Craig standing in East Coast Bays

June 22nd, 2014 at 3:16 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Conservative Party leader will contest the East Coast Bays seat at the election, pitting him against Foreign Minister Murray McCully – unless a deal is done.

Today’s announcement came at the party’s campaign launch, which took place at Rangitoto College’s auditorium – on the edge of the East Coast Bays and North Shore electorates.

The decision comes as no surprise after recent rumours.

During the week, Craig said he expected a deal with National to give him a free run at a seat in September’s election but that has not yet been confirmed by Prime Minister John Key.

Craig expected the Conservative Party, currently polling about 1.5 per cent and well below the threshold for seats in Parliament, would be thrown a lifeline: “I think National will stand aside somewhere.”

In 2011, Craig was defeated by National backbencher Mark Mitchell in Rodney by more than 8000 votes.

I think whether National does a deal will come down to two fairly simple things.

  1. Do they need to do one? If the answer is no, then they won’t. But you can in theory lose the election eve if you’re on say 48% and Labour is on 25% if the Greens, Winston and Kim Dotcom team up.
  2. Are the Consrvatives likely to win enough seats to make it worthwhile to do.

The party also listed four key issues it would push: All referendums to be binding, tougher penalties for criminals, no more separate Maori seats and a flat tax after the first $20,000 would be tax free.

How many of those they would get, will depend on how many votes they get. The more votes you get, the more of your agenda you can get through.

Tags: ,

149 Responses to “Craig standing in East Coast Bays”

  1. mike tan (485 comments) says:

    It is odd to be in the position of wanting (?) a deal from a party you ran a negative advertisement about.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Johnboy (16,597 comments) says:

    “The party also listed four key issues it would push: All referendums to be binding, tougher penalties for criminals, no more separate Maori seats”

    As long as we have Mad Cath to witter on in Murri before each question no one will miss Te Ururoa or Hone! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    ….”I think whether National does a deal will come down to two fairly simple things.”…..

    There’s a third consideration DPF. The number of party votes National will lose by cuddling up to the CCCP.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. smttc (752 comments) says:

    National should forget about Colin Craig and doing deals and campaign to govern alone.

    This deal would alienate more than it would attract.

    Pete George will be along in a moment to tell me it would not be right or democratic to seek to govern alone in MMP.

    Two ticks National.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Manolo (13,783 comments) says:

    P.G. must be fuming. Fresh orders from Ohariu are needed in these desperate times.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Johnboy (16,597 comments) says:

    Red’s single vote is equal to 2000 votes from those prog, liberal, pinko bastards nasska! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    Baity for president! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Chuck Bird (4,890 comments) says:

    National could agree to binding referenda on conscious issues like smack, abortion etc. I am saying could not would. However, there is no way National would agree to referenda on such things a partial asset sales, trade deals or military alliances. Labour would not either under a responsible leader. However, Cunliffe would agree to anything to be PM even for a few weeks or months.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Johnboy (16,597 comments) says:

    President for Life surely nasska? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ nasska (10,250 comments) says:
    June 22nd, 2014 at 3:24 pm
    Yes, I think National needs to do their maths on this one. If Craig wins the seat but doesn’t get enough party votes to drag another MP in, then National will have to pamper to Craig’s demands, and achieve no extra votes than they would have without a deal.

    East Coast Bays, whilst a Nat area, is not as conservative at Epsom for example. There are many young people living there that would not be attracted to Craig’s policies, and might refuse to vote for him. Thus splitting the National vote, and allowing another party to succeed. That is presuming the Nats would still field a player.

    As I have said, I’d rather Nationals win outright, than have a coalition that included Craig/Maori/Whyte and Dunne.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Johnboy (16,597 comments) says:

    What’s your position regarding a Cunner’s/Russel/Laila/Hone/Winnie glorious victory Judith?

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. dog_eat_dog (781 comments) says:

    Binding referenda on human rights issues is opening NZ up to the tyranny of the majority. It lets you take rights away from people you don’t like without having to deal with the fact you are a bigot.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. tvb (4,425 comments) says:

    No surprises here. But Craig is a flake, that is the problem. I think the public know the difference between the electorate vote and the party vote. So a clear signal from the National Party they want people to give their support to Craig in order for there to be a National Government would be respected. But for Craig to insist that National drop its candidate is irritating. But one has to overlook these minor irritants if Craig is important to the forming of a National Government. It would be helpful if Key campaigned in the East Coast Bays seat and he could make his position known then.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. stephieboy (3,102 comments) says:

    I understand the Con Party have a non negotiable item and that is to make the teaching of Moon Hoax landings and other related Conspiracy theories compulsory at pre school and primary school.
    Also the same with Creation “science”.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 31 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ Johnboy (14,410 comments) says:
    June 22nd, 2014 at 3:35 pm

    What is my position

    Probably on the right hand end of the Olympic, close enough to the Brandy, so I don’t risk sobering up between drinks.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    A couple of odd comments:

    Pete George will be along in a moment to tell me it would not be right or democratic to seek to govern alone in MMP.

    smmtc I wouldn’t tell you anything like that because it’s nonsense.

    I think it’s very unlikely National will get enough votes to govern alone, and John Key has said similar, but that’s got nothing to do with being “not right or democratic”, it’s the reality of our MMP so far and it would be very unusual for National to increase their vote to a record level after two terms.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Johnboy (16,597 comments) says:

    Would that be the RMS Olympic or the bar of similar name?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Chuck Bird (4,890 comments) says:

    @Judith

    “Yes, I think National needs to do their maths on this one.”

    Judith you know about as much about math and MMP as you do about banking and David Bain.

    Neither ACT or UF bought in an MP but under MMP it gave a National coalition more MPs. Many someone a lot smarter than me couls explain to you how MMP works. I would not not be silly enough to try.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ Pete George (22,240 comments) says:
    June 22nd, 2014 at 3:39 pm

    Yes, that is the sad reality of MMP. We have seen nothing but a deterioration in the standard of politics in this country due to it.

    Not only does it allow coat-tailing, it means that nothing substantial can be achieved, because even the winning party cannot adhere to their values, because they have to pamper to their coalition partners. As long as the system exists in its current form, we are not a democratic country – instead the minority controls how we will live.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    P.G. must be fuming.

    Why would I be fuming because Colin Craig has made an announcement that was almost as predictable as inane suggestions from Manolo?

    It's quite odd that Craig is forced into making an announcement like this hoping Key and McCully will do him a favour without apparently discussed it at all with them.

    How does he think our democracy works? If he gets a set or two or three does he expect that no negotiations will be required, he just needs to wait until National offer him what policy concessions he wants?

    There's no way National can go to binding referenda. If we had that this term it would have made a farce of our whole democratic system if Labour and Greens could have overturned legislation campaigned on and then passed by Parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ Chuck Bird (4,545 comments) says:
    June 22nd, 2014 at 3:44 pm

    Where did I say that ACT or UF bought any MP’s in due to MMP?

    Re Banking. I had an experience where I questioned my bank over something. They were able to produce a twelve year old record that went to their advantage. If it had been the other way round they would have told me what you were told – there are no records kept.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    Not only does it allow coat-tailing, it means that nothing substantial can be achieved, because even the winning party cannot adhere to their values, because they have to pamper to their coalition partners.

    I don’t agree with that. In the main coalition policies achieved have been pretty much proportional to size of party and number of MPs.

    Coat tailing has enable more fair representation than if we just had a ridiculously high threshold.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Manolo (13,783 comments) says:

    Yes, P.G. National should also start negotiations with UnitedFuture, party of the leaky fantasist and yourself. That is democracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    The party also listed four key issues it would push: All referendums to be binding, tougher penalties for criminals, no more separate Maori seats and a flat tax after the first $20,000 would be tax free.
    ==================
    Hmm, well everyone of those four are straight from the ACT policy manual with slight nuances.

    So does that make it a vote for CCCP and Act mean we might finally get some better policy. Or will Key endeavor to separate them like he did with ACT and Maori so he didn’t have to vote right but could continue to entrench Helen’s socialist policy.

    Any sort of luck he will need both the CCCP and ACT parties to govern. Then he can be pushed into getting rid of Maori seats and sell more rubbish etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    On the surface the idea of binding referenda could be tempting but it would lead to poor, knee-jerk legislation. It could be worthwhile for the conservatives amongst us to consider that policies they were absolutely against would be easy to sell to the electorate.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    @mcquillanatorz

    McCully: Craig’s run in ECB “changes nothing”. Will be “campaigning strongly” to win. Stronger rhetoric than earlier in the week.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    Maniolo – you’re still deliberately making deliberately false claims about my involvement with UF which ceased completely some time ago.

    And you still haven’t had to gumption to state your interest and involvement in the Conservative Party, you seem to keep avoiding when asked about that.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    @kimbakerwilson

    McCully: Craig’s announcement changes nothing. This year I will be campaigning strongly to seek electorate’s support again.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    So where is McCully on the party list?

    He may be able to campaign strongly, and yet a nod and a wink from the right person will ensure Craig gets the vote, and McCully still gets in.

    So in essence, McCully’s statement means nothing. What will mean something is if the nod is given, and people in the area agree with Craig – I don’t think that is certain. He’s too much of a fruit loop, dressed up as an old fashioned gum ball.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    Bizarrely Stuff says:

    Craig expected the Conservative Party, currently polling about 1.5 per cent and well below the threshold for seats in Parliament, would be thrown a lifeline: “I think National will stand aside somewhere.”

    But…

    @mcquillanatorz

    Colin Craig says he’ll “politely decline” a cuppa tea deal with John Key, because “voters didn’t like” the 2011 stitch-ups.

    Craig wants National to stand aside without being asked because voters don’t like seeing what Craig wants and needs?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Colville (2,269 comments) says:

    If National will ever have a few votes spare to burn by inviting the Cons into the tent it will be this election. Labour will never ever be this sick and weak again.

    To me bringing Craig and the Cons onside is a political necessity maybe not needed this time around but in 17 Nats will need them badly. UF will be gone as Dunne won’t stand again and its 50/50 if ACT will wither and die.

    Peters will also be gone, he is barely “all there” now. All of Winestone Firsts votes will be up for grabs and a lot of those people just won’t vote Nat but have similar ideas.

    Craig needs political nous, his heart is in the right place and he has the ability to capure a lot of Lefty christian votes along with older , pro life and anti gay voters. There are a lot of potential votes in those groups.

    When better to train him up as a Pollly than when Labour are just so utterly fucked?

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    “……There’s a third consideration DPF. The number of party votes National will lose by cuddling up to the CCCP…..”

    And where are they going to fuck off to Nasska – Labour?

    Or are Nationals wisened voters going to stay at home because they think conservatives and Christians are worse than marxists, sexual marxists , unionists et el? Seriously?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. tvb (4,425 comments) says:

    Murry McCully is a loyal party person. He wants a National Government more than most as he wants to continue as Foreign Minister. He will get a senior list position that guarantee’s his return to Parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. David Garrett (7,291 comments) says:

    tvb: So “Craig is a flake..” Really? Clearly you must have met him…how many times, can you remember? What in particular did he say or do to lead you to the conclusion that he is “a flake”? I am all ears…

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Ross Miller (1,704 comments) says:

    Sooooooooooo, Mr Craig is running scared of Mark Mitchell and Paula Bennett … why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Colville (2,269 comments) says:

    Isnt McCully looking for a overseas posting?
    Maybe one will just happen to open up in 2 months time so McCully wont be able to stand again!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    “….To me bringing Craig and the Cons onside is a political necessity maybe not needed this time around but in 17 Nats will need them badly….”

    Exactly Colville….if national snob the conservatives and don’t improve the lot for center voters in the next 3 yrs – then they’ll flock to the conservatives in ’17. They won’t stand for 9yrs of nothing.

    National has not taken the center anywhere in 6yrs – national simply went to the center and maintained everyone of helens policies- by twinking them at select committees.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. tvb (4,425 comments) says:

    I have only seen his public statements as have most of the public who have to size him up. That is my impression that he is a flake. That is why Key is cautious about endorsing him. And impressions count. If Craig can demonstrate a consistency of views that are well thought through then he might be OK. But so far he seems to be all over the paddock. I have an open mind so I will wait to see how he goes. So far I am not impressed. He seems shallow and illogical. That is a flake.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    When better to train him up as a Pollly than when Labour are just so utterly fucked?

    You mean, like national were under English, when they scored 21% in an election, not that long ago?

    Labour have a huge problem with their leader, but lets not pretend that it hasn’t happened before. No one liked English, and yet, here National are, being strong and cuddly. Only a fool would consider that Labour won’t bounce back – it only takes the right person to step up as competition, as history as proven.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    I wouldn’t call Craig a flake, he seems quite persistent and determined. It’s cost him millions already – but he still apparently hasn’t tried to talk to National to work out any deals.

    He needs to learn that in politics he can’t just pay and pray.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Liam Hehir (125 comments) says:

    Judith, that election was so long ago that it occurred at a time Laila Harre valued her credibility as a leftwing politician.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    they should give him a seat.

    didnt national have something blocked recently cause that disgraced prostitute disagreed? it would be nice to have another party to turn to.

    also, the deal with dunne is dodgy. the guy polls at 0% yet wags the dog. its plain wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Chuck Bird (4,890 comments) says:

    @Judith

    “Re Banking. I had an experience where I questioned my bank over something.”

    Look at my response on the other thread.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/06/labour_failed_to_declare_150000_from_liu.html#comment-1346202

    Judith, with all due respect I think the back know more about its record policy than you do.

    They could not produce the old records even with a discovery order from the other party’s lawyer.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Unity (584 comments) says:

    Anyone who has met Colin Craig will tell you that he is far from a flake. He is a very down to earth normal bloke who, like many of us, is horrified at the direction this country is heading in. Let us not forget that he is a self-made multi-millionaire. A flake wouldn’t be able to achieve a fraction of what he has.

    Also to say that binding referenda would be a no-no with many issues is complete and utter rubbish. Switzerland have had binding referenda for over 140 years and they work very well. That country would probably be the only really democratic country in the world today. Because the politicians know they have to listen to the people otherwise they will petition for a referendum, means they have very few referenda. Also only 50,000 signatures trigger a referendum, unlike the 250,000 or over 300,000 signatures needed here – not sure which. At the moment we only have a democracy once every 3 years when we vote. The rest of the time we live in a dictatorship where the politicians disregard overwhelming referenda.

    The big worry is that Parliament would corrupt Colin Craig if he got in, like it has many others but I feel he is a strong honest person underneath and because he is wanting to enter Parliament to change our country for the better, I feel he will remain true to himself and those who elect him.

    Too many of you have been listening to the media who have been having a field day portraying Colin Craig as someone he doesn’t even resemble as well as putting words in his mouth. One wonders what they have to fear!!

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    I could happily vote for ACT if I lived in Epsom. I could even reluctantly vote for Dunne if I lived in Ohariu. But there is no way that I would vote for Craig if I lived in ECB. I don’t like his anti-asset sales policy. I don’t like the way he wants to meddle in people’s private lives. I don’t like his whacky moon-landing and chem-trails beliefs. I don’t like the way he has spent millions of bucks and thinks that National should gift him a seat, when he hasn’t been able to build a popular political party.

    If it were a choice between Craig and, say, a Green… I’d probably vote for the Green.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Fisiani (1,039 comments) says:

    I see the chance of Colin Craig winning ECB is 40% on ipredict. That suggests to me that no deal has or will be done (at this stage) If the Conservatives are polling over 2-3% I’m sure the good people of ECB will work out how to best keep John Key as Prime Minister. It will be interesting to see how that stock changes in the next three months. Those with inside knowledge could gain a lot. I expect a sudden price rise would occur prior to any announcement.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “Anyone who has met Colin Craig will tell you that he is far from a flake.”

    if people think hes a moron or whatever then they have either fallen for typical left wing bullshit – hes a right winger so must be stupid or they are grasping as straws cause they dont like his policies.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. dad4justice (8,222 comments) says:

    “The big worry is that Parliament would corrupt Colin Craig if he got in”

    Indeed it would be, as it’s a cess pit of overpaid cockroaches, but in saying that it would be rather refreshing to see somebody honest struggling with all the lying filth.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    dime>hes a right winger

    No he isn’t. He’s an old fashioned conservative left winger. Like Peters, but younger.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I think Winston Peters is a fairly apt comparison. Younger, with a good dose of religious mumbo jumbo thrown in for good measure. Populist, without being popular.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. peterwn (3,273 comments) says:

    A third fairly simple thing:
    3. Will it scare punters? John would not want to drive some of the soft vote into the hands of Labour/ Greens / NZ First.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. smttc (752 comments) says:

    dime, Craig is no right winger. In essence, he is socially conservative and economically wet. And I cannot believe that so-called conservatives like Redbaiter and Harriett support the man who they are only using to try and moderate National in government anyway. Fuck ‘im I say.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    mikenmild>I think Winston Peters is a fairly apt comparison.

    Like Peters, or Anderton, or Dotcom, or Palmer in Australia, he has an inability to work with other people or influence them inside an existing political party and therefore needs to set up a party based on him that agrees with him all the time. We suffer from enough of these weird little populist one-man political parties, and don’t need another. I’d prefer my politicians to be able to work as part of a team like normal functional adults.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. smttc (752 comments) says:

    davidp, hear, hear.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    Fuck!….what a choice.

    1. A self serving fuckwit who serves at the behest of the National party but is so delusional that he thinks the people of Ohariu actually want him as their MP.

    2. A bat shit crazy sky fairy follower who is of the opinion that we should all retreat back to the 50’s and follow the word of is lord.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    There will be a deal as McCully can happily do that.

    Contra the hysteria and fantasies above it would be an act of stupidity for National to assume it will be able to govern alone. It needs coalition partners, and both ACT and the Conservatives are useful in that regard. Craig will bring in one or two supporters, which could end up being crucial.

    It’s a matter of smart strategy, and the airhead liberals and atheists who are whining about Craig or indulging in Naaska’a irrational and insane fantasies are neither thinking straight (or at all) and certainly not thinking about National’s interests.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. David Garrett (7,291 comments) says:

    There is absolutely no comparison between Peters and Craig…Peters is a lying untrustworthy charlatan while Craig…isn’t.

    He is however rather politically naïve, and that that continues to be the case after all this time is a little concerning. The “Moon landings and chem trails” stuff are perfect cases in point…Jamie Whyte of ACT also stumbled into the same kind of trap when philosophising – rather than being a politician – over the rights and wrongs of screwing your sister if she is into it. Watch the MSM and both mens’ political opponents endlessly recap those to things in the weeks to come…

    I am concerned that Craig still doesn’t seem to have got himself a good chief of staff and an even better Press Sec who would stop him stumbling into media set traps..

    But back to you tvb….what you are in fact saying is “Based on the media perception painted of him, Craig appears to be a bit of a flake”…that is a country mile away from him actually being one..

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. tamati (75 comments) says:

    Nationally should think long term and gift Craig the seat. The number of voters who abandon The Nats will be minimal, Key already proved his liberal credentials when he supported Gay marriage.

    Supporting Craig will do two things,
    -It bring the small but significant christian conservative vote into the right wing block. They have been frequently marginalized and forgotten, but should be an important component to a broad right wing coalition. This is not just about 2014, its about securing a long term voting block in elections to come. Many of these christian voters don’t automatically vote National, they come from a broad spectrum of the electorate. Most European nations have a christian conservative party which scores in the 5-10% range.
    -It will undermine Winston Peters. Looking at the blue rinses in Craig’s launch, it’s clear he’s fighting over the same piece of cake as Peters. National will be infinitely more stable in government is Peters is given an early retirement. The Nats should do anything to finish of Peters once and for all.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    Harriet @4.14pm

    ….”Or are Nationals wisened voters going to stay at home because they think conservatives and Christians are worse than marxists, sexual marxists , unionists et el?”…..

    I can only speak for myself but I would either not vote or hold my nose & go for whatever other party would cause the least amount of damage to NZ should National accommodate the CCCP. I would mention that I cast my first vote in 1969…..that was for National & apart from a protest vote for Bob Jones when RDM went off the rails in 1984 I’ve stuck with them.

    National is a broad church. I go along with about 80% of what they do & that’s about as good as it gets. The CCCP were formed to satisfy the vanity of one man & his dedication to forcing his moral standards on to the rest of NZ.

    I disagree with everything he says, everything he wants & everything he stands for.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    Yeah, I’m inclined to agree with that assessment David. Comparing Craig to Peters is just dumb, but he is naive politically, to some degree anyway, but then so is the current ACT leader.

    “what you are in fact saying is “Based on the media perception painted of him, Craig appears to be a bit of a flake”…that is a country mile away from him actually being one..”

    Liberal/atheist Righties will swear black and blue that the MSM cannot be trusted, unless the MSM is bashing Christians and/or social conservatives, and then the MSM suddenly becomes a source of indisputable truth. Check Naaska's claims to be deeply cynical about the media, unless the media is bashing the Catholic Church or Christians in general, and then, abracadabra, suddenly Naaska quoting MSM movies as evidence!!!

    We are not dealing with rational people here, but hypocritical and irrational bigots.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. dad4justice (8,222 comments) says:

    “We are not dealing with rational people here, but hypocritical and irrational bigots.”

    Amen to that Shawn , big bigot bruv and narsekisser are totally unhinged haters.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Viking2 (11,471 comments) says:

    quillanatorz

    McCully: Craig’s run in ECB “changes nothing”. Will be “campaigning strongly” to win. Stronger rhetoric than earlier in the week.
    ============================
    Key will ensure Mc Cully is in Ethiopia or Iraq or someplace for a month before the election.
    That will sort that out.

    Or Tonga or Samoa or somewhere else nice.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    Tamati

    “It bring the small but significant christian conservative vote into the right wing block.”

    I’m less sure about that as I’m familiar with that demographic personally. I think the CP will attracts some of them, but not all or even a majority. Conservative Christians ( a larger group than you think) are too politically diverse to vote for one party.

    What I suspect the CP will do is capture enough conservatives, and enough of Winston’s elderly audience, to bring in two or more extra MP’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    ….”We are not dealing with rational people here, but hypocritical and irrational bigots.”….

    You’re dealing with people who support individual freedom & the right to do what they wish without having the dictates of someone else’s imaginary friend forced upon them.

    In other words mind your own bloody business & live your own lives. (a concept totally alien to religious people).

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. tamati (75 comments) says:

    I don’t think binding referenda and constitutionally possible anyway. If a referendum was past that through up something really against the Government’s, they could simply legislate again to ignore it.

    It’s an undeliverable promise.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Cam M (1 comment) says:

    Please Nats don’t give this fruit loop a free ride.

    I know lefties who are actually voting Nats for the first time because the InternetMana hook-up scares the life out of them and they want stable government even if they have to grit their teeth a bit that they have gone to their dark side.

    The way things are going, Labour people will stay at home and National will have its best win ever.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. OneTrack (3,107 comments) says:

    nasska – “There’s a third consideration DPF. The number of party votes National will lose by cuddling up to the CCCP.”

    Maybe, but the likelihood of it being an issue in practice seems low. The conservatives will have low vote and Key will be able to strongarm them if they get out of line. That is not a benefit that Labour will have over the greens.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. tamati (75 comments) says:

    @Shawn

    Conservative Christians have voted together in the past. The Christian Coalition, Destiny and the Kiwi Party all managed to get between 1% and 4% of the vote. It’s not a huge block, but it’s certainly significant and at present it’s wasted.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    David G>He is however rather politically naïve, and that that continues to be the case after all this time is a little concerning.

    Concerning? The guy just isn’t very bright. We wouldn’t be paying him any attention if it wasn’t for the fact that he is spending millions of bucks to get himself in to parliament, is failing, and expects National to give him a seat. Why do we need an awkward dim man in parliament, just because he thinks he should be there?

    The nearest safe National seat to my place is probably Otaki. I’m happy to stand as an independent and vote for National in parliament if Nathan Guy stands on the List only, and John Key and Guy tell everyone to vote for me instead. This makes more sense as a strategy than gifting ECB to Craig… I won’t reduce National’s party vote.

    The political reality is that if National don’t endorse Craig, then he’ll attract about one percent of the vote and that will be wasted. If they do endorse Craig then a few percent of the National vote will shift to Craig. Craig will win, say, three seats and National will lose three seats. National will also loose a few percent of the vote from moderate voters who don’t want to leap back to the 50s, and a couple of percent of the vote from people who disapprove of the vote rorting. It is unlikely then that National can win, but if they do then we have three years of populist economic muddle and authoritarian meddling in people’s private lives to look forward to.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    The term “conservative Christian” is not a very useful identifier anyway. It’s all in the eye of the beholder. By Roman Catholic standards I’m a liberal!

    There are also significant differences between conservative Catholics and conservative Protestants with the former tending to be economically wet and the latter dry.

    I think Craig’s demographic is closer to NZF’s, people who, Christian or not, feel that Wellington liberals no longer listen to them.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. cha (4,020 comments) says:

    We are not dealing with rational people here, but hypocritical and irrational bigots.

    Says miracle boy.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/09/general_debate_26_september_2011.html#comment-881692

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    ” The Christian Coalition, Destiny and the Kiwi Party all managed to get between 1% and 4% of the vote.”

    Yes, but I seriously doubt that 4% is even close to the total number of conservative Christians, which is my point.

    Christian Heritage did well amongst some, especially the Dutch Reformed, but had major problems gaining much of the Charismatic/Pentecostal vote, and had almost no success amongst Roman Catholics.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    Bring Graham Capill back….he’ll pull in the punters.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. publicwatchdog (2,597 comments) says:

    Sorry to pop the hot air balloon – but in my considered opinion, Colin Craig is NOT honest.

    I was a fellow Auckland Mayoral candidate in 2010, and asked him directly if he supported 35 year private water contracts.

    Colin Craig told me that he didn’t support 35 year private water contracts – but did support 5 year water contracts.

    Which means that in 2010, Colin Craig supported water privatisation, because private water contracts are the most common form of water privatisation.

    So – I find it rather dishonest/sneaky (?) – in my considered opinion, for Colin Craig and HIS Conservative Party to (apparently) oppose asset sales, (privatisation) when Colin Craig has previously confirmed support for water privatisation, via private water contracts?

    http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/index.php?page=Issues

    Economy:
    …………………………………….
    No asset sales, no large land sales to foreigners, no ETS and free trade only if on a level playing field
    __________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Another question which I have asked Colin Craig directly, and never had a straight answer, is what is his/ the Conservative Party policy on a Capital Gains Tax?

    Given Colin Craig’s position as a Director and the major shareholder of Centurion Management Services Ltd, which advertises ‘services to developers’, then surely his position on a Capital Gains Tax, is a serious and significant question?

    So – who else apart from me is asking it?

    ( Information about Centurion Management Services Ltd, from both their website and the Companies Office:

    http://www.business.govt.nz/companies/app/ui/pages/companies/817427?

    backurl=%2Fcompanies%2Fapp%2Fui%2Fpages%2Fcompanies%2Fsearch%3Fmode%3Dstandard%26type%3D )

    http://www.centurion.co.nz/index.php?page=AboutUs
    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

    No disrespect – but if the National Party were to ‘gift’ Colin Craig the East Coast Bays seat, in order for National to get their desperately-needed electoral support, in my view, that would be the biggest electoral rort of all.

    Why?

    Because Colin Craig and his ‘Conservative Party’ have NO proven political track record.

    What has Colin Craig ever achieved for the public, or the public interest?

    He’s stood for public office at election time, then sunk like a stone in a pond, without trace in between elections – in my view.

    It seems to me that Colin Craig polls people to find out what they want – then regurgitates back what they want to hear, hoping to effectively ‘kill two birds with one stone’ by particularly attracting voters from the NZ First constituency.

    But words are VERY cheap ………….

    It’s proven actions that count, and in my opinion, Colin Craig and his Conservative Party have yet to point a stick at ANYTHING which they have achieved by their ACTIONS for the public or the public good.

    If I’ve missed anything – please let me know ……

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright
    ‘Anti-corruption / anti-privatisation Public Watchdog’

    http://www.dodgyjohnhasgone.com
    www,pennybright4mayor.org.nz
    http://www.occupyaucklandvsaucklandcouncilappeal.org.nz
    http://www.pennybright4epsom.org.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    “Says miracle boy.”

    Yup. A rational person does not preclude any possibility, including the possibility of miracles. Otherwise it’s not reason your talking about, but ideology.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    “Sorry to pop the hot air balloon – but in my considered opinion, Colin Craig is NOT honest.”

    Does he steal money by not paying his rates Penny?

    Accusations from a dishonest thief are not credible.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. tamati (75 comments) says:

    I accept that “Conservative christian” is probably a not entirely accurate. But there definitely is a section of society who are devoutly or fundamentally Christian enough to consider voting for a Christian based party., akin to Gerry Felwell’s “values voters”. I guess their principle target would be Evangelical/Born Again type Christians, rather than more traditional denominations (Catholicism, Anglicanism), where religion is only a part of life, not the driving force.

    Probably the census would be the best place find accurate numbers of these sort of religions.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    “You’re dealing with people who support individual freedom & the right to do what they wish without having the dictates of someone else’s imaginary friend forced upon them.”

    No I’m not. Your happy to force secular liberalism on people, or to force conservatives to live in a liberal society, and you will vote to ensure that. So unless your an anarchist, your claim is total bollocks.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Nostalgia-NZ (5,214 comments) says:

    Have to hand it to CC no cap in hand with the bloke – straight out ‘I want McCully’s seat.’

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Colville (2,269 comments) says:

    The CCCP got 2.7% lasttime with Craig standing in an electorate (?) without TV time and with Zero lead up time. They launched 10 weeks out?

    Craig needs some serious media training and a person in between him and the media. Basic stuff but as yet he hasnt grasped those things.

    I think it says good things about his honesty. He really thinks he can talk from the heart and the media wont bend and manipulate the message.

    He will learn fast or perish.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. publicwatchdog (2,597 comments) says:

    Watch your defamatory language sheepish ‘Shorn’.

    Got a Judgment from any Court that I have been convicted of ‘theft’?

    No – you haven’t – so pull your head in.

    Also – try putting your name to your posts – like I do?

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    “…….The CCCP were formed to satisfy the vanity of one man & his dedication to forcing his moral standards on to the rest of NZ…..”

    And you’re then going to say no one else in politics is not vain? or not forcing/projecting their moral standards on to the rest of NZ? Seriously?

    “…… I disagree with everything he says, everything he wants & everything he stands for…..”

    Public referendum is the real guts of policy for the conservatives AND NZ now and in the future – as it leads to what Switzerland is now doing. They only change the laws that are acceptable to a majority.

    Who here has ever said that the Swiss are bigots, homophobes, racists, sexists ect? – And they’ve had public referrenda for 140yrs!

    Surely the Swiss would be all of the above if public referrenda was so ‘very evil’. But they’re not – as most people look up to the Swiss as being respectable citizens in a very civil country!

    Mr Craig is NOT banning homosexuality – he’s only suggesting the gay marriage law is put to referrenda, which is fair enough given that the likes of the London School of Phsyciatry have come out recently and said that gays are ‘not born that way’ and nor is homosexuality ‘immutable’.

    There is no reason why marriage has to involve gays – unless you only believe the ‘rationalised’ arguements from the gays – and reject all other arguements.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. OneTrack (3,107 comments) says:

    publicwatchdog – “Which means that in 2010, Colin Craig supported water privatisation, because private water contracts are the most common form of water privatisation.”

    I’m going to regret this. “Most common form….”. So what. None of that actually describes what Craig actually meant. It just describes what you somehow assumed about somebody whose politics you already disagreed with.

    What about if Craig meant 5year operate only private water contract ie ownership of the asset isn’t changed. In that case, 5 years would be “better”? than a 35 year contract. Is that privatisation?

    In my considered opinion, you should give more consideration before jumping to arcane positions that seem to have little logical foundation.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    ….” Your(sic) happy to force secular liberalism on people, or to force conservatives to live in a liberal society, and you will vote to ensure that”…..

    But I’m not voting for anyone to be forced to do anything liberal. I’m not forcing you into a gay marriage against your wishes….I’m not forcing you to have an abortion…..if you want to die screaming in pain I’m not going to force euthanasia onto you.

    But for some weird reason you presume the right to force the values of your rubbishy creed on to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Captain Pugwash (98 comments) says:

    OK… So here is the new school curriculum; Dinosaurs lived at the same time as man, but were wiped out in the great flood, as Noah’s ark was a bit too small… The theory of Evolution is “just a theory, not fact”; Man did not walk on the moon; “Chem trails” are part of a Jew world bank conspiracy hand in hand with the illuminati; The earth is in fact just a few thousand years old, the creation took place just before evensong, 23rd July 4536 BC.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. OneTrack (3,107 comments) says:

    The thing that gets me is, we all apparently agree that politicians are all fakes, and we would be much happier if they were honest with us about who they are, warts and all. but then when someone does come along and does that, we think he needs to act more like a ….. politician.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. duggledog (1,558 comments) says:

    Good on Colin Craig.

    I don’t give a shit if he believes in chem trails or not. This is a guy who has tons of his own actual money invested in trying to break the doomed socialist cycle we are still treading furiously.

    If CP can put a bit more steel into National’s spine then it can only help. Mind you, this term if National can govern alone (I’ve been saying for months I think they will) then no need.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    Penny

    Are you now, or have you ever been on the payroll of Kim Dotcom?

    Oh, and have you paid your rates yet?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    So Penny, did you ever wee and poo in Aotea Square when you squatted there – and then expect all the Maori and PI council workers on the minimum wage to clean it up?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ big bruv (12,769 comments) says:
    June 22nd, 2014 at 6:09 pm

    Have you paid all your bills yet?

    Have you ever worked or received payment from someone with a criminal record?

    Have you ever stood up strongly for something you felt was wrong?

    Are you a Tigger or an Eyore, or better described as a Lemming?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    “If CP can put a bit more steel into National’s spine then it can only help.”

    And turn it to coalition jelly it by insisting in binding referenda?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Steve Taylor (211 comments) says:

    I suspect that the reason that Craig isn’t standing against Paula Bennett, is because:

    a/ McCully isn’t the guarantee that the centre-right bloc need to confirm a centre-right Govt – Craig is.

    b/ The Conservative Party have a formidable potential opponent to go up against Paula Bennett, if she chooses to run – Christine Rankin.

    Everyone seems to be focussed on whether or not the Conservative Party would secure a seat – what happens if they secured two, and crossed the 5% threshold?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    @ OneTrack (2,401 comments) says:
    June 22nd, 2014 at 6:08 pm

    So because someone is honest, we should vote for them, even if their policies are all shyte?

    I’m honest – will you vote for me? :P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor (190 comments) says:
    June 22nd, 2014 at 6:20 pm

    Everyone seems to be focussed on whether or not the Conservative Party would secure a seat – what happens if they secured two, and crossed the 5% threshold?

    After we have checked for electoral fraud, we should all take the appropriate position and prepare for the second coming. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    There’ll probably be another bright star in the East. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. NK (1,244 comments) says:

    Ok, two comments. The first is I truly hope the Gnats campaign as hard in ECB for the electorate vote as they did in Epsom against Rodney Hide in 2005. Then Craig will really have earned it

    The second is the four “bottom lines”. Three of those are Act Party policies so he is want for originality it seems. However, if the Cons get enough elected with Act then it would be *really* good to see flat taxes and an end to the Maori seats.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    Anyone got a spare manger we can borrow? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Some people are dreaming if they think one iota of Craig’s disparate agenda will ever be implemented. Seriously, what has a one-man party ever achieved?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Reid (16,472 comments) says:

    And turn it to coalition jelly it by insisting in binding referenda?

    So if we had a binding referendum that returned say 60% in favour of repealing anti-smacking, why would a result like that turn any party into coalition jelly?

    I daresay you’d get an interesting result if you ran it on Carbon Tax yes or no, as well.

    Fact is, politicians on both sides sometimes seem to insist on doing something that the majority does not want, like anti-smacking. Possibly because they’re so up themselves they dare to hallucinate they really are advanced thinkers who know better than the great unwashed. Which would be OK if they really did know better and sometimes, very rarely they do, like in 1984 when Douglas introduced Hayeckian economics. But when it comes to social subjects, that we ALL know about, because all you have to do is be alive in society, to know about it, in those cases, politicians simply have no business overruling the majority opinion, and in those cases, a binding referendum would be a great way to tell em.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    “……But I’m not voting for anyone to be forced to do anything liberal. I’m not forcing you into a gay marriage against your wishes….I’m not forcing you to have an abortion…..if you want to die screaming in pain I’m not going to force euthanasia onto you.

    But for some weird reason you presume the right to force the values of your rubbishy creed on to me….”

    LOL……

    How would you like to be forced into having a hetro/gay label if you weren’t gay Nasska?

    Gay marriage took away a very important hetrosexual label – from hetrosexuals. ‘Marriage’ was THEIR label. It defined hetrosexual relationships that were publicly committed to.

    Hetrosexuals who are Married do not now have that hetrosexual label – as it now includes gays. So marriage is no longer a hetrosexual label. They have changed the meaning of marriage to suit them alone – and the vast majority don’t agree with that Nasska – but they have to fucken live with a gay/hetro label forced upon them – or remain unmarried!

    The gays now have no arguement to stop religious people from ditching the state’s ‘marriage’ label – to instead be recognised only under God – through the Holy Matrimony label.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. ShawnLH (5,128 comments) says:

    Naaska,

    “But for some weird reason you presume the right to force the values of your rubbishy creed on to me.”

    You are in fact forcing Kiwis to live according to your rubbish creed, by forcing them to live in a liberal society that sees nothing wrong in murdering children merely because they are in the womb. So bollocks again to your “freedom” claim.

    Moreover, your already voting National or ACT, both parties have policies to force some people to do something. National for example still has elements of social conservatism in it’s DNA, possibly more genuine Tory conservatism than the CP.

    National has no intentions of legalizing marijuana, and just banned legal highs.

    So your claim is hypocrisy, and far from having anything to do with freedom or reason, is just a cover for your hysteria driven and factually challenged bigotry towards Christians.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. cha (4,020 comments) says:

    Some people are dreaming

    Across the land they’ll be on their knees mumbling to themselves to make it so.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    ….” in those cases, a binding referendum would be a great way to tell em.”…..

    Fair enough Reid…..a partition against the anti- smacking legislation could well fly, especially if it was proscriptive enough to rule out a return to the child bashing that used to be sanctioned under Sec 59.

    But will you still support the principle of binding referenda after marijuana is legislated & euthanasia is freely available?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Steve Taylor (211 comments) says:

    Judith & Naaska: Those responses had me in fits of laughter – well played.

    I’m buying you guys a drink on September 20th – whatever the result.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor#

    Congratulations on beating that prick in court Steve. Long overdue according to press reports. Well done.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    ‘….Seriously, what has a one-man party ever achieved?…”

    LOL milky……Bob Jones was a one man party……and achieved for NZ the deregulation of NZ – as Bob took National out of government by taking their voters.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    ….” but they have to fucken live with a gay/hetro label forced upon them – or remain unmarried!”……

    Get to the guts of it Harriet…..have you or have you not been summarily divorced, forced into a gay marriage & compelled at gunpoint to consummate it?

    Because if not, I suggest that your marriage is probably not a soupcon more gay than it was before Trevor & John down the road got married. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Steve Taylor (211 comments) says:

    Hi Harriet, thanks for that – appreciated.

    Hopefully the result will inspire more people to stand up to these parasites, and to self-represent (the Court process is actually pretty straight-forward).

    Credit must also go to Lawyer Madeleine Flanagan, who assisted me in the preparation of the case structure prior to Hearing.

    70 other victims of this guy all let out a collective cheer as well, once the result was published:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10081333/Judge-backs-bloggers-fight-against-fraud

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. duggledog (1,558 comments) says:

    ‘What has a one man party ever done for NZ’ Hahahahaha you must be in your late twenties and never heard of Bob Jones the guy that effectively changed NZ, paving the way for Douglas.

    But back to the thread:

    ‘The party also listed four key issues it would push: All referendums to be binding, tougher penalties for criminals, no more separate Maori seats and a flat tax after the first $20,000 would be tax free’

    This is where Colin will get traction if he campaigns well because all four areas have either been ignored or neglected by National.

    Referendums – specifically smacking, massively unpopular but still went through.
    Tougher penalties for criminals – the penal system is still a wet joke. How’s West Auckland these days, anybody still alive there? Guy murders Filipino lady was on ‘supervision’.
    No more separate Maori seats – common sense and the Nats are working towards it anyway by having plenty of tangata whenua on board even the hopelessly out of her depth Claudette Hauiti
    Flat tax / first 20k free: the only way poor peeps can ever get ahead. Also equals smaller government. Great!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Unity (584 comments) says:

    It never ceases to amaze me how people describe Colin Craig as a Christian. He may well be but he doesn’t attend Church so it is obviously not very important to him. Then they put the Christian label in the same sentence as the Conservative Party. They are not a Christian Party. Those who regurgitate these false notions are only listening to the biased media who seem to have an agenda where Colin Craig is concerned to discredit him in any way they can at every turn.

    Personally I hope he wins ECB fairly and squarely without any help from the Nats. However, it may be that they vote for Murray McCully but give the Conservatives their Party vote. Nothing wrong with that.

    Those who say that a one-man Party has never achieved anything are forgetting that we are now in an MMP environment and it is a different ball game. If the Conservatives are in a position where National need them, then there are several bottom line policies they will be putting forward. If they don’t get them then they will sit on the cross benches. Good on them I say. And good luck!!

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

    “…….Get to the guts of it Harriet…..have you or have you not been summarily divorced, forced into a gay marriage & compelled at gunpoint to consummate it?…”

    That’s not the point Nasska.

    The point is that I now have to live under a gay/hetro label. I never chose to do that.

    [although technicly I live in aussie – and are therefor nothing like you………poofter! :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. cha (4,020 comments) says:

    Hopefully the result will inspire more people to stand up to these parasites,

    Congratulations, you’ve reminded me that there’s one born every minute – and told the world you’re a fool who’s easily parted from his money.

    Taylor paid three-quarters of the price – $23,500 – as a deposit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor>b/ The Conservative Party have a formidable potential opponent to go up against Paula Bennett, if she chooses to run – Christine Rankin.

    Craig is a rather dim man who bumbles from one hapless public act or statement to the next… But Rankin is a discredited ex-public servant who was famous for her culture of excess and her trashy personal image. I am absolutely perplexed as to why anyone would describe her as “formidable” politically.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. publicwatchdog (2,597 comments) says:

    Ah – the anonymous gutless ones are gumming away….. (yawn)…Big Bore my answers are NO NO and NO. And Harridon – there are actually public toilets close to Aotea Square. Seriously – is this the best you lot can come up with? Oh we’ll – you’re obviously reading my posts and feel moved enough to comment? Good on you – thanks for that ;) Kind regards – Penny

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    ….”The point is that I now have to live under a gay/hetro label. I never chose to do that. “….

    It’s what is behind the label that counts Harriet. Mind you if you’re still not sure give “bi” a try.

    At least it will double your chances of getting laid next Saturday night. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Steve Taylor (211 comments) says:

    Hi Cha,

    Fool me once, shame on you,

    Fool me twi…………………..ah, no, Mr King didn’t get that chance, and hasn’t had it with anyone since.

    I got hit, absolutely – but then I got up – and from then on, Mr King was screwed :)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Steve Taylor (211 comments) says:

    Hi DavidP:

    I suspect Bennett would.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Shazzadude (529 comments) says:

    “In 2011, Craig was defeated by National backbencher Mark Mitchell in Rodney by more than 8000 votes.”

    The margin was much larger than that-Mark Mitchell won by 12,222 votes.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. Dom Knots (155 comments) says:

    Harriet trumpets the benefits of education and deportment via the particular catholic schooling system she attended. You really have no place calling anyone a poofter, Harriet. You semi literate ‘fucken’ drongo.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    Penny

    Again I will take you at your word.

    Now, can you tell me when the auction is going to be?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Manolo (13,783 comments) says:

    Miss Dim, have you ever received any funding from Kim Dot Com?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. publicwatchdog (2,597 comments) says:

    As you know Big Bore – a week is a LONG time in politics…. At the G20 Anti-Corruption Conference I attended on 17 – 18 June at Griffith Uni Brisbane – there was a stunned silence when I waved around the stamped Auckland High Court Notice of Sale document and said – here’s the EVIDENCE which proves how the biggest Council in NZ ‘perceived’ to be the least corrupt country in the world – treats ‘whistle blowers’ . I’ll be campaigning on this – and related anti-corruption matters when I stand against John Key in Helensvile. Should help create QUITE a fuss :) First John Banks – next John Key? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/sx456qe1favekkt/Cuckoo%201.jpg

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    Manolo, you still haven’t stated your interest and involvement in the Conservative Party. You seem to keep avoiding when asked about that.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. dad4justice (8,222 comments) says:

    Good on you water lady. Stick it up them corrupt sods and big bore nutters.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    Penny

    Who funded your trip to Brisbane?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. OneTrack (3,107 comments) says:

    mike – “Seriously, what has a one-man party ever achieved?”

    Lets wait and answer that after we see how the Internet party gets on.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. James Stephenson (2,180 comments) says:

    The CCCP got 2.7% lasttime with Craig standing in an electorate (?) without TV time and with Zero lead up time. They launched 10 weeks out?

    On the other hand, you could argue that that result was based on appropriating a known brand and that this time around being not very much like that brand, will see him go backwards.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Anthony (796 comments) says:

    Murray McCully in ECB is the National version of Trevor Mallard. Been around far too long and hard to find anyone who has dealt with him to say a good word about him.

    He was the genius strategist who helped Bill English get 20.93% of the vote in 2002!

    I guess though electorates like familiar faces who aren’t totally hopeless and will keep returning them, much like we keep re-electing Peter Dunne in Ohariu!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. publicwatchdog (2,597 comments) says:

    The G20 Anti-corruption Conference in Brisbane 17 -18 June 2014 had no registration fee, so the costs were airfares, accommodation. transport and meals – about $1000 altogether. A couple of supporters donated $100, the rest I have paid for / will be paying for myself.

    Here’s the go Big Bore – if YOU are SO into transparency when it comes to the work that I choose to do in the public interest – how about a bit of transparency from yourself?

    How about giving YOUR full name?

    If not – why not?

    It’s about time YOU answered that question.

    Until you do – don’t bother asking me any more questions.

    Same applies to YOU BOYolo.

    Put up or shut up.

    (Meant of course in a caring way )

    Kind regards

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. publicwatchdog (2,597 comments) says:

    PS: I’ve already stated for the public record BOYolo – that I have not and would not receive any money from Kim Dotcom.

    (Although I have been to his mansion to hand-deliver the witness summonses to him and Wayne Tempero which got them to Court.

    Unlike some of you gutless wonders – I’ve got a good name – you apparently don’t have any name?

    (And a proven track record – http://www.dodgyjohn HASgone.com :)

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Don the Kiwi (1,758 comments) says:

    Penny.

    I’m sure David Cunliffe could use your expertise ,you being the great corruption sleuth and all. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    Penny

    Let’s get one thing clear here. The “work” you do is NOT in the public interest, if you keep telling that lie I will keep pulling you up on it.
    The “work” you do is political, you are a hard left winger suffering from a deep delusion that what you do matters or is important.

    I will keep asking you questions Penny because until you pay your rates you owe me, indeed, you owe me and every other Auckland resident who has to subsidise your bludging.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. Changeiscoming (189 comments) says:

    Good news! All the best Conservatives we certainly need you in parliment to align National correctly.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. publicwatchdog (2,597 comments) says:

    So Big Bore – how come I got a ‘Good Citizen’ award for the work I do?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10655565

    Perennial protester Penny Bright – arrested 22 times, often at Auckland City Council meetings – has received a “Good Citizen” award from a council community board, The Aucklander reports.

    The outgoing Eden Albert Community Board’s chairman, Christopher Dempsey, says the controversial character is being honoured for focusing attention on water privatisation and pushing for transparency in council contracts.

    Ms Bright has never enrolled at university and has no legal training, yet she has won 21 out of 22 court cases.

    Auckland City Mayor John Banks, who has had Ms Bright bundled out of the council chambers several times, is not at all surprised by the award.

    For the full story, visit http://www.theaucklander.co.nz.

    _______________________________________________________________________________________________

    I was refusing to pay Auckland City Council rates at the time of this article – ‘Big Bore’ – so what do you say to that?

    Given that this was an Auckland City Council award!

    And Mayor John Banks agreed with my getting this award!

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/aucklander/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503378&objectid=10997827

    “Mayor John Banks has had Penny bundled out of the council chambers several times but was not at all surprised to hear about the award.

    “I think if the Eden Albert Community Board want to award Penny, then it’s okay by me. You’ve got to admire her pluck, her tenacity, her strength of conviction,” he says.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

    So ‘Big Bore’ the one telling lies appears to be YOU?

    PS: Oh anonymous GUTLESS one – have YOU ever got a ‘Good Citizen Award’ for any work you do ?

    Moving right along …….

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    http://www.dodgyjohnHASgone.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Shhh… if we’re quiet she’ll leave.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. iMP (2,385 comments) says:

    So, its good enough for Bill English to cede his seat, and David Carter to cede his seat, and both go on the List, but not Murray McCully? McCully lives overseas, in France and Australia, and Germany and America as Foreign Min….since when was he a constituent MP for East Coast Bays? Gimme a break.

    Look, the maths is simple: If the Nats don’t reach out to the Conservative Party, then Cunliffe will be prime minister (with Hone, and Dotcom, and the Gweens).

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. RAS (63 comments) says:

    You’re dealing with people who support individual freedom & the right to do what they wish without having the dictates of someone else’s imaginary friend forced upon them.

    …says the guy who just said he’d rather vote Green instead. I’m an atheist too, but your bigotry is blinding you. In 2014 traditional Christianity is a spent force in NZ, but the Green religion continues its ascent and if think they don’t have a plan to control everyone, you’re an idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Pete George (23,570 comments) says:

    Look, the maths is simple: If the Nats don’t reach out to the Conservative Party, then Cunliffe will be prime minister (with Hone, and Dotcom, and the Gweens).

    Political maths is rarely simple.

    Conservative success in the election could help National over the line, but it could just as easily scare off enough swing voters who could make the difference.

    Craig is sending out mixed messages. He claims Conservatives will get 5% anyway (but he also claimed that last election). He claims he could win the seat anyway

    Mr Craig said his party was focused on getting past the 5 per cent party vote threshold rather than getting into Parliament via a similar arrangement.

    “People will then know it’s an absolute certainty that we get into Parliament otherwise we’ve got to get five per cent. We believe we’ll easily do that but of course any thing like a certain seat, all those things are helpful but it’s not something we’re asking for.’

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11279512

    Even if McCully does a u-turn and pulls out of East Coasdt Bays there’s no “absolute certainty” Craig would win the seat.

    Why would National help the Conservatives? This is prominent on their web page:

    Had a guts full of National’s abandoning their principles? Had enough of their arrogance? Had enough of them ignoring referendums; like the one on asset sales and the one on anti-smacking? Had enough of Bill English’s borrowing habits? Had enough of the two waka Government?

    Come and meet the man who isn’t afraid to say ‘enough is enough’. Come and hear Colin Craig’s antidote to National’s toxic behaviour. Come and meet the man who will give our next Government some backbone.

    http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/

    If Conservatives stick to their principles and bottom lines it’s difficult to see how National could come to any coalition agreement with them. Why would they gift Craig a seat? Craig says he doesn’t need or want National help anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. Manolo (13,783 comments) says:

    @P.G.: I have no involvement at all with the Conservative Party. Neither know nor vote for Colin Craig.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. NK (1,244 comments) says:

    Look, the maths is simple: If the Nats don’t reach out to the Conservative Party, then Cunliffe will be prime minister (with Hone, and Dotcom, and the Gweens).

    iMP, go into East Coast Bays and bloody well earn it you bludger. You guys call cups of tea insipid and dirty yet want McCully to just fold and gift you the seat. Pathetic. As I say, bloody well earn it. And the other thing is this, the Nats won’t necessarily need the Cons in September so your statement about Cunliffe being PM without the Cons is wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. David Garrett (7,291 comments) says:

    Back up thread a bit..

    Nasska: You are a guy whose comments usually make a fair bit of sense to me…but I respectfully suggest you seem to have become obsessed with Craig’s supposed virulent (for want of a better adjective) religiosity…And I believe you are mistaken

    As I have said, I have met the man a number of times…I assisted in drafting their law and order policy last time when ACT decided they didn’t need my help…I have asked Craig straight what his religion is, and how it is reflected in CP policy…(CCCP is another totally inaccurate but oh so clever label the MSM have pasted on the guy)

    His answers? That he believes in and tries to live his life by Christian principles…that he is not a member of any particular church, and hasn’t been for years…he was never a member of a “happy clappy” pentecostalist denomination…

    I didn’t give the man a lie detector test, but his answers and his demeanour satisfied me… And I have some experience cross examining liars….I have not spoken to him about his very stupidly falling into yet another media created hole re the moon landings and “chem trails”…..I have however sent him a copy of “In the shadow of the moon” which should sort him out on the first one…

    Best line in that doco on the “it was all faked” argument was delivered by one Charlie Duke, former astronaut: “We went to the moon narn taims (delivered in a rich Texan accent)..why the hell did we fake it narn taims…if we faked it”?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Fentex (978 comments) says:

    The party also listed four key issues it would push: All referendums to be binding, tougher penalties for criminals, no more separate Maori seats and a flat tax after the first $20,000 would be tax free.

    That’s a sad summary of ambition that won’t find much support. I think it’s nice that proportional representation encourages people ideas at the edges to take their cause direct to the electorate where support can be measured directly and larger parties don’t have to risk over-estimating the support of odd ideas.

    I suspect it’s a mechanism for avoiding capture by extremists as the Republicans in the U.S seem to have been. I know DPF likes to argue Labour has drastically veered left, but I don’t think that’s true. I think they’re having a hard time over-coming internal conflict, personal frictions and factions, administrative incompetence and the general problem of repopulating and reorganizing the wasteland typically left by departed forceful leaders like Clarke and as a result have a hard time being heard except when saying something provocative.

    So the provocative, whether exactly what they said or not, is what people hear and remember even though they’d like to heard about more sensible issues. But National blunts that by adopting what positions would strengthen Labour.

    Annoying for dedicated supporters of Labour but representational democracy at work for the country – one way of the other our votes discipline our government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. David Garrett (7,291 comments) says:

    Fentex: Well, different strokes for different folks as they say…I find those four key issues to be just that…key. And if they can implement one or more of them they will be doing well…If I was running Conservative policy I would concentrate on the abolition of the Maori seats…it was Nat policy in 2008, but once they got to government it was quietly abandoned…Craig can hit on that endlessly…and he should…

    If he could achieve abolition of this abominable racist anachronism and nothing else, he would leave a lasting legacy

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Don’t you think the Maori seats are just a bit of a sideshow? Does anyone really care?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. David Garrett (7,291 comments) says:

    Mikey: they are no sideshow…they suggest that those who were here a few hundred years before the rest of us are “special”, and entitled to special treatment…the ongoing existence of the Maori seats provides support for a whole lot of other “special things” the Chosen People are entitled to, but the rest of us aren’t.

    One of the stated purposes of MMP was to enhance Maori representation in the absence of the Maori seats…they are about 15% of the population..if neither Maori nor Mana can cobble together 5% from a population three times that, then that in itself suggests that the time for “Maori” seats has long passed.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    I think the best way is for them to die of their own accord. The choice is with Maori, really. If enough transfer to the general roll then that will suggested the separate seats have served their purpose. Calls to abolish them are just populist wank and frankly irrelevant to the direction the country is governed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. David Garrett (7,291 comments) says:

    Well Mikey, as is so often the case I disagree with you…Seats reserved for “special people” are an abomination, and having them abolished is not “populist wank” as far as I am concerned (And BTW that downtick was not me…not something I do much…

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. Chuck Bird (4,890 comments) says:

    I can see an argument for special seats for aboriginal in Oz but not for Maori in NZ. Don Brash puts a very good case for a binding referendum on retaining them in his book.

    Dropping the coat tailing and the threshold to 4% would mean Maori would be guaranteed representation. It would also guarantee racist Maori like Hone and Sykes would not get in. Many Maori are embarrassed by the likes of them and only a minority of Maori would support them.

    If Maori were underrepresented in Parliament there could be some argument for their retention. That is not the case especially in the National Party.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote