Nothing positive or progressive

September 24, 2014

Sir Bob Jones on Labour:

. . . Most of all they should embrace the modern age and recognise that social and economic salvation and uplifting the underclass does not simplistically lie in ever increasing taxes on the industrious and thrifty and their transfer to the indolent. There’s nothing positive or progressive about that. . .

Throwing money at problems didn’t work when Labour was last in government.

National’s policy of careful targeting of help at those in  most need and where it will do most good is working.


Abysmal line-up of no-hopers

September 4, 2014

Quote of the day:

Aside from other disturbing considerations, a Labour government is currently only possible by incorporating the most abysmal line-up of no-hopers ever to have presented themselves in our history. The Nats’ rowing boat television advertisement is spot-on . . .  Sir Bob Jones

A Labour/Green government would be bad enough.

Throw in New Zealand First and the Internet and Mana parties – together or apart – and the next three years would be even worse.


Left and Right agree

June 18, 2014

Danyl Mclauchlan and Bob Jones both have a way with words.

Although they’re from opposite ends of the political spectrum they have come to a similar conclusion:

Mclauchlan opines at Dim Post:

. . . Labour are trending down, just like last time – but now their votes are (mostly) going to National, not the Greens. Which makes sense to me: we have no idea what National plans to do in its third term, but that lack of vision is still preferable to being governed by a collection of left-wing parties who all hate each other but want to run the country together. . .

And Jones at the Herald:

. . . If anything, his efforts will hugely harm the Opposition cause in Balkanising and confusing its message, thus presenting an electoral option with, on one side, a rabble of dissimilar, mutually antagonistic parties, all with unpopular leaders and wildly different messages, set against a stable governing party with the most popular leader in our history. . .

Yesterday’s Herald-DigiPoll, on which Mclauchlan was commenting shows National well above the combined left bloc which is swapping votes among parties at that end of the spectrum but not getting any closer to a majority.

However, the poll gives no comfort to National.

. . . And yet nobody in the National Party appears to believe they can win a clear majority of the vote on September 20. Though Labour and the Greens together have amassed not much more than 40 per cent in our latest poll, and New Zealand First are well below the 5 per cent threshold for contention, interest still centres on National’s need of viable partners. . . .

Gaining 50% or more of the votes under First Past the Post was rare, it’s never been done under MMP.

National is a victim of its own success, it’s strength has weakened potential coalition partners.

But while commentators worry about potential partners, the task for the party is to  maximise its own vote and ensure supporters aren’t complacent about the risk the left poses.

McLauchlan is wrong about National not having a vision, but right that the alternative is being governed by a collection of left-wing parties who all hate each other but want to run the country together. . .

And Jones clearly articulates the contrast between  a rabble of dissimilar, mutually antagonistic parties, all with unpopular leaders and wildly different messages, set against a stable governing party with the most popular leader in our history.

There’s a clear choice but the big difference between National and the left bloc which shows in successive polls is very unlikely to be maintained on polling day.


Should the honoured be honourable?

June 3, 2013

Would a convicted criminal be given a knighthood?

It’s unlikely unless the crime was in the distant past.

Should someone keep a title if s/he is subsequently convicted of a crime?

Alister Taylor reminds us that people have been stripped of honours:

Albert Henry was the first Premier of the Cook Islands from 1965. In 1974 he was made  a knight in 1974 and subsequently stripped of this honour by the New Zealand government (then in charge of honours for the Cooks) after his conviction of a criminal offence.

What is a matter of greater significance that has been overlooked is that Sir Douglas Graham was made a member of the Privy Council in 1998. The Privy Council is a a highly esteemed honour among politicians. The Council theoretically advises the Queen, however it it is more honour than substance. Is it appropriate that Right Honourables convicted of criminal offences be members of the Privy Council?

There is an easy way out for the government — strip Doug Graham of his “Right Honourable” but allow him to retain his knighthood.

Another of the convicted men, Bill Jefferies, also holds an honour which is much more pertinent. He is an “honourable”, as was Doug Graham before he became a “Right Honourable” Jeffries retains the right to be addressed as “the honourable” for life. He was accorded this honour in 1990 as a result of his appointment, as a Cabinet Minister, to the Executive Council. Doug Graham had earlier been accorded the same honour. “Honourables” retain this honorific for life. 

The OED defines “honourable” as”implying respect; deserving, bringing or showing honour.”.

The third of the convicted men who has an honour is Lawrence Bryant. He holds the high honour of LVO, or Lieutenant of the Victoria Order. This was awarded him by the Queen in 1974 for services to Her Majesty as Assistant Press Secretary. . .

Sir Bob Jones thinks Sir Doug Graham should keep his knighthood because he was unlucky and gullible.

Sir Bob has been convicted himself, but is brushing that under the carpet.
“That doesn’t count because it was for hitting a journalist and that’s accepted, it doesn’t count. They’re to be hit often,” he says.

He’s probably not alone in that sentiment but that’s not the point.

People have lost money and Graham has been judged culpable.

Last night 3 News reported he would withdraw his title himself before it was stripped. Today John Banks hinted that would be the case.
“Sir Douglas is a very very honourable man and outstanding New Zealander. I’m very very saddened with the turn of events,” says Mr Banks.

That would be the honourable thing to do and I think people who are honoured should be honourable.


Being your own boss

October 27, 2012

Sir Bob Jones on the appeal of being your own boss:

But here’s my point: while most folk are content being employed, a sizeable percentage with an independent streak are not. For them, there’s a special dignity in being their own masters even though it’s often fraught with worries.

Contrary to belief, they’re not primarily motivated by money but simply a desire to steer their own ship. There are hundreds of thousands of self-employed New Zealanders who wouldn’t have it otherwise. They’re farmers, retailers, tradesmen, professionals and diverse service providers. . .

. . . Careers advisers and parents should promote to teens thoughts of ultimate self-employment in whatever career they choose. They should home in on kids who eschew team sports for solo activities such as tennis, swimming, athletics, golf, etc. These choices demonstrate independent personalities, content with self-reliance. . .


Just flog yourself with barbed wire

March 15, 2010

When Rob Hamill and the late Phil Stubbs were seeking sponsorship for their Trans Atlantic rowing race entry they asked Sir Bob Jones for help.

He replied, they should just flog themselves with barbed wire. It would have much the same effect for a fraction of the cost.

There may have been moments when Shaun Quincey felt that flogging himself with barbed wire may have been easier and less unpleasant than his solo Trans-Tasman rowing attempt.

But he persevered and had the satisfaction of completing the challenge nine days faster than his father Colin, who rowed the Tasman from New Zealand to Australia in 1977.

Ultra marathon runner Dean Karnazes reckons you start running with your feet, continue with your head and finish with your heart. Long-distance rowing must take a similar level of physical fitness, determination and emotional strength.

It’s a feat he can be proud of and we lesser mortals can be inspired by.


SFO to investigate Peters

August 28, 2008

He asked the Serious Fraud Office to put up or shut up and go away – and they’re going to do the former.

The Serious Fraud Office has decided to launch a full investigation into Winston Peters, and will use its powers to find out whether donations from Sir Robert Jones and the Vela brothers reached his New Zealand First party as intended.

SFO Director Grant Liddell said he had enough information to suspect the investigation may reveal “serious and complex fraud” the threshold for the statutory powers which can force documents to be produced or people involved to answer questions.

Mr Liddell has been assessing a complaint from Act leader Rodney Hide for the past month.

He said he did not believe there was enough evidence to use the SFO powers on the Owen Glenn donation, because it was clear from both men’s accounts the money was donated to Mr Peters’ legal costs.

And while the allegations concerning the scampi select committee were serious, Mr Liddell said “seriousness of allegation alone is not enough”.

He said it may be that further information was uncovered on these allegations that gave him “reason to suspect” and use the powers.

Keep in mind though, as Matthew Hooton pointed out on The Panel  this afternoon that legislation abolishing the SFO is pending; and that if an election was called the priviliges committee would go too.

But even Helen Clark wouldn’t rush through the legislation then call the election so that both inquiries were aborted, would she?


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,400 other followers

%d bloggers like this: