The SST re-election campaign continues
August 17th, 2008 at 8:50 am by David FarrarThe Sunday Star-Times best efforts to re-elect the Government continue. They try a double header today.
First a story on National’s Benefits Policy. They only talk to two people oppossed to the policy, and no-one in support. They talk to a senior lecturer in political science and a mother who has been on the DPB for 10 years.
Meanwhile they gush over Labour:
Early childhood worker Jemima Newcombe and her partner Jason Steel are ready to raise the roof. The aspiring homeowners from Glendene, Auckland, are among the first to be accepted into Labour’s pilot shared equity scheme.
And the entire story is about how wonderful they feel to have got this support.
So for the story on National’s policy they choose to only interviwe people who are critical of it, and for the story on Labour’s policy, only people who have benefited from it.
Maybe it is just coincidence. But wouldn’t it have been more balanced to have a contrary view in each article? It would not have been hard – probably take 30 minutes work.
Related posts:
- The campaign continues
- Do minor parties do better in the election campaign?
- 2008 Campaign Reviews
- Election Campaign Funding Poll
August 17th, 2008 at 8:57 am
ah, ’30 minutes work’ …. I think you inadvertently hit the nail on teh head…
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Didnt you repeat an ODT story that gushed over Keys visit to Dunedin.
How wonderful that there were no wires to be seen, or that his lips moved in synch with his voice.
Where was the ‘balance’ there ?.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:18 am
I hardly got past the bit where the woman on the DPB says that National doesn’t value people looking after kids because they want her to work or train. What a selfish bitch she is. Working mothers should be insulted by that self-absorbed bull shit. I would have loved to have stayed home with my kids. Trouble is I was not prepared to have someone else support me and my family.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:23 am
Classic leftard whinging. Read what they really mean “I am too lazy to work – I want to be a parasite and live off the effort of others”. No wonder the SST circulation is dropping.
he news for the parasites who don’t want to work is that most families need both parents to work with children, because we don’t get or want benefits – but we are also sick of you living off our hard work. Get a life and get a job – you may even find some self-fullfillment.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:26 am
I note the other article…”How I will honour my friend” Clark talks about wanting to name a mountain peak after her friend!!!!
I consider this an abuse of her position. Mountains are there for thousands of years. This friend of hers had a heart attack in front of her, I get it and am very sorry he has passed away
Her position does not come with naming rights!
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Poor old Ghost, you can just feel the desperation in his words as the people of NZ turn away from this corrupt government in their droves.
You have better get used to the idea Ghost, the public just do not like Labour nor do they want any more of your socialist crap.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:33 am
Dont you mean someone like Ruth Lazar who was able to stay at home and look after her children, with the state also kicking in a low rent house
How dare she.
By the way she was John keys mother
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:33 am
I have just read on SST about Clark wanting to name a mountain peak after her friend who died.
To me this is a gross abuse of her position. Mountains are there for thousands of years. Her friend died in front of her, I get that, and am sorry he has passed. But, he died of a heart attack. It was not an act of bravery or selflessness to warrant such an honour.
Her position does not come with naming rights!
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:39 am
So the scum on the left whinge and moan about having to have some self responsibility, and they cry if National ever mentions a politicians family member – but being the pricks that they are it is perfectly okay to bring John Key’s mother into this. But of course she was not a parasite for ten years. She used the benefit to get herself out of a difficult situation and then carried on working –
Ghost – are you a parasite living off the efforts of the hardworking tax payers of NZ?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Carried on working ?
Really. You know this.
Reminds me of how Bolgers mother was able to get a state funded retirement home with nursing care when many others were required to undergo asset testing and exhaustion of their own assets before the state kicked in.
Lucky for some with family trusts to pass on to the next generation before they go into care .
Labour has largely abolished this requirement for average Kiwis
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:10 am
“She believed that only a minuscule number were abusing the system as the money they received was barely enough to survive on.”
Children are added to benefits at the rate of about 5,000 a year. That’s not minuscule abuse.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:14 am
The SST “story” (aka “propaganda piece”) on welfare reports:
“[Aroha] Jackson worked part-time at night when her two older children were old enough to look after her two younger children, but now the older two have left home she finds organising child care a constant struggle and says finding work that allows her to get her seven and five-year-old to and from school is almost impossible. Instead she’s opted to study towards a Diploma in Social Work. Her course starts at 9am and finishes at 1.30pm, allowing her to be there for her children when they finish school.”
As I understand it, National’s policy is that, once the youngest child is six, you are expected to be doing 15 hours’ work, training or job-seeking. So with her study towards her diploma, Aroha Jackson is already doing what National wants. So why the fuck is she criticising the policy, unless she’s just been placed by Labour, with a quick call to the SST editor?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Welcome to the real world. ACT has a 20 point plan which details a lot of serious policy but have you ever even seen that mentioned in any mainstream media? Rodney etc can only get reported for either tackling Winston, dancing or swimming. At least National gets reported, so don’t be so ungrateful.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Really, a diploma in social work hardly counts as training, and working as a social worker hardly counts as working.
These single moms should really get jobs that actually add to the economy. How is NZ better off for having another social worker?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:34 am
pushmepullu:
It is a matter of opinion about whether or not a social work hardly counts as training.
But the fact is, it would count as 15 hours training under National’s policy, so Aroha Jackson would not have to do anything different under National.
So why is she criticising National?
Did the “reporter” point out to Aroha Jackson that she would not have to do anything different?
Had the “reporter” even read the policy?
Or did the “reporter” set out to write an anti-National story, and Aroha Jackson’s misinformed comments suited that agenda?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Freedom , your 20 bullet points are in no way counted as policy!
Its only one page. What makes you think the newspapers should publicise the musings of a party at 1-2%
Vote:Do your own advertising, the sales rep is waiting for your call, its only $15000 per page
lucky then all 20 points will fit in easily
August 17th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Well, if the Herald are prepared to go out of their way to attack Labour, then I don’t really see a problem with the SST doing its own thing. But I would prefer it if all of the media could at least give the appearance of impartiality and balance, especially in an election year.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Firstly why doesn’t National find a statistic on how many solo parents work without any DPB assistance? The general dumb arse public has a perception that every solo parent in NZ lives on the DPB and non of them work.
Secondly is it a Labour/WINZ policy but why is it when any beneficiary is interviewed in the media they are doing a Social Work course? So the people you want in the community helping others is the ones with no motivation or life skills?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 10:55 am
The basic premise of the story – “Under National’s plan, sole parents on the Domestic Purposes Benefit will have to work for at least 15 hours a week once their youngest child turns six. ” – is wrong, either because the writer doesn’t understand the policy or out of editorial spin. The SST owes someone a correction – perhaps the Press Council.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:01 am
At the time of the last census almost three quarters of single parents with dependent children relied on some sort of benefit – over 100,000. It’s a class of people that didn’t exist 40 years ago. But when governments subsidise something they always get more of it. In many cases that is exactly what they are intending to do eg biofuels. Both National and Labour made a huge mistake when they created the DPB. That’s what needs correcting. National’s policy is wet.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:07 am
GWW (10.35am), wrong as usual. There’s actually a 50 page booklet that goes with the 20 point plan with an analysis of each point, defining the problem, the options to fix the problem, background data on the problems and the preferred policy to address it. The objective is to lift NZ’s living standards. Actions rather than rhetoric.
It was once Helen’s goal to lift NZ’s OECD ranking, but that’s been quietly shelved as it’s become obvious that it is never going to happen with Labour’s policies. We could have saved her a lot of trouble and told her that up front. Unfortunately National’s announced policies aren’t going to do it either, just meekly mirroring Labour in most areas. Certainly no circuit breaker.
That’s really the big story – that NZ is stuffed as neither major party is prepared to go out to the electorate with a positive plan and to tell the truth about where we are heading. Pathetic really.
So we are back to the point that the media aren’t interested in reporting substance. Today the dailies are focussed on the Veitch story. Wow! I guess it’s not a surprise. Just very sad as we sink down and down, getting relatively poorer.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:11 am
If this doesn’t raise questions about the lack of suitability of Labour MP’s to run NZ what does?
“LOOKING FOR WORK: Former Labour MP Georgina Beyer is struggling to find a job after leaving politics.”
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Freedom101 it was also Helen’s grand plan to have a “knowledge economy”.
Whats happened to that? Ireland, India, Israel etc have all raced ahead. Thanks to Labour NZ failed to get out of the changing rooms.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:18 am
I think Helen is smart enough to have known all along that her policies were never going to lift NZ living standards. There is no reputable economist who would have backed her. I’m sure that Treasury wouldn’t have advised that the policies would succeed. Her personal advisers are mostly trade union lackeys, such as Peter Harris (yes he’s an economist, but way out on the fringes bell curve in policy terms).
So, surprise, surprise, Helen is just a cynical politician who knows how to sell hollow promises.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Freedom would we get funding to make a movie about that eg “Hollow Promises”?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:44 am
“The Sunday Star-Times best efforts to re-elect the Government continue.”
Oh well, DPF, you can still read Granny on the other six days of the week. Much more to your liking I’m sure. You probably turn to Fran O’Sullivan first and then read towards the centre.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Nothing like publishing a Labour Party press release word for word is it JafaPete.
By the way JP my mates cats dies, do you think you could get Helen to name a mountain after it? Or is Labour going to start auctioning off the names of mountains to raise money for the election?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
A shared equity scheme is simply sub prime lending with the Government as the sub prime lender.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
GWW2: “Lucky for some with family trusts to pass on to the next generation before they go into care.”
Lucky for some? Are you serious? Trusts are not the domain of the rich. Anyone can settle a trust for the benefit of their families. Generally the “rich” have studied hard, worked hard, paid more than their fair share of taxes and would like something at the back end. If passing assets on to their chosen beneficiaries is such a crime, why have Labour not outlawed that? Reinstate death duties perhaps?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
DPF you missed off the most important part about the aspiring home owners. They’re only 18 and 20, not even married yet.
Why the hell is the tax payer taking on the risk of getting almost teenagers into a first house?
I was expecting them to be mid to late 20′s, which although I don’t agree with the policy could sympathise with them wanting a house.
Who owns a house at 18? If you can on your own then all good. They should be told to go flatting and save a deposit.
Who wants to bet they don’t even get a house. They still need to front up with $400 a week assuming Labour pays the max of 30% equity for a $305K house. There is no way a couple this young could afford that size morgage.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Southern Raider – Hollow Promises. I like it. Trouble is that it would be a cast the size of Ben Hur, with a budget to match. No doubt taxes would have to rise to fund it!
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Just thinking about that OECD pledge – let’s take a realistic look at what Labour has done, and what Labour could have done:
Corporate tax rate cut – a good start, but then made Kiwisaver compulsory when all consultation documents stated it would be a voluntary scheme. So it’s effectively become an extra payroll tax for organisations, with workers losing out through beareaucratic ineffeciencies at the IRD and tax department respectively. So that’s a step backwards.
Public Works: Bugger all. Tunnels for Mt Eden. Transit has projects that need funding to the tune of around $15 billion dollars. We don’t have the money for that, but we do have $1.5b for rail buybacks and operations subsidies for Toll. Hmmm. Electricity infrastructure is woeful, peak loads threaten the national grid in winter, and Labour signed over 15% of the total power supply to Comalco. Interesting move.
Telecom: Botched handling of unbundling (when it eventually came). Even if you’re in favour of regulation or not, you can probably find general consensus that the unbundling plan has been poorly done, too slow and isn’t showing the results that justified several billion dollars being wiped off Telecom’s value because of a leak that was never punished.
Environment: RMA nightmares, moving the burden of leaky buildings onto already cash-strapped councils and the Kyoto Protocol that is being rammed down our throats with a ‘Green at all costs’ attitude.
Industry, R&D: Poor funding of both tertiary institutes and research grants. In a country where you need a masters just to make it as a lab technician, there’s no real point in studying sciences. The scary thing is that we won’t realise this until much later.
Now, here’s where I get worried – if Labour was a real socialist government, they would have had public works. There would have been infrastructure projects. There would have been research. And we would have a strong economy with a strong capital basis. But Labour isn’t socialist. They’re populist wankers who chase the lowest common denominators, simply because there’s more of them. They take strong stances on ridiculous issues like global warming, civil unions and prostitution because they’re completely inept when it comes to tooling a progressive and strong economy. They had one handed to them on a plate, and they failed to make hay while the sun shines. On their way out, they’re appointing all their mates to every board they can – the rats fleeing the sinking ship. And who will pick up the bill? I’ll give you a hint: not them.
Sometimes being a New Zealander is just depressing.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
What is really depressing DED 12.28 is that National promises to be no better.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Agree Freedom and believe that ACT will do very well this election.
If I was National I would be targeting the 2011 election eg get in now and start to tweak things, win the voters confidence and then start making the hard calls in the next term.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
It’s just reassuring to know that as I browsed Stuff.co.nz this morning that I was not the only person thinking those two articles were biased propoganda.
Freedom101, I think you’re onto a winner with “Hollow promises”!
I’m hoping that National and Act can form a majority government and that after 3 years of trust building, and let’s face it, it’s been diminished over the last 5 years, that they can then positively move forward and deliver the country we all deserve. Pragmatism over idealism for the first 3 years atleast.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Don’t remind me.
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
I just hope if National get a clear majority that they still bring some of the minors over to support them eg have a 75% majority over the hard left of Green, Anderton and Labour.
It would be great to have National supported by ACT, United and the Maori Party
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Ghostie
Nice to see you sinking to your usual depths.
At 9.33 you attack the dead mother of the current National leader, with the false claim that she didn’t work part time while her son was growing up.
At 9.46 you attack the dead mother of a former National leader, with the insinuation that she received some kind of preferential treatment with regard to asset testing. This is also false, any suggestion of preferential treatment would have had the opposition and media all over it.
So while your attacks are even more despicable than usual, your inability to get the facts right remains.
Desperate, perhaps?
Vote:August 17th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
Southern Raider: “Or is Labour going to start auctioning off the names of mountains to raise money for the election?”
Would you like your mountain signed, Southern Raider?
Vote:August 18th, 2008 at 12:20 am
jafapete “Would you like your mountain signed, Southern Raider?”
You mean Helen Clark would also sign mountains that she didn’t create?
Vote:August 18th, 2008 at 5:26 am
ghostwhowalks=philu.
equals deadbeats who should just go and play on the standard, they like your type there.
Vote:August 18th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Southern Raider (458) Add karma Subtract karma +13 Says:
August 17th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
“DPF you missed off the most important part about the aspiring home owners. They’re only 18 and 20, not even married yet.
Why the hell is the tax payer taking on the risk of getting almost teenagers into a first house?
I was expecting them to be mid to late 20’s, which although I don’t agree with the policy could sympathise with them wanting a house.
Who owns a house at 18? If you can on your own then all good. They should be told to go flatting and save a deposit.”
You’re a good guy, Southern Raider. But could I point out that the “induced scarcity” of zoning has resulted in house prices going up faster than most people can save money?
But the solution to that, is NOT “sub-prime lending”. (As Owen points out).
I strongly recommend the following by Hugh Pavletich:
“Open Letter to NZ Housing Minister”
“Getting Performance Urban Planning in Place”
(Will post links in a minute)
As he says, this generation of young NZ-ers is the FIRST in history whose housing options and prospects are WORSE than those of their parents.
Vote:August 18th, 2008 at 10:56 am
You’re a good guy, Southern Raider. But could I point out that the “induced scarcity” of zoning has resulted in house prices going up faster than most people can save money?
But the solution to that, is NOT “sub-prime lending”. (As Owen points out).
I strongly recommend the following by Hugh Pavletich:
“Open Letter to NZ Housing Minister”
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/print.html?path=PO0712/S00100.htm
“Getting Performance Urban Planning in Place”
http://www.demographia.com/pav-performance.pdf
As he says, this generation of young NZ-ers is the FIRST in history whose housing options are WORSE than those of their parents.
Vote:August 18th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Sorry, diversion. Back on thread: GOOD, the more the SST keeps this up, the more credibility they lose and the more sympathy the Nats get seeing the MSM are so transparently biased against them.
Vote:August 18th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
expat
Philu doesn’t equal ghostie.
philu is incoherent, but appears to follow some sort of internal logic of his own.
Ghostie is simply dishonest, and presumably doesn’t realise how transparent most of his lies are.
Vote:August 19th, 2008 at 10:15 am
“only 18 and 20, not even married yet.
Who owns a house at 18? If you can on your own then all good. They should be told to go flatting and save a deposit.”
I did. Had savings from jobs since I was 10 and brought first house in my second year at Massey. It was a dump but it paid for itself many times over. At one stage I had eight flatmates there and got it paid off in three years.
Vote:August 26th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
To the haters…Firstly I felt the same way regarding the policy Nats are wanted to legislate when Labour suggested a similar proposal a few years ago. Too many assumtions are being made without facts. Secondly…broaden your knowledge and awareness of whats happening around you before coming to your conclusion with your bias comments.
Vote:Not all single parents will have the support, means or resources to be able to work a further 15 hours minimum each week . Certainly there are many single parents who work which is great but it is because they can and its a choice they have made. This kind of policy will take the choice away.
Parenting is 24/7..not a 40 hour week, so therefore I dont feel Nats value the work, skill and commitment of parenting.Its irrelevant that I will be exempt even if the policy becomes legislation…its not hard to see the broarder affects it will have on families and society.
August 26th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
As to those who are obviously anti-Social Workers. The Diploma in Social Work is a pathway to a much wider range of professions . For those who feel they have no worth in the community…let me ask you this. What are you doing in your wee neck of the woods to help create a society that is safer (for our children)and reflects equality and a better way of life for all?
Vote:What are you doing to reduce violent crime?…how are you addressing the rising youth crime?…when did you last write to your MP to push for positive change?.
I guess at the end of the day its all about priorities and values, and the difference really just comes down to the way we value our priorities and prioritize our values.