Dont be a twat Rex.

With a preface like that, we must be about to gain the benefits of GWW3′s vast experience in the political arena…

The EFA has nothing to do with the broadcasting funding, which has been in this bi partisan format for ages.

Uh, yeah… I know. I was merely making the point that National could, if it wanted to be bold and innovative, redress the other imbalances created by the Act by giving up some of its air time, which I don’t think will do it much good anyway.

Apart from the 1 Jan date and a few minor other changes national would be very happy with EFA, since they are well aware the boot does get on to the other foot.

Uh, yeah… I agree with you. In fact I said as much in my first sentence. Oh wait… I agreed with you. Now that does make me a twat.

The EFA has nothing to do with the broadcasting funding, which has been in this bi partisan format for ages.

Apart from the 1 Jan date and a few minor other changes national would be very happy with EFA, since they are well aware the boot does get on to the other foot.

Pushmepullme your question is easily answered , in 2002 National got 20.9% of the vote while Labour got 41.2 %

Surprised ? Not as surprised as DPF was at the time.
But the 2005 broadcasting funding was only 10- 12 % different.
Which comes to the same amount national stole by not paying the GST
Surprised

[DPF: Strangely Ghost is not a Spokesperson for National so his pronouncements on what National would be happy with should be given the same credibility as Parekura Horomia on kids missing breakfast. And Labour had 22.2% more broadcasting funding than National last time, so the extra 12.5% is not "the same amount" so once again Ghost lies]

Only a new party which hasn’t had the opportunity to promote its philosophy to the public can justify requesting any public funding for advertising – because political discourse benefits from having a variety of voices. If, once they’ve made clear what they stand for, no one is buying then it’s time to fold up the tent or fund your own propaganda.

Edit: I just had a thought. Who really watches these “party political broadcasts” anyway? Ours are rarely attack ads, which at least have the redeeming feature of being entertaining. They’re always worthy and dull.

So if National were capable of thinking outside the square, it’d be offering some of its allocation to the smaller parties and saying “we’re doing this because we oppose the EFA and think everyone deserves a voice and because we believe that what we have to say is so compelling that it’ll eclipse Labour’s offering – and we don’t need to drone on forever to do it”. That might get people to pay some attention, at least, and show they were more than just unprincipled snouts-in-the-trough pollies like the rest of them.

At the very least they should have to sign a contract and undated letters of resignation.

The conditions are that they publish ( cost included in their EFA advertising) a manifesto with timelines and costs.

If they fail to meet the terms and conditions then their letters of resignation are dated.

Same as applied in other contractual scenarios.

This would concerntrate their minds on the task of governing the country a task that is very low if it appears at all on their list of things to do.

We should also demand a set of KPIs be included in the contract.

Again nothing radical Just hold them to the same standard as most others in the work force are held too/

Ohh Of course I forgot They are the political class Above the mere peasants afterall.

I realise this isn’t the issue at hand, but I think it’s best that we start discussing it now.

IMO, providing that the figures are as the polls predict they will be, National should get twice Labour’s entitlement