General Debate 12 January 2014

January 12th, 2014 at 8:00 am by Kokila Patel
Tags:

152 Responses to “General Debate 12 January 2014”

  1. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Once again Fairfax have their poster boy, the obese criminal slug, flouted on their front page. What is their game with this horrible beast . . . they are aiding and abetting his interfering in politics of a hosting country. A effen disgrace!

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Muslim of the Year.

    http://screencast.com/t/863ekfYJd

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    Yep, Kim Dotcom the criminal wunderkind is the first face I see. I even saw his fat f***ing face staring out at me from a JB HiFi catalogue yesterday, he’s put out some shit CD destined for the bargain bin ‘Good Times’.

    Meanwhile, a guy who was possibly just a little bit more significant is way down the page / bulletin – Ariel Sharon.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Here’s a good reason.

    “Where the government is supposed to serve us the people, we are paying with our taxes that they do a good job for us. But look what they do, they undermine our rights, they destroy our freedoms, they censor our internet, so we are the ones who have to bring that change,” Dotcom said in a documentary by international magazine Vice, released last week.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    Ah a dead corpse has finally fucked off.

    8 years as a corpse. must be some sort of record for stupidly supporting life.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 26 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    Another letter on the AGW scam we’re paying for (via the ETS tax):
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/letters-to-the-editor/9595153/Letter-Our-contribution-is-minuscule

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Right of way is Way of Right (1,122 comments) says:

    Viking2 (10,293 comments) says:
    January 12th, 2014 at 8:08 am
    Ah a dead corpse has finally fucked off.

    8 years as a corpse. must be some sort of record for stupidly supporting life.

    I assume you speak of Ariel Sharon, but he is giving Len Brown some hope!

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. flipper (4,060 comments) says:

    If the mad Norseman is referring to Sharon, and I presume it is, take your childish attitudes to Astrolabe Reef and make like a lighthouse.
    Pathetic.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. cha (4,017 comments) says:

    Out of the pan into the fire and beyond.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/10/opinion/france-hollande-allegation-matthew-fraser/index.html

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Both sides of the smacking debate will probably always make opposing claims from any news.

    Fewer parents being investigated despite ‘anti-smacking law’

    Supporters of the controversial “anti-smacking” law are claiming victory after a dramatic fall in the number of parents being investigated for hitting their children.

    But opponents of the 2007 law change have accused the Government of fudging the numbers.

    Ministry of Social Development data shows fewer parents are being investigated for smacking their children. The number dropped by almost third over the past financial year, with 176 parents dobbed in to the MSD, down from 277 the year before.

    Police say they have prosecuted just eight parents for smacking children in the five years since the law came in. Seven of those parents had smacked their child in the head or face.

    The eighth parent was discharged without conviction for striking the child on the hand. Police said they were also being called to fewer smacking incidents though they stopped counting smacking prosecutions after the Government’s five-year review process came to an end.

    Key, who personally voted for the legislation, has consistently refused to entertain a law change, even after a referendum on the issue found 87 per cent of those who voted did not believe smacking should be a criminal offence.

    While it’s difficult to measure actual effects it seems like the law has nor made a significant difference, not many prosecutions, many still unhappy and the campaigners continue.

    Family First plans to campaign strongly on the issue during the election buildup. “It’s a big issue because it was a law that came into every family home. Politicians want it to simmer down and go away, but it’s not,” McCroskie said, adding figures on falling smacking notifications are “fudged . . . It doesn’t identify cases where parents are being ransomed by their own kids.”

    Changing voting based on one relatively minor issue that’s already been thrashed with little change is unlikely.

    The economy and who can best manage it is likely to remain the single biggest election issue, along with the associated personalities.

    If Colin Craig makes smacking his bottom line as he has indicated he may swing the election away from the centre right, which would be ironic as economically he’s more left.

    Surely there’s far more pressing issues for families than the smacking laws.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    Parasite supreme:

    Raymond Hull, 58, who has children by 11 women despite only having been married once, appears to have enjoyed the trappings of wealth – BMWs, foreign holidays, and presents for his numerous girlfriends – despite having been out of work for a decade.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537624/Raymond-Hull-Father-22-children-11-women-neighbour-hell-held-wild-boozy-parties-garden-lives-life-luxury-BMW-speedboat-holidays-abroad.html

    How many Kiwi ones we have?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    Sue Bradford – a gentle smack for corrective purposes and a piece of 4 x 2 wielded by a drunk dad:

    Both are assault. There is no difference.

    This is what she admitted on National radio

    I think 97% of the people who signed the referendum did so because they hated Sue Bradford as much as her bill.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Who here would put significant weight on smacking policy in deciding their vote in this year’s election?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    duggledog – one of the biggest problems with the smacking debate is defining a smack. One parent’s tap on the hand is another parent’s whack round the ear, and another parent’s belting.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    Pete –

    “Surely there’s far more pressing issues for families than the smacking laws”

    Yes, but I think for a lot of people, the fact such an unpopular, pointless piece of legislation took so much energy and time to get through parliament, reminded them that Government wasn’t doing anything useful. Like addressing the ‘pressing issues’ such as why was NZ going into recession before the rest of the world.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    duggledog – one of the biggest problems with the smacking debate is defining a smack. One parent’s tap on the hand is another parent’s whack round the ear, and another parent’s belting.

    Pete, I’m nearly 70 and have never had that problem.
    It just ain’t that difficult at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    Pete – I can show you the difference!

    Seriously though, that’s the court’s job. It’s the difference between parenting, and beating someone up. I do not or rather did not, require government assistance in how to raise my children. Fact is, everybody knew it would never address the problem of child neglect and abuse, it hasn’t and it won’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    flipper (2,973 comments) says:
    January 12th, 2014 at 8:16 am

    If the mad Norseman is referring to Sharon, and I presume it is, take your childish attitudes to Astrolabe Reef and make like a lighthouse.
    Pathetic.
    =======================

    8 years of insulting the dignity of life by force feeding a corpse.
    Even worse than the Mandela debacle.

    For what purpose.

    Oh that’s right its all about skyfairies and the like. Your brain needs a retune flipper.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    “Who here would put significant weight on smacking policy in deciding their vote in this year’s election?”

    Probably not many, but as part of a common sense raft of policies such as phasing out the DPB within 5 years, ending ToW settlements and removing Maori seats from parliament, keeping Govt spending capped at a % of GDP etc I’d say quite a few!

    Cheers

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. flipper (4,060 comments) says:

    RODNEY HIDE DOES A BRILLIANT JOB THIS MORNING:

    Rodney Hide: The glory days are in the past

    5:30 AM Sunday Jan 12, 2014
    Add a comment

    Good and loyal friends have suggested that I put my name forward to be Act’s candidate in Epsom.

    They have supported me over many years and therefore I have given their advice serious consideration.

    It’s a crucial role. But for Act’s success in Epsom in 2008, Helen Clark would have remained Prime Minister. And its success in 2011 also kept Labour out of power.

    That’s why the attacks on John Banks are so intense and sustained. Act’s success has proved the difference between a National-led Government and a Labour-Green one.

    It’s a peculiarity of MMP. Incredibly, Labour Party activists door-knocked Epsom in 2005 asking their voters to vote National. Labour’s candidate declared he was following party instruction and voting for National’s candidate, not himself.

    The success of a centre-right government under MMP has required the country to vote National and Epsom to vote Act.

    That is set to continue. A failure by Act at this election would put at risk New Zealand’s hard-won economic recovery.

    There’s a lot at stake. Our continued economic success requires Act to succeed.

    I also have a philosophical reason for wanting Act to succeed. I think it’s important to have at least one voice for freedom and reason in our Parliament.

    Act provides a much-needed political counterweight to the other parties calling always for more government spending and ever-more regulation. …….”

    SAYS IT ALL DOES IT NOT????

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    duggledog, don’t know if you read this yesterday.

    http://www.elocal.co.nz/View_Article.aspx?Id=1076&title=DNA_to_Rock_the_nation_Part_1

    Finally the possibility of shifting the handouts off the table.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    Eight parents prosecuted in the 5 years since the legislation was brought in,seven for smacking the head or face…….

    so not one of those cases was a serious “assault”.

    In the same period how many children were murdered by a “care giver or guardian”?

    The bill was foisted on us on that pretext……hasn’t stopped the dangerous stuff.

    We did not need this piece of cultural marxism and the Nats should have the balls to repeal it.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Probably not many, but as part of a common sense raft of policies such as phasing out the DPB within 5 years

    There’s nothing common sense about that unless it also addresses all the associated issues. Just cutting the DPB would create enormous problems.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    kowtow – smacking a kid in the head or face is not serious? Potentially it’s very serious -the same as smacking an adult in the head or face.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    flipper (2,974 comments) says:
    January 12th, 2014 at 8:50 am

    Banks deserves all he gets. He was never ever an ACT politician.

    But otherwise we don’t disagree with the general sentiment of Rodneys words.

    however it remains to be seen if Epsom will vote tatically again and if I was anything to do with that process in ACT I would not be considering it a fait a comple.

    We have some interesting idea’s and people linning up. Dot coms libertarian approach, John Ansells Together NZ, One Law for all, Craigs Peter’s Party version 2,Hootons’party of noise, and so on.
    The winner will be that party that has the best slogans(John Ansell), the party with the best technology(Kim Dotcom), and the party with a reasonable set of policy in keeping with the times, i.e. moving right and becoming more libertarian.

    Should be a fun year.

    Remember that 3 people in the last 60 years have changed the political landscape in NZ. Bob Jones, Richard Preeble and Roger Douglas.
    All 3 challanged the staus quo to the betterment of NZ by creating libertarian parties.

    Some more commentary here.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11182540

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. lilman (959 comments) says:

    Yes saw this and it may be true but Maori wont let it be established because most of their grievances are based on collective guilt as opposed to actual factual basis.
    We are continually told of the stealing and disenfranchisement of Iwi from their lands and this isnt debated but to accuse the state of not acting on its duties under the treaty is nothing short of a lie,at best a joke.
    Why do not Taranaki Maori demand money and assets from Waikato Maori who slaughtered and ate and stole their entire culture.If they are being consistant all the monies the state have given Maori should be distributed to those who were murdered and stolen and eaten by their tribes of conquest.
    On the evidence of conquest one only has to look at the Moriori who were decimated by Maori from the mainland,who have never given any money or apology to the affected tribes.
    So in short,Maori will deny and demand ,its just the way it is.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Lucia Maria (2,428 comments) says:

    Pete George,

    The smacking law represents Government interference in the family that goes beyond what is necessary and proper, unless Government’s aim is to become more and more a parent to the nation’s children. It’s a matter of principle.

    Also, the fact that one family was charged for smacking a child on the hand is grounds for John Key to reverse the legislation, which he said he would do if good parents were being prosecuted.

    There are a number of lines in the sand that the NZ Government have crossed with regards to families – the smacking law is one of them.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. freemark (580 comments) says:

    Great to see FB campaigns down south supporting Oil/Gas Exploration. The hippies/watermelons/socialists have owned Social Media (& most MSM it seems)for the last few years with their incessant screeching anti everything. Real working taxpaying Kiwis have had enough.
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Pro-Oil-and-Gas-Otago/202345206637605 vs
    https://www.facebook.com/events/1383186585265435/1387627964821297/?comment_id=1397731497144277&notif_t=like

    There is also the event planned to oust Brown
    https://www.facebook.com/events/630259507036725/?notif_t=plan_edited

    Great stuff

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Hide’s column…

    I thought the worst thing for Peters was getting dumped in 2008. No. The worst thing for Peters was getting back in 2011.

    New MPs snigger at him. There was a time he would have swatted them down like flies.

    I prefer to remember Peters as he was. He’s a salutary lesson.

    John Banks’ attempted return to national politics could be another salutary lesson. He struggled from the start of the term. Obviously he hasn’t helped by the concerted attempts to trash him but he has struggled as much as Peters to revive old glories.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    ‘Our continued economic success requires Act to succeed.’

    Don’t like the sound of that flipper and don’t agree with it, an attempt to take credit for the Nat’s success with the economy and compares a strong and steady ship with (excuse the pun) a banana boat. Probably won’t happen, but I’d prefer to see the Nats govern alone to guarantee the economy – the small party hand outs can be fairly crippling. But as someone said on another thread recently, it gives the dominant ‘partner’ the chance to introduce less than popular legislation through the lesser coalition partner. MMP is a tough old road at times.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. flipper (4,060 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (4,298 comments) says:

    January 12th, 2014 at 9:21 am

    ‘Our continued economic success requires Act to succeed.’
    ****
    ‘morning Nos.

    Simply quoting Rodney…

    I also would prefer Nats alone, because that would at least ensure that the xyz Ministers that I work voluntarily to see elected would be accountable to NP members and the voting public. The MMP system provides a ready made “blame them” response, does it not?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Scott Chris (6,137 comments) says:

    Meanwhile, a guy who was possibly just a little bit more significant is way down the page

    Oh my. I thought Sharon was the fat criminal slug he was referring to. My bad.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Scott Chris (6,137 comments) says:

    Who here would put significant weight on smacking policy in deciding their vote in this year’s election?

    I doubt very much that Craig will get any concession on the smacking law. Key is a pragmatic manager and if something is working he won’t change it.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    Yes, that is right flipper. Just don’t like the image of a very minor party trying to take credit for the economy – it’s scare the horses stuff – there could be a looming mass of non voters from the last election woken this time round, minor parties could have the opposite affect to what Rodney seems to be predicting. At this point it seems the Nats dings and knocks are their own and manageable to the public mind. And frankly Labour Greens may look steadier to those ‘once were absent’ voters. However, you will know the nuances far better than me. Cheers.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. dirty harry (489 comments) says:

    geez you’re such a predicable bore Pete George…you always swim against the tide..is the parasite whore Dunne as predictable and as boring as your good self ?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    “A clip around the ear ” is what it would have been called in more sensible times.

    Today it is termed a serious assault ( by wowsers like PG and the extreme left ,Bradford) and it merits a law change and parents going to court.

    Cultural marxism wins again.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Scott Chris (6,137 comments) says:

    geez you’re such a predicable bore

    And you’re a predictable arsehole laj. And in the context of this blog you’re a criminal in bypassing the demerit rules with your name change.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    dirty harry – PG is doing the bidding of his master. they are on a mission to turn craig into a joke (wait for PG to say “hes done that himself”) blah

    I follow shit head dung on twitter. hes always having a crack at the conservatives. calling them loons etc. to which i like to reply “at least hes not a disgraced minister” :D

    PG seems to be slipping though. over the last month or so hes been trying to coin phrases, stupid rhymes etc he ruined the “yeah nah” thing by just being himself.

    im surprised in this thread i havent seen the words “when the law was introduced the sky didnt fall”. that seems to be a common one nowadays when any social law is introduced.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Chuck Bird (4,883 comments) says:

    PG, Why did you not look John Boscawen’s bill before commenting? See paragraph 29. It covers smacks to the head or face.

    http://www.justice.govt.nz/policy/constitutional-law-and-human-rights/human-rights/bill-of-rights/crimes-reasonable-parental-control-and-correction-amendment-bill

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. dirty harry (489 comments) says:

    Get fucked scottchris you dirty homosexual. Ive had my 2 weeks ban and now Im allowed back. Its funny how you can get away with calling me 1) a cnut ( last post ) and today 2) an arsehole …maybe its because I dont go whining like a bitch to the big cheese. Go play on the road Mary.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    People quibbling about whether Milne bowled at 153.6 or 149.8 kph last night at Eden Park.

    Fact is he is genuinely quick and NZ needs a genuine fast bowler. When he gets some control and swing, which will come with experience,he will be value for money , I love watching quick’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. flipper (4,060 comments) says:

    Pauleastbay (4,929 comments) says:

    January 12th, 2014 at 10:27 am

    People quibbling about whether Milne bowled….

    ****

    Milne is quick, bloody quick. Anything above 146-7 is really quick, but the ability to burst to 150 and above is priceless.

    Like most good FBs, his pace varies. That is a weapon. Pedants riding decimal points are on another planet.

    I suspect that this fellow, if he holds together, will get quicker, and may really test other nations – and improve our own responses to the really quicks

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Harry

    I have it on good authority that Scott Chris’s personal hygiene is impeccable, I don’t agree with 99% of anything he writes but I believe he is very clean when he does

    His sexuality has what to so with anything?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. holysheet (387 comments) says:

    Have the police charged anyone yet? if not, why not?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    Colin Craig has made quite an astute move by picking up the anti-smacking issue. It remains a hot button in the electorate because of what Lucia says – it’s a matter of principle, a line in the sand that was crossed.

    Of course dimwits who don’t understand politics think that it’s in the past and anyway it doesn’t matter because of the few prosecutions that have so far eventuated, but that’s never been the point of the 87% who object to it, because it’s a matter of principle.

    I suspect the only reason Key hasn’t repelled it is because he doesn’t have any desire to pick a fight with the left and more importantly, with the media who control his popularity, since popularity is his main aim, bugger doing the right thing, that’s never been what he’s been about, for his entire term. It’s a highly emotive polarising issue and if you want to be popular you never pick up on those because of the emotional spillover it generates into other issues. that’s why he hasn’t done it.

    But this is the very reason why Craig is astute in picking up on it, because it’s a differentiating point that will make people pay attention to his other policies and he only has to get 5/100 on his side, so he doesn’t care about the polarising effect but he does care about the emotive effect because that guarantees publicity, as he has got with Bradford’s hysteria http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9600491/Smacking-debate-back-in-the-limelight and that’s just the start.

    But as usual dimwits who don’t understand politics don’t get this and instead focus on complete irrelevancies, like for example whether or not he’ll make it a bottom line in the eventual negotiations, which has never been why Craig raised it in the first place.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. dirty harry (489 comments) says:

    Paul

    He’s such a whining handbag twirling mincer..he dishes out shite but wont accept it in return and then goes screaming to the boss like a girly blouse..which is probably what he’s doing right now…

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. flipper (4,060 comments) says:

    Heh Nos….

    I suspect that rather too much is being made of the DNVs.

    I haven’t done any analysis of past elections, but there is always a sizeable no vote.
    Getting that down is, I believe, harder than whistling in the wind. ” NO voters” need to be really motivated to get off their collective butt.
    A good and booming economy will / may NOT motivate such folks because Governments get voted OUT, not IN.
    A booming and improving economy does not motive apathetic folk to vote AGAINST the incumbents.

    Well, that’s my view. DPF may be able to enlighten us. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    “A clip around the ear ” is what it would have been called in more sensible times.

    Today it is termed a serious assault ( by wowsers like PG and the extreme left ,Bradford) and it merits a law change and parents going to court.

    I didn’t term it a serious assault kowtow, I said it could be. That’s the problem with physical discipline, one kid’s clip around the ear can be another kid’s brain damage.

    There can be a fine line between an inconsequential whack and potentially dangerous assault.

    There can be a fine line between a parent in control appropriately limiting their physical punishment and losing it and bashing a kid.

    If a parent establishes a habit of clipping around the ear they substantially increase the risk of escalating to assault if they lose their temper.

    Even good parents turn bad tempered sometimes.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    PG

    How many children have been murdered or seriously assaulted by their parents or “caregivers” since the Cultural Marxist bill that was promised (yeah right) to prevent same?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    If Colin Craig makes smacking his bottom line as he has indicated he may swing the election away from the centre right, which would be ironic as economically he’s more left.

    The obedient minion is always spreading disinformation, sowing doubts, inciting disbelief. All to push his fantasist master’s cause.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    flipper – I have my suspicions on the DNVs as well. Many don’t vote simply because they never vote and it has nothing to do with them waiting for Labour to come along and entice them to vote. Or the Greens. And now Kim Dotcom.

    In marketing it’s repeat business that rules. MacDonalds don’t try to convince people who never eat hamburgers or chips to buy, they brainwash those who like buying junk food, they try to entice Burger King and Subway buyers to switch to their brand, and particularly they encourage the already converted to return more often.

    I’m sure some DNVs can be changed but it’s a hard market to win, especially as it is becoming a crowded market (of suitors).

    For Labour the DNVs seem to be an excuse for losing so many voters last election. It can’t have been Labour’s policies or their leader (who was leading them then?), blame the DNVs.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Scott Chris (6,137 comments) says:

    Actually laj/dirty harriet, unlike you I’m openly and exclusively heterosexual not that that really matters.

    You got your ban for calling me a kiddy fiddler, which is as low as you can go in cyberspace.

    Still, nosing around a cesspit seems to be your thing so no surprises there.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Manolo, once again you’re making things up. Very ironic you defend Craig saying “obedient minion is always spreading disinformation, sowing doubts, inciting disbelief” – that is your modus operandi.

    For the record – and you have seen this recently:

    Mr Craig says his party will demand the so-called anti-smacking law be repealed, in return for its support in a coalition government.

    “If we need to be part of a coalition to form a government, I think getting the anti-smacking thing changed is obvious, something a vast majority of New Zealanders want.”

    http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/128392281-colin-craig-thinks-conservatives-can-reach-double-digits

    You’d better go back and ask Colin for another line of attack.

    If Craig stirs up the smacking debate it is quite likely it will damage National’s chances in the election.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. flipper (4,060 comments) says:

    The arguments over what is a smack and what is assault is pathetic.

    Let us face the fact that the law on this is now what Judges say it is. So far, to my knowledge, no one has taken DC Judges to higher courts. If not, that may eventually occur .

    The question for those that say a smacked hand or bottom is assault is: What does one do to a nine (9) year old male, who in a fit of temper (over whether he could wear new school shoes now) picks up a baby stool, hurls it to the floor, breaks it, slams open a ranchslider with such force that the door jumped off its running rail, smashes two pot plants and then hides in the garden, delivering verbals.

    I know what I threatened to do to him just two days ago – put him over my knee and wallop his backside. The only problem I had was that he was far to agile and quick for me to catch him. :-)

    Time out just doesn’t cut it .

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Smacking nine year olds just doesn’t cut it.

    An inconsequential smack does nothing. So you lose the fight, or you escalate to “smacking” that is severe enough to inflict enough pain to try and win. And if that doesn’t work? How far do you take it?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    How many children have been murdered or seriously assaulted by their parents or “caregivers” since the Cultural Marxist bill that was promised (yeah right) to prevent same?

    You tell me kowtow, if you want to make a point about it. Include how many prior to the bill for comparison, otherwise it’s meaningless.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Scott Chris (6,137 comments) says:

    The only time my parents smacked me was when they had lost their temper.

    Anger resulting in violence.

    That’s why I support the anti-smacking bill.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. publicwatchdog (2,593 comments) says:

    Good moaning Kiwibloggers!

    Seen this?

    http://www.3news.co.nz/McCready-alleges-corruption-against-Len-Brown/tabid/1607/articleID/328072/Default.aspx

    McCready alleges corruption against Len Brown
    http://www.3news.co.nz

    Wellington accountant Graham McCready has shown 3 News the criminal charges he plans to file against Len Brown next week.
    ____________________________________________________________

    If the SFO choose not to re-evaluate the bribery and corruption complaint made by Lisa Prager and myself, then on Wednesday 15 January 2014, the above-mentioned documents will be filed in the Auckland District Court for a private prosecution.

    FYI, a copy of this revised complaint to the SFO can be found on http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz, along with other supporting background information.

    Cheers!

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    Have you paid your rates yet, corrupt Miss Dim?

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “The only time my parents smacked me was when they had lost their temper.

    Anger resulting in violence.

    That’s why I support the anti-smacking bill.”

    so you remember back to when you were 18 months old? 12 months old? impressive!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    It happens to adults, too. What a surprise:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2537240/Children-watch-TV-damaged-brain-structures.html

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. flash2846 (284 comments) says:

    Good on you Scott Chris for sticking by your guns. I too had a particularly vicious mother but no law would have stopped her and would have probably made her worse.
    I believe the so called anti smacking law was designed to take the focus away from the real vicious parents/caregivers.
    The truth remains: Children being cared for by Maori are still being abused worse than any other group on the planet. There’s the problem

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. hj (7,011 comments) says:

    Was listening to Tamiti Kruger and Chris Laidlaw this morning. My mind turned to Mike Butler and the NZCPR always asking for money. The political system should be funded out of taxes. The problem is groups capture and control through self-selection, mutual agreement etc. Eventually dissenting voices are stifled where it matters. 30 years ago no one knew what the internet was. Likewise we need a layer in government who are trained in critical thinking who can put a value on an idea to see that it gets a fair airing. The closest thing I can think of of a group without strings attached was the Savings Working Group who were summarily ignored by the 3 main parties and media (business oriented/ left oriented (RadioNZ). THe NZ Productivity Commission gets quoted as it’s terms of inquiry were required to be “broadly politically acceptable”. MMP FPP simply rearrange deck chairs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. publicwatchdog (2,593 comments) says:

    Prepared to put your real name to your defamatory posts BOYolo?

    Gosh – you’re such a whining gutless wonder………

    (Meant of course in a caring way :)

    Nope.

    I have not and WILL NOT pay Auckland Council rates while the Public Records Act 2005 and Local Government Act 2002 are NOT being upheld and residents and ratepayers are NOT being told exactly where rates monies are being spent on private consultants and contractors.

    (I’m still waiting for statements of support from the Tax Payers Union, in my stand for ‘open, transparent and democratically accountable’ local and central government. )

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    The thieving Penny Bright is back.

    Apparently not declaring gifts amounts to shocking corruption, but outright stealing of services that other people have paid for is just fine.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    Since it’s Sunday, here’s a doco giving absolute proof from scientists there is an intelligent creator. Atheists often mindlessly state, incorrectly, that science opposes theology. Well here are scientists proving the exact opposite. If you want some of the hard numbers, go to 26:20 and start watching from there.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. hj (7,011 comments) says:

    Surely smacking is a matter of social intelligence. My mother smacked me once.
    I was having a squabble with my sister and to get back at her I said (in front of my mother) “anyway we showed…“. She didn’t look at me (she turned her head away), smacked me firmly and went on with what she was doing. Never said a word. The message was clear.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Scott,

    The only time my parents smacked me was when they had lost their temper.

    Judging by all you posts about global warming perhaps they should also have smacked you for lying?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    No PG ,you tell us.

    You’re the one who kicked it off this morning at 818.

    You’ve provided the figure of 8 inconsequential prosecutions in the first 5 years .

    We were told this culturally marxist bill would prevent the murder of so many children.That was one of the claims made to be the intent of the bill….

    From the media we can all see the abuse of children at the hands of mongrels continues unabated……

    The act therefore has been a failure in terms of the claims made by its proponents.But it has been a success in that cultural marxism has taken another advnce into the private lives of good parents here in Aotearoa ,formerly New Zealand. In this we must congratulate the Greens in their ongoing successes and deplore the failure of National to stand up for their stated principles.
    It should be repealed.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Here’s a doco giving absolute proof from scientists there is a Tooth Fairy

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    Here’s a doco giving absolute proof from scientists there is a Tooth Fairy

    Says an atheist who can’t stand the fact his faith has been totally destroyed by the very people he naively placed his own faith in.

    Give it up wat. Or alternatively make a coherent argument against the arguments raised in that vid. If you can…

    The only one real scientists can raise is the pool of monkeys typing, a.k.a. the multiverse. An argument which the vid destroys.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    A new bone to gnaw on…

    Prostate cancer is a new “racism” stick with which Maori can beat the rest of NZ.

    On Marae Investigates today, Tariana Turia weighed in to support accusations of “institutionalised racism” over prostate cancer in NZ men.

    This detracted from a rather poignant report about a decent family guy trying to live with an advanced case of the disease.

    Dr Nina Scott (a pale-skin lady, anyone know who she is?) quoted figures which indicated Maori men are less likely to be given PSA (blood tests for prostate cancer) checks than NZ’ers as a whole. There could, of course, be other reasons for this. For example, are Maori guys more reluctant or bashful about telling a GP they have pissing difficulty or peculiarities? Some non-Maori guys also have paid a high price for such bashfulness.

    If Maori suffer higher rates of prostate cancer than NZ’ers on average, this may be genetic. Similarly, if they have a higher death rate from prostate this could also be genetic. There is a strong genetic factor in many if not most cases of prostate cancer, both in the actual occurrence and in the aggressiveness of the cancer.

    For example, white guys in Northern Europe suffer more from it than southern Europeans.
    Everyone knows that if your father or uncles have or had prostate you need to be watchful.

    One interesting possibility is that the sun and vitamin D play an important role. Skin colour seems to have evolved largely to regulate safe creation of Vitamin D by sunlight. If white North Europeans and black North Americans are suffering a higher incidence of prostate it could well be that sun is an important factor. For example, the dark skins of African Americans may deny them enough Vitamin D compared with the amount their ancestors absorbed in less-temperate Africa.

    If this theory proves to be correct, it is likely that both white skinned Southlanders suffer higher rates of prostate cancer than white-skinned Aucklanders, and also that brown skinned Maori will suffer higher rates than paler skinned New Zealanders. This is in addition to any inherited family predisposition, which affects both white and Maori families.

    Regardless, it’s reprehensible that Turia should jump on the victimhood “racism” band waggon before causes are scientifically established.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Says an atheist who can’t stand the fact his faith has been totally destroyed by the very people he naively placed his own faith in.

    Who destroyed your faith in the Tooth Fairy, Reid?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. grumpyoldhori (2,362 comments) says:

    Now if Milne can learn to swing the ball at high speed he will end up a real handful to any batsman.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    Jack5

    For years we’ve been treated to the theme,by the media ,academics and other cultural marxists that Maoris (and PI’s)due to racism have an “institutionalised lack of access to health care and services”……..

    …..someone then actually had a look at the claim and came up with the true answer……

    …..couldn’t be arsed to turn up or to make an appointment, doesn’t make the same impact as a sound bite though.

    Same goes for hospitalisation for rotten teeth in children,etc etc

    And before I’m accused of racism ,note ,I’m not blaming Maoris. I’m pointing a finger at the Marxists who insist on blaming honkey for all ills in Aotearoa ,formerly New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    Who destroyed your faith in the Tooth Fairy, Reid?

    My mother. What has the tooth fairy to do with the question of God, wat? Other than a childish conflation to the argument which has the same import as a five year-old who holds their hands over their ears because they don’t want to hear what their parents are explaining to them?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Reid,

    Your mother was atheistic with regard to the Tooth Fairy?

    Doesn’t that make her evil or something?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. OneTrack (3,093 comments) says:

    pg – “There can be a fine line between an inconsequential whack and potentially dangerous assault.”

    Yep, and thats what Section 59 was about. Overstep the mark and you were in trouble.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. OneTrack (3,093 comments) says:

    “Children being cared for by Maori are still being abused worse than any other group on the planet. There’s the problem”

    No, the problem is the anti-smacking law didn’t mention not putting children into tumble-dryers. Silly politicians – they should have thought of that one.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. OneTrack (3,093 comments) says:

    “Regardless, it’s reprehensible that Turia should jump on the victimhood “racism” band waggon before causes are scientifically established.”

    That’s all shes got – it’s always the visitors fault. Hmm – didn’t the Key government actually put millions into a initiative focussed on Maori health issues. Was it a waste of money?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Is the plot thickening? Dunedin councillor Jinty MacTavish has repeated her campaign to ban oil and gas from council.

    Mayor Dave Cull has used very similar language:

    Up to this point the policy has been that the treasury company can invest in a number of things including oil companies, there are probably a number of things, the parameters off the top of my head would not allow them to invest in, for example armaments or tobacco or whatever, but up to this point that’s been the policy.

    The same comparison with armaments and tobacco. That seems to be more than a coincidence. And repeating “up to this point”.

    How closely is Cull liaising with MacTavish on this? Mayor and councillor aligned on oil ethics.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. OneTrack (3,093 comments) says:

    Pete – So Dave Cull is giving away the mayoral car then?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. publicwatchdog (2,593 comments) says:

    I have DISPUTED and refused to pay rates because Auckland Council books are NOT open and residents and ratepayers are not being told EXACTLY where public monies are being spent.

    So, those whining about my making a stand on principle that they are arguably too gutless to do, don’t support ‘open, transparent and democratically-accountable’ local and central government?

    They certainly don’t support ‘transparency’ – or they’d put their names to their posts – as I do?

    (Meant of course in a caring way :)

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Keeping Stock (10,339 comments) says:

    @ grumpyoldhori (12.11pm) – quite so grumpy; and with one Shane Bond being the bowling coach for the NZ team, there’s every chance that Milne will indeed learn that skill,and maybe do something like this:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Snarkle (118 comments) says:

    Good on you Penny. Not only are you taking a stand on principle, it coincides point by point with your own financial self interest!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    Not only the car…….they’re going to turn off all the heating too,bwahahahahahahaha

    Tell ya what ,the main library in Dunners is so well heated that the staff can work there in t shirts in winter,no joke!

    Gone are the cardies ,no need for them ,when the relatively poor rate payers of this declining city are paying through the nose.

    http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/287819/dunedin-younger-poorer-more-educated-average

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. RichardX (326 comments) says:

    Reid (14,656 comments) says:
    January 12th, 2014 at 11:53 am
    Since it’s Sunday, here’s a doco giving absolute proof from scientists there is an intelligent creator. Atheists often mindlessly state, incorrectly, that science opposes theology. Well here are scientists proving the exact opposite. If you want some of the hard numbers, go to 26:20 and start watching from there.

    Are you sure you linked to the correct vid?

    As always Reid, You chose to believe what you chose to believe but nothing in that vid gives ‘absolute proof’ and I know that I cannot change your beliefs
    Even the intro to the 26:20 segment you specifically mention, the intro states “which suggest that the universe actually may have a purpose and some physicists are now suggesting it does have a purpose”
    Not exactly a definitive statement of absolute proof
    Personally I do not agree the finely tuned universe argument is much good for either side but it is used by some as a proof for the non existence of god
    As Richard Carrier states

    “Similarly the “fine tuning” of the universe’s physical constants: that would be a great proof—if it wasn’t exactly the same thing we’d see if a god didn’t exist. If there is no god, we will only ever find ourselves in a universe finely tuned (in that case, by random chance), because without a god, there is no other kind of universe that can produce us. Likewise, a universe that produced us by chance would have to be enormously vast in size and enormously old, so as to have all the room to mix countless chemicals countless times in countless places so as to have any chance of accidentally kicking up something as complex as life. And that’s exactly the universe we see: one enormously vast in size and age. A godless universe would also only produce life rarely and sparingly, and that’s also what we see: by far most of the universe is lethal to life (being a deadly radiation filled vacuum) and by far most of the matter in the universe is lethal to life (constituting stars and black holes on which no life can ever live). Again, all exactly what we’d expect of a godless universe. Not what we’d expect of a god-made one.”
    Thus, we have exactly the universe we’d expect to have if there is no god. Whereas a god does not need vast trillions of star systems and billions of years to make life. He doesn’t need vast quantities of lethal space and deadly matter. Only a godless universe needs that. I make a more detailed survey of this kind of evidence in “Neither Life Nor the Universe Appear Intelligently Designed” in John Loftus’s The End of Christianity. It also does no good to say such a random accidental universe is improbable, because the convenient existence of a marvelously “super-omni” god is just as improbable. Either way you are assuming some amazing luck. Which leaves the evidence. And the evidence is just way more probable if there’s no god. Thus, we’re forced to choose between which lucky accident it was, and the evidence confirms the one and not the other.”

    The thing I find most dishonest is using Leonard Susskind while arguing that the finely tuned universe is “absolute proof” of an intelligent creator

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    I’m afraid from that quote and also the video, Richard’s and Leonard’s contention on the vastness of the universe being the explanation of the production of the conditions supporting life, is totally destroyed by the video I posted Richard, since the video focuses on the laws of physics which apply all over the universe and which apply 100% to it no matter where in the universe you are. So Richard’s and Leonard’s argument (they are actually simple assertions, not an argument) make no sense at all, since the laws of physics are universal.

    The fact he doesn’t get that suggests that both you and he have fundamentally misunderstood the (actual) argument in the video I posted. In which case I suggest you watch the video I posted again, it’s not rocket science, after all. Or perhaps you haven’t even watched it once, but you just desperately googled for something vaguely fitting what you imagined the video would be saying.

    Sorry to destroy your hallucination, but that’s science for you, isn’t it. Pays to make sure you understand what the heck the argument actually is, before you attempt to critique it, lest one look quite the fool.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    flipper 10.50. I agree about the DNVs, people with a dollar in their pockets and a clear sight of an improving future probably prefer to keep their feet up. But that lethargy is unpredictable and fertile ground for unexpected results. I wonder if 2013 may have been a better time for re-election because the financial future looked less bright. Personally, I’m for steady as she goes with the safe hands – but it’s a bit disconcerting that the sea will soon be awash with all sorts of dire predictions, sell offs and bogus claims such as credit to Act for National’s fairly impeccable financial management – perhaps credit to them for helping get the coalition over the line. Looking forward to see who will make the running and how, but no doubt there will a lot of mining of the DNVs either with promises or predictions of gloom due to any apathy by them.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    The thieving Penny Bright is back.

    And a shameless thief Miss Dim is.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Sorry to destroy your hallucination, but that’s science for you, isn’t it.

    The ironing is delicious.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    The ironing is delicious.

    Not at all, wat. The only argument scientists (like e.g. Hawking) have managed to come up to refute the science in that video is the multiverse theory which is the equivalent of the monkeys typing and producing, eventually, Shakespeare. And they came up with it because what the video raises, as Hawkings admits, is a real problem, unless you want to admit there really is an intelligent designer.

    And since some scientists (and other assorted illogical thinkers) simply can’t bring themselves to admit that, they pretend that there’s a multiverse, despite there being absolutely no evidence for such, anymore than there is any evidence of real monkeys really typing and really producing Shakespeare. All they’re proving is that atheism is such a powerful religion they’re prepared to abandon the fundamental precepts of their profession in order not to accept what to them is an unpalatable and unacceptable conclusion, regardless of the facts.

    And that’s the dilemma you atheists are faced with, that’s your only “scientific” solution to it, and yet, you call those of us who accept the irrefutable logic, illogical.

    That’s what’s ironic, wat.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. calendar girl (1,232 comments) says:

    Penny at 1:27pm – “So, those whining about my making a stand on principle that they are arguably too gutless to do, don’t support ‘open, transparent and democratically-accountable’ local and central government?”

    If you want to make such a stand on “principle”, as you claim, I suggest that:
    a) you demonstrate first your bone fides by paying your overdue and current Council rates in full; then
    b) you undertake legal action in the Courts against Auckland Council, seeking reimbursement of such rates paid on the grounds that the Council is operating illegally.

    That way everyone wins:
    – Council receives rate payments to which most of us believe it is entitled at law;
    – your fellow-citizens of Auckland cease incurring additional costs (including interest on Council debt) that result from non-payment of your rates; and
    – everyone (including you) has the satisfaction of knowing that your “stand on principle” – relating to a point of law – has been resolved transparently in the Court system, the proper constitutional medium for determining such matters, rather than through a whim on your part that appears suspiciously beneficial to your own personal financial circumstances and cashflow.

    Give it a go, Penny; it could become a conscience-cleansing and career-enhancing experience. If you succeed in the legal action you will recover your costs, and maybe your rates payments too. Most importantly, your success as an anti-establishment activist will be immortalised as you demonstrate the benefits of an ‘open, transparent and democratically-accountable’ Court system. Inevitably, widespread public acclaim and high political office will follow.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    No one should be surprised by this

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537886/BBCs-six-year-cover-secret-green-propaganda-training-executives.html

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Reid,

    To spell it out for you, when someone who invokes magic and magical pixies to “explain” stuff then goes on to say “that’s science for you”, that’s irony.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. stigie (1,183 comments) says:

    Penny, you dont pay your rates bill to the ACC….

    Why not stop paying your electricity bill to your provider ? [maybe you already have !]

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. cha (4,017 comments) says:

    Of course it was a best seller.
    /

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/01/mark-levin-dismisses-paytoplay-charge-180896.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    wat,

    To spell it out for you, when someone invents a multiverse to explain the fine tuning of the laws of physics which have been necessary to create the universe and life as we know it, when had it just been one tiny fraction different then the universe as we know it wouldn’t exist, and there is no evidence for a multiverse, then they are inventing something with no scientific basis to explain away an inconvenient phenomena that they otherwise can’t explain, and calling it science.

    That’s irony.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Sofia (857 comments) says:

    Penny Bright
    If you refuse to pay rates and are the attention of the Council authorities for that, you may possibly be considered to be taking a principled stance.
    If however, your non-payment is unnoticed and without action impacting on you, you are just taking advantage of a situation you have created – that is: found you can get away without paying rates –and your morals are even less than those of Len Brown, who you so strongly criticise.

    Confirm you are responsible for paying rates for 86a School Rd Kingsland, Auckland 1021, and post a copy of a rates demand, with arrears and penalties, on one of your websites and provide a link here, and people may believe you.
    Since your usual screeds of words rate so highly on the krap-o-meter, you do need to provide actual evidence and the transparency you demand of others to have any credibility.

    Inquiries indicate that what you claim may only be the ‘technical’ truth – somewhat similar to prevaricator John Banks.
    Meant, of course, in the nicest way possible :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Reid,

    No, that’s not irony. That’s the positing of a hypothesis which may or may not be correct but which will be objectively and dispassionately judged solely on the evidence, and which may indeed one day be discarded as incorrect. Unlike your infantile attachment to magical pixies.

    That’s science for you.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    The religion of peace.

    Reports of cannibalism and other horrific acts of violence surfaced in the Central African Republic on Saturday night as Christian militias went on the rampage…reports were corroborated by an aid worker who spoke to The Sunday Telegraph, who said: “They were taking machetes to people and burning the bodies and eating them.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/centralafricanrepublic/10565525/Violence-and-reports-of-cannibalism-in-CAR-after-president-quits.html

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    wat,

    No, it is irony. That atheists like you rest your case on the precise exact equivalent of millions of monkeys typing to eventually produce Shakespeare (even when you have no evidence the monkeys even exist) and calling yourselves scientific; and alleging those who disagree are possessed of “infantile attachment to magical pixies.”

    That’s the very definition of irony.

    Face it.

    Facts are facts, wat.

    The most amusing thing is that you atheists can’t even deny there is a problem, when people like Hawking have admitted there is and a whole scientific theory exists to “explain” it.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. RF (1,398 comments) says:

    Anyone heard how the wantabe pirates in Dunedin got on blocking the harbour. I heard that there were about 20 in plastic canoes etc and 40 gas guzzling vehicles in the car park. The glove puppet has his own little boat that he borrowed from his child’s toy box.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Reid,

    As has been pointed out to you before, imagining magical pixies to explain away complex scenarios in fact explains nothing.

    Not least because you are positing something even more complex to try to wish away the complexity.

    You humiliate yourself, explain nothing, and make yourself look even more ridiculous and pathetic by mocking those who attempt to delve into the subject using objective science and evidence.

    The reason everyone laughs at you is because you think that simply uttering the word ‘magic’ explains anything. Trust me on this one, it doesn’t.

    Facts are facts, wat.

    So, magic pixie then?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Dean Papa (784 comments) says:

    As a fraction of the lifespan of the Universe, as measured from its beginning to the evaporation of the last black hole, life as we know it is only possible for one-thousandth of a billion billion billionth, billion billion billionth, billion billion billionth of a percent. And that’s why, for me, the most astonishing wonder of the Universe isn’t a star or a planet of a galaxy; it isn’t a thing at all, it’s a moment in tme. And that time is now. – Prof Brian Cox

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    Who would consider voting for this grossly obese con-man?
    http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8782630/dotcom-keeps-hinting-about-politics

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. OneTrack (3,093 comments) says:

    “Who would consider voting for this grossly obese con-man?”

    People who are easily impressed with free fireworks displays and ice-creams, and want more free stuff?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Colville (2,268 comments) says:

    Who would consider voting for this grossly obese con-man?

    Plenty of fools on the left Manolo.

    ………

    Manolo, in other news, had a 2002 Craggy Range Sophia last night….wow! :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Photos and comments on the Otago Harbour flotilla here: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Pro-Oil-and-Gas-Otago/202345206637605?fref=ts

    Many vehicles, a few plastic boats, then “Twenty minutes after the “flotilla” assembled, and its all over…”

    Quiet about it on the Oil Free Otago page.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    So wat, nothing to say to my 4:05 then? Although addressed to me, your 4:15 appears to be a hallucination of something someone else had said, because it bears no relationship to my 4:05.

    But that’s OK, I sense you’re quite emotional over your religion being destroyed by science, you must be feeling very distressed.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    See wat, it works like this.

    The only thing that can possibly explain the enormous fine-tuning of natural laws that every scientist even atheist scientists admit exists, is either an intelligent designer or a multiverse.

    The problem is, there is no known way to observe any universe other than the one we have. Is there.

    Therefore the atheist’s theory that attempts to explain the admitted problem cannot be “scientifically” verified. Can it. Since science is based on observable phenomena, isn’t it.

    So it comes down to what is the most rational response.

    And atheists say, the most rational response is to hallucinate that there’s a multiverse. Which is the precise equivalent to pretending the most rational response to why the works of Shakespeare exist is because there was a typing pool of monkeys who produced it.

    This is only “rational” if you will not admit that it’s more rational to say that Shakespeare designed his work and that’s why they exist.

    And that’s your problem, wat. Isn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. chiz (1,144 comments) says:

    There are plenty of people in the scientific community Reid who think that fine-tuning arguments are bunkum. Just because Hawking and one or two others think there is a problem doesn’t mean everyone agrees.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. chiz (1,144 comments) says:

    Reid:

    The only thing that can possibly explain the enormous fine-tuning of natural laws that every scientist even atheist scientists admit exists, is either an intelligent designer or a multiverse.

    And here’s the problem Reid – many scientists and atheists don’t agree that there is an “enormous fine-tuning” problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    There are plenty of people in the scientific community Reid who think that fine-tuning arguments are bunkum.

    There are plenty of people in the scientific community chiz who don’t think that fine-tuning arguments are bunkum as well.

    Nature also disagrees – look at the fibonacci sequence occurrences throughout the natural including in us. Then look at particle physics. Then look at carbon generation ion the heart of stars and the resonance tuning involved that. Etc. Then add up all the probabilities of all those things and buy a lotto ticket, you should win big, if you’re right.

    Seriously, check my original post, I told you where to start viewing if you want some examples of fine-tuning. Only takes about 10 mins from that point.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. chiz (1,144 comments) says:

    I can’t be bothered watching a long video, especially on my data plan. It is incredibly unlikely that it presents anything I haven’t seen before. The Fibonacci sequence doesn’t have anything to do with fine-tuning and if the video claims it does that proves that the video is bunk as I suspect it is. Personally I’m not convinced that the Hoyle’s argument about carbon fusion and the fine-tuning involved has any merit whatsoever.

    A big problem with these kind of arguments is that they make fairly arrogant suppositions about life – that it can only occur in one form, and in only one type of universe. We don’t know that. In universes that are very different to ours there may be forms of life possible that are very very different to us. Its entirely possible, for all we know, that out of all the different possible types of universe a large fraction of them may be inhabitable by one sort of life or another.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. MH (753 comments) says:

    it’s because he thinks he’s germane to NZ politics, ja?

    As for smacking 9 yr olds, the new fashion is to provide them with minders who supply them with alcohol.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Akaroa (557 comments) says:

    Harking back to the earlier comments on corporal punishment and associated issues, my somewhat late contributory comment is that back in the 40s my parents believed in administering correction physically.

    A wooden spoon was the chosen instrument and the offender’s clad nether regions the target.

    My abiding memories are:

    A. It didn’t hurt.

    B, Both punisher and punishee were both acutely embarrassed by the whole ridiculous charade.

    It didn’t happen often, but when it did i couldn’t help having a mental picture of those circus clowns with floppy feet and huge check suits who beat each other about with water-bladders and the like.

    Totally ineffective discipline-application-wise!!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Paulus (2,627 comments) says:

    DotCon is not a New Zealand citizen so he cannot be an MP, and is unlikely never to have an NZ Passport, unless Greenpeace Labour get in then he will add this to his other ones – German and Finnish nationalities.
    Tri National ……………….

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    Akaroa

    According to the bleeding heart types, smacking a kid with a spoon ranks up there in heinousness!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Reid (16,454 comments) says:

    I can’t be bothered watching a long video, especially on my data plan.

    I told you the segment I gave you was 10 mins long. You clearly don’t understand the subject if you allege:

    The Fibonacci sequence doesn’t have anything to do with fine-tuning and if the video claims it does that proves that the video is bunk as I suspect it is.

    It does because fine tuning is present not only in particles and atoms but also molecules and in cells and the complexity increases as you move up the chain. But even if you do limit it to particles you’re still faced with insurmountable odds trying to explain it coming about by random chance.

    Face it chiz, you’re like wat. Your religion is destroyed but you can’t bring yourself to admit it, you’d rather hallucinate a million monkeys produced Shakespeare than admit Shakespeare did it. That’s what you’re saying about the universe, and you can’t escape that. Personally, I’d rather be rational, unlike you and your fellow atheists.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    kowtow – what you keep failing to acknowledge is that for every ten parents who paddle their kid’s backsides harmlessly there is one probably one who thinks they have a right to lay into their kid inflicting whatever pain and suffering they want to and another who sometimes loses their temper and far exceeds their usual moderate discipline.

    And a further problem is that because the ten paddlers keep insisting that using a wooden spoon, or belt, or electric cord, or vaccuum cleaner hose or whatever is their right as a parent and fine the thugs and temper losers think that what they do has society’s approval.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    you’d rather hallucinate a million monkeys produced Shakespeare than admit Shakespeare did it.

    This is a poor example – there’s no credible dispute that Shakespeare existed and that he wrote a whole lot of stuff. In contrast there’s no proof at all of, for example, where and how the various texts of the bible originated. A thousand monkeys are unlikely to be responsible but many people with many memories, ideas, beliefs, selections and interpretations are certain to have been involved.

    It’s ironic when Reid accuses others of hallucinating.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. nasska (11,503 comments) says:

    If corporal punishment is to be used it should be short & administered on the backside by nothing more potentially damaging than an open hand. Further, its use should be tapered off as a child develops a sense of reason.

    Bradford’s crap legislation was designed to reduce the excesses of physical punishment meted out by the likes of irascible, eighteen stone women bloody near taking a kids head off with a clout as many of the bad tempered bitches used to do. Similarly it put the kibosh on sadistic religious nutters who used the “spare the rod & spoil the child” crap to satisfy their screwed up impulses.

    An occasional smack on the arse is an effective circuit breaker to correct a child determined to put on a performance wherever & whenever possible but it would require the wisdom of Solomon to draft a law to regulate parents’ reactions when they’re under stress.

    For those still yearning for the clock to be reversed may I suggest a quick read of Colin Crump’s book, “In Endless Fear” describing the early lives of he & his better known brother, Barry. If that is what you think the youth of the country need then you’re sick puppies.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. Fletch (6,387 comments) says:

    As expected, I don’t think I saw anything on either the One news or Prime News in the reporting on the death of Ariel Sharon about his giving back Gaza in 2005. They focussed more on his supposed crimes and nothing about Gaza.

    Biased much?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. kowtow (8,470 comments) says:

    RF

    See freemarks’ links at 913.

    I see that Pro Oil has 545 likes ,while Oil Free Otago (OFO) or Oh Fuck Off has 418.

    This is Oil free link……
    http://oilfreefuturesummit.weebly.com/saturday-11th-conferene.html

    Looks like Greenpeace activism again.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Reid,

    The only thing that can possibly explain the enormous fine-tuning of natural laws that every scientist even atheist scientists admit exists, is either an intelligent designer or a multiverse.

    Or something else.

    And as I explained before, you are saying that the universe is so comlex that only an even more complex magical pixie could have created it. That a grown man could seriously spout such infantile, babyish nonsense is simply embarrassing. I’d ask how this even more complex pixie came to be created, but frankly I’m not interested in delving more closely into your inadequacies.

    But here’s a clue: any time you find yourself saying “magic”as an explanation for something, you’ve already excused yourself from the debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    I can’t be bothered watching a long video”.

    Allow me summarise it for you:

    “Magic”

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Apart from Mark Taylor the Channel Nine commentators are in full self stroking mode today. They are bloody awful. Especially Mark ” Lord Haw Haw” Nicholas

    Where’s Bill?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    So Colin Craig says that as the prosecution of 7 people for whacking the head of a child and 1 for hitting the hand of a child has not ended child abuse then the prosecutions were a waste of time and should not continue.

    And by his profound logic as prosecuting drunk drivers and those committing violent assault has not ended drunk driving or violence …

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    And also from the Dom Post there is Colin Espiner totally failing to comprehend the facts on alcohol – the lower levels of use of alcohol by those under 18.

    The idea that alcohol should not be sold to those 18 and 19 because of the amount of drinking under age 18 is thus invalid – especially as supplying to those under 18 is now targeted by law. So the decline in use under 18 should decline. It is already lower than when the drinking age was last 20.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. chiz (1,144 comments) says:

    Reid:

    I told you the segment I gave you was 10 mins long.

    Yes but its about half an hour into the video, and I’m on a cheap plan. If I was to jump to the time you mention does my computer download all the preceding half hour and therefore chew up my monthly data limit? I don’t know and don’t care.

    This may come as a surprise to you but some of us are already familiar with the fine-tuning argument. I have come across numerous incarnations of this argument over the decades and at a variety of levels – from popular level to academic. Given that your video appears to be creationist in tone it is very very very unlikely that it will include anything I haven’t encountered before.

    The Fibonacci sequence doesn’t have anything to do with fine-tuning and if the video claims it does that proves that the video is bunk as I suspect it is.

    It does because fine tuning is present not only in particles and atoms but also molecules and in cells and the complexity increases as you move up the chain.

    Let me repeat: the Fibonacci sequence has nothing to do with fine-tuning. If the video say it does it just confirms the video is bunk, and if you think it does it just proves that you don’t understand a thing. The fine-tuning argument claims that the laws of physics of the universe are fine-tuned for life. The Fibonacci sequence is not a law of physics.

    But even if you do limit it to particles you’re still faced with insurmountable odds trying to explain it coming about by random chance.

    Still no evidence that the odds are insurmountable.

    Your religion is destroyed but you can’t bring yourself to admit it

    Atheism isn’t a religion. And nothing has been destroyed.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Fletch (6,387 comments) says:

    Peter Mayhew (Chewbacca in the Star Wars movies) has posted some of the photos he made on-set while acting in the movies.

    Here’s one of Carrie Fisher and stunt double relaxing between takes, both in their (in)famous Princess Leia bikini slave-girl costumes as featured in Return Of The Jedi.

    https://twitter.com/TheWookieeRoars/status/420741269434810369/photo/1

    Enjoy!

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “And by his profound logic as prosecuting drunk drivers and those committing violent assault has not ended drunk driving or violence …”

    the difference being they sold us the anti-smacking law like it was going to stop all violence towards kids. just your typical lefty lie

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. RF (1,398 comments) says:

    The green Taliban ship of fools has sunk without a trace in the Dunedin Harbour. Poor old glove puppet .. He was trumpeting that there would a huge crowd protesting and all he got were a few smelly soap dodger gweens who after 10 mts of being seasick retreated to the boat ramp.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    dime, society ended the use of force against children by non parental adults (cane etc) and then moved to reduce the use of force against children by their parents as well. Given the number of step parents around now that was necessary.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. nasska (11,503 comments) says:

    A man walked into work on Monday with two black eyes. His boss asked what happened. The man said “I was sitting behind a big woman at church. When we stood up to sing hymns, I noticed that her dress was caught in her crack, so I pulled it out. She turned around and punched me square in the eye”. “Where did you get the other shiner?” the boss asked. “Well” the man said “I figured she didn’t want it out, so I pushed it back in”.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    Reid, whatever arguments you have regarding how come the universe as a habitat for life is so really well put together, they do not provide evidence for man being directly created by God in God’s image rather than via evolution.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    they sold us the anti-smacking law like it was going to stop all violence towards kids.

    Who sold you that? I don’t recall anyone trying to sell that. It should’ve been obvious it’s a ridiculous claim, there’s no way one small law tweak would do that.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Sue Bradford’s Third reading speech had no promises of stopping all violence against kids. She said “Law change alone is not enough”.

    What we have been simply seeking to do is remove a defence that has allowed some parents to get away with quite badly beating their children and, most significantly, that has stopped police from taking action in many situations of violence against children.

    She states one of the primary goals was so “children will finally receive the same legal protection as adults”.

    She says more needs doing, and the law change needs monitoring to make sure it works ok and doesn’t impact on

    Bradford, Sue: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — Third Reading

    [Volume:639;Page:9284]

    SUE BRADFORD (Green) : I move, That the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. Nearly 2 years ago my member’s bill to repeal section 59 of the Crimes Act was drawn from the parliamentary ballot. Although I was certainly well aware of the controversial nature of the issue that the bill deals with, after facing hostile audiences when on various election platforms around the country, little did I realise back then the full extent of the difficulties that were yet to come.

    I came to Parliament after many years of working for the rights of unemployed people and beneficiaries, and was very used to our groups and ourselves being seen as outcasts—koretake, blamed, and despised. I was used to being physically assaulted when on street protests and, often enough, arrested as well. However, none of that prepared me for the level of vitriol and for the ugly lies and threats cast at myself and others, simply for standing up for the right of our babies and our children to live lives free from violence.

    I thought that in a country that prides itself on being a great place to bring up kids, and where people from all parts of society talk constantly of their love for children, it would be like motherhood and apple pie to work for a law change that benefits children. Instead, the debate over whether to get rid of the defence of reasonable force for the purpose of correction has shown quite starkly that some people believe that the right of parents to legally beat their children is so important that they have stooped to threats of violence and other abhorrent tactics. However, it has in the end been a wonderful thing that despite the ugliness of some aspects of the public discourse, so many members of this Parliament from almost every party have chosen to support my bill in its amended form.

    I acknowledge and thank all involved, from all sides of the House, for their support within this outbreak of consensus politics, and I regret, on behalf of Peter Dunne and Judy Turner, that this bill has seen their party break apart because someone called Mr Gordon Copeland is so dedicated to fighting for the right to beat children that he has abandoned his long-term allegiances.

    The bill in front of us tonight fulfils my original goal of removing the defence of reasonable force, while at the same time dealing with some of the fears expressed at different times by both the Labour and National caucuses, and by some members of the public. The Labour-led amendment that came out of our select committee consideration of the bill is aimed at reassuring parents that they will not be prosecuted if they use reasonable force when doing things like putting a child in a room for time out, forcibly removing a child from danger, or restraining a child from causing damage to people or property. I am aware that some lawyers believe that this new provision may be misused as a legal defence for having hit a child as part of control, and because of this I believe that its use as a defence in future must be monitored to ensure that it is not used this way in practice.

    The second significant amendment to the bill has been the one put forward just 2 weeks ago by Peter Dunne, which was agreed to by both Labour and National through John Key’s leadership. It encapsulates within the bill the long-established police discretion regarding the action they take when deciding whether to prosecute in very minor cases where there is no public interest in proceeding. This new provision simply affirms in law what is standard police practice under their existing prosecution guidelines, but I think it is useful in helping to calm some of the unnecessary fears that have been driven up by the bill’s opponents.

    Neither the select committee, myself, nor anyone else supporting this bill has ever intended that all parents who ever lightly or occasionally hit their children should be subject automatically to investigation and police prosecution. What we have been simply seeking to do is remove a defence that has allowed some parents to get away with quite badly beating their children and, most significantly, that has stopped police from taking action in many situations of violence against children.

    Some of the most powerful submissions to the select committee came from paediatricians, who talked about the injuries they see constantly and about how most of those injuries are inflicted in the name of child discipline. Only last week we were made all too aware of the case of the 3-year-old Ōtara boy who was killed as a result of beatings inflicted in the name of toilet training. The police officer who led the investigation, Detective Senior Sergeant Richard Middleton, said, among other things: “… what I will say is keep your hands off your kids. Don’t hit them. It’s not on. There’s no need for it.” I think it is a red-letter day when a senior police officer feels able to make such an unequivocal statement in the national media. Police, like paediatricians, see the daily consequences of what happens when people assault their kids just to teach them a lesson.

    Some people say that smacking or spanking is not violence. I ask them: “What else is it? If a burly gang member, much larger than you, smacked you in the pub tonight, what would you call that?”. Some people say that the deaths of children like James Whakaruru or the little Ōtara boy have nothing to do with this bill. I say that they have everything to do with it. There is a spectrum of violence used against our babies and children, and one person’s light, occasional tap is another person’s beating or shaking to death—all in the name of so-called correction.

    I have been much criticised by the bill’s opponents for my unwillingness to support the early amendment put up by Mr Chester Borrows, which attempted to define the nature and level of force that parents could legitimately use against their kids. I simply reiterate that to support any such definition would make things even worse for children, by having the State define acceptable violence and by entrenching the legal and social concept that it is OK to beat children but it is not OK to beat adults.

    It is important that as we finally vote this bill into law we also look forward to what else needs doing. Law change alone is not enough. To be really effective, the bill we are passing tonight needs to be accompanied by a well-planned public information campaign that tells people the intentions and implications of the law in a way that does not make people feel frightened or guilty. The Government also needs to make an ongoing commitment to maintain and extend the SKIP programme, so that strong, clear messages about alternatives to physical discipline are available to all parents around the country.

    Funding for community groups that support children, parents, and families needs to be increased. We need research on, and monitoring of, the attitudinal change that I feel sure will result from this new law—as it already has, I think, during the 2 years of public debate. The interpretations of the new law, and its implementation by the courts, police, and Child, Youth and Family, all need to be monitored well. I welcome the 2-year review that was instigated by the Minister David Benson-Pope. I also strongly recommend that the Government works closely with the relevant non-governmental organisations, following the bill’s passage, on an action plan to ensure that the best possible outcomes are achieved for children and families.

    In conclusion, I would like to take a moment to thank some of those who have played such a critical role in championing and supporting this bill in getting it to the stage it is at tonight. An enormous number of organisations have worked tirelessly for reform over the last 2 years, including Plunket, Barnardos, Unicef, Save the Children, the Families Commission, the Office of the Children’s Commissioner, EPOCH, Every Child Counts, the Body Shop, the Child Poverty Action Group, Parents Centres, and many, many others. I am sorry I cannot name them all.

    Many individuals have also played a key role—people like Beth Wood, the Ritchies in Hamilton, Mike Coleman, Deborah Morris-Travers, Megan Payne, Ian Hassall, Cindy Kiro, Kaye Crowther, Robert Ludbrook, Sonja Hogan, Rhonda Pritchard, and David Kenkel. I salute all of them and apologise to all the many others I do not have time to mention tonight.

    I also say a special thanks to the Reverends Anthony Dancer and Margaret Mayman, and to all the other clergy involved in hosting the moving ecumenical service that a number of us attended in the cathedral up the road a couple of weeks ago, for their assistance in mobilising Christians in support of this bill. I also acknowledge the huge amount of work done by the MPs and officials involved in the very long select committee process, including the sterling efforts of our Parliamentary Counsel Office adviser, Elizabeth Grant.

    Finally, I say a huge thanks to all the MPs who stood firm in support of this bill during some fairly dark days, including Helen Clark and the Labour caucus, the entire Māori Party caucus, all my own Green Party colleagues, Peter Dunne, Brian Donnelly, Doug Woolerton, and Katherine Rich. Those members are all heroes in their commitment to a vision of a country where children will finally receive the same legal protection as adults. I also acknowledge the lead that John Key took in working to find a way through a seeming impasse, so that his party, too, could lend its full weight to the mana of this bill.

    But, in the end, this bill is not about us here at Parliament—or, indeed, about adults at all. It is about our children, and what I believe is their God-given right to grow up secure in the love of their families, valued as equal citizens to the rest of us, and without the constant threat of legalised violence being used against them.

    http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/speeches/48HansS_20070516_00001048/bradford-sue-crimes-substituted-section-59-amendment

    That speech should be shown whenever any outlandish claims are made about the bill.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. nasska (11,503 comments) says:

    Whatever anyone thinks of the repeal of S59 it has discouraged mindless violence dished out by parents in the name of discipline. Colin Craig & his followers are probably mad, if not evil, when they want a return to the values & standards of the 50’s……

    IN ENDLESS FEAR: A TRUE STORY by Colin Crump.

    From the New Zealand Herald:

    “My left ear was still quite black and the pain in my right hand, I learnt later, was actually from a fracture … The livid purple mark across my throat drew the most attention … clearly showing a sock pattern that hung in there for days … made by the old man holding my head down to the floor with his foot across my throat while he laid into me with a broken piece of horse harness. It was a hell of flogging and the smell of his feet in his stinking socks will haunt me forever. Barry, who was just one year older than I, having turned eight only the week before, had also just experienced one of his worst floggings ever and the sock-mark imprinted on his throat was semi-permanent.”

    Such was the horror of the childhood of that good, keen man Barry Crump, as shared and now told by his brother Colin. This book sustains the horror right through: the beatings that left one or other sibling trembling beneath the porch for days on end; the beatings of their mother; the looking-the-other-way of their extended family; the police’s refusal to do anything, instead returning Colin and Barry to their father after a brave attempt to find “child welfare”. As Colin says of their older brother Bill, who possibly suffered even more violence than the other two, “While no excuses are made on his behalf for any of the faults and failings that plagued his life as a husband and father – as with Barry – when you are aware of the treatment these men received in their earliest and most vulnerable years, what else can you expect?”

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. itstricky (1,830 comments) says:

    they sold us the anti-smacking law like it was going to stop all violence towards kids.

    Who sold you that? I don’t recall anyone trying to sell that. It should’ve been obvious it’s a ridiculous claim, there’s no way one small law tweak would do that.

    F’ing John Key. He introduced that apprentice bill and promised that it was going to solve ALL unemployment. Typical righty.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. RichardX (326 comments) says:

    As always Reid, you believe what you chose to believe
    “absolute proof from scientists there is an intelligent creator.” is a huge statement and once again, you have failed to meet the burden of proof anywhere but in your own head

    Reid (14,663 comments) says:
    January 12th, 2014 at 1:51 pm
    I’m afraid from that quote and also the video, Richard’s and Leonard’s contention on the vastness of the universe being the explanation of the production of the conditions supporting life, is totally destroyed by the video I posted Richard

    You have missed the point of the video I posted
    The vid in your post uses a quote from Leonard Susskind as part of the evidence of the finely tuned universe when the quote was taken out of context and he quite clearly does not believe in a creator. There are likely to be many more such misrepresentations in there but I have already wasted an hour of my Sunday on this crap

    A video containing; a mismatch of out of context quotes, repeated usage of ‘maybe’, ‘suggests’ and ‘possibly’, arguable philosophical points such as the cosmological argument for the existence of god, and other red herrings does not provide “absolute proof from scientists there is an intelligent creator” no matter how fervently you believe it

    To use a statement such as “Your religion is destroyed” is truly desperate and to claim “Personally, I’d rather be rational” adds to your delusion. I do feel pity for someone who misses the irony of saying magic is a better answer than science because science does not claim to know everything and not all scientists agree on everything. Have you considered that you may be suffering from some sort of condition such as cognitive dissonance?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. lilman (959 comments) says:

    Love oil drilling in the south,I hope it goes well and we have oil and gas coming out our ears.

    Cant believe the mayors position ,if he were my mayor his phone would be red hot.soft cock local government.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. SPC (5,619 comments) says:

    “Astronomers have measured the distances between galaxies in the universe to an accuracy of just 1%.

    While we can’t say with certainty, it’s likely the universe extends forever in space and will go on forever in time. Our results are consistent with an infinite universe,” he said.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25663810

    His comments which are not certain conclusions are at variance with opinion that the universe had a beginning in time and is finite. They would also exclude any other universe.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. Pete George (23,561 comments) says:

    Funny itstricky.

    Some seem to be convinced that the MOM bill would allow all government departments and SOEs to be sold off cheap to Key’s overseas mates. The Sky conference centre deal will make all poor people gamble. The GCSB bill will mean all our phone calls and emails will be recorded forever. Etc etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    What is it with you nasska and Colin Craig? You seem obsessed with something you believe about the man as though it’s representative of something in your own past and are tormented by it.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. nasska (11,503 comments) says:

    Study a bit of two bob psychology in your free time Nostalgia? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    ‘Colin Craig & his followers are probably mad, if not evil’

    Don’t need to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    i don’t give a shit if C Craig is a bit loopy.

    If he turns out to be what we need to keep Cunliffe, Ardern, Robertson, Moroney et al out
    he has my vote.

    And of course compared to the Greens…….

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    If you needed any confirmation as to how fucked up the Obama administration is….

    http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-white-house-iran-nuclear-deal-20140110,0,1510706.story#axzz2qB0hztpW

    History will record Obama as the most shallow, weak, useless president ever.

    Maybe the one man who single handedly fucked up and sold out the whole free world.

    This useless prick makes Neville Chamberlain look like …….(add your own adjective)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Since it’s Sunday, here’s a doco giving absolute proof from scientists there is an intelligent creator. Atheists often mindlessly state, incorrectly, that science opposes theology. Well here are scientists proving the exact opposite. If you want some of the hard numbers, go to 26:20 and start watching from there.

    Your anencephalic existence is proof that an omnipotent omnibenevolent god does not exist. Did you even pass school c?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    The Messiah to split from Marie Antoniette?
    http://www.jerusalemonline.com/news/world-news/around-the-globe/report-barack-and-michelle-obama-are-going-to-divorce-2822

    According to some reports in Russia and the United States, Barack and Michelle Obama are going through a severe marital crisis, which reached its peak after distorted photographs were taken of Obama with the head of the Danish government during the memorial ceremony of Nelson Mandela. There is no official confirmation to the rumors.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote