Shoddy story on TV3
TV3 just did a shock expose story on something that has been in the public domain since November 2008. Just because they didn’t do research doesn’t excuse them saying:
Had this not been leaked, it raises the question of whether National would have ever told anyone.
The issue is the agreement to fund an extra staff member in Out of Parliament offices of MPs whose electorate is larger than 20,000 sq km or is a Maori seat. I’ll come back to the merits of the policy later. But first the total beatup that this was some sort of secret only revealed by leaked documents. Have a look at the actual supply and confidence agreement signed by National and the Maori Party on the 16th of November 2008. It says:
The challenges of servicing the disproportionately large size of the Maori electorates will be addressed through immediate implementation of the recommendation from the March 2007 report of the Committee of the Third Triennial Review (Goulter report).
There is inequity in respect of the support that Parliament provides the very large electorates compared to the very small ones. One comparison is between Te Tai Tonga (147,000 sq km) and Epsom (22 sq km).
So this was as public as you can get. The supply and confidence agreement was massively reported on at the time. TV3 has stuffed up big time by painting this as some sort of hidden initiative.
The other aspect totally lacking in the TV3 story was what this decision was based on. As the supply and confidence agreement states, it was recommended by a neutral independent reviewer (John Goulter) in March 2007. And what did the Goulter review say. On page 92:
“That all Maori constituent Members of Parliament and each constituency Member of Parliament with an electorate in excess of 20,000 sq km in area be entitled to the services of an extra staff member to equate to three full-time equivalent out of Parliament support staff members”
So this was a open and public decision to implement the recommendation of a neutral expert reviewer. That does not mean it was a good decision (in fact I disagree with aspects of it), but TV3 were dishonest with their portrayal of it as National MPs voting them and their allies more money in secret. They even listed the MPs names with dollar signs next to them as if they were personally getting the money. In fact they are merely getting permission to hire a third staff member.
Now as it happens this issue has been reported on before – by myself and Home Paddock. Despite both being Nats we have been critical of the actual policy because of an inequality. The smallest Maori seat, as Home Paddock pointed out on 16 November is Tamaki Makaurau being only 730 sq kms in size. So why include that in extra resources?
I’d personally blogged twice on this issue previously. I actually commented when the agreement was announced:
I would rather decisions like this are made through the Parliamentary Service Commission. But this was recommended by the Goulter review, and two offices are not enough for some of those large electorates.
I didn’t like the idea of funding arrangements being decided bilaterally, but noted the fact it had been recommended mitigated that.
Then I linked to Home Paddock’s post and commented on 18 November 2008:
It is hard to justify a third staffer for Tamaki Makauru, when it is so much smaller than the other Maori seats.
I went on to propose the policy should be based on size only, so should be:
To be fair to all large seats, the agreement should be modified to be either:
- Only three of the Maori seats and four general seats over 20,000 sq km
- Five Maori seats, and four general seats over 15,000 sq km
- Six Maori seats and six general seats over 12,500 sq km
- All seven Maori seats and 27 general seats over 730 sq km
So you actually had a couple of Nats four months ago criticising the policy, before the media had even run a single story on it.
Really TV3 actually stuffed in every regard. The story they should have run is on the inequality of including Tamaki Makaurau when it is not a large seat. That is the legitimate issue you can criticise the decision over. I’d like to ask John Goulter (who made the recommendation) why he included them.
But instead of doing analysis they tried to portray this as some sort of secret hidden decision that only came to light due to a leak. They either did not know or decided not to mention that it had been announced four months ago. And they also neglected to mention it was implementing the decision of a neutral independent reviewer. A highly relevant fact.
UPDATE: looking more closely at the TV3 story, it looks like the Government decided not to fund Tamaki Makaurau for a third staff member (they only list the other six Maori seats), despite the recommendation and agreement it be all Maori seats. If correct, that is a good thing. It also means the story is then even more of a beat up.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Very poor use of tax payer money in any case. Though I’m rarely surprised with some of the stupid shit we (the tax payer) fork out for these days.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Yes David… but, well, you know, you’re Nouveau Media and you don’t count.
TV3 has decided that the honeymoon must end, and that they must make it end.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
TV3, as with many media outlets, likes sensationalism. But the problem I have with TV3 is they’re often passing off the investigative work of others as their own (eg Whaleoil’s scoop), or relying on “leaked” material to create a sense of cutting-edge journalism. Neither of those scenarios involves TV3 doing its own work and finding its own stories. Perhaps TV3 needs to get back into the business of investigative journalism – yes, I’m being charitable by assuming that TV3 has, at some point in its life, operated in that business space.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
exactly- what have the facts do with the matter? TV3 doesn’t get viewers for their news by reporting progress; it needs controversy. If John Key won’t screw up for them they’ll fake it.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Irrespective of the rights and wrongs DPF it is not a good look, yes TV3 are being mischievous and yes they seem to have decided that the honeymoon period is over but that is not really the issue.
The problem we have here is that once again our pollies have no fucking idea what many in the real word are going through, spending 400k at this time on themselves is just plain dumb.
Of course a lot of this has to do with Key’s stupid decision to beg the Apartheid party to be part of the gummint, we all know that as far as Maori go they seem to think that money grows on tress and to them another 400k is bugger all.
[DPF: I am not defending the decision, It was made months ago. The issue is the dishonest way it was portrayed as a hidden or secret decision]
March 12th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
It reminds me of the media brouhaha about the so-called ACC “blow-out”. You know, the one Price Waterhouse says doesn’t exit.
[DPF: You are confused. Price Waterhouse said the liabilities have increased by $2.5b]
March 12th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Just another reason to never watch TV3 news or support any of their advertisers.
Big Bruv pretty much nails the rest.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
I’ve never been able to take TV3 ‘News’ seriously, all their staff seem to be the usual ‘speak truth to power as long as it’s a right of centre power’ types.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
I think I agree with David Farrar’s argument here about TV3 reporting of this item. But at risk of diverting from the argument at hand, I’d raise the question of why such political funding increases are included in a coalition agreement. It makes it look as if parliamentary funding is negotiated as victor’s spoils. But I guess that’s essentially what it is.
It also reminds me of the 1996 National Party post-election caretaker government agreeing to make substantial political funding available to New Zealand First – and, in theory other parties – for which to help them undertake their coalition negotiations. NZ First allegedly used the money to pay over $100,000 to Winston Peters’ brother Wayne Peters for legal advice etc.
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
[DPF: I agree it should ideally not be in a coalition agreement. That was in fact what I blogged on the day they announced the agreement]
March 12th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
I must confess I did happen on TV3% News (Goffs own channel) and caught the story. I couldnt believe the content, let alone the coverage which seemed to interview one labour MP after another.
The question remains however is why have any Maori seats at all, let alone give them this kind of additional funding?
March 12th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
BE:
“But at risk of diverting from the argument at hand, I’d raise the question of why such political funding increases are included in a coalition agreement. It makes it look as if parliamentary funding is negotiated as victor’s spoils.”
What about when ACT negotiates in its agreement with National to set up a “Leadership Council”, including a provision that: “To enable ACT to make a substantive contribution to the government’s programme, it will have adequate access to funding, in a bulk form or for specific projects, to enable it to commission contract research or other consultancy assistance. The terms of such funding will be a matter for the Leadership Council to decide.”
Heaven forbid that ACT, having finally got near the teat of public power, would use this position to take tax-payers money to enable it to develop and promote its own policies? I mean, that sounds like something the socialists would do …
March 12th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
I stopped watching TV3 news almost completely now except for the sports and weather. Someone’s head will roll at TV3 news though because for two nights in a row they did not have Phill Goff commenting on either sports or weather.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
“I mean, that sounds like something the socialists would do …”
dont you mean ‘did’?
March 12th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
As private enterpise, they can do no wrong, leave it to the market.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Well said racer, TV3 are bastards but they are not costing me one cent so they can say what they like as far as I am concerned.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
PS:
“dont you mean ‘did’?”
Yes. They did. So two wrongs now make … two wrongs.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
I think it’s safe to say the racist Maori seats will be around beyond 2014…
March 12th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
No, one wrong is pretending to be right
March 12th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
“No, one wrong is pretending to be right”
Agreed. ACT is being highly hypocritical on this issue. They should admit they are wrong.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
You’re right David. Paper liabilities of course but still they look bad for the next few months. Good thing ACC investments are made over a much greater term than that.
Who I actually meant was the actuaries who have described Smith’s comments as “ill-founded scaremongering”. Or perhaps we should look at Brian Fallow’s comments about it. Or Espiner’s. Or Small’s. This is the shortest political honeymoon I have ever seen. Even that sociopath Douglas got a better run than this. The world just turns faster and faster the older we get.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
TV3′s owners are thick if they can’t recognise the gap in the market for a centre-right free-to-air TV channel, or even for just a centre one.
In the mainstream media in NZ, centre-left and left is crowded, centre and centre right are almost empty, though that’s where most of the consumers are.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
“So two wrongs now make”
are you have trouble counting AG?
March 12th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
Really? When you wake up from your dream check out Key’s approval rating and then divide by about 20 to get Goffs. Facing up to reality is tough for you Socialists isn’t it?
March 12th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
Ferdinand, it was pretty obvious that ACC had just become another branch of Labour’s welfear state. Plus a cash cow to many providers. I suggest you should apply the word “sociopath” a bit closer to home. Or find a new planet if change is going a bit fast for you.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
AE raises the very good point about the Act party negotiating into its coalition agreement that additional political funding would be made available to “commission contract research or other consultancy assistance”.
I still can’t really understand what that is all about. Has anyone else shedding any light on it? No Right Turn had a good guess about it in this post: http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2008/11/rodneys-pork-problem.html But has anyone else tried to get to the bottom of it all. Sounds rather dodgy.
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
March 12th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
So why are you surprised DPF that yet again Duncan Garner runs more sensationalist bullshit and how does this differ from what he delivers every single day?
I recall you used to rate him.
I’ve never understood why.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
TV3 news is an absolute joke
I saw a story the other day about stem cell research. They actually called Obama a SUPERHERO
And a few weeks ago, I saw a story about Minnie Dean (the mass murdering baby killer), the reporter basically said at the end it was a pity she didn’t get off (not her sentenced commuted to life but got off)
Not that I watch it very often, but I can’t imagine what other crap they are spouting.
Say what you like about TVNZ news bias but at least they aren’t the Delahunty’s of the news
March 12th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
That is why I refuse to advertise on TV3.
Duncan Garner is a Gunt.
Tricky, smarmy, biased, crude, and totally lacking in any finesse.
I just can’t stand him.
He was our dearly departed leaders BITCH.
March 12th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
I think the media the world over has gone to hell in a hand-basket.
One particularly perplexing recent story in the herald
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10561047
where the writer copies verbatim a statement from the local plod that the person falling was lucky to break his back by falling onto the river bed rather than having a nice safe splash-down in deeper water.
The inability of media these days to question ANYTHING is so completely infuriating. Give em anything they will just regurgitate it without question it seems.
March 13th, 2009 at 12:01 am
At least he didn’t nick my story or documents this time.
I thought though that this had al the hallmarks of Cunliffe’s first bid for a bit of publicity prior to him trying to knife Goff.
March 13th, 2009 at 12:20 am
Without the hierarchy of the Coven.
Goff is being a Pioneer.
The problem is that the definition of a pioneer, is someone with arrows in his back.
As pre-programmed and automatic gainsaying as Goff really is. He comes across as being Dorkish, Myopic, and Meek.
Cunliffe on the other hand strikes me, (Not in a Mallard way though) as a thoroughly spiteful, peevish, and unfulfilled dork.
The sort of lad that was beaten up by many contemporaries because he was a useless, annoying piece of shit.
The type that really dreaded House Rugby competitions, because he was was so very disliked by everyone. He always got the worst shoeing.
The type of lad that would always grass the rest of the class up.
Cunliffe is my most favoured choice for Labour Leader, and as soon as possible.
March 13th, 2009 at 2:45 am
TV3 really is biting the hand that feeds it.
They should concentrate on more stories about how much taxpayer money is being pissed away trying to keep Helen Clark from jointing the ranks of the unemployed.
They’d get better ratings.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:42 am
Ah, the art of the well edited soundbite. I would love to see TV One take this story and properly present it. If this is seriously the best thet Mssrs Cunliffe and Garner can come up with I am not surprised that Labour is tanking in the polls. If Labour really wanted to have more money spent on it’s electorates, they should have won a few more.
Democracy, it’s just so limiting, isn’t it!
March 13th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Pleeze, pleeze, Fox News, set up a New Zealand operation.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Glutaemus Maximus says:
“Cunliffe on the other hand strikes me … as a thoroughly spiteful, peevish, and unfulfilled dork.
The sort of lad that was beaten up by many contemporaries because he was a useless, annoying piece of shit.
The type that really dreaded House Rugby competitions, because he was was so very disliked by everyone. He always got the worst shoeing.
The type of lad that would always grass the rest of the class up.”
Ah, so you’ve met him then GM? Do continue.
March 13th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I’ve been unable to stomach TV3 news for a long time. I used to watch it over TVNZ because I had thought a non-state run station was less likely to be biased in favour of the then Labour Government. But as the levels of bias and extreme left wing nature of the station became ever more evident to me I decided to at least give TVNZ a try, expecting it to be even worse. I was surprised to find this not to be the case. They’re still left of center, but they do appear to at least try and appear balanced. So on those occasions when I’m in the unfortunate position of needing to get my news off the TV it’s TVNZ for me.
March 13th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Jman – I’m exactly the same. Quit TV3 news about 3 months ago and have never look back.
PhilBest – ref Fox news. I’ve tried to like this… but just can’t. Agree with their economics, but the authoritarian war-mongering type reporting just makes me cringe. Their talking heads all have perfect teeth and near hair.. so I guess they’re any others in that regard.