accused) men sitting in jail? Did you ever hear her complaining about men being the victims of sexual violence? She is spokesperson for justice but seems only to care about her female clients.

Just wondering - how come?

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 04:19 PM
Your sources are four years old and precede the the Williams saga. Maybe Labour had at that stage still a somewhat more sensible and fair view and regressed since then. Perhaps. Although I think they are still suggesting a commission prior to introducing any reforms.


Never heard a Labour politician worrying about the right of men not to be accused without proper cause, though. Did you ever hear Ms William worrying about innocent (wrongly accused) men sitting in jail? Did you ever hear her complaining about men being the victims of sexual violence? She is spokesperson for justice but seems only to care about her female clients.

Just wondering - how come?
Poto Williams does recognise the problem of false accusations:
"One thing we have to do is find out the numbers of false allegations that have been made, because that will be one of the things people will be really concerned about - that someone who's falsely accused of sexual abuse will be put through a process that is completely unfair."
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/329767/call-to-shift-burden-of-proof-to-rape-accused

i have seen her comments referring to victims (sex unspecified) so cannot really comment on whether she is only concerned for her female clients.

craic
17-07-2017, 04:26 PM
Having floundered around in this area for thirty years as a probation officer, I left with as many questions as most. I was always surprised at the number of false allegations of rape I don't mean failed complaints but allegations that were made where there was no offender and the complainant was seeking some form of sympathy or was disturbed in some other way. The other aspect that disturbed me was the number of aged complaints, from middle aged or older people who wanted something from 30 -60 years ago, brought to court. those complaints were never from people we might consider successful - that is people who had a happy family life/career and so forth. They were mostly from grey people, heading into the twilight with not a lot to show for it. and it makes me wonder if maybe they look for a reason outside of themselves. I have met rape victims who shrug it off as just another unpleasant, not their fault, and they move on. The police have a hell of a job. If the offender is identified guilty or innocent he will go through hell. A highly respectable friend was "identified" on a bus, followed home and reported to the police. He torn to bits over a lengthy period. the second victim, another nun, was called and immediately knew him as a friend and declared that he was not the culprit. There are many cases on record, before DNA of easy offenders being convicted and then cleared. One of the results, for me is that I maintain a daily diary that is very boring but in ten years from now I wll be able to prove where I was today.

fungus pudding
17-07-2017, 04:32 PM
Having floundered around in this area for thirty years as a probation officer, I left with as many questions as most. I was always surprised at the number of false allegations of rape I don't mean failed complaints but allegations that were made where there was no offender and the complainant was seeking some form of sympathy or was disturbed in some other way. The other aspect that disturbed me was the number of aged complaints, from middle aged or older people who wanted something from 30 -60 years ago, brought to court. those complaints were never from people we might consider successful - that is people who had a happy family life/career and so forth. They were mostly from grey people, heading into the twilight with not a lot to show for it. and it makes me wonder if maybe they look for a reason outside of themselves. I have met rape victims who shrug it off as just another unpleasant, not their fault, and they move on. The police have a hell of a job. If the offender is identified guilty or innocent he will go through hell. A highly respectable friend was "identified" on a bus, followed home and reported to the police. He torn to bits over a lengthy period. the second victim, another nun, was called and immediately knew him as a friend and declared that he was not the culprit. There are many cases on record, before DNA of easy offenders being convicted and then cleared. One of the results, for me is that I maintain a daily diary that is very boring but in ten years from now I wll be able to prove where I was today.
Hardly. It will only prove what you wrote in the diary, which is hardly likely to outline any crimes you've committed.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 04:38 PM
Poto Williams does recognise the problem of false accusations:
"One thing we have to do is find out the numbers of false allegations that have been made, because that will be one of the things people will be really concerned about - that someone who's falsely accused of sexual abuse will be put through a process that is completely unfair."
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/329767/call-to-shift-burden-of-proof-to-rape-accused

i have seen her comments referring to victims (sex unspecified) so cannot really comment on whether she is only concerned for her female clients.

Fair enough - so she realises it is a problem for her if people might worry about false accusations. Does not mean, though that she is concerned about the people who are thanks to her policy wrongly accused.

And there hardly can be a question about the gender she wants to empower - can it? She used to be the CEO of a centre for abused women. I am sure she saw terrible cases of females being abused, but I am wondering how this helped her to find some balance.

Just think about who would win if under Labour's proposal both a man and a woman claim that they have been raped by the other person. Neither of them can prove consent. Who do you reckon will go to jail - both? Yeah, right ...

craic
17-07-2017, 04:41 PM
Rubbish. If someone claims that I raped them behind the Taihape toilets on that day we in fact I was Melbourne. Most solid citizens have no idea of what they were doing last Wednesday.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 04:48 PM
Rubbish. If someone claims that I raped them behind the Taihape toilets on that day we in fact I was Melbourne. Most solid citizens have no idea of what they were doing last Wednesday.

craic, you might not realise that we talk here just about cases where the sexual contact is not contested (or can be proven). Every time any couple have sex, either of the partners can according to the proposed Labour policy claim afterwards that they have been raped - and than the other partner will need to prove consent if they want to avoid jail.

If you are in Melbourne, than obviously you only can be accused by other people with whom you had sex on that day in Melbourne ;).

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 04:58 PM
Rubbish. If someone claims that I raped them behind the Taihape toilets on that day we in fact I was Melbourne. Most solid citizens have no idea of what they were doing last Wednesday.If you normally keep a diary, then I agree it could be evidence in helping to establish an alibi to the actual event actus reus in the absence of any genetic material. I guess if your diary was blank apart from an entry for the day in question, it could be more likely to be self-serving and not be so helpful.

The police can refer to their notes in establishing evidence.

Brovendell
17-07-2017, 05:03 PM
BlackPeter, I love your logic and reasoning. Posters might like to search on Wikipaedia "Blackstone's Formulation".

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 05:09 PM
...

Just think about who would win if under Labour's proposal both a man and a woman claim that they have been raped by the other person. Neither of them can prove consent. Who do you reckon will go to jail - both? Yeah, right ... It is a difficult area. When investigating, police may refer to any previous complaints, history of violence etc. Whether previous history of complaints/ false accusations or previous convictions is admissible as evidence in court could be a subject of any review of the law surrounding sexual complaints.

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 05:13 PM
Shouldn't cost much. I reckon they'd get a heap of volunteers.

LOL. Obviously it depends ... but I am sure as well that you realise I talked not just about the financial burden of employing a witness - some people do value their privacy ;)

BlackPeter
17-07-2017, 05:19 PM
It is a difficult area. When investigating, police may refer to any previous complaints, history of violence etc. Whether previous history of complaints/ false accusations or previous convictions is admissible as evidence in court could be a subject of any review of the law surrounding sexual complaints.

Ouch - and here goes another pillar of our justice system? So far it is in court all about what you have done (as evidenced by your actions at the alleged crime), not about "how good you are" (evidenced by what you might have done in the past ...).

Are you just saying that Labour wants to crumble this pillar as well? The accused with the better history wins ...

I know it is a difficult (and very sensitive) area. Makes it worse that Labour wants to make political points with not even half baked policies.

Bjauck
17-07-2017, 05:28 PM
Ouch - and here goes another pillar of our justice system? So far it is in court all about what you have done (as evidenced by your actions at the alleged crime), not about "how good you are" (evidenced by what you might have done in the past ...).

Are you just saying that Labour wants to crumble this pillar as well? The accused with the better history wins ...

I know it is a difficult (and very sensitive) area. Makes it worse that Labour wants to make political points with not even half baked policies.Similar fact evidence is already admissible in certain circumstances (to establish a modus operandi) - could be the subject of review in certain cases.

winner69
17-07-2017, 06:07 PM
New ad out from Labour. Andrew Kirton sent me the link.

But the words put me off - don't think I'll watch it ....might bring me to tears

He did ask me to share it though
http://www.labour.org.nz/freshapproach-videolaunch?utm_campaign=170717_ad_nonim&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour

elZorro
17-07-2017, 06:20 PM
New ad out from Labour. Andrew Kirton sent me the link.

But the words put me off - don't think I'll watch it ....might bring me to tears

He did ask me to share it though
http://www.labour.org.nz/freshapproach-videolaunch?utm_campaign=170717_ad_nonim&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour

I'll bet you watched it, W69. I personally think Labour is pretty good at producing lame ads. This could be one of them. Three years we've waited for a decent show, there should be some better ones. Maybe they're going to play super nice with National again, but National are on such shaky ground that I'd like to see them getting some stick.

Paula Bennett was asked directly about her own experiences with WINZ today. She never 'deliberately misled them' about her situation.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/paula-bennett-says-she-never-deliberately-misled-winz.html

Sgt Pepper
17-07-2017, 10:00 PM
Ref John Keys being conferred with the Order of Australia
What a delicious irony, considering the issues Kiwis living in Australia have

"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap" .Napoléon

elZorro
18-07-2017, 06:42 AM
Ref John Keys being conferred with the Order of Australia
What a delicious irony, considering the issues Kiwis living in Australia have

"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap" .Napoléon

Agree, what's that all about? Is it a contra deal or something? Kiwi-born residents in Australia are being hammered by successive changes to the rules. But John Key has single-handedly improved our foreign and trade relations?

I would think that many Labour MPs have a portrait of Michael Joseph Savage in their offices. Quite a few National MPs could instead frame that quote from Napoleon.

Some comments on Labour's first video, which won't run on TV or radio at this stage of the campaign.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/94792113/Andrew-Little-regular-guy-is-the-theme-of-Labours-first-campaign-ad

fungus pudding
18-07-2017, 08:11 AM
I'll bet you watched it, W69. I personally think Labour is pretty good at producing lame ads. This could be one of them. Three years we've waited for a decent show, there should be some better ones. Maybe they're going to play super nice with National again, but National are on such shaky ground that I'd like to see them getting some stick.

Paula Bennett was asked directly about her own experiences with WINZ today. She never 'deliberately misled them' about her situation.



Obviously guilty as sin, wouldn't you say eZ ? Wait - don't answer. I'll try and guess, a bit later perhaps when my brain has been rested and nourished.

fungus pudding
18-07-2017, 08:16 AM
New ad out from Labour. Andrew Kirton sent me the link.

But the words put me off - don't think I'll watch it ....might bring me to tears

He did ask me to share it though
http://www.labour.org.nz/freshapproach-videolaunch?utm_campaign=170717_ad_nonim&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour

They put me off too. So does the on-screen caption of them.

westerly
18-07-2017, 10:36 AM
They put me off too. So does the on-screen caption of them.

You are not deaf then. Just ?

westerly

Bjauck
18-07-2017, 11:09 AM
Ref John Keys being conferred with the Order of Australia
What a delicious irony, considering the issues Kiwis living in Australia have

"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap" .Napoléon

Almost as bizarre as Abbott, claiming a Captain's call, appointing Prince Phillip as one of the last Knights of the Order of Australia. Sir Duke of Edinburgh. Good knight nursie!

winner69
18-07-2017, 11:36 AM
Occasionally see Andrew out walking Harry and thinking about how great this country is .........should bail him up and have a chat with him ......but that wouldn't be fair really as out walking with Harry is meant to be his time for reflection.

fungus pudding
18-07-2017, 03:56 PM
Occasionally see Andrew out walking Harry and thinking about how great this country is .........should bail him up and have a chat with him ......but that wouldn't be fair really as out walking with Harry is meant to be his time for reflection.

Also you may cause a shock reaction, as I doubt he has previously encountered any voter wishing to speak to him.

craic
18-07-2017, 04:44 PM
Just started the nations plan to be rid of all vermin by tomorrow - or was it yesterday? Went to farmlands and bought a A24 Automatic multi-kill trap for rats. It cost me $189 and the paperwork seems to suggest that a couple of dozen of them spread around the property would be effective. Anybody out there know of a good market for dead rats? Either of the two main parties, National or NZ First, offering a bounty? Do I keep the ears or the tails in case?

elZorro
18-07-2017, 05:51 PM
Just started the nations plan to be rid of all vermin by tomorrow - or was it yesterday? Went to farmlands and bought a A24 Automatic multi-kill trap for rats. It cost me $189 and the paperwork seems to suggest that a couple of dozen of them spread around the property would be effective. Anybody out there know of a good market for dead rats? Either of the two main parties, National or NZ First, offering a bounty? Do I keep the ears or the tails in case?

I hate to burst your bubble, Craic, but I bought one of those and tried it in a rat-infested shed next door. No takers for weeks on end. But those electrocution traps seem to work OK, and a standard rat trap does too. They are well designed though, the Goodnature traps. Maybe we had the bait wrong. A bit like National huh? Sounds good, looks good, but doesn't do anything..

artemis
18-07-2017, 06:27 PM
Just started the nations plan to be rid of all vermin by tomorrow - or was it yesterday? Went to farmlands and bought a A24 Automatic multi-kill trap for rats. It cost me $189 and the paperwork seems to suggest that a couple of dozen of them spread around the property would be effective. Anybody out there know of a good market for dead rats? Either of the two main parties, National or NZ First, offering a bounty? Do I keep the ears or the tails in case?

Always used to be said to plant your lemon tree on top of a dead cat. Guess a few dead rats would work just as well.

Mr English might be interested in a bulk lot on 24 September.

elZorro
19-07-2017, 07:54 AM
Always used to be said to plant your lemon tree on top of a dead cat. Guess a few dead rats would work just as well.

Mr English might be interested in a bulk lot on 24 September.

I think you are confusing rhetoric with reality. NZ First's policies look a lot like Labour's for the most part, Winston has stronger social media ties with Labour than with National, and he's been hammering National for years. Literally and figuratively. Is anyone sure which way he would go, if given the deciding vote? What will he do when the Labour-Green coalition get more party votes than National-Act does?

Keep an eye on this page of Wikipedia, shows that the polls are quite variable. National is trending down in popularity. OK, Labour is flat-lining at the moment..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_New_Zealand_general_electi on,_2017

fungus pudding
19-07-2017, 08:44 AM
I think you are confusing rhetoric with reality. NZ First's policies look a lot like Labour's for the most part, Winston has stronger social media ties with Labour than with National, and he's been hammering National for years. Literally and figuratively. Is anyone sure which way he would go, if given the deciding vote? What will he do when the Labour-Green coalition get more party votes than National-Act does?



Easy answer. Winston first says he will negotiate first with the highest polling party. But the end decision will depend on 'baubles'. Labour/Greens will be ready, willing, and probably able to offer him Prime Minister portfolio, given that neither party could front with a suitable PM. That and the promise of a knighthood. Two burning desires for Winston. So I'll concede. Next govt. will be Labour/Greens/NZ First with Peters as PM. Not good at all for the country, but it'll be amusing to say the least.

craic
19-07-2017, 08:58 AM
The latest poll has English sitting on the pigs back with Little going nowhere and just a point ahead of Winston. Last nights radio talkback appeared to put a bomb under the Greens as a result of their leaders confession of benefit fraud. NZ First know that they must clearly state that they will not work with the Greens if they are to maintain their voter base and WP knows that. Gareth Morgan is a non-event. A change of government looks less likely with each passing day.

BlackPeter
19-07-2017, 08:59 AM
Easy answer. Winston first says he will negotiate first with the highest polling party. But the end decision will depend on 'baubles'. Labour/Greens will be ready, willing, and probably able to offer him Prime Minister portfolio, given that neither party could front with a suitable PM. That and the promise of a knighthood. Two burning desires for Winston. So I'll concede. Next govt. will be Labour/Greens/NZ First with Peters as PM. Not good at all for the country, but it'll be amusing to say the least.

Probably as amusing as the Trump presidency. Nothing will get done but the country will turn into the laughing stock of the world. I am pretty sure Trump will support Winston.

However - as funny as it might be, I still hope we can save the country from this disaster in the making ...

elZorro
19-07-2017, 09:46 AM
Probably as amusing as the Trump presidency. Nothing will get done but the country will turn into the laughing stock of the world. I am pretty sure Trump will support Winston.

However - as funny as it might be, I still hope we can save the country from this disaster in the making ...

The country will be saved by a change of government - have a look at this commentary on John Key's abdication speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZercNPiZVGU&feature=share

BlackPeter
19-07-2017, 09:59 AM
The country will be saved by a change of government - have a look at this commentary on John Key's abdication speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZercNPiZVGU&feature=share

Hmm - not sure I intend to spend more than an hour on Labours propaganda ... Obviously - backwards looking as usual.

However - didn't they tell the Labour propaganda department that John Key is history? If Labour wants to win in one of the next elections than they should at least put their effort into throwing mud at people who still matter, if throwing mud is really the best they can do.

Obviously - still better would be to come up with a positive forward looking plan for the country, but we probably shouldn't overestimate their capabilities ...

winner69
19-07-2017, 10:04 AM
OMG this quiz must be rigged

Labour came out on top by miles ....... They are 82% aligned to my beliefs (whatever that means)

http://newzealand.isidewith.com/political-quiz?from=DCVbcxafk

RGR367
19-07-2017, 10:21 AM
OMG this quiz must be rigged

Labour came out on top by miles ....... They are 82% aligned to my beliefs (whatever that means)

http://newzealand.isidewith.com/political-quiz?from=DCVbcxafk

Did it too and it says I'm more with NZ First than the others. Jon Snow will die again if I ever give my party vote to NZ First racist party.

iceman
19-07-2017, 10:43 AM
I have least in common with Mana, Aeotearo Cannabis, Maori, United Future and Greens. Not really a surprise !! But ACT was 70%, National 69% and NZ First 59%. Interesting. ACT basically strong due to electoral views

winner69
19-07-2017, 10:44 AM
Did it too and it says I'm more with NZ First than the others. Jon Snow will die again if I ever give my party vote to NZ First racist party.

Rod Drury tweeted the quiz says he sides with National - spose quiz has some credence then.

BlackPeter
19-07-2017, 10:46 AM
OMG this quiz must be rigged

Labour came out on top by miles ....... They are 82% aligned to my beliefs (whatever that means)

http://newzealand.isidewith.com/political-quiz?from=DCVbcxafk

LOL - looks like I am a pretty balanced voter despite Gareth seems to make the cut (never would touch him with a bargepole, alone vote for him) ...

Here are my results ...

8997

Not very helpful, but the people calling me hard right (westerly) or hard left (Craic) can find some inspiration ...

but than ... I typically support ACT, National and (sometimes and a long time ago) the Greenies - adding all of them up makes 166% - this is how it works? Right?

elZorro
19-07-2017, 10:55 AM
OMG this quiz must be rigged

Labour came out on top by miles ....... They are 82% aligned to my beliefs (whatever that means)

http://newzealand.isidewith.com/political-quiz?from=DCVbcxafk

Labour was my top too, joint winner with the Greens, but only at 79%. This must mean you're more of a Labour-leaning leftie than I am, W69.

fungus pudding
19-07-2017, 11:27 AM
I have least in common with Mana, Aeotearo Cannabis, Maori, United Future and Greens. Not really a surprise !! But ACT was 70%, National 69% and NZ First 59%. Interesting. ACT basically strong due to electoral views

Interesting. I was Act, then National but what really surprised is TOP was third but a fair way back..

P.S. Reason I was surprised with TOP being third is I would not consider voting for their policies.

iceman
19-07-2017, 11:40 AM
Sort of confirms myself, FP and BlackPeter are slightly right of centre and EZ, w69 (Westerly and others yet to confirm) are far Left :-)

craic
19-07-2017, 11:49 AM
Wow! I came out with Act on top followed by NZ First then National. I'm sure I could get a better result if I did it again. But I have the same problem with horses.

winner69
19-07-2017, 11:50 AM
Sort of confirms myself, FP and BlackPeter are slightly right of centre and EZ, w69 (Westerly and others yet to confirm) are far Left :-)

My socialist upbringing and background showing through ....but I had thought I had become more of a radical centrist

Bring on the revolution

BlackPeter
19-07-2017, 12:37 PM
The country will be saved by a change of government - have a look at this commentary on John Key's abdication speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZercNPiZVGU&feature=share

EZ - really? Did you listen to it before you posted it?

I thought I might listen into it today while doing some chores, but I stopped when the loser talking was attacking John Key's family and afterwards proposed that more prime minister should finish their terms by assassination. This is just tasteless, has nothing to do with politics.

This is the nastiest piece of c**p I've ever heard - even Trump (to my knowledge) never went down that low.

Is this really you - EZ?

Dumb, offensive, cowardly - I don't think any honorable person could support this drivel. If that's really what Labour is about, than they will need a long time to recover. This is clearly not what the majority of the NZ population would support.

Joshuatree
19-07-2017, 12:48 PM
The country will be saved by a change of government - have a look at this commentary on John Key's abdication speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZercNPiZVGU&feature=share

Hilarious and accurate, unmasking the teflon king.

Major von Tempsky
19-07-2017, 05:09 PM
ATTENTION SHARETRADER MODERATOR: Any piece attacking politicians families and countenancing assassination of politicians should be Moderated OFF this Forum and out of the NZ Media!!!

EZ - really? Did you listen to it before you posted it?

I thought I might listen into it today while doing some chores, but I stopped when the loser talking was attacking John Key's family and afterwards proposed that more prime minister should finish their terms by assassination. This is just tasteless, has nothing to do with politics.

This is the nastiest piece of c**p I've ever heard - even Trump (to my knowledge) never went down that low.

Is this really you - EZ?

Dumb, offensive, cowardly - I don't think any honorable person could support this drivel. If that's really what Labour is about, than they will need a long time to recover. This is clearly not what the majority of the NZ population would support.

elZorro
19-07-2017, 05:31 PM
ATTENTION SHARETRADER MODERATOR: Any piece attacking politicians families and countenancing assassination of politicians should be Moderated OFF this Forum and out of the NZ Media!!!

It did say for ADULT listening, and I listened to the first 15 mins and checked some of the rest to make sure it didn't sound too rough. I'm sorry if some of the satire was too close to the bone. It's partly for entertainment.

But from my point of view, while Vinny Eastwood clearly engages in what Deputy PM Paula Bennett might still be calling 'hyperbowl', he's also extremely accurate in other ways. As Joshuatree posted.

Politicians put themselves up onto these podiums, the least they can do is to be truthful when they are speaking about what they've achieved while in office. Which reminds me, John never did furnish those tax returns.

westerly
19-07-2017, 07:22 PM
Sort of confirms myself, FP and BlackPeter are slightly right of centre and EZ, w69 (Westerly and others yet to confirm) are far Left :-)

NZF, Labour, National, and TOP between 70 and 60. Confirms my view that all of these parties have policies I can relate to. Which makes voting difficult.
Have serious doubts about the relevance of some of the questions to NZ and therefore like most polls the results are questionable.
I consider myself so far left I circle back to centre.

westerly

BlackPeter
19-07-2017, 08:15 PM
Hilarious and accurate, unmasking the teflon king.


It did say for ADULT listening, and I listened to the first 15 mins and checked some of the rest to make sure it didn't sound too rough. I'm sorry if some of the satire was too close to the bone. It's partly for entertainment.

But from my point of view, while Vinny Eastwood clearly engages in what Deputy PM Paula Bennett might still be calling 'hyperbowl', he's also extremely accurate in other ways. As Joshuatree posted.

Politicians put themselves up onto these podiums, the least they can do is to be truthful when they are speaking about what they've achieved while in office. Which reminds me, John never did furnish those tax returns.

Disappointing. I thought at least we might despite political differences still share some common decency. Looks though that decency is not that common anymore.

Sure - politicians set themselves up as political target. If they can't stand the heat they should get out of the kitchen. However - pulling their families through the dirt? What have their kids to do with the job of the father? What the wife? And suggesting that an assassination might have been in order? You guys should really be ashamed of yourself - this is not fun.

Not sure whether you are still able to see a political opponent as human being, but give it a try. EZ and JT - imagine that somebody is talking about your family and yourself the way this cowardly and dirty mudslinger talked about Key and his family. Would you like that? Really?

elZorro
20-07-2017, 08:43 AM
Disappointing. I thought at least we might despite political differences still share some common decency. Looks though that decency is not that common anymore.

Sure - politicians set themselves up as political target. If they can't stand the heat they should get out of the kitchen. However - pulling their families through the dirt? What have their kids to do with the job of the father? What the wife? And suggesting that an assassination might have been in order? You guys should really be ashamed of yourself - this is not fun.

Not sure whether you are still able to see a political opponent as human being, but give it a try. EZ and JT - imagine that somebody is talking about your family and yourself the way this cowardly and dirty mudslinger talked about Key and his family. Would you like that? Really?

No, of course he went too far too often, made some wild incorrect assumptions, might even be a conspiracy theorist. But many other comments I had to agree with wholeheartedly. From a site well outside mainstream, this is more social media.

Bjauck
20-07-2017, 08:50 AM
It did say for ADULT listening, and I listened to the first 15 mins and checked some of the rest to make sure it didn't sound too rough. I'm sorry if some of the satire was too close to the bone. It's partly for entertainment....
He's like a shock jock...Mostly for sledge-hammer "entertainment" with a smidgen of saitire.
I guess, you just have to hope that all those who stumble upon it or view it, understand that it is "just entertainment."

fungus pudding
20-07-2017, 08:58 AM
NZF, Labour, National, and TOP between 70 and 60. Confirms my view that all of these parties have policies I can relate to. Which makes voting difficult.
Have serious doubts about the relevance of some of the questions to NZ and therefore like most polls the results are questionable.
I consider myself so far left I circle back to centre.

westerly

I think most people will find that their real policy preferences can be cherry picked from all parties, although not one single thing about Winston First's policies appeal to me, and not many of Greens. And although I can only speak for myself, I suspect all of Labour's and only Labour's policies appeal to eZ.
So I suppose for a lot of voters it gets down to a matter of which party has competent MPs. That's where the current Labour lot are sadly lacking, and why National remains the favourite party - it's not all about policy.

craic
20-07-2017, 11:31 AM
I read a good article about WP's policies - he runs to the site of almost anything that might gain him a few votes. Turned up at Woodville to have his say at a meeting about the closure of the Manawatu Gorge and the effect it has on Woodville. Now I like Woodville and I have been there many times and used its toilets and cafes over the years but the Manawatu Gorge has never been anything but a disaster waiting to happen and it is very fortunate that there hasn't been bus loads of people swept down into the river. A good politician would be closing it down and creating an alternative route. Not WP he just wants sympathy votes

Major von Tempsky
20-07-2017, 02:07 PM
From MSN.co.nz - what will EZ say then poor thing?

The Winston Peters plan to become Prime Minister
Labour's vote collapses to 22 percent or lower.
At 22 percent Andrew Little won't make it back on Labour's list. That's because Labour will still win a number of safe electorate seats, and won't have enough vote to bring in even its number one list candidate.
Labour therefore does not have a leader with a mandate from the public on September 24.
Labour is in crisis and also has to start its own laborious leadership selection process, which will take several weeks.
But there is still a kingmaker scenario, with Labour/Greens/NZ First still having the numbers to form a Government.
With Labour having no leader, Winston Peters puts forward a combination that with him as Prime Minister. There is a joint policy agenda with concessions for all sides. Labour MPs would be in senior roles like Finance, and Green MPs would also get top jobs.
Labour and the Greens can either take that deal - or Winston Peters goes into Government with National and they are out of power for three more years.
Labour and the Greens accept the Peters plan - and Winston Peters is Prime Minister of New Zealand.
This is obviously an outside chance of happening, but it is not impossible.
It is made much more likely the more power Peters has - for example in a "political earthquake" scenario where he manages to overtake Labour (eg. NZ First 21 percent,

fungus pudding
20-07-2017, 02:17 PM
From MSN.co.nz - what will EZ say then poor thing?

The Winston Peters plan to become Prime Minister
Labour's vote collapses to 22 percent or lower.
At 22 percent Andrew Little won't make it back on Labour's list. That's because Labour will still win a number of safe electorate seats, and won't have enough vote to bring in even its number one list candidate.
Labour therefore does not have a leader with a mandate from the public on September 24.
Labour is in crisis and also has to start its own laborious leadership selection process, which will take several weeks.
But there is still a kingmaker scenario, with Labour/Greens/NZ First still having the numbers to form a Government.
With Labour having no leader, Winston Peters puts forward a combination that with him as Prime Minister. There is a joint policy agenda with concessions for all sides. Labour MPs would be in senior roles like Finance, and Green MPs would also get top jobs.
Labour and the Greens can either take that deal - or Winston Peters goes into Government with National and they are out of power for three more years.
Labour and the Greens accept the Peters plan - and Winston Peters is Prime Minister of New Zealand.
This is obviously an outside chance of happening, but it is not impossible.
It is made much more likely the more power Peters has - for example in a "political earthquake" scenario where he manages to overtake Labour (eg. NZ First 21 percent,

No. It's not impossible, although unlikely that Labour will drop too low for Little to return. But even with Little in Peters could still do a deal with Labour and Greens. His price will be Prime Minister role for himself and a couple of portfolios for his MPs. There's only Peters, Marks and Jones capable of holding a portfolio. There'd be as little as possible for the Greens but they'd settle for something on the environment. Most portfolios would have to go to Labour - but with criteria acceptable to Peters. Could happen. I'm hoping for a strong Act vote as with, say, 3 MPs National would not need Winston First.

BlackPeter
20-07-2017, 02:38 PM
No. It's not impossible, although unlikely that Labour will drop too low for Little to return. But even with Little in Peters could still do a deal with Labour and Greens. His price will be Prime Minister role for himself and a couple of portfolios for his MPs. There's only Peters, Marks and Jones capable of holding a portfolio. There'd be as little as possible for the Greens but they'd settle for something on the environment. Most portfolios would have to go to Labour - but with criteria acceptable to Peters. Could happen. I'm hoping for a strong Act vote as with, say, 3 MPs National would not need Winston First.

Agree with your sentiment - and hey, David Seymour is doing an outstanding job and clearly punched above his weight. Hard to believe ACT has at this stage only one MP. They would deserve to get this time around some more MP's ... as well to keep National honest.

http://act.org.nz/david-seymour/

craic
21-07-2017, 01:27 PM
The Herald cartoon on WP today is a classic. Only flaw is that it failed to show Little on the pillion, clinging on for dear life.

elZorro
23-07-2017, 07:07 AM
The Herald cartoon on WP today is a classic. Only flaw is that it failed to show Little on the pillion, clinging on for dear life.

Met up with a young uni student who is also a highly motivated NZ First party member, yesterday. He's part of a large left-wing faction within the NZF party, who would far rather see Winston siding with the Labour-Green coalition. Above all, they want a change of government. This person was a bit dismayed about Metiria having a go at Winston, but hopefully most of it is rhetoric. NZF have some good policies, some right-wing and some left-wing. They just don't get much air time.

Meanwhile National carries on as normal, another annual record for net immigration showing the way. Hold those house prices up, keep wages down, sack a few hundred more govt workers, make it easy for those at the top.

http://www.landlords.co.nz/article/6216/new-record-heats-up-migration-debate?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+22 +July+2017

craic
23-07-2017, 07:24 AM
You still didn't rescue the image of your leader from the back of Winston's motorcycle. Are you really that desperate that you would have Winston as your Prime Minister ?

fungus pudding
23-07-2017, 07:53 AM
You still didn't rescue the image of your leader from the back of Winston's motorcycle. Are you really that desperate that you would have Winston as your Prime Minister ?

Having Winston as Prime Minister would be undesirable. Having Little would be unimaginable.

janner
23-07-2017, 08:18 AM
Not for the Approx 21000 immigrants over the past three years. Plus those already here..... Free Moneeee

Blackrose
23-07-2017, 09:59 AM
Hi everyone.

Some $0.02 to throw around.
First up, Winnie turning up in Palmy to see if he could put a populist spin on the Manawatu Gorge thing.
Now having lived in Palmy, and as it's populated by fierce country folk, I was fortunate enough to talk to a senior road engineer, and a mining engineer with regards to the tricky Manawatu Gorge.

Here's some inescapable facts that should be taken in to consideration with regards to this issue.
1. We were talking of an out of date estimate of around 7,000 trips that's 3,500 each way that used that section of road each day. It was a very dangerous section as it could have collapsed at any moment as it was on a 45 degree angle.
2. The geo-technical bit. The rock on the hillside of this gorge is uplifted greywacke volcanic soil, with an active geological fault that is moving at the rate of 40mm apart each year. It has the consistency of wet vitabix, or for the 7th day light bulb changers out there, weetbix.
3. It would cost more than a billion to get a modern roading standard carriage way. Unless we turn in to UAE overnight - NZ could not afford it.

Winny rolled in to town to hear about 200 angry denizens that had not got the full facts in front of them. He knew for the amount of people involved vs the hard reality that it wasn't going to be the bigger media "splash" for him. So apart from a nod from the Manawatu Standard - that show pony was wheeled off to do something else.

It's nice to know the true Winny.

In the mean time that Iside thing pegged me as a greens supporter then labour. Who knew?

Joshuatree
23-07-2017, 10:18 AM
Having Winston as Prime Minister would be undesirable. Having Little would be unimaginable.

I like the idea of an altruistic leader in which Little is the real deal; just what this country needs for two terms at least; some real moral fibre and integrity which are sadly totally missing in action with the snouts in the trough zeal of national.Shameful and shameless, but in full transparency.

craic
23-07-2017, 11:26 AM
Giving the taxpayers money to losers is not altruism it's muggery. Let's see the man gain the confidence of an electorate, get elected and then get elected after serving his constituents and he might qualify as a potential leader. Taking an unknown union leader with the charm of a possum and sticking him at the top is desperation.

Major von Tempsky
23-07-2017, 02:05 PM
"part of a large left wing faction within NZ First?"

That's an oxymoron. A fairy at the bottom of the garden.

I'm ROTFL!

Joshuatree
23-07-2017, 02:14 PM
Didn't think being charmed was high priority for you craic; in fact you come across as the opposite; down to earth and no bull , like Little.;)

iceman
23-07-2017, 08:05 PM
Been in the UK for last couple of weeks . Reading the news here one realises how utterly divided and chaotic the UK is at the moment with no real strategy towards BREXIT and deep divisions in the 2 parties still alive and Lib Dems out of action. Enjoyed a dinner with a group that included a Labour MP that is a centrist and has not taken sides with Corbyn. Clearly was not a Corbyn fan and told me that their campaign promises had been totally impossible to implement had they won. Nobody ever expected to win so they went for promising whatever people wanted to hear, with a particular focus on far left and young disgruntled and unmotivated voters. Sadly a large part of that faction is nothing but thugs and is now openly harassing MPs that were not in the Corbyn camp with personal threats even at their home by slashing car tires and dropping stuff at their door step, trying to push them out to get more far left candidates into their seats. The Conservatives are so busy with internal fighting for the top job (May being a dead duck), that they are incapable of seriously negotiating the BREXIT.

My conclusion is that apart from some of the opposition parties in NZ promising a lot of expensive policies that they will find very difficult to deliver on in Government, there is absolutely no comparison between the political situations in NZ and the UK. I think NZ Labour needs to be very careful not to try to copy the tactics of their thuggish brothers and sisters in the UK. It will/would backfire badly for them in the much more stable and pleasant NZ.

craic
23-07-2017, 09:27 PM
Very little on here about M Turias situation and how that will impact on the Green vote. Not much sympathy for her in the papers and overnight talk-back callers offer no sympathy. Anyone prepared to start a Give-a-Little page to help her pay back the money?

Joshuatree
23-07-2017, 09:37 PM
Impressed with M Turias openesss; this is exactly what this country needs.Lets wait and see if Bennett gets her history reviewed shall we; be good to know if there isn't anything to it to clear the air or not. Anyone else seen a response from her yet? Very quiet atpit .

fungus pudding
24-07-2017, 07:38 AM
Impressed with M Turias openesss; this is exactly what this country needs.Lets wait and see if Bennett gets her history reviewed shall we; be good to know if there isn't anything to it to clear the air or not. Anyone else seen a response from her yet? Very quiet atpit .

She claims she has never received a benefit she was not entitles to. Has been reported in several papers.