NX-Files 100th Post!
Since then things appear to have deteriorated to the point that question time in the Clark years became merely sneering and nasty. The Prime Minister adopted a practice of pointedly turning and looking away from the Opposition leader while delivering dismissive responses to his questions. The advent of MMP may also be to blame. The House seemed to have a higher tone when members were addressed by their electorates rather than by name.
..............
He would do well to encourage his new ministers to conduct themselves with dignity and decorum in the House. The Government's role is crucial to its conduct. Oppositions have to be aggressive and provocative, ministers need not reply in kind. Ministers have the advantage of status at question time, they should use it. A polite, restrained, factual answer to a politically-pointed question would be far more impressive on television than the tedious partisan exchanges of recent times.
Couple of points; since Helen Clark lost power some in the media have all of a sudden developed a spine and made some terse comments about her leadership. The other day John Armstrong wrote that Helen pretty much told the truth and lied at the same time i.e. if she didn't like how a journalist interpreted her comments then she'd deny that she ever said it such was the mire surrounding her public statements.
And now the Herald editorial bravely writes that Helen Clark was 'sneering and nasty' during Question Time.
News Flash! We've known this for quite some time. Your in-depth analyze is too little too late.
And what's annoying still is that the Herald is advocating that National's answers to questions should be 'polite, restrained, and factual'. Well, I'd argue that was always going to be the case given that National Party rank and file aren't your standard battle harden union yobo who inhabit the Labour party.
"I'm the Treaty negotiations spokesman," Dr Cullen said.
"I have no intention of re-engaging in those areas."
What a cop out. Dr. Cullen runs the books for nine years & this is all we get?
Well let me reassure you Dr. C, you won't be 're-engaging in those areas' ever again.
Very simply, it was the most partisan government since Sir Robert Muldoon's. And that partisan edge became very wearing.
NX-Files agrees. I come to realise that in terms of every day governance the whole left vs. right thing doesn't matter. John Key & Barack Obama are the new breed of politicians who aren't afraid to cross the politician divide to get the job done. Helen Clark was stuck in the old ideological mindset, another reason why she's been consigned to history..
He doesn't hold back.....
It's been an amazing, some would say, self-indulgent career for which we will pay for years to come. Many of the biggest losers in the end will be the same vulnerable people who attached themselves to Aunty Helen in the first place. She made them feel good for a time, but eventually they'll start to realise that Aunty came up short, and that the Fifth Labour Government cheated them.
NX-Files agrees that
There must have been a better way to distribute the economic spoils fairly that didn't burden future generations.
As for Helen's social agenda – there's no disputing she had one. I'm socially liberal so my annoyance with Helen with regards to her social agenda is how she framed the arguments. I think she did a lot of damage with the anti-smacking bill even though her intentions may have been good. I agree with the Civil Unions Bill but the way Helen played down the gay marriage issue seemed disingenuous considering what the bill actually did - why would a Labour Prime Minister shy away from arguing for equal rights? However, I'm not convinced by the merits of the Prostitution law reform – and having Georgia Buyer shouting at the top of her lungs in parliament didn't do the bill any favours in my eyes.
But as Michael alluded to – it was Helen Clark's anti-man agenda that annoyed me the most.
My hope for the Key lead National government is to promote tolerance & equal rights, but without introducing a plethora of nanny-state social legislation.
The market share of Microsoft's Internet Explorer dropped under the 70% mark last month for the first time since Web metrics vendor Net Applications Inc. started keeping tabs on browsers, the company said today.Source: Computer World
Hell, even I've stopped using Internet Explorer (I tend to use other microsoft products). I now use Google Chrome with an add blocker called 'web washer'.
Chrome is definitely heaps faster.
I tried IE8 beta 2, but it had too many bugs. When the final version of IE8 is realised next year I'll give it another look.
Message to microsoft - you are taking too long developing IE8.
What I like:
Judith Collin's as Minister of Police, with Paula Bennett becoming Minister for Social Development and Employment. Paula projects a softer image where it counts while Judith's 'no non-sense' approach is a better fit with the police.
Dr Jonathan Coleman in the cabinet. This guy is pretty new having come into parliament in 2005, but has been impressive in the house. Think he's a rising star.
Christopher Finlayson as Attorney-General. Probably the highest rank an openly gay man has ever risen to in New Zealand politics. What I like about Christopher is that he doesn't let his sexuality define him, he really is the best man for the job.
National also breaks new ground with the first Minister of Asian orientation.
Only a couple of concerns: David Carter and Wayne Mapp are Ministers of agriculture & science & technology respectively; areas relevant to me. The MPs are very much part of Nationals old guard and don't portray National's dynamic fresh image. But then on the other hand they could be safe pairs of hands. So we'll see.
Heh, it's ironic all those sixes in Labour's party vote also happens to be the 'Number of the Beast'.
KEVIN Rudd is hoping to match Malcolm Turnbull's online popularity by joining the social networking service Twitter
^ heh, had to a laugh at this comment:
Surely this is an April Fool's joke. kevinpm.com.au? I'm lost for words. Maybe some of you will think twice about voting Labor next time! Just like Americans travelling abroad under the Bush administration called themselves Canadians, we'll have to start calling ourselves New Zealanders.
Posted by: David of Brisbane 8:26pm today
Comment 14 of 16
Not on your life David of Brisbane. If we can put up with nine years of Helen Clark and still call ourselves New Zealanders, then you can do the same with K Rudd.
After all we don’t want out good name besmirched ;).
....
In the Beehive, meanwhile, documents were being shredded and wheeled rubbish bins were being carted in and out of offices as staff packed up to make way for the new administration.
A little publicised out-come of the 2008 general election is the end of Heather Simspon's career (H2). H2 was widely regarded as the most power unelected official in NZ's history. She was a member of Clark's kitchen cabinet and even sat in on cabinet meetings. She was the ultimate backroom dealer.
H2's reputation was tarnished beyond repair during the last election campaign where she used the power of the PM's office to badger parliamentary services to pick-up the tab for Labour's election expenses to the tune of $820,000. Most notable was the pledge card (over $400k). There is email evidence which clearly shows H2 agreed to include the cost of the pledge card as an election expense therefore count against their cap. She totally backtracked on this after the election.
Sure, this is old news, but anyone who thinks Labour's 2005 overspend isn't significant needs to consider that the $820K overspend + NZ1st $160K essentially is the equivalent to half an election campaign!
So we have established Heather has a less than ethical record, which is why we haven't seen her since the election. NX-Files suspects that as soon as it was clear that Labour weren't going to win, H2 has been coordinating a massive document shredding exercise because she knows where all the bodies are buried.
To be fair, Helen Clark’s concession speech wasn’t bad. There were echos of McCain’s gracious speech.
But then, in typical Helen style, she ruined it with an inflammatory comment:
Miss Clark spoke of her pride in what the party had achieved over nine years in government, adding: "I just utter one fear, and that is that I do hope that all we have put in place doesn't go up in flames on the bonfire of Right-wing politics."
Nasty stuff. Defaming someone just because they have a different set of ideas to you is prejudicious rubbish. Especially in light of your loss. Prejudice in all forms is something the left suppose to be passionately against.
The quote above neatly highlights why I won’t miss Clark; her hypocrisy. I’ve lost count the number of times she has attacked her opponents over something they’ve done while not only committing the same crime but to a much greater extent. Examples include electioneering and dirty politics. It’s a cunning tactic but one that is particularly repugnant.
So my hope for the new National government is that they treat their opponents how they would like to be treated themselves. My other hope is for a Prime Minister that doesn’t have his head stuck up his own arse.
The first signs are positive; John Key isn’t obsessed with politics and doesn’t take himself too seriously. A brighter future indeed.
……… enough said.
Especially in my inebriated state.
Chanting "bring on Mr Flip Flop", the unionists were outnumbered by those bearing National Party signs, but were the most vocal.
A general behavioural observation: Lefties tend to be more vocal than righties. Rightie tend to be naturally restrained. That is why I'm cynical about 'citizen juries' some politicans have proposed to help develop policy. A townhall meeting invariably ends up being dominated by some loud mouth leftie with nothing better to do, little sense, and is well funded by a union.
Though even righties have a breaking point:
One Labour supporter repeatedly asked Mr Key to "tell the truth" about the changes National would make to the Employment Relations Act.
Eventually Mr Key's frustration boiled over.
"The truth is you're an idiot," he yelled back.
Way to go Mr Key!
I bet a few Labour ministers take a perverse pleasure in seeing John Key take on Helen Clark after sitting around the cabinet table with her for nine long years (shudders at the thought).
Helen's abrasive style has reduced many a journalist into a cowering mess. But not John Key; like water off a ducks back. Not only is he confident, but some of his one-liners are classic.
Reflecting on the 2005 election, Dr Brash also showed no fear during the debates. The difference being he was too gentlemanly to really take her on.
.... AT least he's carrying his own bag. Nice looking copper too.
NX-Files special tip: Don't bother trying to convert your leftie friends. If they're still voting left after all Labour has done, there's no hope for them. And chances are they won't understand your arguments and will look down on you for voting National. So the best non-conflict way to explain why you're voting National is to say you "don't want to see Winston back in government". It works a charm because who want's to defend Winston.
We all remember Don Brash being confronted over the Exclusive Brethren affair in 2005. What damaged Dr Brash was the guilty expression on his face and the messiness of the affair as there was no 'smoking gun' for evidence of a lie and his story was plausible.
Well I certainly think there are parallels with Helen Clark being confronted over who paid for Mike William's dirt digging trip to
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/video.cfm?c_id=1&gal_objectid=10540325&gallery_id=103218
Three news tonight revealed that a top Aussie Labor lawyer assisted Mike Williams with gaining access to tens of thousands of legal documents with the purpose to find something to smear John Key. This raises a couple of questions:
1. Did the upper echelons of the Aussie Labor party know about this?
2. Who paid for the lawyers time?
If our media were on to it, they would've already asked these questions and more.
Traditionally Australia and New Zealand keep out of each others elections. The National Party need to send a 'please explain' request to the Aussie government. After all, Kevin Rudd and John Key are going to have to work together after the election.
While on the topic of Australia, I'd would like to draw an unusual parallel between Helen Clark and John Howard. Both tripped and fall during their respective election campaigns. The stumbles were very uncharacteristic for both sure-footed politicians. John Howard went on to lose the Australian Federal election in 2007. Is Helen Clark destined to follow in his foot-steps? NX-Files certainly thinks so.
Keeping stock blogs about the disparity between the figures quoted for the cost of the Student Allowance Scheme. Cullen estimate's the scheme will cost $210 million, while Treasury estimated the cost to be as much as $700 million.
The best way to settle this is to compare the cost Labour estimated for the Interest Free Student Loan scheme back before the 2005 election with the actual cost now.....
NEWS: Labour is writing cheques it can't cash - Bill English MP
"A Universal Student Allowance is an admirable goal and National will be making some changes to the allowance in its own, yet to be announced, tertiary education policy.
"It will be more generous than the current scheme, but won't be universal.
Awesome. National has the potential to capture this argument and make it their own. They can take the moral high ground by providing generous assistance on a means tested bases - therefore supposedly targeting the students that need it.
So, if the media are consistent and respond in the same way they do to National - the headline could read: 'Nats help poor students; Labour hands over cash to rich kids'.
As mentioned in the previous post, I prefer a less than generous Universal Student Allowance. However, given the media predilection to emotive headlines based on left leaning philosophies - the Nats have the potential to owe Labour in this debate by playing them at their own simplistic game.
Disclosure: - I actually talked to John Key about the issue of Student allowances when I meet him at the markets - and he seemed to be up with the play on this issue (which maybe an indication he has a game plan for this very scenario - is that why he sounded happy during his radio interview?)
This time it's universal allowances (by 2012).
I'm currently a pseudo-student, so having gone through the system I know it pretty well. The problems are:
- Unfairness; some students get all some get nothing
- Loop holes; by filling out forms x, y and z while dancing the can-can and blowing bubble gum you can get some cash
Through out my time as a student I've received the full allowance amount of 160 bucks a week... then the next year I get nothing thanks to the magic of ever changing form criteria.
So based on my experience I support a universal allowance of around 60-80 bucks a week. You can't live off that amount, so you'll either have to get a weekend job or borrow off your loan. An allowance set at this amount achieves the two conflicting objectives of helping out students, while discouraging bludgers. It also offers consistency.
Will Labour's 2008 election bribe be as effective as Labour's 2005 interest free student loan deal?
Doubt it. The loan write-off effected a much greater number of people and once passed into law the effect was instantaneous.
The allowance bribe only effects students studying, so as a consequence pisses off students who've graduated. And some will have to wait till 2012 to get the allowance. The bribe isn't as clear-cut as the one in 2005.
Next question; National apparently knew about this bribe - should they have 'snookered' Labour (as Cullen puts it)?
Good question. NX-Files reckons yes. John Key could've announced say an $80 a week universal allowance with a slightly modified tax plan.
Clark proposes mini-budget in December News - Yahoo!Xtra News
Prime minister Helen Clark says a Labour government would present a mini-budget in December to deal with the effects of the international financial crisis.
"It's obviously affected the kind of policies we are going into the election with," she said today on TV One's Breakfast programme.
"We're not looking to cut overall government spending but we have to look very carefully where we direct it."
NX-Files needs help understanding the quotes above. December is only a couple of months off. So they're going to come up with and campaign on a bunch of policies.... then once in power enact a completely different agenda to combat the international financial crisis. Why not just campaign on what you intend to do in your mini-budget?
Court told how Korean student was throttled News - Yahoo!Xtra News
The three are alleged to have picked up Kim on the road from Greymouth to Westport on the day he was killed.
They later pulled over and pretended the car was stuck.
Mr Lange said Mr Kim was pushing the car when he was attacked from behind and throttled by Mr Flewellen and his body was later buried.
How senseless! The murder appears to be racially motivated. Not only did they go out of their way to pick up the hitcher, they even created a ploy that their vehicle was stuck ..... all for what, so they could murder him because he's Asian.
What gets me is they actually thought of a ploy, which indicates thinking. The ability to envisage didn't scenarios and outcomes. Yet they committed murder based on race.
Word for word from 'Close Up'.
"What I'm putting forward this election is myself as a creditable leader of international standing who has lead New Zealand through good years and difficult years and done a good job. I believe I can be trusted with our countries future and from what I've seen today this is a recipe for low savings and a dumb economy."
Oh Please.... get over yourself. As far as your 'international standing' is concerned, Kevin Rudd didn't even bother to consult you before he went public with his idea of an EU style union between countries of South East Asian. We've seen the Aussie dossier on you and they don't think much.
And just because the people of some small Pacific Island nation carried you in a wooden carriage on their shoulders doesn't mean you can let it go to your head.
NX-Files gets the impression that Helen thinks she's too good for this country.
Only a few more weeks now before she can get that job at the UN she's always wanted and be truly appreciated as a multi-talented leader. Speed the day!
You've got to laugh - both Helen and Winnie are streets ahead of anyone else. That wouldn't be so bad if they were on opposite sides of the political spectrum. But they're not - they're essentially on the same ticket; like Obama/Biden, McCain/Palin..... or as is the case Clark/Peters.
The Standard would debunk this poll by stating that anyone reading a newspaper online is obviously not normal. Though they mightn't be far wrong - case in point being Mike Hoskings who admitted being an online newspaper reader.
Technorati Tags: Polls,New Zealand Herald
NX-Files is basically a play on my username (NX) and the TV series The X-Files (which coincidentally is one of my favourite shows).
As before, I'll be simul-blogging on Windows Live Spaces & Blogger, but this time with the same blog name.
http://nx-files.blogspot.com
http://nx-files.spaces.live.com
I decided that the blog names 'Brashtalk' and 'NinthFloor' were a little too obsecure and I wanted to include my username in the URL.
It's very painful choosing a blog name. This will be the last time I'm going to change my blog URL, ever ;) . NX-Files is a fairly generic and inoffensive blog-name, so it's perfect.
Even though I've settled on a blog name, I haven't settled on a platform. There are things I like about in both Windows Live Spaces and Blogger. However, in terms of user friendly-ness and customisation - Blogger is streets ahead. WL Spaces can't seem to handle even basic HTML. However I do like the uniqueness factor that comes with WL Spaces because everyone seems to have a blogger account.
Check 'em out. I'd appreciate any feed back on the design and layout of the two platforms.
Family first rates the leaders
Never missing an opportunity to test my opinion, I've followed in DPF
footsteps and taken the Family's First 'social legislation' test.
Prostitution Bill- NX Abstain - 0
Civil Unions - NX support - 0
Relationships Bill - NX support - 0
Parental Notification for under 16 abortions - NX support - 1 (as with
DPF I support notification, not approval)
Euthanasia - NX support - 0 Care of Children - NX oppose - 1 (not sure what this bill is about, but
I'll go with DPF)
Marriage Amendment (define as man/woman only) - NX support - 1
Anti-Smacking - NX support - 0
Easter Trading - NX oppose - 1
Easter Sunday Trading - NX oppose - 1
Drinking Age to 20 - NX oppose - 0
Street Prostitution (Manukau) - NX Abstain (yes, how very Obama of me) 0
Electoral Finance - NX oppose - 1
So I get 5 out of 13 = 38.5%. This puts me into the same league as Jim
Anderton (probably my least favoured MP). Which just goes to show - that
like minds don't always think a like.
...... according to both Helen & Peter's websites. Helen suppose to be acting Foreign Affair's minister, a subject she 'loves', yet it's not listed as one of her responsibilities.
The Labour website should be kept up-to-date because they're the governing party (for now) and the site is paid for by the taxpayer.
The Owen Glenn, Winston Peter, and Mike Williams saga is just one piece of a puzzle for which the picture has been quite clear for sometime now; Helen Clark owes her third term to acts of corruption.
You don't have to be partial to conspiracy theories to realise this. Lets see.....
- Labour stole $820,000 from the tax payer to fund a key component of their '05 election campaign.
- Labour broke the electoral spending cap - an act defined as a corrupt practice in the law.
- The Maori Party was offered $250,000 to side with Labour post '05 election.
- Labour's biggest donor gave $100,000 to Winston Peters early after the 2005 election to pay for his legal battles with National's Bob Clarkson and possibly even Rodney Hide.
- Labour and Winston Peters obtained copies of 100s of Don Brash's and National's email correspondence and released some of them at critical times during the '05 election campaign. How they got them they won't say.
- Owen Glenn gave Labour a $100,000 interest free loan to help pay for Labour's '05 election overspend, a loan which Mike William initially denied.
- Labour arranged buses to take Mangere voters to the polls. This in itself isn't corrupt (though taking advantage of the politically naive Pacific Islanders is hardly ethical), Labour's '05 Mangere candidate Philip Field is up for charges of corruption. There has also been recent speculation that Labour bribed Mangere people KFC for votes!
- Well before the '05 election Helen Clark and Phil Goff broke an important convention and released MFAT notes take during a meeting between National and American senators. They then used the 'gone by lunchtime' quote as an attack theme during the '05 election.
- Post '05 election Labour passed a law to make their illegal overspending legal.
- Post '05 election Labour passed the radial Electoral Finance Act without even consulting opposition parties; a break in parliamentary convention of the worst kind.
- Post '05 election Labour has stacked the public service with their cronies; another serious break in parliamentary convention.
The above points are all fact and have been reported in the media. They either show an abuse of power or outright corruption on Labour's part. New Zealand is a small democracy with only one house of parliament and no constitution. Conventions are what hold the place together, so to deliberately break them is very serious.
The facts are pretty damming, but I reckon there's more going on behind the scenes but can not be proven (yet). For example.
- Helen Clark won't fire Winston Peters because she not only knew about Glenn's donation to Winston Peters, but approved it. In fact the donation may have been a condition of Winston's coalition deal with Helen.
It all adds up to the 2005 election being stolen from National and Don Brash. And this is why I can't stand Helen Clark and why she has to lose the election on November 08/08.
Quote
Jim Hopkins: Hurrah for Fat Controllers and clever choo-choo plan - 09 May 2008 - Politics: New Zeal
Some of my favourite quotes:
"Paying the thick end of $700 mill for a grimy bunch of clapped-out trains is daft!! With a capital Duh!!!!!!"
"Perhaps it's because they're a nostalgic echo of the 19th century much like the Treaty, with which our leaders are also needlessly besotted. Perhaps it's because trains are the limit of their technological imagination. Perhaps it's the irresistible thought of all the new stations they can open and ribbons they can snip."
As I stood next to one huge forest fire, I thought of all the times I have been urged to unplug my phone charger, turn my TV off standby or turn the thermostat down by a couple of degrees.
Yet I cannot remember ever being told that the fires burning down the rainforest are responsible for 20% of worldwide carbon emissions, the same amount as all the transport in the world combined.
The leftist blog 'The Standard' bangs on about political misdirection so much that I decided to steal the term to highlight the substantial issue of environmental misdirection.
With attention focused on carbon emissions, other environmental issues like deforestation of the rain forest and reduced species biodiversity are left by the wayside.
While celebrities lecture us about reducing our carbon footprint to achieve a non-specific goal, species are becoming extinct and forests are being destroyed.
It's very easy to measure success with saving a species e.g. increase the kiwi population by 10,000 birds. But you can never fail if you're advocating climate change because how do you know if you succeed?
It's a pity National leader John Key did not reach out directly to domestic purposes beneficiaries to persuade them why it was in their best interests to seek work once their youngest reaches six.
Fran does have a point. John Key would've received a lot of mana if he delivered his message to an audience full of beneficiaries. He also would've also received more media coverage.
Sure there would've been the odd heckle and Key would've had to moderate his language, but the pay-off in the eyes of the voters could be worth it.
However, given his message was well received by the voters - it may have not been worth the risk.
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters says he is happy for the public to hear what he has to say to the privileges committee next Monday and wishes the hearing was earlier in the day so more people could attend.
Yes of course is he.
Mr "5.6%" Peters is both irrelevant and important at the same time - which is exactly why MMP is flawed.
Then again, any Labour minister brought in front of the privileges committee would get similar amounts of attention. The difference being the attention would be unwanted in the Labour minister's case.
All Winston needs is 5% of the vote, so any publicity is good publicity.
Sure what Winston has done is hypocritical and reflects badly on himself, but the irony is that the heavy news coverage may actually help him.
In my opinion - Winston doomed himself and his party as soon as he signed up with Labour which is the main reason why they're low in the opinion polls. NZ 1st voters are naturally conservative. So all the scandals surrounding Winston only cements his supporters because 95% of New Zealanders wouldn't vote for him anyway.
I haven't blogged specially on Peters up till now because frankly he's just a sideshow.... a has been. He had promise in 1996 & 2002, but he continually disappoints. Many National voters who defected to him in 2002 did so on the proviso he would be a formidable voice in opposition to Labour - because at the time National sure wasn't. But instead he spent the entire time attacking National and even more so when Dr Brash became leader. His attacks haven't really subsided since John Key became leader.
Winston has past up one opportunity after another.
After reading that the left-wing activities who infiltrated the Nats conference and quizzed MPs on left-touchstone issues, I decided to quiz myself on the issues.
I'm defining a touchstone issue as something that divides opinion. Other bloggers are welcome to take the quiz and post results on their blogs. The best way to determine your political allegiances is when you consider the issues rather than party personalities. So am I right or left - libertarian or authoritarian?
1. Civil unions: for or against?
For. If people want their relationship to be reconginised in the eyes of the law... why not. Though from a libertarian perspective I personally don't see why the state needs to validate relationships.
2. Prostitution Reform Act reform: for or against?
Leaning toward against. I hate to think this has become a genuine career choice for young woman....
3. Legalised Cannabis for or against?
Leaning toward for. Ultimately I'm for freedom of choice. But scientific evidence shows cannabis can cause genetic damage. Then again.. I drink diet coke.
4. Nuclear weapons: for or against?
For unfortunately. A necessary evil. In any other time an army numbering in the millions (China and Iran) would be out conquering countries. The only thing keeping them at bay are nuclear weapons.
5. US naval ship visits: for or against?
For - for the reason above.
6. Republic or Monarchy.
Monarchy. Because I consider British traditions part of our culture too!
7. Anti-smacking: for or against?
Leaning toward for.
8. Global warming: Skeptic or believer.?
Leaning toward skeptic. I can accept the world is warming, but the political measures to combat GW are rubbish. The elephant in the room GW activists ignore is population growth. One person = how many energy efficient bulbs...? I support reducing carbon for clean air benefits. However the ETS is rubbish.
9. Nuclear power for New Zealand: for or against?
For. Should be at least on the table - especially if the hydrogen economy comes about and to reduce carbon emissions. A royal commission of enquirer would determine if it's right for NZ
10. Genetic engineering: for or against?
For. How else are we going to feed the worlds ever going population?
11. Kiwibank: Sell or keep?
Leaning toward sell. Don't Kiwibank and Westpac et al. borrow money from the same off shore location? So interest paid on Kiwibank mortgages goes to the same off shore lender. The main argument for keeping it in my eyes is they have branches in rural locations.
12. Broadband or trains?
Broadband. Trains are so last century.
13. Electoral finance act: for or against?
Against - let the Exclusive Brethren and the unions campaign - the electorate is smart enough to sort out crap from crap.
14. State funding: for or against?
Against. But could be convinced otherwise.
15. MMP: for or against?
Against. Another proportional system please - perhaps like what the Aussies have.
16. Obama or McCain?
Obama - because I'm sick of anti-Americanism. Though I wish he was pro-free trade.
17. Minimum wage increases: for or against?
For - as long as the increases are pegged to some sort of wage growth index. Currently the minimum wage equals $26000 a year before tax (based on a 40 week). That's enough to get by, but is pretty rubbish really. But to be honest I haven't considered the economic implications.
EMBATTLED NATIONAL deputy leader Bill English says he will "never" challenge John Key for the party leadership.English, who was National leader from 2001 to 2003, said he no longer wanted the post "because John Key is doing an excellent job and, having worked with a number of leaders and been one, I'm probably in a better position than most to judge that".
Sometimes you just need to be reassured. There's nothing more damaging than a perception of fractured leadership team.
It's curious why Helen Clark didn't attend the Olympic games opening ceremony. I saw Kevin Rudd, Sarkozy, Bush and a number of other country leaders on the big screen. There is an immense amount of pride when you see your Olympic team enter the stadium and it's surprising Helen Clark didn't take the opportunity to be associated with that.
One possible reason is that she's planning for an early election.
Technorati Tags: Helen Clark,Olympics
It is Key's loose-lipped talk, coupled with the rather too frank comments that English sometimes makes about him, that would have persuaded his opponents that the deputy would be a rich candidate for entrapment. Who can forget his priceless "I'm a stayer, he's a sprinter. I grind away, John just bounces from one cloud to another"? I blogged this week that English's 'loose' comments about John Key were more a reflection of his style rather any split between the two. Fran's column above throws doubt on my theory. She speculates there is an 'ideological rift' between Key and English and that English will eventually roll Key for the prime ministership. Having leadership ambitions and differences in opinion are fine - even healthy - just as long as English doesn't under mind his leader. So in light of Fran's column I've a couple of concerns about Bill English: - English rates himself too highly evident by his comment that Brash and Key don't fully understand WfF - Even though English said he'd never be leader again when he first became deputy, he still harbours leadership ambitions - Combining the two above equals an un-contented deputy leader I wonder whether Key made the right choice when he made English his deputy/finance minister. So given my concerns I reckon Don Brash would've been the better choice for deputy/finance minister and keep Bill English as education spokesperson where he was doing an excellent job. Brash would've been ideal for the job because after his failed bid for PM and his age - he'd have no desire to be leader again.
However he will do so against the background in which for the first time since he faced Tony Blair, a genuine rival has emerged. Gordon Brown spent the good part of decade hounding Tony Blair for the Premiership and destabilizing his government as a consequence. So now the boot is finally on somebody else's foot - the Blairite David Miliband. 'Poetic justice' some may say. Brown is now so obviously the underdog that I'm starting to think better of him. Funny how that is.
Mr. Key said Miss Clark could "go for it" but National would be running a positive campaign.
"If she's going to do everything from rort the electoral law, to get (journalist and author) Nicky Hager to listen into our emails, to go out there and get young Labour affiliates to be bugging our personal conversations, well that's her style of politics."
Here Here! To recap Labour dirty deeds (in chronological order IIRC);
- the release confidential MFAT meeting notes- rort of the electoral law (defined as a corrupt practice in the law)- exploiting hundreds of National's stolen emails- Labour affiliated John Key attack blog "The Standard"- Labour affiliated National attack blog "08wire"gb- secret recordings
There are likely to be many more instances such as the fact John Key's rubbish has been searched on multiple occasions. Now much of the above can't be inextricability linked to Labour but it's all rather covenant
There are a couple of possibilities for all of this;
- Labour activists are even more psychotic and 'on to to it' than anyone thought and don't need guidance from their idols on the 9th floor - who are oblivious to what is going on.- Labour are only casually aware.....- Labour orchestrates and drives the whole operation from the 9th floor.
I suspect it's a mixture of the latter two. Some of the authors for the attack blogs work for Labour in the beehive!
You can learn much about a person by how they treat their enemies. I can't even remotely consider voting for Labour until they ditch these dirty practices or at least condemn them for what they are.
A change in style is exactly why I'm voting for John Key - regardless of how many dead rats/fishs he swallows.
.... well maybe not by lunchtime, but maybe after the election.
In 2005, National gifted Labour the 'gone by lunchtime' comment.
It's rather pointless correcting information on 'The Standard' - there are none so blind as those who will not see (plus the authors work for Helen). Anyway, the quote above is wrong.
Helen and Phil Goff broke a very important convention by using the notes taken by a junior MFAT (ministry of foreign affairs and trade) official during the meeting between Dr Brash, Lockwood Smith and visiting US senators. Even if Lockwood or Brash said the comment, the context is unknown - it may have been a joke or on another topic all together. That is why you don't release what is meant to be confidential meeting notes (Goff only release a partial account).
As a consequence political parties no longer trust MFAT officials - another Labour legacy - which is a real shame.
Labour's willingness to use confidential notes, stolen emails, and secret recordings point to how dubious and dirty that party is under H1 and H2 - which is my 'hot button' issue for why I'm not voting Labour.
The secret recordings of Bill English and Dr Lockwood Smith reveal nothing new but perhaps the realities of being in opposition. However, as Paul Holmes said, Mr English's comments show a lack of respect toward John Key. This is concerning but you've got to put it into context with English's style. His tone can often be interpreted as disparaging but is unlikely to reflect what he really thinks.
The evidence for this is the fact he is held in high regard within the National caucus. What this highlights is that English isn't a very good communicator - which is a major reason why he didn't do too well in the 2002 election.
This does not change the fact he's a highly competent MP and finance spokesperson. He has an excellent grasp of the detail. He made an excellent education spokesperson under Dr Brash.
One positive from all of this is that John Key is really shining at crisis management - getting on top of the situation really quickly with his message sorted.
On a general note - it's pretty sad someone snuck in a microphone and recorded private chats. A similar thing happened at Labour's conference during a more 'public' Q & A' with Mike Williams. Wonder if Labour's fingerprints are on this...?
^ fair enough. The main argument against borrowing is the cost of the interest, while the argument for borrowing is the potential for the new asset to generate income. For example; A business may go into debt to pay for an extension to their shop with the idea the extra floor space will generate more profits which will ultimately benefit the business.
Each argument is just as valid so there is no right or wrong. National is for borrowing while Labour claims to be against borrowing.
If Labour want to make this an election issue, they're going to have to be far more convincing. To make their case they should declare an aim to reduce debt to 15% of GDP, necessitating the need to keep taxes high. Their key messages would be the savings resulting from the reduction in interest payments and the fact more money stays in NZ.
As Labour stands at the moment with a plan to cut taxes by $10.5 billion and keep debt at around 20% of GDP - they don't have the platform to mount such a campaign without being called hypocrites.
One of Kevin Rudd's major election planks has just gone by the wayside:
THE 1000 Australian soldiers, sailors and air force personnel in and around Iraq will be there "for a long time to come", Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon has warned.... That completes a comprehensive adjustment of the ALP's policy on Iraq and a significant shift from the impression created by Labor in opposition that Australia's role in Iraq was all but over.
Obama is currently campaigning to withdraw troop from Iraq. All bets are off on this one.
The title Senior Counsel replaces Queen's Counsel under a law that came into force today and Attorney-General Michael Cullen has convened a selection panel for the first appointments.
Labour's continual harping on about National's a secret agenda is really just a cover for their own secret agendas; one of them being republicanism by stealth.
Labour has made a number of subtle changes over the years, removing crowns from logos, ditching the Privy Council, Knighthoods, and the word 'royal' where ever possible. Now it appears Labour are ditching Queens Counsel, the designation for top lawyers, for Senior Counsel.
These terms and traditions are just as much part of our culture as they are part of British culture. So when Labour changes these traditions to meaningless, bland, PC alternatives without consultation, they are taking away part of who we are. Even if NZ became a republic there would be in harm in keeping the historic terminology.
The surreptitious way this Labour government operates, practically those on the 9th floor, is a major reason why they're getting the boot come 2008!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
About me
- NX
- Interests: Politics, New Zealand
The catalysis for this blog was my dislike for the Clark'n Cullen Labour govt - particularly their transgressions during the 2005 general election & treatment of then opposition leader Don Brash.
However, I'm not anti-Labour & consider myself a political moderate. I'm looking forward to someday voting for a Labour Party which isn't all about 'tax and spend', is happy with NZ's current constituational arrangement (i.e. keeping the monachy), and isn't controlled by the unions.
I won't hold my breath.
I'm an avid reader of Kiwiblog.
Political Matrix
Word Cloud 2
Technorati
