This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 18th, 2007 at 1:02 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Tane – just a not of interest. Does anyone even visit the Standard? It always seems very empty. And never has robust debate or even vaguely insightful comments (don’t get me started on the posts), so how successful do you think it is? It seems a total flop to me.
Regardless, it must suck having DPF’s blog having continued high levels of traffic. A bit green with envy, are you?
Sticks and stones is the motto I think she would apply to herself at this time Ross.
But I seriously believe that if Labour wins the elections next year they will be secretly flabbergasted and mystified. I mean really shaking their heads and wondering how dense the electorate really is.
from here on in if they get in they can get away with anything.
They could make Tim Shadbolt look like a stirring cantankerous old dinosaur who needs strict taming and conforming. They could make hi, look totally alien to all thats decent, law abiding and appalling to the democratic process they’ve almost completely ushered away.
At the end of the day we’re just an obedient conformist society who wants to keep the status quo. There has been no status quo since 1984 and that was taken away by a Labour govt as well. 1989, they took the treason laws away and now we’re facing this sad predicament of losing our public and political voices.
What has to happen before we understand we are in a communist police state???
No, Tane. That pretty much answers my question. Though I’m not sure how you would quantify that you are the second or third most popular blog. Do you reguarly compare stats with other blogs, or is that from your own discernment?
Overall, its good that the Left have a standard (excuse the pun) blog that is so blatantly left-wing. I don’t agree with most (or anything) you would say but its always healthy to have discussions oversuch a diverse political spectrum. And I mean that.
An earnest letter sent to Metiria this morning (no reply yet)…
>>Kia Ora Metiria,
I am taking the unusual (for me at least) step of writing to a Member of Parliament because I feel sufficiently strong enough about an issue, and am perturbed at how it is being ‘fielded’.
Firstly, I have a question to put to you as the co-drafter of “Protecting freedom of speech and fairer elections”. In the ‘Amendments negotiated by Greens’ section, you state the following:
>>Amendments to protect freedom of speech
1. Alter the definition of election advertising to protect issues advertising
This means that individuals and groups will be free to campaign on the issues that are important to them, regardless of whether one or more parties is also campaigning on the same issue. The Greens come from a campaigning background and we were determined to protect the right of groups to continue to campaign. For example, Greenpeace can continue to campaign against whaling, even though it is a campaign the Green Party has a profile on.
I have been through and through this Bill looking for such an exemption for issues based advocacy, and have drawn a blank. All I keep coming back to is the broad vagueness of Section 5(1)(ii), which seems to specifically include issues based advocacy. If the intention for exemption is there, it is not clearly recorded in the Bill. I would be extremely happy if you could point to where the exemption takes effect – in the Bill (just saying it is so is not good enough for me).
Secondly, I am a member of a small organisation that had intended to promote policies of sustainable urban development next year, to coincide with election year focus on affordable housing. Our stance was sharply critical of Key’s suggestion to relax the RMA to specifically promote the freeing up of land for residential development. This places us squarely within the gambit of EFB 5(1)(ii), and with uncertainties, the extra compliance, etc, we no longer feel confident of running such a campaign. Nice work on the freedom of speech front.
Lastly, the manner in which you are trying to discredit the opposition to this Bill is ill-conceived, inaccurate, and likely to cost you some support. I have always voted ‘on the left’ (and Green on at least one occasion). The legislation is appallingly drafted, and while I don’t pay heed to the suggestions that this is wilfully so, I am embarrassed that our executive would even consider passing this into law. I would vote National (for the first time ever) to ensure this is repealed.
The issue is not simply one of left versus right; it goes across the political spectrum, so your one dimensional attack on its opponents simply does you no credit at all. By trying to discredit the opposition as raving, big money, right wing lunatics, you are insulting many of your own potential supporters. You should be able to gauge from my email address that I work in a predominantly left wing institution, and the feeling amongst my colleagues is similar. This is not an issue of big money buying up elections anymore, but on the restrictions (I’ll avoid the hyperbole of a ‘direct attack’) on free speech (if it were a left/right issue, I would have thought that the left would share these views).
Anyway, I don’t expect to be able to change your mind on the merits of this Bill (especially at this late stage), but if you at least ‘listen’ to the breadth of the opposition to this Bill, then you might understand how inappropriately you have dealt with this issue.
I would very much appreciate a response on the question that I posed in the first point of this message, as it may impact on the proposed campaign for sustainable urban development (as mentioned above).
After the election victory when National forms the new Gov on its own I would like to see a binding referendum on MMP. If the liars party can gerrymander electoral law its only fair that National should let the people have a say in how the country should be run.
I did a wee couple of posts last night along these lines, which are a prediction for the new year;
if this EFB gets passed today then I suspect that voting intentions will become like rapid-set cement and solidify against the helengrad facsists. It will do this for a large portion of the more political thinking peoples, which are often swinging type voters (who have been labour swingers (horrid horrid thought) in recent elections).
Frist time caller They are still trying to figure out which excuse to use. Pity them in the New Year when the results are even worse with the Nats up over 55 points Socialists under 35 point snad the minors all under the 5 point barrier.
Apart from the Maori Party its goingt o be a 2 horse race with one horse (Socialists) pulling up lame in the last furlong
Can someone explain to more how spending $240 million plus say $25 million on transport infrastructure, plus tens of millions elsewhere on rugby stadia for once off additional revenues, REVENUES, not profits is justified. I could understand it if there was ongoing benefit which yielded over a 10 year period say $200 million a year in surplus, ie revenue minus cost, so that there was say a tax take on the surplus of say $600 million plus the GST on the revenues. But on the numbers stated the investment does not seem justifiable.
THe IRB takes the great majority of the direct revenue, so the NZRU is going to make a loss we are told. I have seen comments that say investment in the WRC is strategic. In my experience this is what people say when seeking to justify projects that do not stack up on rational criteria for investment and they cannot quantify the intangibles.
NZRU and the Government landed us with this, and I suspect Govt bought in on the basis of ‘bread and circuses’ assuming the ABs would win in France.
Quite frankly the Americas Cup appears on these numbers to be the better public sector investment, with a longer term spin-off for the marine sector amongst others.
Whilst I rarely agree with much of what John Banks says, I do here, as why should Auckland ratepayers foot the bill for a white elephant, especially as no other council in the Region will stump up, whilst expecting to reap benefit from the event.
It’s just an unscientific estimate based on comments, discussion on other blogs and our growing traffic. We’re not going to do monthly blog stats as I don’t think that really matters, I was just responding to a question from Hoolian.
Oh and First Time Caller, regarding your comment:
<i>When I visited the standard there was no meantion of the latest polls…funny that</i>
[Alexa (and yes it is not perfect but it is only freely available service) has The Standard as the 1,412nd most read site by NZers. That's actually pretty good for a relatively new site, and is above many blogs. WhaleOil however is ranked 322nd]
SO stats do not matter – they do not matter. Ah, so evidence is no longer relevant. SO we are expected to take Tane and his chums on faith, thus in this as in so much else no evidence will be presented.
Um, Adam, you’ll notice I used the words “By my reckoning…” rather than “The fact is…” or something similar. But hey, make a big deal out of nothing if you need something to stoke your two minutes of hate.
If you do want to look at some stats why not go check out the work The Standard and Blogblog have done on the minimum wage?
Grant McKenna – I would agree with your statement that politicians should be changed often. What happens, despite good intentions, is that they become so unattached from ‘normal’, everyday life that all they have is to run on their political and personal ambitions – i.e. they stay in power as long as they can and do nothing but propagate their own personal beliefs onto other people, with no regard as to whether or not it’s good for NZ.
So change is good – good for the party, good for the country and definitely good for democracy.
An electoral loss is probably the best thing Labour can hope for. It will not revitalise itself otherwise.
And Labour should be careful. If they sink too much further in the polls they run the risk of becoming a ‘minor’ party as Clark cheerfully acclaimed National was following the 2002 election.
Tane – “If you do want to look at some stats why not go check out the work The Standard and Blogblog have done on the minimum wage?”
But this isn’t stats about the popularity of your blog, or even its traffic. Its stats on something completely irrelevent. I think if you’re going to claim “easily second or third” most popular blog, you should at least have some stats to back it up. Its an outrageous and effortlessly discredited assertion otherwise.
[Alexa (and yes it is not perfect but it is only freely available service) has The Standard as the 1,412nd most read site by NZers. That’s actually pretty good for a relatively new site, and is above many blogs. WhaleOil however is ranked 322nd]
Dunne now seeking to justify himself, refers to court of public opinion,he is using this to withdraw UF support for bill, thus he seeks to keep himself in baubles, refers to support for Labour only for balance of term.
Quote: “Blind adherence to leading the country is arrogance……….”
Rat has jumped ship to all intents and purposes, to save himself – what a tosser!
Say, has anyone else noticed a bit of taxpayer cash being splashed around in the last 4-5days
2x maori ‘settlements’ (wellington and waikato river)
1x Stadium (still think this is an excuse to have wads of taxpayer cash floating around an ‘undefined’ contract scope – I do hope none of it appears as now-legislated anon donations to the Labour party)
1x Minimum wage increase
Now nothing on their own perhaps … but these in rapid succession just prior to the EFB lurching violently onto our statute books, and in advance of next years tax-cuts which just might benefit folks who don’t support Labour. Hmmmm ….