The Irascible Curmudgeon

The Budget bites deep - The Key-NACT budget has stripped the worker

2010-06-30T12:32:00.000-07:00

Enough said. The Key-Dipton-Hide budget has stripped the NZ taxpayer of any relief from the NACT assets for the rich policies.

This link further shows how out of reality the Key NACT government is - both in terms of policy and the PM's brain cells (sells). http://www.thestandard.org.nz/key-proud-to-have-imaginary-kiwis-support/

Post Modern Comments

2010-06-30T04:11:00.001-07:00

These comments on modern life are worth the look. Sourced from Salon.com.

Israel's image as a civilised nation

2010-06-07T05:18:00.000-07:00

Israel & Gaza

2010-06-02T09:10:00.000-07:00

With these cartoons the recent act of international piracy condoned by the Israeli Government is summed up.
The IDF spokespersons being interviewed on TV and Radio sound so insincere about their "truths" one cannot believe that they can expect support from any rational country.

The Tory-Lib-Dem coalition in UK cartoon- why can't we have critics like this in NZ.

2010-05-29T00:45:00.000-07:00

The cartoonists in the UK are certainly more perceptive than the journalists and cartoonists in NZ. The coalition of NACT & Maori is as much pinnochio like as this representation of the UK relationship. With just as many hidden agendas waiting in the wings.

Checkmate comment on Key

2010-05-24T08:38:00.000-07:00

This quote was translated and adapted to fit the New Zealand situation into English from an article appearing in the Czech Republic as published in the Prager Zeitung of 28 April 2010 .

“The danger to New Zealand is not John Key but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Prime Ministership. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of a Key Government than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their Prime Minister."

"The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Key, who is a mere symptom of what ails New Zealand . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.
New Zealand can survive a John Key, who is, after all, merely a fool.

It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”

Budget Rorts and politically naked, Key's lack of clothing obvious

2010-05-20T22:07:00.000-07:00

The Keynglish 2nd budget was released yesterday. Hints at reviving Nosferatu Douglas' privatisation agenda and giving Hide free rein to sell off Auckland's water supply to the NACT rorters incorporated along with a forecast rise in debt, inflation and indirect tax along with fees.
These two cartoons are a great demonstration of the management processes of the Key led NACT government.

The worm Turns - albeit slowly

2010-05-05T19:18:00.001-07:00

New Zealand Today - Pictures, cartoons and images of NZ under NACT

2010-04-01T22:51:00.000-07:00

Herr. Rodney Hide as the Sunday Star Times portrayed him
Ironic really as the SST is leading the charge to unseat Hide's vociferous mayoral critic!!

New Zealand under NACT

These images reflect the humourlessness of New Zealand under the NACT government of "Smile & Wave" John Key.

Herr. Key flexes his muscles while wearing a Nazi helmet

Napier Street Scene soon after Herr. Key finished his routine

Herr. Rodney Hide -
The Minister in charge of the NACT anti-humour
and the removal of democratic rights Ministries

The controversy inspired by ACT councilors on the North Shore against the local Mayor when he dares ridicule and satirise their present leader, Rodney Hide - the Jack Boot of Epsom - is a good example of the stasii like state this present government is taking the country to.

There is some hope, though, Tom Scott is still in action as this cartoon satirising the American scene shows. Let's hope the cartoonist's bite is also directed against the NACT policies and actions in New Zealand.

2010-04-01T10:48:00.000-07:00

While walking down the street one day John Key is tragically hit by a truck and dies.

His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance.

'Welcome to heaven,' says St. Peter.. 'Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you.'

'No problem, just let me in,' says Key.

'Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity.'

'Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven,' says N.Z. P.M.

'I'm sorry, but we have our rules.'

And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all his friends, Hide, Douglas, Double Dipton and other politicians who had worked with him.

Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people.

They play a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and champagne.

Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly & nice guy who has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before he realizes it, it is time to go.

Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises....

The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him.

'Now it's time to visit heaven.'

So, 24 hours pass with Key and a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns.

'Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity.'

Key reflects for a minute, then he answers: 'Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in hell.'

So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell.

Now the doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage.

He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above.

The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulder. 'I don't understand,' stammers Key. 'Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time reminiscing about ripping off the N.Z. voter, destroying Auckland's local body democracy.... Now there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable.

What happened?'

The devil looks at him, smiles and says, 'Yesterday, John Boy, we were campaigning... ...

Today you voted.'

Ecosia search engine

2010-01-17T04:29:00.000-08:00

I recently started using this internet search engine that saves 2m² (2.4yd²) of rainforest with each web search I do. Their search results are as good as Google or Yahoo, and it’s free. Not only is it eco friendly it actually helps, leaving a positive footprint rather than merely reducing a negative one.
The address is: www.ecosia.org/how.php to learn how it all works. Quite impressive actually. A really good idea.

So far Ecosia has saved 12 million m² of rainforest!

Check it out and forward this email to your friends. It’s never been so easy to be green...

Nosferatu Rises Yet Again.- The Twilight of New Zealand

2009-11-20T20:40:00.000-08:00

The NACT vampire, Roger Douglas, has risen further from his grave carrying the instructions his assistant, Rodney Hide, will champion, as official Key lead policies, into the cabinet where the ministers are too busy rorting the taxpayer to scrutinise the sketched out legislation presented within the ACT written briefing papers. Given that Rodney's scenario, outlined at his ACT fundraiser breakfast in Christchurch is true (and judging from the Rape of Auckland legislation one doesn't doubt it) then we can see this NACT government presiding over the wholesale wreckage of the welfare state in order to satisfy the blood-lust of the corporate vampires forever circling the lobbies of this government.

Douglas' alternate budget,given prominence on the ACT website, will see,as reported in the national party's apologist organ, The Herald, the following:

A flat income tax rate, of one dollar in six, above a threshold of $31,200 with a higher tax-free threshold for those with dependents. (discredited when he proposed it during the 1980s - but revived here to capitalise on the NACT cabinet's memory losses.)

GST would rise to the same rate (16.66 per cent).

Company tax would be abolished, to be replaced by a flat asset tax of 0.8 per cent for all enterprises and for households with assets of more than $1 million. (who will be sucking whose blood? Another bite into the State's income rather than investment in the welfare of the country.)

Sir Roger's Budget would cut Government expenditure by more than a quarter within one year.

People would be expected to pay for their children's primary and secondary education directly; tax credits would be available for those whose tax cuts were insufficient to cover those costs directly.

They would also be expected to take out catastrophic health insurance and meet more minor health costs like GP visits, out of pocket. Accident, sickness and unemployment insurance would also be a matter of individual responsibility.

(So why not go the whole hog and remove all State support mechanisms and reintroduce voluntary charities and localised parish poor laws so the wealthy can feel good about themselves as they gaze over their estates?)

Trade barriers should be unilaterally removed and restrictions on the use of land, from zoning or the Resource Management Act, should be removed.

Labour markets should be further deregulated and immigration rules should be radically changed "allowing hard-working and entrepreneurial immigrants to freely enter New Zealand".

(Let's really, really screw the worker and reward the exploiter - and why would any hard-working, entrepreneurial individual want to come to a country whose policy is to exploit and screw them into the ground or is entrepreneurial code for "NACT only rewards those who know how to dine at the public trough and then claim justification (like "all my mates are doing it" Hide claimed )for the naked rort?"

ETS & NACT taxpayer rorting

2009-11-17T18:48:00.000-08:00

This cartoon says it all.

Is The Worm Turning??

2009-11-14T02:56:00.000-08:00

Does Tracy Barnett's opinion piece in the NACT apologist paper herald the spring of disillusionment with the NACT Government of Engkeylish?

The tone of this article certainly indicates a dose of reality checking setting in - at least with one journalist.

The Biege Brigade - Key and his inaction

The scariest moment for any opinion columnist is when she discovers she doesn't have an opinion - and I just got there.

One year on from John Key taking office, and it feels as if New Zealand has entered the Age of Beige - and I can't think of anything more terrifying.

Our new Prime Minister is friendly. He genially pays for his wife's overseas airfares, his shirts are tidy, his comments evenly modulated.

When my American family asks if I like him, I reply, "he's fine", like someone's inquiring about how your school uniform fits. After that, I lose the plot. I can't tell you what he stands for or against. The depth of my analysis is that to his everlasting credit, he looks nothing like his dog-toy incarnation.

Admit it: John Key's most memorable moment in one year of office was seeing him on the stage of The David Letterman Show, smiling like somebody's brother-in-law you'd forgotten you went to school with.

When my colleague's column waxed rapturously of Key's first year, like our Olympian had just gotten a perfect 10 from a Russian judge, I was honestly befuddled.

I only know that my malaise is uncomfortable because it, too, is beige. Once in a while, my dander kicks in at his ministers' misguided priorities that seem to make stealth cuts to those least able to defend themselves - at-risk youth, the adult illiterate, disabled children, sexual abuse survivors.

In my newbie Kiwi way, this appeals most to my sense of fairness. But I'm waiting, waiting for this Prime Minister to fill in his paint-by-number canvas so I can see some kind of the bigger picture.

John Key's greatest asset, and deficit, is that he's managed not to show us much of his hand - and hence, where he's going.

It's as if we ordered a competent business manager for our Prime Minister, and forgot to ask for a leader, and no one seems to have minded much.

When John Key made Afghanistan his war - and it is indeed his war now - he quietly decided to re-deploy 71 SAS troops as though it was a business deal. I looked around for a reaction and found - nothing.

He's wagering his payoff will be some political capital with the new, sexier American president. Maybe joint military exercises or a softer approach to free trade.

As journalist Jon Stephenson put it so well, John Key is still a trader at heart. But my fear is that he is gambling with Kiwi lives. It seems we are content not to notice - until someone's son comes home in a box.

Face it, Afghanistan hasn't exactly been raging conversation at quiz night. There's a war on, and we're in it.

The perception, I suspect, for most people is that this is America's war, not ours. We've been graciously reassured by our new Prime Minister that our soldiers won't be put in dangerous positions, as if he can stage-manage roadside bombs.

I've written a few columns about it. But it is the silence that scares the hell out of me. It is as if I am back in America in 2003, when war was still far away from anyone's daily experience, and we were, to eerily quote Wayne Mapp upon his recent return from Afghanistan, "getting on with the job, so to speak" - in the same breath as much of Europe, and finally the American public, is questioning where this tragic fog of war is taking us.

John Key's stale, indefinable reassurance that Kiwis are "fighting terror" sounds like a punch line without the joke, eight years on.

The cost of war can't be measured by accruing political capital, as though it can be banked for a bigger prize. What we all seem to forget, with each successive generation, is that war is a moral choice with a huge price tag - a life exploded, a future dissolved.

Turn around, John Key, and show your colours. Define your administration as being an international leader, not a follower of American-pulled strings.

I don't know if I can stomach watching the mistakes of my former home being duplicated in my new one. If there is anything I feel I've earned the right to say, after watching two American wars unfold, and thousands of my countrymen die, it is to warn us all that there is nothing beige about the colour of Kiwi blood.

Lead us out of Afghanistan.

www.traceybarnett.co.nz

The Free Enterprise dream - NACT agenda revealed

2009-11-12T21:16:00.000-08:00

The cartoon in the NACT newspaper -The Herald - reveals the John Key dream - Free business enterprise and the stasi state of no individual liberties or civil rights.

EDUCATION UNDER TOLLEY

2009-11-06T21:33:00.000-08:00

How do these people survive?

ONE

Recently, when I went to McDonald's I saw on the menu that you could have an order of 6, 9 or 12 Chicken McNuggets.
I asked for a half dozen nuggets.
'We don't have half dozen nuggets,' said the teenager at the counter.
'You don't?' I replied.
'We only have six, nine, or twelve,' was the reply.
'So I can't order a half dozen nuggets, but I can order six?'
'That's right.'
So I shook my head and ordered six McNuggets

TWO

I was checking out at the local Countdown with just a few items and the lady behind me put her things on the belt close to mine. I picked up one of those 'dividers' that they keep by the cash register and placed it between our things so they wouldn't get mixed.
After the girl had scanned all of my items, she picked up the 'divider', looking it all over for the bar code so she could scan it.
Not finding the bar code, she said to me, 'Do you know how much this is?'
I said to her 'I've changed my mind; I don't think I'll buy that today.'
She said 'OK,' and I paid her for the things and left.
She had no clue to what had just happened.

THREE
A woman at work was seen putting a credit card into her floppy drive and pulling it out very quickly.
When I inquired as to what she was doing, she said she was shopping on the Internet and they kept asking for a credit card number, so she was using the ATM 'thingy.'

FOUR
Last month we hired a Typist who was none too swift. One day she was typing and turned to a secretary and said, 'I'm almost out of typing paper. What do I do?' 'Just use paper from the photocopier', the secretary told her. With that, the intern took her last remaining blank piece of paper, put it on the photocopier and proceeded to make five 'blank' copies.

FIVE
The NACT Education Minister was told she would be given a "helicopter overview"of tertiary education in N.Z. and wondered why she was given a set of briefing papers rather than a real helicopter ride over the city.

SIX
The same cabinet minister was given her meeting schedule that included a meeting with the Vice-Chancellors of the NZ Universities. She refused the meeting as she thought she was being insulted as she wasn't scheduled to meet the Chancellors.

Perhaps she want's the public to join her... judging by the earlier examples she's succeeding.

NACT Humour

2009-11-06T20:57:00.000-08:00

The Economy is So Bad under a NACT Government that....

• I got a pre-declined credit card in the mail.

• I ordered a burger at McDonalds and the kid behind the
counter asked, "Can you afford fries with that?"

• CEO's are now playing miniature golf.

• If the bank returns your check marked "Insufficient Funds,"
you call them and ask if they meant you or them.

• Parents in Remuera fired their nannies and learned
their children's names.

• That NACT MPs have to take their girlfriends on holidays to preserve their emotional stability as the evidence that their policies don't work stack up.

And finally...

• NACT says they are looking into this Perk Abuse scandal.

Oh Great! The guys who have their hands deep in the taxpayers pockets are
being investigated by the people who claim they don't own the house their family trust own and can therefore rort the taxpayer for rent and who take their girlfriend on an all expenses paid overseas trip to attend a wedding and visit an amusement park while claiming to be a "perk-buster" and have their noses even deeper into the trough!!!
Really makes you feel confident doesn't it?

Hypocrisy and Idiocy in NACT

2009-10-29T23:15:00.000-07:00

The recent headlines coming from the NACT government are hardly ones to write home about.

First we have the erstwhile PM pontificating at the CTU conference telling the teachers that they should take a salary cut so the NACT govt can then pay the school support staff properly, then we have "Double Dipton" declaring that the change in "ownership"of his family home in wellington had nothing to do with him being able to rort more of the taxpayers' money in "accommodation allowances" so that he could be a permanent resident in Dipton - a township that hasn't seen him as any more than a temporary resident since he left there to go to school. adding to that rort we then are witness to him being paraded in an election campaign style advertising blitz by none other than the state broadcasting corporation as the front man for a programme named after him and all being declared as being honest and transparent!

Add to that the revelation that the NACT govt is now going to privatise ACC, flog off local body assets, especially water, in the race to "super-size" Auckland and the path to corruption gets even smoother.
Then, today, we get a report that the Herald's favourite "perk buster" and supporter of local democracy, Rodney Hide, has been caught rorting the taxpayer as well. As this story demonstrates:

ACT leader Rodney Hide says he disagrees with the perk that gives MPs a taxpayer-funded 90 percent fare discount for themselves and their partners - but he still used it to take his girlfriend overseas.

The air fares for Louise Crome's trip to London, Canada and the United States are reported to have cost $25,163.

Mr Hide's fares and accommodation cost $26,872.

He said today the perk was "a silly anachronism" but it existed and he couldn't change it.

"I don't agree with that rule but I'm not a martyr," he said on Radio New Zealand.

"I checked twice with the prime minister that it was acceptable. It got all the ticks."

To make it worse Rodney "I'm a little piggy too" Hide declares that because it's alright with Key and the others are doing it too he'll dig his hands into the public purse to entertain his girlfriend with overseas trips again.

Lapsed perkbuster Rodney Hide says he will use his MP's travel expenses again to take his partner overseas.

The Act leader was making no apologies yesterday for the public purse paying $25,163 for his partner, Louise Crome, to accompany him as Local Government Minister on a Super City fact-finding visit to Britain, Canada and the United States, and some domestic travel.

Mr Hide is the second Act MP to run up a big globetrotting bill on the taxpayer by using a travel perk for longstanding MPs.

In July, it was revealed that Act's Sir Roger Douglas, Parliament's most vocal campaigner against wasteful spending of taxpayers' money, had spent $44,411 on travel - most of it on a trip he and his wife took to London to see their son and grandchildren. The figures emerged under a new quarterly reporting regime of transparency for parliamentary spending.

If this isn't hypocrisy in action and being given the "BIG TIC" by the John Key I'm at a loss to discover what might be.

Isn't it about time there was a real public outcry at the high handed manner this NACT government is behaving?

Is this a picture of future leaders?

2009-10-18T20:02:00.000-07:00

The recent exploits of ABG boys while on a trip tothe Auckland museum do not give a lot of credence to the claims that the school is educating future leaders of New Zealand but then the activities of the present NACT government would indicate that the bully boy mentality these boys are "worshipping" is alive and well in the corridors of power around the Engkeylish power base.

Undervalued profession

2009-09-09T20:34:00.000-07:00

This story gives the lie to Tolley's idea that graduates with MA's will rush to be fast tracked into teaching in New Zealand schools. It also demonstrates that the attacks on teachers, with the insistence that they are over paid and underworked by this NACT government is nothing more than shallow political rhetoric from those without a sustainable education policy.

Teachers earn below OECD levels

Thursday Sep 10, 2009

Primary and secondary teachers in New Zealand earn well below the OECD average, and thousands of dollars less than their Australian counterparts, a report says.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's Education at a Glance 2009 report compared the salaries of teachers in primary, lower secondary and upper secondary education, at a starting salary and after 15 years of experience.

The salary figures, in US dollars, were based on buying power parity, which eliminates price differences among countries.

New Zealand teachers at each level of education started on about US$19,236 ($28,044) - significantly less than the OECD average starting salary of US$28,687 at primary level, US$31,000 at lower secondary level and US$32,183 at upper secondary level.

After 15 years, New Zealand teachers reached about US$37,213 at all three levels of teaching, compared with OECD averages of US$39,007 at primary, US$41,993 at lower secondary and US$44,782 at upper secondary levels.

Australian teachers, on the other hand, consistently earned hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars more than the OECD average.

They began on about US$32,259 at primary level and US$32,406 at both secondary levels, and reached up to US$44,245 at primary level and US$44,942 at secondary level after 15 years.

In New Zealand, female teachers comprise 98.8 per cent of pre-primary education teachers, 83.3 per cent of primary teachers and 65.7 per cent of lower secondary education teachers.

The number of female teachers dropped to 57.8 per cent at upper secondary education level and to 49.9 per cent at tertiary level.

Teacher-student ratios were slightly smaller than OECD averages, while the net time spent teaching was above the OECD average.

Teachers' unions said the figures confirmed teachers were underpaid and undervalued, the Dominion Post reported.

PPTA president Kate Gainsford and Educational Institute president Frances Nelson both said change was needed to make the industry more attractive and to retain teachers.

NACT import failed programmes from failed Bush policies

2009-09-07T02:00:00.000-07:00

Let be said that Ann Tolley knows failure when she sees it and that she is prepared to follow the tried and true NACT philosophy that if it failed in the US it must be good and NZ will be able to tweak it with No 8 wire & baling twine. Here she is ready to screw up the NZ education system with a discredited US scheme. These two stories illustrate her lack of wisdom and knowledge.

Minister explores 'fast-track' teachers
By NATHAN BEAUMONT - The Dominion Post
Last updated 05:00 07/09/2009
Prospective teachers could skip specialist university training and be fast-tracked into the classroom under a plan to cope with an ageing workforce.
Under the scheme, anyone who already has a master's degree could bypass teacher's college and learn on the job.
The suggestion follows a high-level meeting between Education Minister Anne Tolley and controversial United States schools leader Michelle Rhee.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/2839264/Minister-explores-fast
-track-teachers
<http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/2839264/Minister-explores-fas
t-track-teachers>
And here is the research and argument to prove both Tolley and Rhee wrong.
(Previous daily news had comment from Australia - US expert condemns Teach for Australia 17 August 2009
http://www.nswtf.org.au/media/latest_2009/20090817_berliner.html
<http://www.nswtf.org.au/media/latest_2009/20090817_berliner.html> )

I'm a Victim therefore my argument is correct.

2009-09-02T21:12:00.000-07:00

I'm a victim therefore my argument is correct and you're a big bully for challenging me.

While including the statement that perhaps the pupils' teacher deserved to be fired was extreme and unwarranted,there are not many times that I agree with Michael Laws for I regard him in the same light as Tom Scott portrayed him back when he was an M.P. - an opportunistic opinionated shallow individual- but to read that he is being accused of "bullying" because he gave a group of primary school pupils the courtesy of a reply to their letters arguing for a change to the spelling of Wanganui and chose to point out, very frankly, that their argument was based on somewhat tenuous grounds and that there were more urgent and deeper matters affecting Moaridom that they could be justifiably concerned about is unbelievable.

One of the problems in New Zealand society is the lack of robust, rational debate on issues that affect our lives (ironically the shallowness of that debate is partly attributable to the talk-back hosts, like Michael Laws, who do not encourage rationality on their radio shows, favouring, instead, the emotional, argumentum ad homenum as it gets better ratings.). The lack of robust, rational debate in the media and in our classrooms means that when pupils and teachers are faced with a frank and pointed rebuttal of their favoured position they immediately cry "BULLYING!!!" and then retreat into their corners to stroke their belief convinced that now they have painted themselves as victims their position is now even more correct and deserving of total public support.

So it is with this response to Mr.Laws' letters to the pupils of Otaki School.
The episode is a beat up, a proverbial storm in a tea-cup, that serves none of the "victims" of the "bullying" well.
Let's encourage robust, informed debate and, perhaps, our society can focus on real issues with a greater sense of arguing based on substantial and substantive information.

Supercity smackers

2009-08-24T13:59:00.000-07:00

One of the great ironies of the NZ political scene is that of the ACT party. It was a party founded on the Friedmanite principles of "the individual behaves with total economic rationality and, therefore needs no assistance from the State tomake the best decisions" and yet the representatives of this political philosophy in the NZ government continually fail to live up or down to this principle.
First we have the clown prince of ACT- Rodney Hide (the only one of the ACT bully squad who professes to represent an electorate ) - who appears to believe that if he threatens to throw his toys out of the cot he will be able to continue on with his campaign to remove the democratic rights of ratepayers to be represented at the local level by someone who actually lives and works in their ward instead of by the "big business" interest whose concerns do not reflect those of the ratepayer. This is nothing more than corporate dictatorship being imposed on the ratepayers.
Then we have ACT's justice spokesman, Garrett, whose belief system incorporates Hide's bully boy attitudes and adds such niceties as inappropriate sexual suggestions to staff and threats of retribution against any state employee who chooses to criticise any policy he puts forward... like privatising the state prison service for the benefit of the foreign corporate raider.
And now we have "Let's smack-em down" Boscowen who is loudly campaigning on behalf of the religious right, both here in NZ and with interference assistance from the USA, for NZ to return to the pre-repeal of section 59 situation which allowed "responsible" parents to claim justifiable force when they injured their children in the act of disciplining them.
All three of these righteous men appear to have no clear idea about responsible individual behaviour or principle apart from that of the dictatorship of the selfish bully.
Mind you their founder Roger (Nosferatu ) Douglas certainly provided the foundation for such behaviour so I presume we shouldn't be too surprised.
Their sole reason for existence is to prop up one of the most inept and rorting governments of recent years.

Come off it Key - suspend your errant MP until he is proven innocent!

2009-08-19T16:00:00.000-07:00

The Double Standard rides again. If Key was as principled as he portrays himself Bakshi should be taking gardening leave until all allegations of wrong doing are cleared... after all isn't this what he insisted Clark should do with Peters?

What is sauce for the goose must also be for the gander?

National MP Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi has assured Prime Minister John Key he has not done anything wrong and Mr Key wants him to be treated like everyone else during an inquiry into immigration allegations.

The inquiry, involving list MP Mr Bakshi, is back on after police were provided with fresh information.

Mr Bakshi has denied allegations he accepted money for false job offers to bolster Indian immigrant applications.

There have also been allegations about attempts to silence witnesses.

Mr Key, in Australia for meetings with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, said Mr Bakshi should be "treated like any other New Zealand citizen", Radio New Zealand reported.

"I've directly and personally asked him whether there's any truth to the allegations, he's given me a personal assurance there is not.

"If there is grounds for investigation then the authorities should conduct those investigations and they'll get full support from the Government if it's required,"

Mr Bakshi would be "called to account" if there was a case to answer, Mr Key said.

Acting Prime Minister Bill English said yesterday Mr Bakshi was "quite clear he hasn't done anything wrong". Immigration New Zealand started an inquiry last year but closed it in March because of a lack of evidence.

It has now provided police with further information on the allegations after interviewing a new informant.

The service also provided police with a sworn statement, obtained by Labour MP Pete Hodgson from another new informant, which said complainants were encouraged by people in India to drop the matter; "because he was going to be the first Sikh MP in New Zealand".

Police said they were looking at the role of former immigration consultant Darshan Singh Bains, who took job offers from Mr Bakshi and gave them to Indians to use as part of their applications to migrate to New Zealand.

Mr Bakshi said he knew nothing about the police investigation, and had not had any contact with Immigration since its file was closed.

Mr Bakshi has been away from work after a heart bypass operation but is expected back soon.

Double Dipton's State House

2009-08-11T22:07:00.000-07:00

An exclusive picture of Bill English's new home. This will soon be copied by Phil Heatley and others in the NACT cabinet.

To Tom McCroskie & the NO campaigners

2009-08-02T20:17:00.000-07:00

I've been reading Alice in Wonderland to my 4 year old grand-daughter as the ballot papers for the most ineptly worded referendum yet have been distributed and await our mark and return. I came to chapter 6 -Pig & Pepper as I read to her and found the following rhyme the NO campaigners might find useful as a campaign song.

The Duchess began nursing her child again, singing a sort of lullaby to it as she did so, and giving it a violent shake at the end of every line -
"Speak roughly to your little boy,
And beat him when he sneezes:
He only does it to annoy,
Because he knows it teases.

I speak severely to my boy,
I beat him when he sneezes;
For he can thoroughly enjoy
The pepper when he pleases!"

Lewis Carroll certainly knew a good campaign song when he wrote it.

Reognisable even now!

2009-08-02T20:11:00.000-07:00

In view of Michael Laws' commentary on the rorts being perpetrated by English & Co in claiming rent assistance to live in his own house in Wellington (as a boarder of his wife - of course) and, as Laws was so willing to pontificate on over the weekend I thought Tom Scott's cartoon from the Muldoon era when Laws was a new MP was highly relevant.

Proof that The Past gives birth to the Present.

2009-08-02T12:55:00.000-07:00

I was browsing through a book of Tom Scott cartoons - "In a jugular vein" recently and came across these cartoons commenting on the National government social and economic policies.
Apart from changing the facial features of the social welfare minister (the build is the same) there appears to be little difference between Shipley and Bennett.

Then if we look at the social policies of the Engkeylish government we see echoes of the following.

Then the noises from the Treasury and the Brash consulting group provide reminiscences of this failed economic policy.

A Stasi Government - Tories reveal their hatred

2009-07-29T00:19:00.000-07:00

Paula Bennett with John Key and their apologist Hooton revealed the depths of stasi like behaviour that those with long memories associated with the bullying dictatorship of East Germany where the private records of the citizens were routinely used to prevent any criticism of the activities of the government.
In earlier posts I remarked on this bullying tendency as being a hallmark of the NACT politicians signaled during the election campaign. Paula Bennett's use of confidential data held by a government department on a citizen and John Key's endorsement of that action is nothing more than the arrogant abuse of power one would expect of a petty tyrant whose inability to engage in rational and reasoned debate is only resolved by destroying the individuals who dare challenge their policies.
Garroting Garrett's threatening public servants who attend Select Committees to question government policies along with Hide's roughshod attack on local communities with his super city legislation we have too many examples of dis-quietening anti-democratic behaviour by the NACT government.
The complacency of the media with its willingness to mouth the PR line fed to it by the government is also not reassuring... in another country the headlines would have been a concerted call for the minister's head along with cartoons with John Key as Salome.

The Secret Agenda revealed

2009-07-22T16:11:00.000-07:00

Back in 2008 I commented on the Engkeylish policies and suggested that they concealed an agenda that would be a repeat of the privatisation policies that failed in New Zealand in the late 80s and throughout the 90s. This cartoon from the bastion of National Party support - The NZ Herald - is a vindication of my contention that the English-Key NACT government intends to flog off the family silver to the highest foreign bidders within the coming few years.
Flip-flops and policies based on political expediency rather than honesty have given NZ the receipe for a wholesale sell off of our national assets and an abnegation of social responsibility by this NACT government.

Pomp, circumstance and Arrogance

2009-06-28T06:33:00.000-07:00

The following links provide ample evidence of the lack of policy and the incredible arrogance of the present NACT government as they slash and burn the NZ economy in the quest to allow their traditional support base to feed at the tax payers' expense.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2009/06/27/1245b6b22e76

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2009/06/26/1245b6a11a42

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10580801

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/education/news/article.cfm?c_id=35&objectid=10580670

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/education/news/article.cfm?c_id=35&objectid=10580795

A sorry record of ignoring advice, of hammering the taxpayers, of rewarding the affluent arrogant with targeted funding to support private schools at the expense of the state schools, night classes, early childhood education and those that need specialist assistance in the school system.

Trough Feeding Time for NACT

2009-06-28T04:48:00.000-07:00

The evidence of the arrogance and pomp attitudes that are the hall marks of the Key NACT government are manifesting themselves in the profligate expenditure of the present cabinet.There are no excuses for this especially when the same men are constantly criticising the voters for not saving, for over spending and reckless use of credit.

Let's stop the hypocrisy and stop feeding at the taxpayer's expense and get on with demonstrating that somewhere and somewhen there are effective policies hiding under the crosby-textor spin that got you elected.

From the press-gallery:

"Mr Goff said National ministers had spent $739,000 on travel in the first three months of the year -- more than double the $336,000 Labour ministers spent in the same period last year.

"It's straight hypocrisy for the Government to call for others to exercise restraint while applying a different standard for themselves," he said."

But Mr Key said it was Mr Goff who was being hypocritical.

"It is unbelievable hypocrisy for Mr Goff to criticise ministerial spending when as trade, foreign affairs and defence minister during the last nine years of a Labour government, he would have racked up hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of spending on travel," he said.

Yes, but Mr. Goff was actually doing his job and not masquerading as a cabinet minister as people like Richard Worth, Pansy Wong, Rodney Hide, Tony Ryall, Pita Sharples, Tiria Turia and Maurice Williamson did or do.

"Our spending is totally understandable for a new Government that is seeking to build relationships with governments of other countries for the benefit of New Zealand and its economy."

Come on.... the impact on the world stage of the present NACT cabinet is summed up as a "Resounding Silence". Compared to Helen Clark and Phil Goff the present NACT representatives are but gnats.

Mr Goff also said Mr Key had doubled the number of ministerial staffers earning more than $100,000 a year and approved the hiring of consultants on rates of up to $2000 a day.

"In a mean-minded act, the Government has also taken away $2.5 million funding for severely disabled children at school which may make it impossible for some children to continue to attend school."

Mr Goff said he was dealing with distraught mothers and concerned teachers about the damage the cuts were causing.

"This shows just how out of touch the Government is with the people it is hurting and the perverse priorities it is following in cutting help to the most vulnerable while spending more on itself."

True. At a time when actions should reflect the rhetoric the NACT government retreats into the arrogance of its past traditions and rides on the taxpayers' wallets.

National's McJobs to hide policy Failure

2009-06-27T19:49:00.000-07:00

Gordon Campbell's opinion piece examining the paucity of policy behind the McJobs policy announced by Paula Bennett and the corresponding lack of policy examination by NACT support party - The Maori Party is well worth the read.

Who is Pulling Paula Bennett's strings then?

2009-06-25T01:22:00.000-07:00

This opinion piece from the CEO of MacDonalds in the UK sounds just like the prepared statement by welfare minister Paula Bennett in little old N.Z. Which leads one o ask- just which big business is pulling the NACT government's strings and who, in particular, is twanging on Paula Bennett's strings?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6571510.ece

Bennett's Benefit Brevity

2009-06-23T21:36:00.000-07:00

It is reassuring to hear that the traditional NACT policies are succeeding in their usual manner - unemployment is increasing at 1100 a week and the number of people on benefits has reached 302000 - the highest since 2005, and that Social Welfare Minister Paula Bennett's solution is to simply let everything, from welfare through to the Family Commission fiasco that is Christine Rankin, go west as she looks to her weather vane leader to vacillate towards another off the cuff unresearched scheme that will resonate with emptiness in the Herald's PR pages.

PRISON HULKS.- a modest proposal

2009-06-21T21:35:00.000-07:00

A Modern Prison Hulk - note the use of shipping containers

This latest proposal from the deep intellects of the present cabinet would support the contention that N.Z. has entered a phase of talibanisation by embracing the "great leap backward."

Corrections Minister Judith Collins is releasing the numbers on a proposal to house prisoners in shipping containers.

The Government is looking at the idea as a way of dealing with rising prisoner numbers, while reducing the costs of new prison facilities to taxpayers.

Ms Collins says putting the container option into existing prisons would cost between $53,000 and $63,000 per bed. She says using the same approach in a new prison development would cost around $370,000 per bed.

Perhaps an even greater cost saving could be made by purchasing a cruise liner that has reached the end of its economic and sea worthiness life and, instead of sending it to the breakers yard, mooring it out off the Manukau Heads and shipping the prisoners to it.

The prisoners would be away from the cities and towns where they are causing problems (thus keeping Melissa Lee and others like her safe in their bigotory-blue themed worlds ), they would be housed in cells that already exist, they would be far enough away from land that escape would be almost impossible ( diligent feeding of sharks around the hulks would provide added security) thus reducing the number of guards needed while the prisoners could be gainfully employed constantly pumping the bilges to keep themselves afloat.

I'm sure that the economics of this modest propsal would keep the Treasury wonks in happiness pills for a considerable time although the person, like Judith "Crusher" Collins, who would seriously front such a proposal could be described as having a brain that if placed on the head of a pin it would roll around like a dried pea on an eight lane highway.

The Engkeylish Government crumbles?

2009-06-20T11:26:00.000-07:00

Commentary from the right wing and Granny Herald indicate that disillusionment with their favourite sons is beginning to set in.

First: Rodney's favourite: Mr. Garrott: (sorry...... Garrett)

A Government MP has been reprimanded for lewd conduct just weeks after the resignation of National's Richard Worth.

Act MP David Garrett was spoken to by party leader Rodney Hide after making sexual comments to a female member of the party's Parliamentary office.

Hide said last night he had cause to speak to Garrett after learning the fledgling MP had made "off-colour" remarks. He said he hoped the incident would not lead to the end of Garrett's career as a member of Parliament.

Garrett is one of the drivers behind Act's "Three Strikes" policy - and this incident makes for his own second strike. Garrett also came under fire when he compared homosexuality to paedophilia on TVNZ's Eye to Eye show, after he had been drinking.

The new allegations have earned the National-led government a warning that it risks becoming branded as a "government of sleaze". INDEED!!

Second: Key Apologist - Bill Ralston:

In dismissing the need for better political management he shows he is not really a politician. After almost three decades in the business Goff is truly a politician.

Goff understands that a government can be slowly undermined by all the "white noise".

He served as a minister in two governments in which that happened. Labour lost power last year, even though the economy was still strong and it was continuing to deliver the goods to its constituency. It lost because it was gradually overcome by the "white noise" and the public lost faith.

The Government needs to learn it might ignore the "distractions" but that doesn't mean they will go away and the consequences can be fatal.

Third: Matt McCarten: on the Melissa Lee fiasco:

The campaign was deserted by the leadership

Does Key get it that by-elections are national campaigns? Anyone can hold the job as leader when things go well. The test of a leader is when things are not going well. Key failed. He picked Lee against the wishes of the locals, he didn't get his experienced people taking ownership of the campaign and he just wasn't there. But the unforgivable act was Key's holiday on by-election weekend. The best he could do was send Lee a text. None of his senior ministers or even his president was there. Lee was left to face the massacre alone, like a stunned possum in a car's headlights.

If this is how National copes under stress in a campaign, I hope the recession doesn't get too difficult. This by-election shows us that our Prime Minister and his Cabinet can't be counted on when things get tough.

Fourth: Rodney Hide's puppet master - the Nosferatu of NZ politics- Roger Douglas:

"This only enforces the emerging trend we have seen between Mr Key and Mr English. Mr Key announces a stupid idea - be it a cycleway or forced investment in New Zealand - Mr English realises the idea is stupid, and distances himself from it.

"The Prime Minister then becomes hell-bent on scoring another symbolic victory over the Finance Minister - who backs down and Mr Key gets his way. But these battles are only resulting in pyrrhic victories - neither the cycleway nor forced investment will make New Zealand better long term.

"The trend is towards an obsession with massaging Mr Key's political image, at the expense of New Zealand's long term prospects.

Fifth: Brian Rudman: On the decision to waste the Rate Payers' money on a grandiose booze barn or John Key's "Party Central"

Brian Rudman: Government bullies pushing city a wharf too far

Sixth: Christine Rankin's decision to front the support whacking your kids campaign despite the assurance from John Key that she would not be involved in actively campaigning on the issue:

Families Commissioner Christine Rankin's decision to be a face of the "vote no" campaign for the smacking referendum is "quite incredible", Green MP Sue Bradford says.

Ms Bradford was the architect of a 2007 law change which removed the defence of reasonable force in child abuse cases. Ms Rankin vehemently opposed the law change and was spokeswoman of For The Sake Of Our Children Trust.

Tomorrow Ms Rankin will front at the launch of a campaign urging voters to vote no to the question "should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand"?

That is despite Prime Minister John Key last week saying he would not expect Ms Rankin to continue to campaign against the law change, and the Families Commission saying it supported the new law.

One can only echo the favourite word of the National Party Bloggers: "INDEED!!"

Ralston,bloggers, journalists, photographs and things

2009-06-14T00:29:00.000-07:00

Bill Ralston's commentary on the sorry saga that is the Worth affair is an indictment on someone who claims to be a reputable senior journalist and political commentator, at least in the small journalism pond that is Auckland.
It is a poor effort because it is obviously derivative of the spin lines being provided by the National Party HO sourced blogsites - the repeated mantra of a "purposely created honey trap" set and sprung on a poor and unsuspecting Richard Worth by a woman who had been primed to do so by forces greater than herself.
The line is then spun out for credibility sake with photographs of Ms Choudary at various functions around Auckland where she is seen posing beside Labour Party MPs from Helen Clark down with the assertion that Ms Choudary is, therefore, a high ranking activist because she unsuccessfully nominated for the Botany Electorate in 2008.
One should be clear about Ms Choudary's involvement in the NZLP to assess how high ranking she is. Enquiries would indicate that she is not a member of the NZ Council of the Labour Party. She is not an active member of any of the NZLP's policy committees and she is not a member of any of the Party's regional committees.
All that can be substantiated is that she is, or has been, a member of the Botany Electorate Committee and was involved in the Botany Campaign during 2008. She is or was also heavily involved in the various Indian community groups through out Auckland.
To imagine her, as Ralston and others in the NACT spin machine have attempted to do, as a high ranking activist is to allow one's imagination to soar to stratospheric levels.
We should, if we were objective, be wary of any collection of photographs showing an individual in close proximity to any person of status, be it political or social, for these merely record the prescence of the individual at a function where he or she could meet and be seen. For example a photograph of Ralston, Slater and Farrar with Clinton and Obama doesn't suddenly make them high ranking members of the American Democratic Party or personal friends of Clinton and Obama. It simply meeans that Ralston and company took the opportunity to be snapped in the company of Clinton and Obama and, perhaps, use the photograph to enhance their own petty status.
One could contend that Ms. Choudary is in the same situation as the Ralston example - that she has been a regular attender at functions where she could be seen to rub shoulders with MPs and others and that she, like many people, especially those from countries where meeting and or seeing one's MP is a remote possibility, has taken the opportunity to be photographed in their company.
One wouldn't be surprised if, on digging through files of photographs taken at functions hosted by the Indian community during the 2008 election at which there were National Party MPs looking for support one could find photographs of Ms Choudary and others like her posing beside Key, English, Williamson and Worth etc. These photographs could easily be construed as implying that Ms Choudary was a high ranking member of the National Party.
One could also presume that these MPs encouraged such photographs to be taken without enquiring about the political persuasion of the Indian, Korean, Chinese, Japanese... person concerned because such a photograph could be used for political advantage - a photographic endorsement of the National Party policies from the members of the ethnic community concerned.
Perhaps, too, Mr Worth attempted to recruit Ms Choudary to the National Party as he probably did, during the election campaign, to all people who he may have come in contact with in the hope that this would give him an in to the community. That he attempted to carry this invitation past the enquiry about the individual's possibilty of joining his campaign was his "honey trap" and his own nemesis.

A review worth Reading-How the Money speculators took the world for a ride.

2009-06-12T21:45:00.000-07:00

From the New York Times comes this gem of a book review recounting how the money speculators thought they had a magic solution to make debt disappear.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/books/review/Barrett-t.html?_r=1&8bu&emc=bua2

One wonders if the Engkeylish NACT government has learnt anything about economics considering that the PM was a key player on the money speculation market and his present puppet masters English & Hide are devotees of the mysticismof speculative policies, privatisation and the mantra "the market will regulate itself."

TEN GOOD REASONS TO VOTE SHEARER ON SATURDAY

2009-06-11T11:33:00.000-07:00

Saturday's by-election in Mt.Albert offers the electorate the chance to send a strong message to the Engkeylish NACT government by returning David Shearer with a huge majority and dropping the NACT candidates to 3rd & 4th places.
Here are ten good reasons for voting Shearer on Saturday:
1) A budget that has broken most of the key promises on the campaign pledge card and which seems designed to drive the country deeper into recession.

2) A government which insists on rail-roading through the Hide "destroy local government" policies with the super-city dictate which will lead to the sale of local assets in another asset stripping grab of the public assets.

3) A government that insists on driving a motorway through a community and thus gut its heart and its identity.

4) A government that has slashed and burnt the education vote and thus cut out the investment in the country's future.

5) A government that has the briefing papers and policies ready to sell off the telecom "kiwishare" and remove the free local calling entitlement the original privatisation schemes retained to placate the public as the family silver got hocked off.

6) A government that has set out to destroy the investment in the superannuation schemes designed and set in place by the Labour government to the extent where the advice being given to the cabinet is to seriously look to raising the GSTaxation from 12.5% to 15% and / or raise the age of eligibility to 67+.

7) A government that whose sole contribution to the key tourism portfolio is to saddle the Auckland ratepayers with a $100 million bill to pay for a monument to self-indulgence with 2011 Party Central. (Hardly an investment Rodney Hide would advocate a local body involving itself with as building and investing in the entertainment industry would be outside its core business.)

8) A government whose Social Welfare Minister endorsed a profligate pro-child assault campaigner to the family commission to protect the rights of the family!

9) A government that has been exposed as having a Cabinet Minister who has been accused of offering appointment to government boards and committees in exchange for sexual favours.

10) A government whose candidate, Melissa Lee,has the wit and intelligence to declare that: a) building a motorway through a community will prevent South Aucklanders driving into the area to commit crimes - a calculated insult to all residents of South Auckland and to the intelligence of the Mt.Albert residents and voters.
and
(b) she, a list MP on $131,000 + expenses is a low paid worker. To claim that she is being paid $2.00 an hour and obviuosly under paid while speaking to an audience of pensioners and minimum hourly rate workers certainly demonstrates a connection with the electorate and an ability to empathise with the "ordinary voter". Perhaps Ms. Lee thinks she is a genuine welfare beneficary?

Super City - disposal of Assets

2009-06-10T02:42:00.000-07:00

The latest Cabinet briefing paper on Local Body Reform does not bode well for the residents and ratepayers of N.Z. cities and towns. If the definition of core services is as narrow as reports indicate (local roading, water, sewage, rubbish disposal ) then expect to see your local council gutted and your local ratepayer purchased assets disposed of in a fire sale to any bidder who may appear and expect those assets that do not provide a rapid return to the private / foreign owner who may appear from either increased charges or restructuring and part sale of spun off "companies" or that which can be transformed into businesses to be run down and slowly but surely disappear as community services.
Watch out for libraries, community halls, art galleries, museums, swimming pools..., to be the first services to be affected. The rhetoric of ACT lovcal body councillors in the Eastern Suburbs and those of the Key favoured mayor for the Hide created Auckland would indicate that their philosophy is "I'm a moneyed philistine who doesn't use the public library / community services .. so why should anyone else have to need to use these services?"
Remember that it was John Banks and the Citizens & Ratepayers who were responsible for the disposal of community housing in Auckland before the Hubbard mayorality. It was also John Banks who wanted the Council to invest in V8 street racing at the Ratepayers expense with no reward to the Ratepayers. Remember it is the John Banks lead group in the present Council who appear to think that Mobile Library services are not core business activities for the Council.

To advocate referenda on the activities of the Councils but to deny the ratepayer citizens of greater Auckland the chance to vote on the wisdom of high cost spending to destroy the administration infrastructure of Auckland is a further demonstration of the dictatorial policy processes we are seeing in the Engkeylish government and must be opposed at all costs if we are to retain our sense of community and participation in the activities of our cities and towns.

Texts From Last Night for what it is worth

2009-06-07T21:19:00.000-07:00

The sort of message that has consumed the media recently appears to be a phenomena amongst those of a certain intellect, frame of mind and alcohol induced brilliance.
Perhaps the list MP for Epsom got his inspiration from these illuminaries whose literay skills with the text phone are recorded for all to see: textsfromlastnight. They demonstrate that while the memory may fade the text lives on.
Despite Mr Key's refusal to acknowledge the existence of the texts and Mr. Worth's denials and protestations of innocence the memories on cell phones live on and will not go away as these public embarassments reveal.

Enough said - Dutch courage = Key's strategy

2009-06-04T20:27:00.000-07:00

Key used the equivalent of a political gun earlier in the day in announcing the effective sacking of Worth, and joked he could have done with a drink himself.

"The day I had today, it's a shame the pub wasn't open at 8am, I might have given a better speech."

We all remember another Nat PM who needed a drink to give his speeches don't we?

Hardly a recommendation for a man who is playing at Prime Minister.

The list of questionable decisions and MPs grows longer every day: Here's the six month mark tally.

Bennett & the Rankin appointment?

Lee

Bakshi

Worth

Who next???

Key proves to be worthless.

2009-06-03T05:56:00.000-07:00

A RECORD ACHIEVEMENT- 6 months and yet another scandal in the NACT Government!!

The wheels are coming off the crosby-textor NACT Party with Key having to front up to announce the resignation of one of his friends from cabinet after coming under investigation by the Police for criminal matters.
As the history reveals Key had every opportunity to sack Worth much earlier than this but his despite his reputation as the "smiling assasin" Key vacillated and failed to purge himself of the political embarassment of his Epsom List MP. (A pity he couldn't also get rid of the canary NACT MP incumbent in Epsom as well.)

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10565612

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10565720

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10576273&pnum=2

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10576151&pnum=2

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10576188

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/right-wing-blogger-criticises-national-over-worth-2767081/video

Engkeylish Economics

2009-05-31T06:20:00.000-07:00

I make no apologies in republishing this piece critiquing the budget stupidity of the Engkeylish policies as it demonstrates the inadequacy of the present finance minister and his money speculator boss.

The $8 billion robbery

Published by Eddie on May 31, 2009 at 3:44 pm in bill english and economy.16 Comments

On Q+A this morning Guyon Espiner interviewed Bill English. Guyon had received papers from a treasury official that apparently show the cost of cancelling the government’s contributions to the Cullen Fund for 10 years will be $8 billion over and above the cost of borrowing to fund the contributions. $3.5 billion from lower value of the Fund and $4.5 billion from lower tax take. The Cullen Fund is one of the largest tax-payers.

Which makes a lot of sense. The long-run cost of borrowing government is 6% a year according to Treasury. That’s lower than the long-run return on the Cullen Fund of 6.57%, after tax (and on top of that there’s the tax that flows to the government). Even if the exact numbers are different in the end, the long-run return for a managed fund like the Cullen Fund is going to be higher than the interest rate on essentially risk-free debt issued by a government.

Put on the spot English couldn’t just say ‘Treasury’s wrong’ so his response was ‘well, the Cullen Fund lost money last year and was making 14% a year when it started’. Yeah, as Guyon pointed out, that’s why it’s called a long-run average. Some years are good, some are awful. The long-run is going to be better than the cost of government borrowing.

So, English had to try another angle. ‘If you have a mortgage and hire purchase and credit card debt , and you go to your bank manager and say ‘I want a hundred grand to play on the stockmarket’, see what kind of answer you get’.

Firstly, the government is not heavily indebted like English describes it. Our debt is actually very low by international standards (Ireland’s is over 45% of GDP, UK and US even higher, many OECD countries have more than 100% of GDP debt).

Secondly, the argument is basically that you shouldn’t have savings on borrowed money (as English said in his speech on Friday). Well, that’s plainly dumb. Anyone who has a mortgage and savings effectively has savings funded by borrowing. What’s more, if you extend English’s argument we should liquidate the Cullen Fund altogether, along with the ACC Fund, the EQC Fund, and any other financial assets we have to pay down our debt. Sometimes having an asset while also having debt makes sense. Especially when, like the government with the Cullen Fund, your expected return is greater than your cost of borrowing.

English is going to need to come up with a better excuse for starving the Cullen Fund to death and quick. Because right now it looks like he’s ripping off our country to the tune of $8 billion because of an ideological opposition to ensuring the future of superannuation.

The Herald turns on its masters.

2009-05-29T19:45:00.000-07:00

The Herald turns on its masters

These stories may be the beginning of the recognition by the Herald that the party it supportshas traditionally been the most politically and economically irresponsible political party in NZ history ever since it was created.
John Rougham's article certainly demonstrates the con job the Standard & Poor's scare tactic was by Key and his rumour mill money speculator cronies who form NACT was. I wonder how many of his mates were speculating on the knowledge that S&P wouldn't down grade as others less well briefed sold the currency short?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/budget-2009/news/article.cfm?c_id=1502817&objectid=10575335

Budget 09: Super burden shifts to next generation

4:00AM Saturday May 30, 2009
By Simon Collins

Budget 2009

Taxpayers will pay more than $1 billion a year more for pensions from 2020 into the indefinite future as a result of the Government's decision to stop paying into the NZ Superannuation Fund for the next 11 years.

Background papers published by the Treasury yesterday show that if payments to the fund resume in 2020-21, the payment in that year will have to be $2.8 billion, compared with only $1.6 billion payable if there had not been a break in payments.

The 11-year break means net payments into the fund will then have to continue until 2030, compared with 2027 under the pre-Budget scheme.

Labour leader Phil Goff said yesterday that the Government had chosen to fix a short-term deficit problem at the expense of a much bigger long-term problem paying for the ageing population.

"Effectively what they will be doing is killing the Superannuation Fund," he said.

But Prime Minister John Key reiterated at a business lunch in Manukau that he was committed to keeping the pension for everyone from age 65 at a married rate of 66 per cent of the net average wage.

"I have made a commitment that if we raise the age or lower the pension payment, I would personally resign as Prime Minister," he said. (Key must be held to this promise. He's lied so many times to the public over his financial expertise he needs to be held accountable. Watch out for attempts to cut pension payments in the face of further bungles by Key & English over the term of this NACT government.)

The Super Fund, or "Cullen Fund", was set up by law in 2001 to lower the future cost of pensions for the growing number of old people by putting money aside in each year up to about 2027 - effectively smoothing out the rising cost of the elderly.

Without the fund, the cost of Super would have risen from 3.62 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) at present to 4.49 per cent in 2020 and 6.50 per cent in 2050. Because of the fund, we actually paid 4.68 per cent of GDP for super in the past year, including just over 1 per cent of GDP salted away in the Cullen Fund.

Under the original Cullen scheme, we got the payoff for that investment from 2027 onwards until by 2050 we would have only had to pay in 5.73 per cent of GDP - almost 1 per cent of GDP less than what we will then pay to the elderly. The law requires the Treasury to recalculate the required contributions each year to achieve smooth contributions for 40 years ahead.

This year, because of the 11-year break in contributions, it says payments in 2050 will have to be 5.99 per cent of GDP, wiping out about a third of the benefit that the fund could have given us.

Political Chicanery

2009-05-28T20:09:00.000-07:00

The sort of political spin we can expect from the Beehive under the present Government. After all their PR machine has had experience in the USA political campaigning so a lesson learnt there will be used in New Zealand.

POLITICAL CHICANERY.

Judy Wallman, a professional genealogy researcher in southern California,
was doing some personal work on her own family tree. She discovered that
Congressman Harry Reid's great-great uncle, Remus Reid, was hanged for
horse stealing and train robbery in Montana in 1889. Both Judy and Harry
Reid share this common ancestor. The only known photograph of Remus
shows him standing on the gallows in Montana territory. On the back of the
picture Judy obtained during her research is this inscription: 'Remus Reid,
horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed
the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and
hanged in 1889.' So Judy recently e-mailed Congressman Harry Reid for
information about their great-great uncle.
Believe it or not, Harry Reid's staff sent back the following biographical sketch
for her genealogy research:

"Remus Reid was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to
include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad.
Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to government service, finally taking leave
to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run
by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important
civic function held in his honour when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed."

That's real POLITICAL SPIN

THAT's how it's done, Folks!
That's real POLITICAL SPIN

Reality checks on Key's road to economic failure

2009-04-10T20:45:00.000-07:00

The reality of National's financial ineptitude is finally biting.

Why wasn't the Herald listening during the election campaign? Perhaps it's single minded campaign to destroy Helen gave its editorial staff blinkers?

The public deserve better journalism and financial management.

Most don't want tax cuts through borrowing, says survey

4:00AM Saturday Apr 11, 2009
By Alanah May Eriksen

The G20 - a cartoonist's perspective

2009-04-04T19:46:00.000-07:00

The Guardian cartoon sums up the issues with the Economic crisis and solutions being offeed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/cartoon/2009/apr/04/martin-rowson-g20-obama-brown-cartoon

Obesity, fast food and the "nanny state"

2009-04-01T07:03:00.000-07:00

While the national government has taken its first steps to becoming a 'great' education reforming one by removing the healthy eating guidelines from the schools and encouraging the students to eat take aways, fast foods and other junk food while at school the research coming from the USA indicates that there is no wisdom in the National Party policy decisions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/health/nutrition/26obese.html?_r=3&ref=education

But who said that the minds of our present government were informed ones?

The Emporer's Clothes & the Global meltdown

2009-03-27T02:23:00.000-07:00

The Guardian commentary is spot on and should be required reading for all New Zealanders after their fool-hardy love affair with the neo-liberal economics of the NACT government of the naked money speculator turned pseudo-politician.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/26/anticapitalism-protest-recession-g20

NZ makes the World Economic News!!

2009-03-26T20:42:00.000-07:00

Today's report on New Zealand's economy is a rousing endorsement of John Key's vibrant business focused government.
The report announced that since Key and his Crosby-Textor created government took over the reins the NZ economy has shrunk and has entered into a deeper recession than would have been otherwise expected.
Only four months to really run the economy into a tail-spin!!!!
This report should ensure that the media enchantment with National will continue unabated and the National Party spin-doctors will be heralded as credible authorities on the economy.

The ACC - Political Distortion & outright Broken Promises

2009-03-19T20:32:00.000-07:00

This article demonstrates the truth about National and John Key - absolutely naked underneath the clothing created by Crosby-Textor. The sags & bags of the real National Party stand revealed. The use of Engkeylish is now demostrated.

Rod Oram: ACC - the political claims and the reality

Sunday Star Times

Last updated 05:00 15/03/2009

Text Size

Oram: Politicians are flinging lots of scary numbers around.

Relevant offers

ACC IS a mess, according to the prime minister and Nick Smith, the agency's minister.

Only a wholesale clearout of ACC's board and changes to legislation and policy will secure its future, they say.

To make their case, the two politicians are flinging lots of scary numbers around. ACC has suffered a "very significant blowout in its liabilities" to $22 billion, the prime minister said on TV3 on Tuesday.

ACC is "massively" under-funded, so either "premiums will go up and go up enormously so literally mum and dad will be paying thousands of dollars a year more or we get on top of this scheme", he added.

For his part, Smith said on March 4 that the latest analysis of ACC's liabilities "translates into ACC levy increases over the next five years of 185% for employees, 71% for employers, 129% for motor vehicle owners".

But there is a huge gap between the rhetoric of John Key and Smith, and reality.

Liabilities: They are indeed $21.875b according to the latest report from PricewaterhouseCoopers, ACC's actuaries. And they will have risen by $9.2b in the three financial years ending this June.

But these liabilities stretch out a maximum of 40 years. And they are highly influenced by changes in economic conditions, investment returns, discount rates, accounting standards and actuarial assumptions.

Over the past year, those external factors have contributed the lion's share of the increase in liabilities. For example, a change in international accounting standards for all insurers contributed $1.45b to the $9.2b.

Some of these adverse factors will turn positive in due course. If ACC massively hiked premiums now to cover paper liabilities, it would have to offer massive refunds when the liabilities failed to eventuate. Instead, it manages prudently by smoothing such swings over the medium term.

Funding: From its inception in 1974 to 1999, ACC was funded on a pay-as-it-goes basis from the levies of the day and annual government grants. But its long-term liabilities were largely unfunded.

When Labour took office in 1999, it decided to be prudent. It set the goal of achieving full funding for all liabilities by 2014, and beefed up ACC's finances to set it on that path. From 1999 to 2008, ACC had improved from 64% under-funded to 45%.

Turmoil in global financial markets has hit investment returns over the past year, delaying progress to full funding. But ACC was on to it. Over a year ago, it recommended to Maryan Street, ACC minister in the previous government, that the date for full funding should be moved to 2019. Doing so halves the increases in ACC levies that would otherwise be required to meet the goal.

As her successor, Smith agrees in ACC meetings that the date should be moved. But he continues to use estimates of levy increases, as he did on March 4, based on the current date, thereby seriously distorting the view the public is getting of ACC.

Levies: ACC's activities are divided up into six accounts. Levies fund four, the government one and a mix of the two fund the last. The process of setting levies is thorough and transparent. For example, a steering committee includes representatives from Business New Zealand, the Council of Trade Unions and the AA.

At the end of its part of the process, ACC recommends new levies to its minister. The minister then takes independent advice from the Department of Labour before making a proposal to cabinet.

Back in October, ACC recommended modest increases to levies for the coming financial year. In contrast, the Department of Labour recommended far higher ones, mostly because it was pushing for full-funding on the old timetable.

Smith used these unreasonable Department of Labour figures to fulminate about ACC's alleged shortcomings and to scare people into believing massive hikes were coming.

But lo and behold, on three of the four accounts funded by levies, the government has agreed to exactly the low increases ACC proposed. Only on one account did it set the rate slightly higher.

The rates are bargains. For example, the work account remains fully funded even though the levy for employers and self-employed rises only 4% from $1.26 to $1.31 per $100 of payroll. This even covers large increases in the likes of doctors' and nurses' wages.

And they are bargains by international comparison. According to Pricewaterhouse-Coopers' mammoth study of ACC last year, the average levy here was 94 cents per $100 of payroll in 2006-07 while the average Australian rate was $1.73, ranging from a low of $1.18 in Queensland to a high of $3.14 in South Australia.

Entitlements: The previous National government had made ACC a mean and ugly agency. Policy directives forced it to cut corners and throw people off benefits at the earliest opportunity. If you felt hard done by, you had to go to court.

The Labour government somewhat widened the scope of ACC by, for example, removing the malpractice test on medical injury, doing more for long-term workplace injuries such as hearing loss and bringing in hard to define but real issues such as workplace trauma.

The new National government sharply criticises these increased entitlements. It is threatening to roll them back. Yet, of the $9.2b increase to $22b in ACC's liabilities for the three years to this June, only $595m came from cabinet-approved rate increases and new programmes plus $205m from court-imposed rulings and government legislative changes to expand the scheme's coverage.

The new government seems particularly worried about ACC's non-earners account. It is the second-largest of the six accounts and it is the only one the government funds directly and exclusively. And it is the one for which it has had to find recently an additional $297m.

This fund covers people not in paid work, that is, mostly young and older citizens. More than 45% of all ACC claims are made through it, yet it represents less than 20% of ACC's liabilities. If the government is trying to cut this account, it will run into a storm of public protest.

Rehabilitation: ACC's record on getting people back to work is deteriorating, the government says. Yes, it has slipped. But there is a small global decline in return to work rates for a wide range of factors, including an ageing workforce. ACC's performance is still better than Australia's and among the best in the world. Moreover, the same slight downward trend applies to the 24% of our workforce covered by the accredited employers programme. So there is no difference between ACC or employers handling their rehabilitation.

Costs: The comments of Key and Smith might give you the impression that ACC has poor cost control. In fact, PWC's analysis shows ACC's work account claims management and administration costs were 19.7% of services against the Australian average of 25.2%. In other words, ACC pays out 80.3c of every dollar on compensation and services whereas the Australians pay out only 74.8c.

Yes, in these tighter times even better budget control is needed. ACC was long working on that before National came to power.

Investments: You might also have thought from government comments that ACC's investment managers had lost a bundle in the global financial markets.

In fact, for the seven months to the end of January they earned a positive return of 2.73%, a gain almost all other fund managers only dreamed of as global markets crashed.

Unusually, ACC has its own in-house investment team led by Nicholas Bagnall and Phil Newport. They have outperformed all comparable investment teams in the private sector in New Zealand for the past 10 years and in Australasia for the past seven, earning a return of 8.7% a year. ACC has out-performed the Superannuation Fund since the latter's inception, despite the latter's more costly use of external fund managers.

All the information in this column comes from widely available sources, including ACC's briefing to the incoming minister, dated November 2008.

So the government can only be taking its extreme line on ACC because it's panicking or politicking.

If it is the latter, it must have its sights set on sharply cutting ACC's services.

P.M. reveals general knowledge

2009-03-12T08:57:00.000-07:00

At a recent summit junket convened by the government in an effort to discover how to deliver the ball from a rolling maul John Key was introduced to a noted psychiatrist who was advising the politicians about psychosomatic illnesses in communities hit by collapsing banks and the efects of money speculation.
Key took the opportunity to ask how the psychiatrist could detect mental deficiency in someone who otherwise appeared normal and in control of a situation.
The good Doctor said, "You ask a simple question that everyone should be able to answer. If he hesitates, that puts you on the right track. I'd ask, "Captain Cook made three voyagesaround the world and died during one of them. Which one?"
Key thought deeply for sometime and finally responded with a nervous laugh, "I'm a banker at heart. You wouldn't have an easier question would you. I must confess I don't know much about history."

National's Perpetual Talk the Talk but not Walk the walk fests

2009-02-27T20:36:00.000-08:00

This press release from Mangere M.P. Su'a Sio deserves wider circulation than the local press will give it. His commentary is relevant especially for those whose real work provides the foundation for the economy.

Communities want job security and income protection.

I have been critical of the government’s job summit as being a mere talkfest, that government wasn’t moving quick enough while the plight of our economy continues to grow, that Government was excluding ordinary communities from the summit, and that the very communities that will suffer the greatest from a depression would not have a voice in the summit. Then as I watched the television coverage of the event, I have to admit; the Government looked good. Admittedly, the television coverage of the event was carefully orchestrated and clinically scripted suggesting duplicitous behaviour for the sake of politics.

Nevertheless, the most innovative idea I picked up from the news coverage is the 9 day working fortnight with one day for education and this should be explored. The initial concerns by ordinary families on this idea will be who will pay workers for the days they give up? If no one pays us, how will we meet our daily living expenses if we are forced to give up what would normally be a paid working day? If our incomes are reduced by one day will our fixed daily expenses such as rent, power, water, sewage, and phone lines be reduced as well?

To add further concerns to troubled minds, the inability of the Government to come clean on what it intends to do with the Super Fund is cause for considerable distress amongst our senior citizens. Many Grey Power members remember well the Government that reduced superannuation to 60% of the average wage in the 1990s.

Then on Sunday the Government’s ‘fire at will 90 day’ law will come into force on the premise that it will boost employment opportunities with small to medium sized businesses. In reality however, National is telling employers they can hire people for up to three months and then get rid of them without any hassles. All this law will do is remove worker’s rights to take personal grievances for reasons of unjustified dismissal and will leave workers open to being taken advantage of, and abused by unscrupulous employers. This is another cause for more worry by ordinary communities.

Notwithstanding, the real test now is how Government will give confidence to its citizens that it will meet the needs of all families, especially vulnerable communities throughout New Zealand.

In Mangere, families aren’t just concerned about job security, we are also concerned about income protection, and how the needs of our families will be sustained now and into future years.

Botany MP Caught OUT??

2008-12-08T18:54:00.000-08:00

How much credibilty does Pansy Have?
The answer: NONE.
Earlier in November,Pansy Wong assured the Principal of Howick College that the much vaunted "National Standards" testing had gone even before lunchtime. It appears that Ms Wong was somewhat economical with the truth or else she, as a cabinet minister, was considerably out of the policy loop, which doesn't say a lot about her influence, or that she was following the party mantra of simply tailoring her response to the Principal to suit the political circumstance.

Whichever way it was it appears that she deliberately misled a large group of her constituents following the Howick College Senior Honours Ceremony as Mr Slippery has announced the decision to ram through the "National Standards" testing inside the first 100 days.

Either Pansy comes clean and publically apologises to the Principal, staff and parents of Howick College for deliberately misleading them or she admits that she is an ineffective and purely token member of the cabinet and remains silent on the issue.

Perhaps, more honorably, she should speak and voteagainst a piece of legislation she obviously disagrees with. Now, wouldn't THAT be a change?

Cabinet Appointees -stable or not ? a Key question.

2008-11-25T13:32:00.000-08:00

The National cabinet has been appointed in the manner befitting an autocrat. Key has appointed a group of courtiers who, in the manner of the Fairy Tale Emporer, will, on seeing his new clothes, inform him that they are a perfect fit even though all other observers can recognise the imperfections, the fakery and appeal to vanity that is the reality of those clothes. The new cabinet will soon find that their appeal, as acolytes, will soon fade both for Key and the real politic in the electorates as , very soon, the repeated blanishments of empty praise pall for both the appointer and the wider audience.
In an earlier blog I pointed out that Key had been, folowing the advice of Crosby-Textor, dressing himself in clothing borrowed from greater men in preparation for the election campaign and that the imagery behind these borrowed vestments would be exploited for the duration of the campaign and the first symbolic 100 days of power.
After this Key would initially keep wearing the clothes but, like the Anderson's emporer, slowly cast them aside until someone (Maurice Williamson perhaps?) cries ot that "There are no real clothes being worn" and the demands for Key and the party he represents dress in the manner to which they are accustomed.
At present Key has surrounded himself with those, like him, who wear the election campaign image. Their tenure and security will remain until the demand from the Party's traditional constituency to return to their philosophic basics reveals his fundamental insincerity and philosophic shallowness.
Cracks in te artifical gloss on this cabinet are already apparent for those, unlike the Herald reporters, look in depth at the blogs and research sources.
Here, for instance is Paula Bennett, Minister for Social Welfare, on the National Party during her student days:

"Newly elected National Party MP of Waitakere has been found out about her past days as a National Party bagger. Using her pseudonym Paula Poo she lambasted the National Party for cutting Education and increasing student fees , these comments made when Paula was President of the Massey University Student Association;

"Fees suck and fee increases just piss me off. Damn the Nat's who bring cuts to our education system, make us pay for them out of student loans that will take many people decades to pay off. In my own case, I will probably still be paying off my student loan when my daughter gets to university age; her future looks promising!"
When urging her fellow university students to make their vote count she said ... "don't vote for f**k wits."
Reconciling these views of her favoured political party with her present reality will take a lot of doing ... unless, of course, she is locked into the groove of praising new clothes.

Another crack in Key's reality comes from Pansy Wong who informed the Principal of Howick College, after he had made a speech to the school prize giving ceremony calling for the policy to be abandoned, that the much trumpeted testing against "national" standards had been swept from the table even before the lunchtime bell had been rung despite her local colleague and cabinet minister (outside the room) Maurice Williamson telling the Eastern Courier that the policy still stood.

There has been a glimmer of analysis of the wisdom of Key's appointments appearing in the media, especially over the relationship with Rodney "Rheinfeld" Hide and his role as "Minister" of Local Government for it is in this area that the real agenda that lies beneath the "emporer's"new clothes will be revealed.

Once "Rheinfeld" Hide begins to cry "Master! Master! Help me!" to Nosferatu Douglas and John Key begins the return to the National Party's roots the electorate will see the dismantling of the image... watch out for slash & burn attacks on Kiwisaver, on welfare, the Cullen Fund and other areas of social expenditure with the excuse of " dire economic times" and the "international credit crisis" have forced the Government to back down on so many of the implied policies offered during the election campaign ... we will see how apposite Paula Bennett's earlier advice to the readers of her blog were.

Journalism & Blogosphere.. laziness or investigation?

2008-11-24T11:22:00.000-08:00

Over recent months I've been intrigued, wondering where the journalists employed by our national media find their stories. The tertiary courses and the journalism textbooks discuss the process of building contacts, talking with and to community leaders and interest groups so that, armed with a "black book" of contacts the journalist can establish the backgrounds and the bases for the stories that are passed on to him or her or, by dint of individual enquiry, can be substantiated and probed with some degree of depth.
However, that text book and journalism course idea is a myth, an ideal from the past, for the reality of our present is, according to a young journalist informant, that the news room journalist is a passive actor in the news gathering process. Today the young journalist is told to, and instructed in the process of, explore the chat rooms of Trade Me and the snippets from a small, quite limited, recommended list of blogs.
The limited range of blogs recommended to my informant did not inspire confidence in the investigative powers of the journalists or the policies of the papers concerned for the sites were all heavily slanted towards the right-wing blogs and the "celebrity sex life speculation" snippet blogs.
One would assume that the editorial policy of the media is to concentrate on the celebrity scandal, the weird and idle gossip then such "news" gathering is acceptable but if one wants more from the media then a diet of Trade Me chat and the salacious "snidery" of the Farrar-Slater blogs one would expect our journalists and media to be far more proactive and responsible.

Fruitcake, John Key and his flip-flops - welcome to the N.Z. summer

2008-11-18T10:04:00.000-08:00

In an earlier blog I argued that Key and Rodney (Rheinfeld) Hide would engage in trade offs that would give ACT the impression it had power in this national led government of self interested selfish parties but that son splits would occur and Rodney would do a Winston and throw the baubles of office out of the cot.
It was, therefore,no surprise when the National Party advertising pamphlet, The Herald, published Brian Rudman's critique of the marriage of ACT & National and the flip-flops on climate change it required.
Perhaps the baubles will be tossed earlier than the 18 months I argued would be the length of time this government would take before disintegration begins.

Where are our cartoonists?

2008-11-12T22:16:00.000-08:00

The paucity of biting comment in NZ cartooning may be attributed to the editorial policy of the NZ Herald and its craven support of the National Party.
Here is the Guardian's cartoonist's commentary about tax cuts policy wars. Biting isn't it? I don't recall anything as powerful as this in the NZ press pages.
We might have had a different reaction to the great tax cut bribe wars in NZ.

Can John handle the Jandal?

2008-11-10T12:50:00.000-08:00

Now that the election is over and the decision to move N.Z. to the right of the political spectrum has been made the NZ Herald will pull back from its hysterical panicking about Left wing conspiracies and fall into its usual position of campaigning against Trade Unions, State servants and environmentalists of any colour while claiming that it has no bias in any of its editorial directions. Garth George will descend into his monk's cell to contemplate a bluer heaven and worship the apotheosis of John Key and to congratulate himself in self justification for his righteous belief that women are on earth to tempt men from the path to salvation and that with Helen Clark stepping out of the political sphere another temptress has been taken from his dream of paradise here in the Pacific.
However, while the transition proceeds one can offer some comment about the possible stability of the new government.
With a record of policy and position shifting throughout the period since becoming leader of the National Party and in the build up to the election John Key may find that he will be in administrative difficulty once his colleagues get their feet under the Cabinet Table. The difficulties will be compounded with the presence of ACT's Rheinfield - Rodney Hide within the coalition. One recognises that there is no way ACT will want to be sidelined away from its traditional hardline free marketeering, retributive policies beloved of its Nosferatu founder, Roger Douglas and that there will be determined efforts from this quarter to drive National into more radical conservative policy directions.
As well, Hide is very similar in nature to his nemisis- Winston Peters. Both men are driven by ego, both are driven by a single minded belief in their own rightness, both have the natural instinct to hone in on a person or policy with one inclination - to destroy it or come crashing down in their own self destructive nature. One cannot but believe that within 18 months Hide, Rheinfield like, will, with his master, Douglas hive off into the extremities of Friedmanite economics and force a division in the hydra that is the National-ACT-United Futures coalition.
For Key this will mean that he will resort to his usual escape mechanism of making the unacceptable palatable in order to bring Roger and Rodney back into the crypt by flip-flopping on policy, pleading as he does so "political expediency and economic necessity because of the crisis created by the money traders and other free-marketeers."
One predicts that the fallout and consequent retribution on the electors will occur over the following policy areas: Employment Law - as workers rights are scaled back in a return to the elements of the ECA ACT will claim that the process isn't fast and hard enough and agitate for more punative legislation to bring the workers to heel.
Finance - the attacks and raids on both Kiwisaver and the Cullen Superannuation fund will continue with the extreme right of National siding with ACT to reduce both funds to mere shadow of their intended purpose. This will be done with the catch cry of "teaching the worker self sufficiency" and "to reduce reliance on nanny state."
The international credit collapse will be an excuse for the more extreme of the National-ACT coalition to allow Rheinfield Hide open Nosferatu's coffin and allow Roger Douglas to emerge and demand asset stripping, further reductions of workers' rights and conditions, slash and burning of Social Welfare programmes, privatisation of Health, Education, Prisons, Roading and Water reticulation ... so that the "books can be balanced" and "sanity restored to the free market."
The privatisation of ACC - the confusion and fallout as this occurs will see the entire scheme collapse into a miasma of conflicting and reductive insurance policies that extract a lot but provide little while taking the profits overseas.
Education - here the introduction of a failed Bush scheme of National Testing and Reporting (the No Child Left Behind policies) will create tensions in the teaching profession, confusion and resentment among parents and a media frenzy of "let's bash the teachers" which will again lead Key to drop the leader's jandal.
Crime and Civil Liberties - in this area the public will soon come to realise that National - Act cannot deliver on its promise to reduce crime in the community. They will also come to appreciate that the State will intrude even more into their lives as civil liberties are reduced and surveillance becomes a norm.
For Key these tensions will prove difficult to manage as so many of his bench and MPs like, Ryall, McCully, Williamson, Wong, Smith N & L, Brownlee and English, have deep seated and firmly held political beliefs that can be evidenced by their past involvement in retributive legislation that will not be able to be controlled under his natural instinct to gamble for a gain by short term expediency thus opening the possibility of a push by Key's controller, English, to make a push for more overt control of power and a consequent hardening of policy initiatives and true nanny state legislation.
So while the polls may have spoken they spoke for an image not for what lay behind it so that as the next three years unfold and Key's instinctive flip floppery management style fail to control his coalition it should not come as surprise to the more astute observers to see what appeared to be a comfortable majority faction into self destructive quarrelling while Hide and Douglas, like the ghost of Adam, gibber at the table.

KEY RULES OUT WORKING WITH OBAMA!

2008-11-04T17:26:00.000-08:00

One cannot help but wonder at the political naivety of the National Party leader when he announces to the world that he would prefer to work with a Republican President rather than a Democrat as he believes that McCain's policies would indicate he would be a friend to NZ whereas Obama would not be such an assured "friend to New Zealand."
John Key should realise that the US President is not Winston Peters or whoever else in NZ politics he doen't like.
At this time in an election cycle and as a pretender to the premiership of NZ one would think that Key would exercise sound political judgment and refrain from making such a pronouncement especially as it has taken the Labour led Government till recently to persuade, cajole and negotiate with the American administration to recognise the reality of international politics that New Zealand has a very principled and clear position on international affairs that, while being different to those espoused by the USA, are recognised by other Nations and do not interfere with NZ's willingness to be constructively involved on the world stage.
To announce that Key favours the Republican positions is to give credibility to the English position that" the world needs a US president who will pull the trigger." - that is who will take war were ever he thinks deserves one. Mind you, judging by the ACT pamphlets I've received it would appear that Mr. Key is merely echoing the paranoia of the canary one - Rodney Hide.
No thanks Mr. Key - if one needed an excuse not to vote National you have just given us one.

ELECTION BUILD UP THE FINAL ARGUMENTS

2008-11-02T00:18:00.000-07:00

These comments from THE STANDARD sum up the points voters should consider in making their choice on Saturday.

Closing arguments

Published by Steve Pierson on November 2, 2008

Six days to go. Here are the five big issues that I am finding can turn swing to the Left. There are others as well (see our Standard line series) but these have been effective points in my experience. Over the next few days, you’re bound to find yourself talking to people who are planning to vote National or ACT. Try out these arguments on them

ACC. The fact that ACC is so widely used, there are a million claims a year, makes it an important issue. Despite its faults, ACC is a world-leading system and people depend on it. Private insurers can collapse and have every incentive to avoid payouts. National wants to privatise it, Labour wants to cut its cost, reducing car registration by $80 and employer levies by 20%. Nobody wants ACC privatised, not business, not the medical profession, not legal experts, and, most importantly, not ordinary people. Nowadays, when I hear someone is going to vote National or ACT, I just mention they want to privatise ACC and it’s usually enough to switch them to the Left. Why Labour hasn’t made more of this, I don’t know.

Kiwisaver. 850,000 people have joined Kiwisaver so far, and that number will soon reach one million. Chances are good a swinger voter you talk to is either in Kiwisaver, close to someone who is, or planning to join. If National gets into government, every Kiwisaver would be worse-off, even after you count National’s tax-cuts, because they’re going to cut Kiwisaver in half. Rather than your employer putting in the equivalent of an extra 4% of your income into your Kiwisaver, National would reduce that to 2%. That will cost every Kiwisaver hundreds of thousands of dollars over their career. By cutting Kiwisaver, National would also cut domestic saving, meaning we have to borrow more from overseas.

Tax. National’s tax cuts are less than $10 a week more than Labour’s for most people. Many people actually get smaller cuts from National - if your income is less than $24,000 or $44,000 if you get Working for Families, you get larger cuts from Labour. The only people who get big cuts from National are people like John Key on really large incomes.

Trust. After all these years, the only ‘trust’ issues they have on Clark is that she once signed a picture for charity that she hadn’t painted, her drivers drove really fast one time, and her billboard picture is ‘too nice’. These are not substantive issues, they have no bearing on whether someone can be trusted to govern. National tries to hide its policies and its senior MPs have broken Parliaments rules. They have a track record in government of low growth, high unemployment, lower wages, higher crime, and running down public services like health and education. National always has been and remains the party of the wealthy; they cannot be trusted to act in the interests of ordinary Kiwis.

Experience. Key’s business experience is not an asset in the current economic conditions. He has no experience running an economy. In fact, his economic experience is making money doing exactly the kind of deals that have led to this financial meltdown in the first place. One of the guys who got us into this mess is not the kind of person to lead us out of it. In Clark, Cullen, and the other senior ministers, we have a very experienced team with a record of low unemployment, high wages, high growth, and stable government.

Herald reduced to printing all copy in Blue if National Wins election.

2008-10-31T15:48:00.000-07:00

A HUGE Scoop written in the breathless adoration style of the National Party's advertising pamphlet - The Herald.

Rumour has it that the Herald management has committed itself to publishing every edition in tory blue if the Nats win the election. Apparently they have undertaken to print every edition for the duration of the presumed National-ACT - Dunne government on Tory Blue with all use of the colour red, mention of the colour red, Helen Clark or Labour banned unless mentioned by Garth George when quoting the Bible as vindication for wishing the hydra monster of Douglas, Engkeylish, Hide and Dunne on the nation in pure Revalations raving.

Mind you, when one reads the sort of reporting being cultivated by the Herald editorial staff one could believe this rumour.
For as another blogger writes:

A week out from the election, Granny Herald has still yet to do any proper coverage of the effects on individuals and the economy of National’s four flagship policies: privatising ACC, gutting Kiwisaver, reducing work rights, and weakening the RMA and ETS.

Yet, they can find the space to tell us which politicians would make the best Halloween character or could mentor according to their online polls (always biased towards the type of people who are sitting in front of computers all day [clue: it ain't the working class]).

Here we are, in the middle of the process of choosing the people who will have the most powerful jobs in the country, and the largest newspaper is engaging in inanities that tell us nothing more than the demographics of its online readers.

How my heart yearns for a decent media in this country.

However, in mitigation of the Herald it did publish a "leader article" admitting that it was mildly annoyed at John Key for mis-remembering his employment at Elders Finance and the H scandal and for the voting public it is important to be assured that its leaders are not dissemblers of the truth isn't it????

Women in red drive men crazy - Why the Nats get upset over Helen!

2008-10-29T00:51:00.000-07:00

At last! We now have an answer to the question that has been bugging political pundits each election for the past nine years: "Why does Helen Clark get under the skin of the male young Nats and really infuriates the older ones, like Ian Wishart, who have to resort to homophobic rumour mongering to explain their own reactions?

Researchers have discovered the reason: Women in red drive men crazy. It would appear that men rate a woman as being more sexually attractive if she is shown in an image framed by a red border rather than some other colour (like blue for example?).

So what happens in the NZ political situation is that old Nats, living on past memories, and young Nats, living in hope, see the photos of Helen framed in a warm glow of red on the Labour Party billboards and become overcome with a feeling of being attracted to the icon of social democracy. Then, because they cannot cope with the revelation that they do and are attracted to Helen and the Labour Party can only retreat into good old fashioned reactionary abuse or, in the case of the billboards, scrawling offensive grafitti across her image.

We must thank the US researchers for this exhaustive study and the explanations it now gives us for the viputrative commentary that sometimes passes as investigative political analysis in New Zealand.

The Gambler throws the dice once too often

2008-10-29T00:32:00.000-07:00

The earlier post: Look Alikes appears to have had a ring of truth about it when one considers this story on the Herald's website today.

The Great Gambler appears to have thrown the flip flop dice once too often - this time they've fallen against the run of play.

Where was John Key when Allan Hawkins needed him?

National Party leader John Key faces accusations of misleading the public about his knowledge of one of New Zealand's most notorious white collar crimes, the New Zealand Herald website reported today.

An item posted on the newspaper's website said the allegations centred around the so-called H-Fee -- two payments totalling $A66.5 million to Equiticorp funnelled via sham foreign exchange transactions in 1988 -- and an interview Mr Key gave the Herald last year.

During the interview in August 2007, Mr Key confirmed he worked as a foreign exchange dealer at Elders Merchant finance, part of Elders IXL, which made the payments to the Allan Hawkins-controlled Equiticorp.

But he said he left Elders in 1987, before the transactions were processed.

"Three months before any of these deals got decided I left Elders...I was never involved in them," Mr Key said during the interview.

The Herald said it had checked court documents made public by the Labour Party which included the fact that Mr Key resigned from Elders in June 1988, six months after the first payment.

It said there was no evidence Mr Key was involved in handling the sham transactions.

The Herald said it had read the 13,000 page court file in Melbourne which contained a statement by Mr Key in which he said he resigned from Elders on June 24, 1988, and was immediately placed on leave because he was going to a rival company.

It said Labour was planning to drop the "bombshell" on the election campaign trail tomorrow.

Prime Minister Helen Clark said if the Herald had published the story then they obviously believed there were questions to answer.

Miss Clark said it was not a story that she was handling, but whether it was a bombshell depended on the answers to the questions raised by the story.

Asked if it was appropriate for Labour to be digging around in Mr Key's past, Miss Clark said the lives of political leaders were open books.

Electorate Reporting

2008-10-28T01:34:00.000-07:00

Roger Douglas explains his policies to an incredulous voter while campaigning for support for the ACT candidate in Botany.
A photo opportunity Mr. Tan missed while reporting for The Herald

In an earlier post I pointed out the ironies (Ironies on the Campaign Trail ) present at a meet the candidates meeting in the new electorate of Botany. There was a full muster of candidates present on the stage which seems to have escaped the notice of the Herald's intrepid reporter - Lincoln Tan whose report of the same meeting focused entirely on the more incoherent candidates on the platform - one Kenneth Wang who, like Pansy Wong seems to consider that the appellation "Asian" is synonymous with "Chinese". (Incidentally,in keeping with his political mentors Rodney and Roger, the only coherent aspect of Mr.Wang is his billboard)
Any observer, like Mr. Tan, should have noticed that the census data lumps Indians (regardless of origin) in as Asians so the simplistic analysis practised by the Wangs & Wongs in Botany presents a substantial miscalculation of their possible support base.
While on the subject of reporting One does wonder why, if Mrs Wong was so upset about the Wang message on his billboards, that she complained to the Electoral Commission; why the two candidates have taken to placing their billboards side by side like kissing cousins or why Mr Wang has not been forced to remove the Wong name from his boards? One must ask if the noise over the Wang boards wasn't just a ploy to get reporters, like Mr.Tan, to fall in love with them and constantly photograph them for lazy publication in the Herald or, more sinisterly, a real indication of the possible emergence of a Nightmare on Elm Street of Roger Douglas rising, like Nosferatu, from the political grave as National reaches to embrace its long term political lover and enter an unholy alliance in the the manner signalled by the Wang loves Wong Billboards??

Look Alikes!!

2008-10-24T12:13:00.000-07:00

In the tradition of the local press - has anyone noticed how similar these two money speculators look?
Apart from their physical similarity both worked for failed money market "merchant bankers' and both made fortunes from a shared driving force - greed and a desire to gamble on speculation and rumour.
But then it is a matter of trust isn't it???

Further Ironies on the campaign trail

2008-10-24T00:36:00.000-07:00

Ironic isn't it.. Rodney takes a hiding in the rough & tumble with Winston. One presumes that if you continue to sweep your dust under your carpet when someone else lifts the carpet your dirty secrets are exposed.
Robert Jones' generosity of rent free offices to the tune of $20,000 a year was obviously a donation that needed to be declared despite Rodney's disingenuous attempt a disguising his Party's guilt and shoddy book keeping. Mind you, it does raise the question: if ACT can't keep its books in order how could they be trusted, in any coalition with the great gambler (Engkeylish) to keep the country's books in order?
Naughty, naughty Rodney - keep throwing mud and eventually the mud comes back to stick on the thrower.

A note to the Banks - merely a query.

2008-10-22T18:06:00.000-07:00

Dear Sirs,

In view of what seems to be happening internationally with banks at the

moment, I was wondering if you could advise me. If one of my cheques is

returned marked 'insufficient funds,' how will I know whether that refers

to me or to you .
Just seeking clarification.
Curmudgeon.

Mind you, if we were to believe that National could provide responsible economic management we might be writing more such letters especially considering Mr. Key's past record of speculation on the New Zealand dollar (even if it was during the days of Roger Douglas 1987-88 ). After all a gambler never loses the habit!!

Ironies on the Campaign Trail

2008-10-22T12:07:00.000-07:00

Last night I went along to a "Meet the Candidates" presentation to hear and see those who would represent the electorate in Parliament. The evening was one of irony and Monty Pythonish humour.
First, there were three candidates who were immigrants to New Zealand - each proclaimed that they were here because they saw opportunities and possibilities for them by moving from their country of birth. The National and Act candidates, both Chinese born, then condemned New Zealanders for following their example and traveling overseas for experience, opportunity and gaining knowledge of other cultures and societies. One was left wondering why it was OK for them to emigrate, to travel overseas but for young New Zealanders to do the same is to be seen as betraying the country?
Second, there was a Kiwi Party candidate who supports the repeal of the law protecting children from violence in the home on the basis that this would stop parents being classed as criminals for chastising their children, sincerely advocating the use of the rattan, a la Singapore, as a deterrent to criminals while declaring that N.Z. shouldn't become a police state. Well, at least he was consistent even if confused about the nature of a police state.
Third, the ACT candidate called for deregulation of business so that they could flourish as businesses do in the deregulated environment of China as well as calling for the removal of bureaucrats who interfere with the free market practices of business while advocating the expenditure of $1 Billion to crack down on crime.
He seemed to forget that in the deregulated, free market of Chinese business where the bueaucracy didn't maintain checks on the business practices criminal behaviour was rife. A point well appreciated by Fonterra!!
Then, again, the ACT candidate argued for the removal of taxation to allow the individual to decide how best to spend their money but then failed to explain where the money would come from to pay for their $1 Billion Anti-crime policy as well as the provision of what education, justice, defence, infra structure maintenance....
He, too, didn't seem to appreciate that the policies he was calling for would create a police state in New Zealand even though he'd decided to emigrate here to escape such a police ridden state!
Then, the National candidate was prepared to defend Lockwood Smith as a credible politician when, apparently, the only value Lockwood would have placed in her would be her small hands.
Mind you she also declared that her esteemed leader was an responsible experienced manager of finances while glossing over, or conveniently forgetting, his role in the 1987-88 money trader speculation on the NZ dollar that almost caused a collapse of the NZ economy. Hardly the actions of a responsible New Zealander one would have thought but, then, as I stated it was a night filled with ironies.

National Party PPP tolling scheme to be launched by Maurice Williamson!

2008-10-21T11:21:00.000-07:00

This little story and illustration from The Standard will lighten the hearts of Brian Kelly and his supporters in Pakuranga!!

The National Party has today been forced to clarify its policy for more public-private partnerships in transport after an embarrassing leaked photograph found its way onto several online internet ‘blogs’.

In response to the photo (below), John Key has scheduled a press conference where he is expected to formally announce a policy to lease public bus stops to private commuters at the rate of $2 an hour.

The clarification comes after transport spokesperson Maurice Williamson today stated the bus stops would be sold off completely, then backtracked and claimed they would be leased to private commuters at $5 an hour.

Mr Key has distanced himself from Mr Williamson’s comments, saying his transport spokesperson “jumped the gun” and has not been briefed on the party’s transport policy.

Unreported Comunity Reactions to the Leaders

2008-10-21T01:09:00.000-07:00

An interesting comparison in public perception of the worth of the leaders of the major parties has been reported from the Botany Electorate.
Apparently Helen Clark visited the shopping centre in an un-publicised walk about with candidate, Koro Tawa earlier this week.
The walk about was, reported to be a scheduled 90 minutes but was extended to 2 hours because of the demand from the local public to speak and meet with her.
My informant tells me that it took Helen almost 40 minutes to walk from the front entrance of the Conservatory to the rear entrance.
So what happened when John Key did his follow the leader walk about?
My informant has it that he was met with rapturous ignore - the shopping centre remained quiet, no one approached the tour party leaving John and Pansy Wong to walk through the centre at a rapid pace, board their transporter and head off to another surrounded by the faithful photo opportunity.
I wonder what it is about the two leaders that they get greeted so differently when ever they go into the public arenas -- perhaps its something called trust and charisma?

IRONIC COMMENT ON MONEY MANAGEMENT

2008-10-19T11:05:00.000-07:00

The NZ Herald runs a cartoon strip in its business section that provides a great insight into the money management skills of the merchant banking class experience in which John Key claims an ability to manage an economy. If the latest strip is anything to indicate confidence in such experience one must assume that to give Key and his advisers access to a macro-economic situation would seriously endanger the economy as rumour and mis-reading of information would take precedence over rationality.

Key Promises!

2008-10-19T00:56:00.000-07:00

I received another National Party ripped off idea this weekend - a pledge card!! (Where did this idea come from I wonder... see my early posts about the pretender's new clothes.)
It was amazing, especially as to be honest pledges one would presume that the person making the pledges had had a record of consistency and of having high moral principles if one is to accept the pledges.
I'm sorry but the only consistent feature that Mr. Key has displayed to the public is inconsistency as this little clip demonstrates with clarity.

The Worm Keeps Turning

2008-10-16T11:11:00.000-07:00

This clip from the Leaders' debate is worth a viewing.
It certainly beats Peter Dunne's favourite - the worm especially as this worm turns and keeps turning as slippery John keeps letting his gambling instinct over-load his competence.

Lies. Lies and more Lies as Debate heats up

2008-10-14T02:20:00.000-07:00

This analysis of the Key positions taken by John Key demonstrate the tenuousness of his logic. It's worth sharing.

Live fact-checking of the debate.

Key: The unions supported National’s position on Kiwisaver.
Lie: The unions do not support National’s plan and never have. “We have supported 2+2 arrangements as a starting point but under the current scheme, this attracts the full value of member tax credits and employer tax credits. Under the National Party proposal there would be enormous pressure on workers to pay for the employer contribution by forgoing a wage increase. And for those who joined expecting a 4 per cent employer contribution, this is a major reduction”

Key: Productivity has halved under Labour
Lie: Productivity is up 15% under Labour

Key: Labour has got unemployment beneficiary numbers down by moving people to the sickness and invalid benefits.
Lie: Total benefit numbers are down 100,000. The sickness and invalid number growth has been in line with a growing, aging population. Unemployment is down 120,000.

Key: We should be slower on the ETS, our Kyoto liability is so big
Contradiction: If we go slower on reducing our carbon emissions through the ETS our Kyoto liability will be higher. Our Kyoto liability is forfeit for not meeting our commitments to reduce emissions; the ETS is a scheme for reducing emissions.

Key: interest rates have doubled up Labour
Lie: 2-year fixed mortgage rate in December 1999 - 8.3%. 2-year fixed mortgage rate today - 9.0%

Key: carbon emissions from coal have doubled under Labour
Lie: electricity emissions have increased 20%, more electricity is generated per unit of emissions, there is a ban on new baseload thermal generation, and Huntly will be replaced by renewable generation.

Key: power prices have increased 50% under Labour
Lie: power prices are up 18% after-inflation (source 1,2). Incomes are up 25% after-inflation (source 1,2)

Key: we’ve had an explosion in the number of bureaucrats from 26,000 to 36,000
Misleading: Key is talking about people employed by the core public service. That includes the Police, corrections staff, customs, social workers. Key has promised policies that wold require at least a 1000 new people in those departments.

Key: 322 workers at Carter Holt Harvey lost their jobs today because of Labour’s economic mismanagement.
Lie: according to Carter Holt, the jobs were lost due to oversupply of timber in the international market. As Key should know, the timber industry is going through a major correction at the moment having overexpanded during the global housing bubble, which has now collapsed.

The Axe Falls on Kiwisaver - Key untrustworthy yet again.

2008-10-10T12:26:00.000-07:00

This cartoon says it all. Here is the first wedge of the workers' benefits to be axed under a Key lead government. Remember a gambler prefers to gamble with other peoples' money while ensuring the house retains its share!

Where ACT & National would take us with their Crime policies.

2008-10-08T13:32:00.000-07:00

Underwhelming Policy Release- Tax Cuts - Tax Schmucks

2008-10-08T12:45:00.000-07:00

Over the years New Zealand experiences a sense of deja vu with each release of "new" policy from the National Party policy think tank.

When John Key released the much hyped tax cut policy yesterday one was immediately reminded of Robert Muldoon in 1975 - same smirking smile, same short sighted thinking, surrounded by acolytes from past National administrations all congratulating themselves on regenerating failed past policies and supported by happy memories of dancing cossacks leaping through their collective minds. Here was history repeating itself.

In 1975 Muldoon dismantled the New Zealand Superannuation scheme - a programme designed to encourage savings and investment in industry and the N.Z. economy - arguing that this was the first step towards a communist state and appealing to the mirage of a short term individual gain by returning the contributions to the taxpayer and promising a tax based superannuation payment.

Interestingly, a later National Government, with Ruth Richardson as finance minister, took the axe to the Muldoon scheme and reduced the promised retirement payments as well as abusing the taxpayer for not saving and investing in the economy.

In 2008 John Key took the script from the ghost of Muldoon and began the proposed dismantling of Kiwi-Saver by raiding it to pay for the promised tax-cuts - if this isn't a good example of a john robbing the peter one doesn't know what else is.

Points echoed by Brian Fallow, in the National Party's advertising pamphlet, The Herald, commented on the Tax Cut policies as - "You can't have your cake and eat it too" policies. He said that the Kiwisaver was an essential shift in attitude to an investment in the economy of the country and that the policy released by Key was reminiscent of the 1975 National Party assault on the NZ Super Scheme.

It is interesting to note that the Herald's editorial writer suggests that at a later date National should, would , take the knife to other social investments like free childcare and other universal benefits as there is no point in providing welfare... if it "cripples" the economy.

The revitalised 1975 anti-investment policies of John Key, in his muldoonist incarnation, is also directed at disenfranchising the worker when it comes to negotiating better employment conditions and pay increases by providing the opportunity for employers to argue that those who are Kiwisavers cannot get a pay rise because they're already receiving it through the, under National minimal 2% employer contribution to the employee's superannuation savings scheme.

Here, too, is the policy of encouraging selfishness that is the underpinning of the Key theory of economics.

The prospect of a reincarnation of muldoonist economics and social policies even under the smirking smiles of John Key is not an attractive prospect for NZ to consider. The Tax Cuts - Social programme slashing policies being presented are not attractive for either the individual or the country as a whole.

Tax Cuts??? John robs the peter to gamble again.

2008-10-07T23:12:00.000-07:00

National leader John Key today revealed his plans to destroy KiwiSaver and its long-term benefits for New Zealand for the sake of his own pursuit of power, Finance Minister Michael Cullen said today.

"John Key's announcement today that National would slash by half employer contributions to New Zealanders' personal savings, and cut into many employees' contributions, exposes National's short-term agenda and proves how hollow National's so-called economic growth plan really is.

"National's first instinct is to destroy a programme that will help promote growth and to remove important employment rights that protect employees in KiwiSaver.

"If implemented, this would gut KiwiSaver and sells the 800,000 plus members down the river. It would mean the sell-out of many Kiwis' hopes of buying their first home. It would mean the sell-out of many New Zealanders' opportunity to having a little bit more in retirement," Dr Cullen said.

"The past 18 months of major stress in international financial markets has highlighted very clearly that New Zealand needs to strengthen its savings culture and needs to strengthen its savings and investment record. This is why KiwiSaver is so important.

"The short-sightedness of National's proposed attack on savings is matched only by its attack on investment in research and development and in infrastructure. John Key proposes to axe the R&D tax credit that is a fundamental ingredient in raising the nation's productivity and non-inflationary growth rate over time. John Key also proposes no offsetting increase in public sector research and development," he said.

"All for what? A poorly-designed tax package that delivers nothing to 370,000 New Zealand households that receive Working for Families, reduces legislated tax rates and thresholds for the lowest and highest earners and claws back as much as it gives in tax cuts – and more – for current KiwiSavers.

Note: Impact of National's proposals on modest income KiwiSavers

A person earning $30,000 in Kiwisaver under Labour would save $750 a year themselves, receive a $750 contribution from the government and a $750 contribution from their employer: That is $2,250 a year in their account. Labour has protected workers against employers clawing back their (employers') contribution.

But under National's anti-savings plan, the same person would pay in 2%, that is $375, receive $375 from the government but the $375 from their employer would be paid by the employee because of reduced wages: In other words, that worker would still have to pay $750, but their return would only be $1,125 in their account after a year.

Because these people would not get any additional tax relief under National's plan, they would end up losing $1,125 a year from their savings account in order to pay for National's tax cut package which, by design, mostly benefits those already on high incomes, without children and who do not have a personal savings plan.

Irony or Truth? The Gambler & the Casino.

2008-10-04T18:56:00.000-07:00

A couple of postings ago I wrote an analysis of the National Party's economic policies and the supposed economic management expertise of their present finance spokespeople. In that posting I commented on the parallels that exist between riverboat gamblers and the money "traders" who gamble on the money markets.
I noted that the leader of the National Party made his reputation working for Merrill Lynch as a gambling speculator on the NZ dollar during the 1980s. Other bloggers have noted that the gambling on the NZ dollar at that time almost caused a collapse of the NZ economy if the Reserve Bank hadn't intervened.
It is, therefore, with great interest and a sense of the heavily ironic that one notes that the National Party with its "Great Gambler" at its helm is to launch its official 2008 campaign at The Sky-City Casino in Auckland on the 12th of October.
It is, perhaps. fitting that a political party with its roots deeply embedded in speculation, in money market gambling and other gaming activities should decide to associate itself with a Casino as it attempts to persuade the N.Z. public that it has a rational, well thought through and non speculative set of policies that would fit it to govern the country responsibly.

The Worm is Turning!!

2008-10-02T12:14:00.000-07:00

It’s time John Key delivered his main policy planks
The Independent Financial Review, 2 October 2008
By Jenni McManus

Just as the United States House of Representatives this week rightly refused give a US$700 billion (NZ$1.04 trillion) blank cheque to Treasury Secretary Henry “Hank” Paulson, Kiwi voters should think twice about handing power to John Key.

Congress reacted with what commentators have termed “visceral discomfort” at the thought of giving Paulson, himself a product of Wall Street, carte blanche to save the butts of his mates, all on the taxpayers’ bill.

There was an information vacuum bordering on arrogance about the bailout itself, said the scheme’s critics. There had been insufficient grovelling from Paulson and Fed chairman Ben Bernanke. Taxpayers should get more than “just the avoidance of the apocalypse” for their dollars.

Such was the level of anger in some quarters that one Washington research economist, noting the Bush administration had allowed the crisis to happen in the first place, said: “It’s almost amazing that they can do this with a straight face. Paulson has been totally wrong about almost everything.”

Some viewed it as the banks effectively recapitalising at the expense of the taxpayer; others described it as a reward for failure. Best comment of the week came from The New York Times’ veteran columnist Maureen Dowd: “Who would have dreamed that when socialism came to the USA it would be brought not by Bolsheviks in blue jeans but by Wall Street bankers in Gucci loafers?”

How does all this relate to John Key?

A lack of leadership at the top echelons of government and an arrogant refusal to be accountable to voters.

Like George W Bush, who took 10 days to front up to the American people with some guidance on the proposed bailout, Key — five weeks from our election — has yet to tell voters what he believes about anything and what he might do if handed the Treasury benches on November 8.

Like Paulson, he wants to be handed a blank cheque. Clearly, he expects voters to elect him with no real notion of his plans. He wants to skid into government with as few policy commitments as possible. And voters might be stupid enough — or so despairing of what the business community views as nine years of weak economic management and “crackpot social issues” (Independent, August 14, 2008) — to let him get away with it.

Much has been written about Key’s failure to release policy detail — or even policy frameworks — in critical areas and his lack of a coherent economic vision to lead the country through the next three years.

Five weeks out from the election is simply too late for voters to absorb complex policy platforms. Is this actually what National wants?

Where, for example, are the detailed and decisive policies to combat the recession? Where was National’s strategy midway through last year when the US sub-prime market began to unravel? Where were Key and Bill English when the Kiwi property market tanked in March? How would they have handled the economy as increasingly desperate householders struggled with sudden increases in petrol, food and mortgage interest rates?

The simple answer is we don’t know. And the electorate needs to know these things before people can cast an informed vote.

Like the Senate Banking Committee, which heard the initial arguments on the US bailout plan, New Zealanders are being offered a pig in a poke.

For the past year, Key and English have been dodging anything that smells like policy commitment, telling private business dinners in Auckland and in Wellington that many of these matters will be decided when they get elected — or words to that effect.

Not only do we have no detailed policy in key areas such as the economy, health, education and the environment, but National has failed so far to spell out its plans for the Resource Management Act (a contentious issue for business), the Employment Relations Act (another key bone of contention), infrastructure development (becoming urgent as two power companies increase their prices this week), a new regulatory regime, dealing with crime and the long- promised referendum on MMP.

Nor will the party disclose what it will do about relatively straightforward matters such as the future of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and, more contentiously, whether it will repeal the SFO Act, thus allowing fraud suspects the right to silence when interrogated by the SFO.

Unemployment will be another big issue. Alasdair Thompson, chief executive of the Auckland Employers and Manufacturers Association, says 25% of the work being done by his organisation is helping employers who want to downsize.

These are not big companies; the layoffs are coming from small-to- medium sized businesses. So far the redundancies have been done quietly but the total is expected to be evident in the next quarter’s employment figures.

As a Washington commentator noted this week when discussing the proposed US bailout: “One might thank God that the cavalry is coming but what exactly is the cavalry going to do?” Ditto New Zealand. Five weeks from the election only one thing is certain. As always, we will get the government we deserve

Short Term Memory Loss & Rumour Mills

2008-09-28T12:47:00.000-07:00

National's claim that it is not engaging in a dirty campaign this election rang hollow over the weekend when, while on the campaign trail, a canvasser was informed by a died-in-the wool National supporter that the only way Labour won the 2005 election was because in Ross Robertson's Manukau East Electorate a secret cabal from the local Labour organisation, aided by the then Mayor who provided a secret list of Manukau residents who were on work schemes or benefits, visited all these people and threatened them with loss of benefits or places on work schemes unless they went to the booths and voted Labour.
When pressed by the canvasser to name the members of the inner cabinet of the Manukau Labour Party the National Party supporter at first claimed the names were common knowledge among the business community and the National Party but he wouldn't name the people himself but it was enough to prove that Labour used dirty campaigning techniques to win elections.
To this observer such rumour milling is proof enough of a demonstration campaign hypocrisy being practised by the National Party as the rumour has as much credibility as the claim that the National Party has insisted that John Key undergo an urgent medical for Alzhiemers as his requent demonstrations of short term memory loss when pressed to recall either ownership of TransRail shares, National Party policies, or meetings with visiting millionaires was of concern to their spinmeisters - Crosby-Textor.
One would argue that if a political party was to run a clean campaign it would not be a party to the spreading of such rumours but perhaps it is because the National Party has no appreciation of satire that their response to its use is to promote the dubious and obviously dirty campaign rumour the canvasser was regaled with as he door knocked last weekend.

National endorses Labour Candidate.

2008-09-28T12:16:00.000-07:00

Today's Herald carries an interesting story about the new Botany Electorate where the marriage of the natural bedfellows Act and National is being heralded on billboards around the electorate.
Apparently National's candidate has threatened to throw the weight of the EFA, legislation they opposed on the grounds it would stop "free" speech, on the Act candidate because he has endorsed their candidate without consent.
This must be very pleasing for the Labour candidate especially as, in censuring the Act candidate, the National candidate appeared to endorse, in fact encourage Botany voters to vote for him when she is reported to have said: "Botany doesn't want more Chinese MPs as the electorate is multi-ethnic and voters will vote on the strength and commitment of candidates...." Obviously National would rather have their Botany candidate returned from the list and Botany return an indigenous MP to represent the seat more equitably across all the ethnicities within the electorate.

Ethical MisBehaviour a key issue.

2008-09-22T02:49:00.000-07:00

HOW MANY SHARES DO YOU REALLY OWN?

Answer: I can't remember. It could be 20-25000. It might be 50000. Oh gosh I remember now it was 100,000. Mind you I had to be pushed to admit it though. - John Key being slippery yet again.

This press release deserves a lot more publicity than the Herald will give it.

It would appear that there is one rule for Winston and another less rigid one for John Key and his money trader colleagues.

Labour has accused John Key of lying over his ownership of Tranz Rail shares amid revelations the National Party leader failed to fully disclose his interests.

Mr Key's interests became an issue earlier this year when Labour claimed a conflict of interest because he had asked parliamentary questions about the Government's planned buyback of the country's rail tracks while he still had a shareholding in the rail operator.

Despite his role at the time as National's associate transport spokesman, he did not disclose his shareholding.

When Mr Key was questioned on the issue this year he said his family trust had held 30,000 shares in the company, but had sold them on June 9 and June 12, 2003.

He said his questions and comments never led to any gains from the company's share value.

But Finance Minister Michael Cullen today released correspondence and share register information contradicting several of Mr Key's claims.

The information showed Mr Key, through his trust and under his own name, had owned 100,000 rather than 30,000 Tranz Rail shares.

Questioned on the issue before he was aware the information had been released, Mr Key told One News his shareholding ranged between 25,000 and 50,000 shares up until June 2003.

But when pressed on the issue he admitted there were more shares.

"Actually maybe 100,000 from memory, sometimes 50,000, sometimes 100,000, yep," he said.

"Yeah, sorry, there was 100,000 in total."

Mr Key said no one had questioned him previously on exactly how many shares he had owned.

The papers released by Dr Cullen show Mr Key personally bought 50,000 shares in Tranz Rail in May 2003 after he had actively pursued information from the Government on the company.

He sold those shares five weeks later for $51,000 -- more than double their $22,500 purchase price.

However, 50,000 shares bought by his family trust in February 2002, were sold in June 2003 at a loss of $132,000.

Dr Cullen said Mr Key should have declared his shareholding to Parliament and his failure to do so was unethical.

"John Key lied because he knew he had something to hide," he said.

"Mr Key was in fact commenting publicly on Tranz Rail, meeting with bidders for the rail track and vigorously pursuing the release of commercially relevant information all while being an undisclosed shareholder in the firm."

One News has just run the revelation that John Key lied to the public and to Parliament about the extent of his shareholding in Tranzrail while using his position to ask questions about the Government’s intentions for rail.

More importantly, it seems he met with Rail America in his capacity as National’s transport spokesperson to encourage the company to go ahead with its intention to purchase Tranzrail. He said in a newsletter that he hoped:

the interest shown by Rail America will be picked up by others.

Having pumped the sale without declaring his interest, he then divested of 50,000 Tranzrail shares, doubling his money within five weeks.

The public needs to know what went on during that meeting with Rail America. We also need to know the full details of all Key’s holdings and an investigation needs to be held into whether he has misused his position for financial gain anywhere else.

Given one of National’s favourite taunts over the last three years has been ‘corruption’, one can only hope the media will see real corruption for what it is.

Dr Cullen said Mr Key had spent a lot of time attacking Prime Minister Helen Clark's credibility over the New Zealand First donations scandal, but had covered up his own actions.

"For him to have in effect grossly misled both the media and the public on this I think raises that issue of trust yet again," he told reporters.

"Clearly Mr Key was not simply not forthcoming, he actually lied."

Riverboat gamblers, money traders and other key speculative behaviours

2008-09-18T01:54:00.000-07:00

What are the similarities between riverboat gamblers, money traders and other speculators? There aren't any - just degrees of "acceptability" based on who employs you. Essentially all these men do is gamble on the possibility of making a profit from the turn of a card, the roll of a die or the chance that the other guy will blink first. Each of them is concentrating on making a profit from an illusion of skill.

Michael Cullen is drawing no long bow when he points out that it was the actions of men, in the same profession as John Key once was, whose gambling caused the collapse of Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch.

For anyone who understands the use of analogy and of examples when arguing a case Cullen's comments make perfect sense and provide a solid logical progression to an inevitable conclusion. For the benefit of the media and other commentators it runs like so:

1) Merrill Lynch was a financial institution that had made its reputation from speculation on the futures markets and currency trading which are simply sophisticated forms of riverboat gambling.
2) The money traders employed by Merrill Lynch are highly paid gamblers who use other people's money to take bets on the possible value of commodities and currencies that might eventuate as a result of a rumour, a possibility of a storm, flood, pestilence or the failure of a sports team to win a crucial test match.
3) John Key's reputation is not based on his political acumen but on his gambling ability and instincts developed while employed as a currency gambler by Merrill Lynch.
4) As a high stakes currency gambler Mr Key was successful - but only while the house of cards built up on successive levels of speculation remained standing.
5) Once the house of speculation collapsed the reputation of the currency and commodity gamblers must be called to question just as the security of the finance houses like Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch must be called to question and account.
Therefore: Given that John Key is still, at heart and reputation, a money trader (gambler / speculator) and has had well publicised ties to the firm of Merrill Lynch which collapsed because of the poor judgment of the currency and commodity gamblers employed there then it must follow that questions about Mr Key's ability to take control of a country's economy must be called into question.
However, the spin doctors, the Herald agenda driven reporters who appear to lack an understanding of the nuances and subtleties of language and logic have all leapt to the illogical conclusion that John Key was the cause of the collapse of Merrill Lynch. ( Would that were true - it would really make some earlier gambling trades that went sour on individual traders look like small bikkies.)
What people should recognise is that no one is saying that Key caused the collapse of Merrill Lynch but one does begin to doubt the ability of a currency gambler to make sound economic judgments.
This is not negative campaigning. This is not personality attack. This is not dirty politics as the Crosby Textor script would have it. This is legitimate questioning of the perception that Mr Key has the ability to make sound judgements based on the evidence that other currency gamblers obviously have none as they caused the collapse of Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch.
The conclusion then becomes obvious.

Of Cabbages & Kings & other matters of import.

2008-09-16T19:19:00.000-07:00

While one does not normally support Winston Peters the events of the past few weeks reveal one thing - Winston has a problem - a very 21st century problem - that judgements are now made on perceptions rather than hard, substantive evidence.

While, for sometime, Winston has managed to bluff and bluster to position himself as the "people's champion" for didn't he stand up to Muldoon and, on a matter of principle, resign the National Party to stand for Tauranga to demonstrate the electorate's support for that principle he is now being tried by a jury of his"peers" and the media on an issue of principle.

Would you trust the country to these men?
The National Party shadow cabinet discussing what to do with Winston.

Unfortunately for Winston the substantive issue - Did he or did he not have to declare the donation of $100,000 that went into his legal fighting fund - has become "Did he or did he not know about the donation being solicited and paid into his lawyer's trust account?"

For his peers and the media it is easier to pillory Winston on the latter issue because he chose to grandstand a series of denials of knowledge of such largesse being extended to him. In such a manner the substantive issue isobscured and lost.

One is lead to conclude that the issue of should the $100,000 be declared will not be decided by the media or by the jury of Winston's peers because, in the public perception, the outcome has already been decided - guilt by association and a decision by John Key not to deal with Winston in the event of a close call in November.

For John Key is attempting to build up aperception of being a decisive, principled and strong individual as opposed to a person who takes a more measured, calmer, more rational approach to decision making.

To do this he and hisadvisers have adopted the "chicken licken" approach to political debate... to shout that the sky has fallen despite all evidence to the contrary on the basisthat given a loud enough shout the echo will become the evidence.

Of course John Key is familiar with such a strategy as that is precisely how the money speculators in organisations like Merrill Lynch operate in order to drive the speculation on the money or commodities they're gambling on up or down in speculative value and thusgain profit for themselves or companies they work for.

These decisions are not based on sound judgement from substantive evidence. It isjudgement based on perception, on image, on the loudest shout, on a chimera which, once accepted by others in the market, can cause a collapse of the whole artifical construct the money speculator (gambler) has built up. One only has to lok at the collapse of companies like Merrill Lynch ( a past employer of John Key ) to witness the fallacy of speculation on perception.

All of which leaves the N.Z. voter with two important questions " shouldn't we expect more from the N.Z. media when reporting and recording events than we are presently getting?" and "can we, as a nation, afford to allow ourselves to be governed by one whose judgements and reputation are made on perception and image rather than hard, substantive evidence?"

Positive spin or stasi action?

2008-09-16T16:53:00.000-07:00

Tony Ryall, National Party MP, has demonstrated the stasi mentality that is the foundation of his political philosophy in his recent letter to the Auckland DHB demanding that they not publicise any of their achievements in improving the provision of and delivery of health services in the region because such a message would run counter to the advertising messages that Mr Ryall wants to run as part of his Party's advertising campaign during the election period.
Of course Mr Ryall is not trying to censor the Health Board. He is not trying to control the news. He is not trying to manipulate the Board members. He is not trying to dictate anything to the Health Board. He is merely carrying out his duty as a National Party apparatchik - a member of the tory stasi and attempting to ensure "fairness" and a "level playing field" during the election campaign!
One must ask why the N.Z.Herald, in reporting the story, didn't pounce on Mr Ryall's attempt to stifle free speech and expose his activities to fair and open criticism ... or.. is this too much to ask in this "open" society?

Rodney, Winston & the Bull Pen

2008-09-09T16:22:00.000-07:00

Over the past few months we have been treated to the sight of two bulls competing for dominance in the bull pen - Rodney the upstart and Winston the twice anointed king-maker.

At stake is the right to decide which of the two big parties will form the government at the end of this year. Hide sees himself in that role as witnessed by the ACT party pamphlets distributed around the country in recent months.

This means that the donation saga is not about faulty book-keeping, not about poor management and inadequate systems within the N.Z.First machine. It is not about Owen Glenn's generousity to either N.Z.First or the Labour Party. It is about Winston Peters and his political survival. It is about the manipulation of the political landscape in an MMP environment.

Hide, whose motivations on the political field can be questioned, has set out to destroy Peters in the interests, he says, of ensuring stable government in New Zealand. (Morning Report interview. august 2008). For stable government read one supported by ACT and none other.
Hence the constant barrage of innuendo, of demands for Privileges Committee interrogations, of Police investigations and SFO inquiries coupled with theatrical presentations of files to various authorities in front of cameras and supporters. Hide's campaign strategy is to throw allegation after allegation at Peters in the knowledge that eventually a crack will appear or a daub of mud will stick so that guilt by implication can be established and the "crime" elevated to credibility.

For Peters, the problem has been one of his own character fault, a propensity to bluff and bluster when confronted with a barrage of questions. It is this character fault that cracked. It was this fault that allowed the daub of mudto stick. It was this fault that Hide has manipulated to his advantage over the past few months as he campaigns to exert his right to be seen as the new stud in the Bull-pen of Parliament.

If Peters had paused, reflected and analysed his position on the issue he was challenged on he may have responded in a more considered and strategically advantageous manner. But that isn't his nature and Hide knows it.

If Peters had admitted and provided evidence that monies had been sought and paid to N.Z. First through whatever vehicle and that the monies had been fully accounted for he would have not found himself in the ignominious position he is presently in. For now his position as an "honorable member" whose word must be, by statute, taken as true is called to question.

In the face of the evidence presented by Glenn to the Privileges committee Peters will now have to prove that his position is and always has been that of a truthful and honorable member. If he cannot prove that, if he resorts to the bluff and bluster, he will be found wanting and his political demise, so long predicted, will be assured. However, he won't he destroyed by an accounting failure. He won't be destroyed by faulty management processes. He won't be destroyed by his strange relationship with his lawyer. He will be destroyed by his own character faults for that is Peter's hubris and that is what Hide has exploited throughout this whole sorry saga.

Leaks from the Ad Agency

2008-09-02T19:53:00.000-07:00

Rumour has it that the National Party is demanding a commission of enquiry into their Advertising Agency following the leaking of their billboard designs and slogans after the launch of their only policy statement board (coincidentally, it reads almost identically to an ACT Party pamphlet circulated last month - I wonder if that means anything?)

Anyway here are the leaked billboards and associated slogans from the Tory Ad agency. One can see why John, call me Obama, Key is so upset... they actually reveal their manifesto promises.

Refreshing Honesty

2008-08-24T16:26:00.000-07:00

This weekend's Agenda programme allowed Maurice Williamson the opportunity to display refreshing tory honesty about the effects of the much vaunted National Party tax cuts policy on the worker's wallet.
While John Key promises everyone a $50.00+ a week tax cut Maurice explained why it was needed- "to pay the tolls that would be levied on N.Z. roads when, under National, they would be semi-privatised under the PPP schemes that underpin the National Party policy documents."
What the N.Z. taxpayer now sees is that "there ain't no free lunch under a tax cut regime" for under such a regime the need to pay tolls (private enterprise taxation) for the use of public facilities becomes obvious as under the PPP schemes the private enterprise"partner" is allowed to tax the public (and claim against the taxpayer for any shortfalls ) to pay for the costs of the roads, the schools, the hospitals and other infrastructure a National Party Government, in partnership with Private enterprise, chooses to build.
It is interesting to note that where-ever such PPP infrastructure building schemes have been in operation (Australia, UK) the taxpayer is forced to bail the Business sector out - effectively paying twice or more over for the facility.
One must thank Maurice for his refreshing honesty when he said that he knew that no one would object to paying $50.00 a week in tolls as part of one's normal household expenses. At least we now know the reasoning behind the tax cut policy - to allow the taxpayer the ability to pay big business for their largesse in donating to the National Party coffers.
Mind you, it is good to see John Key swinging again in typical flip - flop manner over Maurice's out burst of political honesty. It just goes to show that the pretender has an ill fitting set of crosby-textor borrowed clothing. It is about time the un-blinkered observers started shouting that he has no clothes. But that might be all too honest.

Interesting Editing Exercise

2008-08-22T20:01:00.000-07:00

The editing of Letters to the Editor of The Herald reveal the bias of the paper quite obviously.
On the 21st a "brevity" was published that read: "When will the intense scrutiny of the funding of N.Z.First be extended to that of National and Labour?"
The full, unpublished, submitted letter read:

Sir:
Today on Morning Report Rodney Hide said the object of the present inquiry was to get rid of Winston Peters, after which we would have stable government. So much for disinterested concern for democracy.
When will the intense scrutiny of the funding of N.Z.First be extended to that of National and Labour? Who remembers the Exclusive Brethern?

Which now puts a different meaning to the letter - an opinion that,dare one argue it, is contrary to the admitted agenda of the Herald.

Modern Fables with a political twist

2008-08-16T14:33:00.000-07:00

READ TOP TO BOTTOM

There is an 'Old Version' and a 'Modern Version' .... Two Different
Versions! Two Different Morals!

OLD VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his
house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays
the summer away.

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY:
Be responsible for yourself!

-------------------------------------------

MODERN VERSION:

The Labour Party ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The National Party grasshopper thinks the Labour ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away and keeps borrowing against any assets he may have. In fact he campaigns for everyone to do the same as well as stating that others should avoid contributing to the good of all in the interests of selfishness.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

The Herald, TV1, TV3 and Maori TV show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. New Zealand is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Good Morning with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green.'

John Key stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house, declaring it to be in struggle street, where the news stations film the group singing, 'We shall overcome.' He then takes a local to Waitangi to show he cares. (I mean: "Really, really cares. In fact he'll resign if he doesn't really care.")

Gordon Copeland then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

Michael Cullen explains in an interview with John Campbell that the worker ants have gotten rich by carefully balancing the books, investing in the future and saving the state assets and that the National Party Grasshopper is reaping the results of consuming too much while borrowing and failing to invest in assets. The Herald declares that the Grasshopper is showing "enterprise" and is capable of good management.

Rodney Hide makes a series of complaints to the Privileges Committee and the Fraud Office in an effort to discover who is scamming who thus spending more of the limited taxpayers money in political grandstanding campaigns.

Finally, the National Party grasshopper campaigns on a policy of borrow, borrow and sell all state assets and drafts the Foriegn Investment Economic Equity & Anti-Ant Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined, the assets are sold and stripped, the workers are penalised by having their wages cut, their employment conditions heavily curtailed and subject to heavy private enterprise (PPP) taxes (tolls ) to pay off private debts, his home is confiscated by the Bank which begins to call in mortgages and raise interest rates to cope with the heavy borrowing of the grasshoppers.

Any complaints about the actions being taken by the Grasshoppers against the worker ants are tried before a panel of judges that John appointed from a list of self interested big business men who gave several millions to the National Party Coffers.

The Worker ants lose the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it as he thinks the overseas landlords will do it to protect their assets.

The ant has disappeared in the snow.

The grasshopper is found to have been asset stripped in a sub-prime financial collapse incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of foreign spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighbourhood as they move the income from asset stripping overseas.

MORAL OF THE STORY:
Be VERY careful how you vote in 2008!!

Something Old, Something Blue, Nothing new

2008-08-12T00:38:00.000-07:00

Recycling is back in fashion with John Key, in typical engkeylish speak, the National Party's "Welfare" policy promises to deliver advantages for the "righteous" and disadvantages for whom righteousness has not been thrust upon.

This article from The Standard is a solid examination of the logic or lack of logic that underpins the National Party's policy position.

Dog whistle politics to some, beneficiary bashing to others. But is there logic to National’s policy on benefits? Gordon Campbell asks:

Will John Key’s policy announcement on welfare this afternoon do much to resolve the problems it claims to address? Hardly…

It is as if National felt the need to beat up on beneficiaries somehow, and somewhere - and so it picked primarily on solo parents, the group of beneficiaries widely recognized as being in LEAST need of extra motivation to get off the benefit.

One angle I thought was interesting was a study done by the Ministry of Social Development which looked at the health (and mental health) status of sole-mothers. If they are already more likely to be sick then sending them out to work with penalties if they don’t is not likely to lead to good outcomes, for either the parent or the children.

And one question I was hoping to hear asked - what are the penalties planned for those who do not abide by the rules? And what happens if there are others (like children) living in the household?

There’s a fundamental difference in approach here with both sides arguing that the studies back their logic. However as Simon Collins suggests:

…there are other factors besides welfare in the breakdown of the traditional family, and forcing parents into paid work may not be the answer.

The Truth Will Out - Secret agendae the not so hidden policies!

2008-08-09T17:22:00.000-07:00

Enough Said!!

Check out Rod Oram's comments in SST.

Which Head Tells the Truth? Does two out weigh one?

2008-08-05T02:52:00.000-07:00

Watch Slippery John, with the Crosby-Textor spinners taking control, attempt to deflect the media attention away from the not so subtly secret agendas revealed by the arch controller, English and minion Lockwood Smith to flog off the family silver to the highest bidders and allow private enterprise to levy taxes, in the form of tolls and increased charges, on each and every NZ citizen once Key & co get their hands on the levers of government.
The old adage that any spin is better than facing the truth will be clearly demonstrated from today on as National tries to disguise the falsity of their public policy statements.
The jettisoning of Bill English from the Nat's pirate ship won't help Slippery John recover from this series of, for the first time, honesty from his closest associates.

The revelation that John Key is not talking from the same script as his closest advisers and colleagues demonstrates clearly that he is no more than the smiling "bagman", "snake oil salesman" for the package designed and wrapped by Bill English and Lockwood Smith. Slippery John has been assigned the job of selling the wrapping while Bill and Lockwood conspire to keep the reality of their plans hidden until too late for the electorate to back out of the contract being offered by the bagman.
Bill and Lockwood have placed on record, despite post caucus denials, the real policies of the National Party... borrow against tomorrow, flog off the family silver, remove the safety nets of welfare and social services that have been hard fought for and then claim that they had a "mandate" to do so.
To fudge and hedge with such phrases as "not in the first term of a National Government" is to state "but definitely in the next time we have the power we'll rape and pillage the possessions of the people and pass all the responsibilities of the State to private contractors and businesses."
With two of the National Party's "shadow cabinet" saying we have a secret privatisation agenda" and one saying "that's all news to me" it would appear that the suspicions of the political sceptics are justified.

Conflict in the Engkeylish camp of Tax Cuts, asset sales and increased Borrowing.

2008-08-04T00:26:00.000-07:00

A simple question: How does a party leader this answer these questions and maintain logic:
"How will you fund the infra-structure building you plan to do with a reduced tax take from the large tax cuts you have promised?"
Answer""By borrowing thus increasing the public debt."
Question: "But aren't you borrowing to fund the deficit created by introducing huge tax cuts?"
Answer: "No we'd be borrowing to build infra-structure."
To any intelligent listener the logic of this series of answers is as somewhat tenuous and revealing of the speaker's fundamental lack of economic logic as the increased borrowing must logically follow from the reduced income created by the tax cutting programme that he espouses. If the Government has a decreased income flow because the tax take doesn't fund the planned spending then the borrowing is necessary to fund the tax-cuts.
Then the real answer must be that given by the man John Key says he'd be happy to resign to after one term holding the reins of power - Bill English who declared in a taped interview at the National Party Conference "We'll sell State assets - i.e. KiwiBank." (Un-said by underlying the message: at least not until we've been wielding power for a term... and have convinced the public that asset stripping, like the cane was said to be, good for the state as the country's assets are best held by foreign companies.) After all selling the family silver will allow National to reduce state taxes and allow private enterprise to levy taxes in the shape of tolls and increased charges and prices.

Tax Cuts and the politics of selfishness

2008-08-03T02:48:00.000-07:00

The calls for and promises of extra big tax cuts coming from the National Party Conference are the manifestation of the politics of selfishness.
They are argued with such self centred statements as:
“I want to avoid paying tax because other people gain a benefit from my tax payment. I believe that those people don’t deserve those benefits.”
“I want to avoid paying tax because I am, at heart, a charitable man and would gladly and liberally give alms to the begging poor so the State needn’t provide welfare schemes.”
“I want to avoid paying tax because I believe that the country can and should borrow against the future to fund any programmes I object my taxes being used to fund..e.g. social welfare, state education, public health services and, anyway, what are insurance companies for for but to provide these services from the investment individual insurance policies are designed for. After all individuals should take responsibility to provide for themselves by buying from private providers.”
“I want to avoid paying tax because I believe that the State, in providing socio-economic developments is providing too much and is employing too many people and thus growing too big - and, anyway, there are too many people getting assistance they don’t deserve.”
“ I believe I shouldn’t pay tax as private enterprise can provide all the services and infra-structure for the economy without the State being involved.”

In all these demands to avoid paying tax, in all the political grandstanding by the National Party the big question is avoided: “ Who pays private enterprise to build and provide all the infrastructure and services?” The answer is, of course, the non-tax paying individual who must pay a premium for the goods and services he wants at an ever increasing rate and price as our ever increasing electricity bills and the asset stripping of Air New Zealand and Rail N.Z demonstrate once private enterprise and the presumed benefits of the competitive economy were introduced under a previous National Government.

It is a pity that the present political discussion hasn’t explored or commented on the fallacies of individualism and the selfishness that underpins the tax cutting policies espoused by the National Party. New Zealand sorely needs the debate to be widened and treated with greater seriousness than we have seen and heard over recent months.

Trusts, Hypocrisy and Politics

2008-08-03T02:46:00.000-07:00

It is ironic that the Media fascination with Winston’s fund raising exercises is built on the concerns that gave birth to the Electoral Finance Act.
The Act is designed to encourage transparency about the funding of political parties in New Zealand.

That N.Z. First is now revealed as being dependent on the same funding sources as all the other political parties in the electoral arena - donations from high income benefactors both individuals and business is hardly devastating news. It merely confirms what everyone has known for years - no political party of any size or credibility can exist without seeking out large donations and that, trusts have been used to hide the identities of the donors. The public have long known that the National Party has used secret trusts to channel monies into its accounts so what is different about N.Z. First resorting to the same devices?

To rail against the Electoral Finance Act because it is designed to reveal the sources of finance that support our Political Parties and thus remove any doubts about influence and policy manipulation and then attack N.Z. First because it has been shown as resorting to the devises of trusts and passing the begging bowl around big business in order to fund its activities is to reveal the depths of political hypocrisy that runs deep within the National Party as well as the lack of balance seen in the analysis of politics by those who profess to be qualified to comment.

One must, however, give Rodney Hide and ACT credit as ACT has always been up front about the reasons why its big business supporters have given money to it - as ACT’s policies areobviously designed to provide the pay offs from ACT policies designed to strip all State assets from the common good.