A waste of $9 million for a political side show. As a tax payer this makes me very angry as it could have been spent better elsewhere.
Please do not patronise me by saying the money is a drop in the governments coffers cause 9 million is a hell of a drop to me.
…but still a majority based on Key’s logic of how his Government got in power in the first place right? Voter apathy is not his, nor anyone else’s problem. The result was against at the end of the day.
Civility and Satire. Ben Uffindell (22) of The Civilian is starting his own satirical political party. He talks here about Colin Criag, depression, income in NZ, popularity, fame, Gen Y. issues. Disarmingly open. Aired yesterday. Great listen on a saturday.
itstricky, so was the anti smacking vote and your side kept telling is it was low turnout. Boot on the other foot now and you talk it up, can’t have it both ways I am afraid.
There’s no such thing as “your side”. I didn’t vote in this and I voted the other way around in that referendum. Nobody’s fighting a war here. Your flippant use of the word ‘idiot’ is more so revealing that you seem to class people into categories.
It was a loss for both sides at the end of the day and a waste of money.
$100 million to sell well performing assets to just people who could afford them at the time seems to be more of a waste of money but hey, that’s just my slightly logically, brain saying “what’s 10×10 and how many future dividends/profits has the country lost from companies that will always be well performing?”. Sell Solid Energy & maybe even Air NZ tomorrow – sure – but utilities companies? Short sighted.
I would have preferred it if the questions were these three:
Do you support asset sales?
Do you oppose asset sales, but understand there’s no other way to keep your increasingly unaffordable, effectively socialist NZ lifestyle afloat, save even higher taxes or even more overseas borrowing?
Do you not really understand but you have fallen for the glossy rhetoric anyway because that’s easier?
So the gweens and the greys spent $9M of our money to try and make a political point over something that was put up as an election issue, mandate given and already largely delivered on.
The contempt which both of these groups holds the electorate in is frankly astonishing. The greys would be the first to wail at the waste of money in any other circumstances. Mind you, the gweens response would be dont worry, we can print some more.
As noted by smarter people than me elsewhere, if JK had been found by a security guard with his pants down in the Ngati Whatua room, the left noise would be horrific. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. And thus we have a $9M circus, courtesy of these fucking idiots.
Christ, makes even me think about moving to Australia.
But then Christmas is upon us – 2 more days of work then weeks of boat, bach, bike, BBQ, booze, books and bed. Nice symmetry there. Maybe I will stay
I don’t see why utility companies are any more important than say, food suppliers. Should we nationalise food suppliers too? Personally I see more benefit for the consumer to break the current duopoly and create more competition.
The EY Review of Mayor Len Brown does not indicate hotel stays involving Bevan Chuang, but lists bookings Brown [on Campbell Live] insists were made by his wife for ‘family purposes’.
So the $6130 “freebie” rooms and $32,888.50 are additional indiscretions only if Brown is supposed to record ‘gifts’ his wife receives.
Shouldn’t a report that is reputed to have cost rate payers $100,000 be a little clearer.
Scott Chris – “Should we nationalise food suppliers too?…”
Dont give them any bloody ideas. KiwiFood maybe. A apparatchik in Wellington can set the price of your corn flakes. And if you dont like that price you can buy them somewhere else. Oh, wait, you wont be able to – oh dear. And if they set the price so its uneconomic, the supplier will stop supplying or limited supply. Queues down the road to get the last packet?
Yeah, KiwiPower is such a brilliant idea. What could go wrong?
The greater the NO response to the referendum, the greater the indication of those who opposed partial asset sales but still voted for National.
Because of this, the larger the NO vote, the better John Key should feel – since Labour swore assets sales was THE single Election issue, and National agreed – but obviously many voters gave away reservations on asset sales to vote National, rather than for parties that would show their true governance and stewardship by paying people to raise signatures for a $9m referendum on an issue their own election campaigning had already decided, an issue legally introduced and almost completed, but somewhat failed because of Opposition sabotage during it.
The bigger the NO vote, the greater the Opposition is fucked – but then, they have already done that to themselves.
Following on from yesterday re party funding of blogs, both Lynn Prentice and Cameron Slater say there is no party funding of The Standard and Whale Oil. Obviously there are party sources for both blogs, but no admissions of party staffers being authors.
Scott, by that logic only 32.9% of eligible voters voted for a National government in 2011.
Yep, and not voting in the GE is tacit acceptance of whatever the result is, whereas not voting in the referendum is tacit acceptance of the government’s actions, since the referendum won’t change anything.
Iranians walk out of nuclear talks after there is talk of tighter sanctions.
Iranian negotiators abruptly ended nuclear talks with Western powers in Geneva on Friday just a day after the Obama administration announced tighter sanctions on Tehran.
Iran had threatened that new or tighter sanctions would nullify the recently reached interim deal, which is not yet in effect.
The Iranians abruptly “halted” the talks and left Geneva so that they could consult with higher-level officials about how to proceed with talks following the tighter sanctions, which were announced Thursday morning by the U.S. Treasury Department.
So it looks like the speculation that the offer from Obama to Iran was just a feint in order to justify an attack so they could turn around to the useful idiots and say to them: look we really really tried but the bastards didn’t want a bar of it; was on the money.
No surprises there. Sometimes I wish the useful idiots would wake up, but no sign of that, anytime soon, I’m afraid.
SO much for global warming.
Snow covers the Middle East for the first time in 100 years.
Nobody in Cairo was dreaming of a white Christmas, but it looks like they’ll get one. The worst snowstorm in more than 50 years hit the Middle East, blanketing Cairo, Jerusalem and areas of Syria in white powder. It was the first time in 100 years that Egypt had seen snow.
Looks like the fake sign language interpreter from the Mandela funeral has faced multiple violent charges in the last two decades, including murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, rape, theft, housebreaking and malicious property damage.
eNCA’s investigations have found that Thamsanqa Jantjie, who is being treated for schizophrenia, has also faced rape (1994), theft (1995), housebreaking (1997), malicious damage to property (1998), murder, attempted murder and kidnapping (2003) charges.
Many of the charges brought against him were dropped, allegedly because he was mentally unfit to stand trial.
Jantjie was acquitted on the rape charge, but he was convicted of theft for which he was sentenced to three years in prison. It’s unclear if he ever spent time in jail.
Court records reveal that the 2003 murder, attempted murder and kidnapping case against Jantjie and other people, was referred to the South Gauteng High Court in 2004. It was finalised in November 2006, but the court file for the case is empty.
Reid (14,465 comments) says:
December 14th, 2013 at 12:07 pm
In recent times I note you quoted and linked Resne.com a website run by one Jeff Resne. He is notorious for his Anti Jewish views, amongst many other things, and is considered to the Right of Alex Jones.
Obviously you have lived a sheltered life. John Stringer is an ex Nat who one summer spent too long outside without his hat & ended up joining the CCCP. In time & with suitable counselling he may return to good health & rejoin the National Party.
There you can step back in time & see how exposure to fruitcake conservatism & religious hocus pocus can addle what were probably once normal people.* Watch them do mental backflips to accommodate their Skydaddy….witness the delusions of those who would drag NZ back to the 1950′s.
* A firm grip of reality is recommended before venturing on to this site. At the first sign of nausea depress Ctrl, Alt, Del simultaneously.
Actually, I just found out to qualify for POTUS you don’t need to be a US citizen as long as one of your parents was born there. If this is true I don’t know why the leftist media didn’t inform the public about this.
Howdy Kiwibloggers – interested in your feedback on THIS one!
MEDIA ALERT: Penny Bright
“When is the right time to reveal an ‘inconvenient truth’ – that neo-liberal ANC President Nelson Mandela championed ‘privatisation’ – not ‘nationalisation’?
It seems that locally, nationally and internationally, people are largely unaware of this following quote from ANC President Nelson Mandela? :
“”Privatisation is the fundamental policy of the ANC, and is going to be implemented …Just because we [government and COSATU] have a working relationship, and they [COSATU] helped put us in power, does not mean that we are happy with everything they say.’ 49
49 Sunday Times, 26 May 1996.
(COSATU – Congress of South African Trade Unions)
How many people know that in 1994, millions of black South Africans voted for the ANC, which swept into power on the following promises / policies:
“The ANC’s 1994 national election campaign was not only premised on delivering democracy and freedom to the citizens of South Africa but was also strongly rooted in the memory of apartheid’s denial of basic resources to black people.
Riding on the crest of the Reconstruction and Development Programme (the ANC’s proposed economic plan for the post-liberation era based on redistribution of the country’s wealth to the poor), the ANC promised to right the wrongs of the past and to give the people what had long been denied them.
Election posters blazing with the black green and gold party colours screamed out to the poor:
“A better life for all!”, “Free basic services!”. “Jobs for all!”,
with a promise to redistribute the wealth accumulated by the apartheid government, white business and the white population.
The poor, trusting the rhetoric, voted in their millions to put the ANC into power as the first democratic government.
When the ANC capitulated to the charms of a market-driven economy, the party ditched clauses from the Freedom Charter and the RDP and emerged with a macro-economic policy that was a ‘fairly standard neoliberal one”. 1
[1 Adam Habib and Vishnu Padaychee (2000), "Economic Policy and Power Relations in South Africa's Transition to Democracy" in World Development, (vol.28, no.2)3. ]
The choice of a market-driven policy that would ensure maximum profit accumulation by the already rich was made in full knowledge of South Africa’s stratified economy. …. ”
[CENTRE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY RASSP RESEARCH REPORTS 2005, VOL.1
Saranel Benjamin, Durban, September 2005]
But, on the watch of President Nelson Mandela, without consultation or democratic mandate, there was a 180 degree ‘U turn’, when the ANC adopted a neo-liberal agenda:
PRIVATISING SOUTH AFRICA BY DICTUM: A REVIEW
Michael J. Meyer
(Department of Development Studies, University of North West)
Mindful of the experience in the Third World in general, and Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)in particular, where in some instances the privatisation of state assets was turned into a farce because of corruption, nepotism patronage and insider dealing, in South Africa (SA) the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) insisted from the outset that the privatisation process is shrouded in secrecy and should be made transparent.
As a consequence COSATU objected to the African National Congress’s (ANC) adoption of a privatisation policy at its December 1994 Conference, which was endorsed without any form of consultation with the labour movement -the ANC’s strongest social partner.’ In order to forestall any unilateral action on the part of the ANC the labour movement insisted on participation and transparency, calling on the ANC to be accountable, not only to its allies but also the masses on any decision taken
on the issue of privatisation.
1 COSATU 6th National Congress: 16-19 September 1997, Book 4, Resolutions, Discussion
Documents (1997), p. 33. ”
The ANC’s mechanism for these neo-liberalism reforms – was the GEAR (Growth, Employment and Redistribution) policy:
“The Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) policy drew from the main tenets of neoliberalism as installed globally with the main objective of creating an environment which enables maximum private investment.
Hence GEAR proposed cuts in government spending to reduce the deficit, the introduction of tax concessions for big business, a reduction of tariff barriers (in the clothing, textile,leather and car manufacturing industries), the privatization of government assets (which included the provision of basic services), a reduction in state welfare programmes and a more flexible labour market. Adelzadeh 3
[3 In Hein Marais (2001), South Africa: Limits to Change, (Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press) 163] and Saul both agree that the ANC had “come full circle, back to the late apartheid government’s Normative Economic Model.
For the central premise of South Africa’s economic policy now could clearly be clearer: ask not what capital can do for South Africa, but what South Africa can do for capital…”4
[4 Saul 12]
The ANC pushed for GEAR, arguing that the policy framework could help achieve economic growth, attract foreign investment , boost employment and increase socio-economic equality. the verdict so far has been resoundingly negative:
“GEAR has been associated with massive deindustrialization and job-shedding through reduced tariffs on imports, capital flight as as controls over investments are relaxed, attempts to downsize the costs and size of the public sector, and real cuts in education, health and social welfare spending”. 5
[5 Saul 13 ]
This neo-liberal economic framework precludes the the development of any form of social security system for the growing band of unemployed, informal sector workers and the poor. GEAR argues for a decline in state expenditure and, in keeping with global trends, this translates into cutting back on state welfare programmes.
The harsh effects of the GEAR policy have been felt most by those who came into the era of democracy poor. These were black, working class people.
Most were black, women, urban and rural. GEAR has left the poor more vulnerable to increasing poverty and has debilitated most workers by decimating the industries they work in. …”
How / when did Nelson Mandela shift from supporting ‘freedom’ to ‘free markets’?
“When you think about Nelson Mandela, you probably think about freedom — free people, free country, free speech. What may be overshadowed by Mr. Mandela’s extraordinary legacy was his complicated journey to support free markets and a free economy.
When Mr. Mandela was released from prison in 1990, he told his followers in the African National Congress that he believed in the nationalization of South Africa’s main businesses.
“The nationalization of the mines, banks and monopoly industries is the policy of the A.N.C., and a change or modification of our views in this regard is inconceivable,” he said at the time.
Two years later, however, Mr. Mandela changed his mind, embracing capitalism, and charted a new economic course for his country. …. ”
What a coup for the global elite to have this world-famous anti-apartheid icon, now promoting pro-corporate policies!
Do you really think that Nelson Mandela’s face would be adorning the front pages of the global corporate media, if he had continued to support ‘nationalisation’ instead of privatisation?
Why do you think so many of the global elite were at his funeral, and had so many nice things to say about him?
Yes – Nelson Mandela’s policy of ‘truth and reconciliation’ may have helped prevent a racial bloodbath, but how much did it also help put a ‘lid’ on the fightback against the ANC’s ‘economic apartheid’?
It feels that in ‘blowing the whistle’ and telling the truth, I am not just ‘swimming against the tide’, but standing up to a tsunami.
So be it.
‘Truth is truth’.
In so doing, I believe I am keeping faith with the millions of black South Africans, in whose interests thousands of New Zealanders took to the streets, to help stretch the ‘thin blue line’, to try and make the 1981 Springbok Tour ‘unpoliceable’.
We didn’t march down the street in order for the lot of the black South African majority to be worse off – for racial apartheid to be replaced with ‘economic apartheid’.
Should we have still protested to help stop racial apartheid in South Africa?
However, in order to help prevent ‘brand Mandela’ being used by the ANC in the elections next year, in order to continue to push their neo-liberal agenda, I believe that now is the time to reveal this ‘inconvenient truth’.
In so doing, let me say that this gives me no pleasure.
No one likes being told that their idol has ‘feet of clay’, or that they have been effectively misled.
I am ‘boycotting’ remembrance services for Nelson Mandela, because I hope that this will encourage debate and discussion, and those ‘social movements’ in South Africa who have been leading the fightback against the ANC’s ‘war on the poor’, will get the attention and support that they deserve.
I believe they are holding one at the Huia Dam headworks tomorrow. Only those who have paid their water charges are invited to show the respect they have for the man who said..”Those who have paid the water bill are among the chosen”!
Poor Penny. Mandela is hailed as one of the greatest humanitarians and a key individual in the repeal of apartheid in South Africa, but, because he said free markets might be ok, he is declared persona non grata. After he died. Well done Penny.
But the true hard-leftie started sneaking through when you, somehow, tried to suggest that free markets are the opposite of freedom. They are actually an excellent example of freedom – supplier a can sell to consumer b – job done. So, its pretty clear that when you, and other hard-lefties, say the word “freedom”, you dont actually mean what the dictionary says the word means , do you?
Why is so much being made of a crook “signer” ,afterall it was at a convicted terrorist’s memorial,whose ex wife was into murdering opponents with burning tyres around their necks,in a country that, since the white handed power to the ANC, has become the rape and murder Mecca of Africa?
The signer was probably one of the straightest people there.Cameron and Obama aren’t saints, they supply war material to jihadis who murder Christians,Shia,Allawites and Druze in Syria.And Obama blows up weddings.
Little Boy: What will communism be like when perfected?
His Father: Everyone will have what he needs.
Little Boy: But what if there is a shortage of meat?
His Father: There will be a sign in the butcher shop saying, “No one needs meat today.”
Despite the video and being told of the video the police told the camera man the F off.
Now of course all the weasel words that accompany this type of behavoir by the police are being trotted out.
Does our commissioner still think being publicly associated with police thugs is still a good idea?
“It is important not to pre-empt the outcome, however the circumstances will be investigated thoroughly to determine if the officers have acted in accordance with the high expectations of the Service,” he said.
“Policing can be a complex and dangerous job, and the Service also provides officers with appropriate training to deal with a range of situations, and that is why the QPS has a set of guidelines that govern the use of force options available to officers.”
ANNABEL HEPWORTH NATIONAL BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT
December 14, 2013 12:00AM
THE renewable energy target, state and territory feed-in tariffs that pay households to generate electricity from roof-top solar panels and other green schemes are responsible for 17 per cent of a typical power bill.
Nationwide, a report by the Australian Energy Market Commission, has forecast that average annual electricity prices will ease over the next three years — rising at 1.2 per cent a year, less than inflation, from 2012-13 to 2015-16.
A programme of nationalising South Africa’s assets would ultimately be destructive to South Africa’s developing economy and plunge the country into irreversible decline that would include the far reaching consequence of a complete breakdown in law and order and governance as witnessed in Zimbabwe.
Both Penny Bright and John Minto are completely naïve in believing that nationalisation is the panacea to South Africa’s ill’s, it would be a farce and disastrous for South Africa to head down that path.
I don’t see why utility companies are any more important than say, food suppliers. Should we nationalise food suppliers too?
No. But we had already nationalised utlities companies (hold, on let’s redefine that as electricty providers, seeing as electricity makes the world go round) providing a good profit (that wouldn’t dip because, again, electricity makes the world go around) that we decided we’d carve up and give the best bits of to those who could afford to buy them. Clearing debt? Sure, but why sell the family silver ahead of the old mouldy couch in the corner? And why not actually get a decent price for them if you’re going to do it? I’m sure there’s a lot of fund managers out there scratching their heads… “why?”