365 days of gratitude

It’s 10 years today since I started blogging.

My introduction to blogs came through reading Kiwiblog which introduced me to other blogs, including No Minister, Lindsay Mitchell,  Not PC, Whale Oil, and the sadly gone but not forgotten Cactus Kate and Keeping Stock.

Reading led to commenting and that led to the thought I could start my own blog. I happened to mention that thought to a friend who is much more computer savvy than I am, she said it would be easy and thanks to WordPress, it was.

Once I started blogging I found other blogs and different news sites which, for a while supplanted books.

A trip to Argentina for a couple of weddings when I had no internet access for several days at a time persuaded me that less blogging would be more healthy and I cut back on computer time.

Every now and then I contemplate giving up altogether and perhaps I will one day.

But not yet.

I still enjoy the writing and, whether or not I agree with them, the contribution from those who leave comments.

Without them this would be a very one-sided conversation. With them there’s variety and for that, and the people who provide it, I’m grateful.

 

 

 

2014 blogging in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2014 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

The Louvre Museum has 8.5 million visitors per year. This blog was viewed about 450,000 times in 2014. If it were an exhibit at the Louvre Museum, it would take about 19 days for that many people to see it.

Click here to see the complete report.

Among the stats are most viewed posts:

• 1 Todd Barclay Nat candidate for Clutha Sthlnd 19 comments April 2014
• 2 Should never have called it ‘global warming’ 257 comments December 2014
• 3 Why agriculture matters 191 comments October 2014
• 4 How long should a gas cylinder last? 8 comments January 2009
• 5 New Cabinet announced 2 comments

The top referring sites:

1. nominister.blogspot.co.nz
2. keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz
3. kiwiblog.co.nz
4. twitter.com
5. lindsaymitchell.blogspot.co.nz

No Minister is consistently the site from which most visitors come.

Keeping Stock is still a top referrer even though, sadly, it has gone into recess.

And the five most active commenters:

 

• 1 robertguyton 1286 comments
• 2 TraceyS 1197 comments
• 3 Dave Kennedy 1045 comments
• 4 Mr E 984 comments
• 5 Andrei 645 comments

Thank you all for reading and even more for contributing to conversations.

I’ve been blogging much less since late September. Readership has dropped as a consequence – I’m hoping that’s a case of less quantity and more quality. 🙂

P.S. Thanks to WordPress and its staff who provide the platform for this blog, give prompt and helpful assistance when it’s required and provide such good service.

 

Silly or weak

One of the challenges for the leader of the opposition is to look like a Prime Minister in waiting.

It’s one which David Cunliffe has yet to master, and his silly apology for being a man was another example of that.

 Trans-Tasman points out:

. . . The Labour Party election year congress dominated the first part of the week, with Cunliffe’s rather strange apology for having both an X and a Y chromosome. It was all very well for Labour’s apologists to splutter – as they did – about the apology being taken out of context. The only context which matters is Cunliffe wants to be PM of this country, and is campaigning ferociously to get the job.

In this context, the apology made him look either silly or weak. People don’t, by and large, go for leaders who look silly or weak. And, looking back, the thought of, say, Norman Kirk, Peter Fraser or Michael Savage apologising for being a man boggles the mind a bit. . .

Labour was once the party of the working man – and woman.

It’s strayed a long way from those roots.

That’s reflected in its loss of support in successive polls – and it’s showing up in other places too:

@johnkeypm I think your vote in Tawa Wellington is pretty secure at the moment #TeamKey pic.twitter.com/uSc8DWgDzA

— Aidan Drummond (@Aidan_Drummond7) July 9, 2014

Hat tip for tweet: Keeping Stock

As for the issue which has been lost in the slipstream of the stupid apology, Peter Dunne writes:

. . . Meanwhile, the scourge of domestic violence continues across all communities, sadly without discrimination, right across the country. Let there be no doubt about the severity and complete unacceptability of any violence against women and children in our society. That has to stop – now – and, as the major perpetrators of that violence, men have to face up to their responsibilities in addressing it. Bold action, across the board, is required right now – not simpering, gesturing apologies for a biological fact that cannot be easily altered.

We need to take the wraps off domestic violence and expose its prevalence wherever we can. Police revelations there are around 200 reported cases every day of the year are part of that. Our aim has to be to make any tolerance of domestic violence as unacceptable as drink-driving and smoking have been made in earlier times, so that underlying social attitudes are changed. . . .

 The last thing we need is the absolute trivialising of a serious social problem by fake and insincere apologies, designed more for a headline, than to do any meaningful good. The women and children of New Zealand who live in constant fear and suffering because of domestic violence deserve a far better response than that.

And I make no apology for saying so. . .

Dunne has no need to apologise for taking a serious issue seriously.

Free computers? Yeah Nah

You’d think a party with so many teacher-union friends would know what’s happening in today’s schools, but no, Labour’s playing catch-up on 21st century schools:

Associate Education Minister Nikki Kaye says Labour has clearly not done its homework in the education area and is promoting “new ideas” that have already been put in place by National.

“Most of what Labour has announced today is already being delivered by the Government through its 21st century schools programme. We have a massive build plan underway to modernise school facilities, upgrade school broadband networks and partner with communities to provide digital hubs through those networks. Our Ultrafast broadband and rural broadband initiatives are delivering fibre broadband with uncapped data to nearly every school in New Zealand.

“Labour’s announcements today prove they have no idea what is already going on.”

Labour want to put money into professional learning development for ICT over the next few years. National has already invested $35 million in Professional Learning and Development, specifically targeted at learning with digital technologies.

Labour want to build an unspecified number of new schools and classrooms by 2030. Under the National government, hundreds of millions of dollars has been spent building new classrooms and upgrading older schools with the help of the Future Investment Fund, which Labour opposes. National has opened 12 new schools in the past three years in areas of growth.

And Labour wants to enable students to access the internet at home. Last year, National announced a change in policy to enable schools to extend their school internet to the surrounding area so students and families can access the internet from home.

Ms Kaye said the device subsidy programme also did not appear to have been thought through.

“There is an amazing lack of detail. Are they really going to make the subsidy available to every one of the 580,000 children in years 4 to 13? How do they plan to deal with rapid changes in technology? Is the plan limited to one device throughout the period of the student’s time in school? If not, how many devices? How are they planning to deal with the interest costs? All these questions must be answered.

“Labour has simply not done their homework. It really does make you wonder what they have been doing over the past six years.

“Our Future Focussed Learning report, sets out the direction the National government is going.

“Labour really needs to research what’s happening and catch up,” Ms Kaye says.

This ignorance of 21st century education schools isn’t surprising when Labour spends more time looking backwards than forwards and appears to be stuck in the 20th century, fighting old battles.

But that isn’t the only problem with the policy announcement, it’s yet another yeah nah one.

It sounds like every child would be given a computer but that’s not the story in the fine-print:

. . . For those schools that opt in, the policy would require parents to pay about $3.50 a week to pay off the cost of the device, estimated at about $600 each – and the Government would put in a $100 kickstart payments. The device would belong to the child after it was paid off.

For the poorest families which could not afford the payments there would be a $5 million hardship fund to call on. Teachers would also be given training in how to get most use out of the devices through a $25 million programme in 2016 and 2017. . .

The party that thinks parents can’t afford a $100 donation a year now want them to pay six times more than that.

The policy is based on the Manaiakalani Trust programme in Tamaki, which works with 12 lower decile schools to provide students with a netbook and 24/7 access to the internet.

Keeping Stock points out that is essentially a public-private partnership.

But Labour would rather spend taxpayers’ money on an initiative when there’s already a very good model supported by sponsors and trusts they could use.

Is it any wonder even they don’t expect to be in government for another 27 years.

 

Right on top of blog rankings

Open Parachute’s monthly blog rankings show the right on top:

Visit Rank	Blog	Visits/month	Page Views/month
1	Whale oil beef hooked	1758095	2957997
2	Kiwiblog	445721	771086
3	The Daily Blog	218234	345266
4	The Standard	201495	443470
5	Auckland Transport Blog	155853	160244
6	Throng New Zealand	53729	94004
7	The Dim-Post	53509	75134
8	Sciblogs	39662	50631
9	Liturgy	36160	50478
10	Keeping Stock	33807	53244
11	No Right Turn	26757	35029
12	Homepaddock	26471	36951
13	NewZeal	21726	35094
14	No Minister	20898	27292
15	Music of sound	14879	18833
16	Imperator Fish	13552	17547
17	13th Floor	12544	17630
18	Save our schools NZ	12355	14307
19	Keith Johnson Wellington NZ	12120	12574
20	Offsetting Behaviour	11835	16377

 

The combined total of the top left-wing blogs, which are at third and fourth, is still less than Kiwiblog which is second and miles from Whale Oil in first place.

Dim Post from the left is seventh and Keeping Stock from the right is 10th. I’m at 12, No Minister, which is more right than not is at 14th and Imperator Fish which is left is 16th.

I ditched Sitemeter because I kept getting a window asking me to sign in to it and now rely on StatCounter to record visits:

 

 

What would they do differently?

Labour is threatening to tinker with the Reserve Bank Act to keep interest rates down.

They are conveniently forgetting that interest rates have been at an historic low for three years and interest rates were far higher when they were last in government.

The OCR increased by 5.00 in November 1999, went up and got to 6.50 in May 2000, stayed there until March 2001, went down to 6.25 and continued to drop until it got to 4.75 in November that year.

It was all up from there reaching 5.75 in August 2002 before going down again and getting to 5 in July 2003.

The reserve Bank increased it to 5.25 in January 2004 and it climbed from there, reaching 8.25 in July 2007 and staying there until it went down to 8 and was at 6.5 by October 2008.

National won the election in November and the OCR went down from then, getting to 2.5 in April 2009, increasing to 2.75 in June 2009 and 3 in July. It stayed there until March 2011 when it went down to 2.50 where it’s stayed until today.

Several factors have influenced the low rate, including the global financial crisis.

The government had no influence over that but it has had influence over its own spending which is another big influence on the OCR because of its impact on inflation.

National has been very prudent with its spending and intends to continue that as the economy grows.

Labour and its potential coalition partners appear to have no familiarity of the concept of fiscal prudence and should they get into government, their high-tax, high-spending policies would fuel inflation and drive up interest rates.

Labour couldn’t keep interest rates down last time it was in government.

What would it do differently if it was in power again?

It’s not going to rein in its own spending and tinkering with the Reserve Bank Act would do more harm than good.

It would lead to higher inflation which would do far more harm than the small increase in interest rates we got this morning.

Hat tip for chart: Keeping Stock.

Three smogs and you’re . . .

First there was a tweet from Labour leader David Cunliffe complaining about rising power prices which clearly show they rose far more steeply when his party was in government:

:

Hat tip: Keeping Stock

Then there was the tertiary education spokesman who didn’t check his spelling:

And yesterday there was this:

Three SMOGS – social media own goals – and you’re not looking like a government in waiting.

As someone with an unfortunate propensity for typos, I know how easy it is to make mistakes.

But a political party ought to ensure other eyes to check their tweets and Facebook posts before they hit publish to save themselves from SMOGs.

She got there on merit

The majority of people surveyed by Herald-DigiPoll  are opposed to Labour’s policy to have a female quote for its caucus.

The survey asked respondents whether they believed Labour’s target of achieving 50 per cent by 2017 was a good idea, or too restrictive.

Overall, 54 per cent said it was too restrictive, while just 38 per cent believed it was a good idea. Among the women respondents, 52 per cent said it was too restrictive while 42 per cent believed it was a good idea.

About 57 per cent of men did not like it, compared with 33 per cent who said it was a good idea.

Graeme Edgler tweeted that’s more people supporting the policy than the party.

A spokeswoman for Labour leader David Cunliffe said it was a matter for the party. Party president Moira Coatsworth and secretary Tim Barnett were overseas and could not be contacted.

Ms Coatsworth has previously said the target of 45 per cent of women in 2014, and 50 per cent in 2017 would be achieved by structuring the party list so the goal was reached if there were enough women candidates in safe seats. . .

Electoral law requires parties use democratic processes to rank their lists, does rigging it to get a gender quota count as democratic?

. . . Former Labour candidate and party member Josie Pagani said she was not surprised at the poll result because it was not an issue that affected most people’s lives. She believed the targets had drawn attention from other, more universal gender equity issues such as equal pay which Labour had strong policies on.

“The Labour Party doesn’t have a problem particularly with female representation in its caucus. It just put the focus on something that people aren’t sure is a problem at all.”

It’s worse than this.

Keeping Stock used the story as an opportunity for a Tui billboard competition.

This policy has gifted opponents a damaging one: She got there on merit. Yeah right!

Whether or not Labour’s female candidates were selected on merit, the policy raises the question – are they there because of their ability and what they can offer as MPs or just because they’re women?

Plenty of men have got into parliament without being the best candidate, but none have had their position undermined by the suggestion they are just there to make up the numbers.

 

 

 

2013 in review

The clever WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2013 annual report for this blog.

The Louvre Museum has 8.5 million visitors per year. This blog was viewed about 370,000 times in 2013. If it were an exhibit at the Louvre Museum, it would take about 16 days for that many people to see it. . . 

The top referring sites were:

1. nominister.blogspot.co.nz
2. keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz
3. kiwiblog.co.nz
4. nzconservative.blogspot.co.nz
5. twitter.com

The most prolific commenters were:

• 1 TraceyS 1383 comments
• 2 robertguyton 811 comments
• 3 Andrei 722 comments
• 4 Viv 629 comments
• 5 Armchair Critic 448 comments

Thank you to the people who write the blogs which refer readers here, the people who visit and the people who comment.

Click here to see the complete report.

No need to tighten foreign ownership of farm land

Labour is proposing tightening rules round the sale of farm land to foreigners.

The sale of farms to overseas investors will be restricted under proposed new legislation, Labour’s MP for Mount Roskill Phil Goff says.

“My Overseas Investment (Owning our Own Rural Land) Amendment Bill will be debated by Parliament after being drawn from the Member’s Ballot today.

“John Key once said ‘New Zealanders did not want to become tenants in their own land’. He never did anything about that; this Bill does.

“It stops wide purchase of New Zealand land by foreign investors unless significant benefit to New Zealand can be proven.

“Labour believes Kiwis are concerned about farms being sold to foreign buyers when there is no benefit to New Zealand. . .

Over at Keeping Stock Inventory 2 points out the hypocrisy in this when Labour had no qualms about selling the equivalent of 122 rugby fields a day when it was in power.

If those sales had caused problems a change of heart would be understandable but this policy isn’t based on principle, it’s appealing to emotion and is an attempt to out-Winston NZ First for the xenophobic vote.

Existing rules are already very tight and and place strict requirements on the purchasers.

This can provide more benefits for New Zealanders than if the land was sold to locals by, for example, requiring public access.

Foreigners might have more capital for development than locals too.

Property near us has just had Overseas Investment Office approval for sale to foreigners.

Their development plans require at least five new houses for extra staff. They are also planning to build another dairy shed which will require more staff and another couple of houses.

That will provide significant economic and social benefits.

They will be getting water from the North Otago Irrigation Company which requires independently audited farm environment plans each year which will ensure they look after water and soil quality too.

Labour’s trying to reconnect with the provinces but this policy is more likely to appeal to city people who never come closer to farming than a fast journey down the open road on the way to somewhere else.

Those of us who live in the country know it’s not who owns the land but who lives on it and what they do with it which has nothing to do with where they come from.

Poll for progess

One of the reasons Taranaki is making so much progress is the benefits it’s getting from oil exploration off its coast.

It’s been happening for years with none of the disasters that are being used to scare people into opposing more explanation.

But while the people opposing progress are getting headlines, they’re not necessarily reflecting the views of most people.

Yahoo is running a poll which asks do you support drilling off New Zealand’s coast?

When I voted yes a few minutes ago, 52% shared my view, 44% voted no and 4% were undecided.

Of course it’s self-selecting and not scientific so it would be foolish to read too much into this.

But it’s a reminder that views which dominate the news aren’t as widely held as those promoting them would like to think.

Drilling brings risks but it also brings rewards and providing best practice is followed the risks are far, far smaller than those portrayed by the anti-drilling people.

Hat tip: Keeping Stock.

 

 

Learning to be leader

As  backbencher you can pick your fights. An opposition leader can too but has to be careful about which s/he picks.

On the lists of things you should be above are attacks on a by-election candidate in a seat your party is expected to win but David Cunliffe made the mistake of getting stuck in to Matthew Doocey, National’s candidate for Christchurch East.

That has provided Doocey with the free publicity of a letter to the editor:

I am writing to express my surprise at the personal and desperate attack on me by the Leader of the Labour Party. I was not given the opportunity to respond to comments from David Cunliffe which were published on Friday November 8.

For the record I have expressed no interest and am not even thinking about any other election other than the one taking place right now in Christchurch East. I have been working hard nor for a number of weeks in what to date has been a positive campaign: my Facebook page demonstrates this.

Mr Cunliffe has inadvertently given my campaign another confidence-building boost, as I attempt to make history and take thsi seat from labour.

It was only one week ago  that the prime minister launched my campaign and it would appear I am already seen as a threat the the Opposition leader. Surely this must be some kind of political record.

For Mr Cunliffe to target me as some sort of carpetbagger is both insulting and wrong. I grew up in Christchurch and I”ll be here long after the by-election. Unlike other candidates I was was not parachuted in from Auckland at the expense of local nominees.

I’m running a strong campaign in Christchurch East and have had tremendous support from almost all of the senior MPs in John Key’s National caucus.

I can only assume Mr Cunliffe’s outburst is a symptom of desperation and.or poor polling for Labour in Christchurch East, where the community is questioning where the nearly 100 years of Labour representation has got them. Matthew Doocey, National candidate Christchurch East.

As is the way today, the free publicity doesn’t stop with The Press.

The letter has been picked up by CoNZervative, Kiwiblog and Keeping Stock.

When a mammoth attack a mouse and loses, the mammoth looks much smaller.

An aspiring Prime Minister shouldn’t even notice a by-election candidate from another party, let alone launch a personal attack on him.

This is the second time in a week Cunliffe has got publicity for looking less than leader-like.

The first was for his refusal to appear on The Farming Show with Jamie Mackay in case he didn’t get a fair hearing and would be made fun of.

I covered that here and the story has also been picked up by Keeping Stock and Kiwiblog.

When you’re opposition leader you can pick your challenges but an aspiring Prime Minister wouldn’t turn down a regular slot on nationwide-radio for fear of being made fun of.

This was a mistake on several counts, the three biggest being that the slot is now taken by Green co-leader Russel Norman; that he’s supposedly rediscovered the regions and is trying to appeal to them and that’s where the show gets blanket coverage; and  it makes him look like a lesser leader.

10 candidates for Chch east by-election

The Electoral commission has released the names of the 10 candidates for the Christchurch East by-election:

Candidate Name	Party
BAKER, Leighton	Conservative Party
DOOCEY, Matthew	National Party
GASKIN, Ian	Independent
HOLLAND, Adam	Independent
LAMBERT, Paula	Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party
LICHTWARK, Jenner	Democrats for Social Credit
MOORHOUSE, David	Green Party
PARK, Sam	Independent
VEALE, Gareth	ACT Party
WILLIAMS, Poto	Labour Party

Keeping Stock has found Labour has been a mite premature about the outcome:

This is a red seat and the odds favour Williams but it is good manners to wait until the voters cast their ballots before claiming to be an MP.

#gigatownoamaru is taking nothing for granted in the race to become the Southern Hemisphere’s fastest town.

Apathy front-runner in council elections

Only 15.5 percent of eligible voters in Wellington have voted in the local body elections halfway through the election voting period.

The return rate is even worse in Auckland with only 12.6% of eligible people having voted so far.

Local body elections rarely get the same participation as general elections do but participation in both has been dropping.

The reasons for that are many but I think postal voting, and particularly the length of time people have to vote, might have some impact on council elections.

It’s too easy to miss the envelope or put it somewhere intending to get back to it then forget about it or lose it.

This must be very frustrating to candidates who are putting serious time and money into campaigning.

Some, perhaps many, of those who haven’t voted yet might intend to, but it looks like apathy is the front-runner in council elections at this stage.

There is no easy answer to turning that around, though Keeping Stock points to a Facebook Page Roy Williams for Mayor which seeks to spice the Wanganui mayoral race with satire.

Too early

Wanted – alive and well – an extra hour of light in the morning.

Just for another three or four weeks, then there will be enough to share between both ends of the day.

This time last year we were in Argentina to watch the All Blacks vs Los Pumas.

When we got home the confusion between body and clock was due to jet lag so an hour here and there made little difference to how we felt.

But we still noticed the clocks had been put forward.

Before we’d left just over a week earlier we’d been waking up to daylight around 6am, on our return it was dark until around 7.

That’s how it is this morning and will be for another three or four weeks.

The spring equinox was only a week ago so we’re getting only a few minutes more than 12 hours of day light.

The extra hour before sunrise this evening comes at the cost of an hour more of dark this morning.

If daylight saving was delayed until the end of October, which is when the clocks went forward when it was first introduced, we’d have 14 hours between sunrise and sunset and it would be light for longer at both ends of the day.

I’ve said all this before  and started a Facebook page but at least this year I know I’m not alone.

I was listening to talk back while driving home on Thursday evening when Kerre McIvor voiced my thoughts – it’s too soon and too cold for daylight saving.

If we’ve got to put up with the effect of jet lag in the morning without having had the fun of a holiday, then it should be when it’s warm, and light, enough to get the benefit in the evening.

Update:

Keeping Stock takes the contrary view but PM of NZ is on my side.

More CV questions

The first question over David Cunliffe’s CV was about  voluntary work. The reference has now been removed.

The second was about claims he’d done consultancy on the formation of Fonterra.

He’s produced a time sheet to confirm that he did work for the company between October 1997 and January 1999.

But Keeping Stock raises a question over that:

. . .  we can’t help but wonder; how could Mr Cunliffe’s work in that period be being billed to an entity which didn’t come into existence until October 2001 after legislation was passed by Parliament, and an entity that was only given the name Fonterra on 27 August 2001?

It is possible the name was used long before the company was formed but a name isn’t usually used that early in case a leak spoils the eventual launch.

Even if it was, Matthew Hooton who raised the issue said:

. . . He doesn’t want to get into a prolonged argument with Cunliffe, but said: “I just don’t think that doing a paper on research and development in the dairy industry can be described as helping with the formation of Fonterra.

“He obviously thinks that the paper he wrote … was in some way crucial to the creation of the company but I don’t think it would be a view shared by the industry leaders who lead the creation of Fonterra in 2000/2001.” . . .

It does seem to be gilding the lilly.

But whether or not the claim is justified, Andrea Vance has raised more questions over Cunliffe’s CV, this time about his academic record.

He’s often been credited with a degree from Havard, but that’s not right:

. . . A biography posted on the Labour party website until recently said: “He was a Fulbright Scholar at Harvard University’s John F Kennedy School of Government and Harvard Business School, where he graduated with a Master of Public Administration.”

The implication from that is that the MPA was from both but:

On Monday the website was refreshed. The biography now reads: “He held a Fulbright Scholarship at Harvard University’s John F Kennedy School of Government in 1994-1995, earning a Master of Public Administration.”

His Wikipedia entry still says:

He was a Fulbright Scholar and Kennedy Memorial Fellow at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and Harvard Business School in 1994 and 1995, earning a Master of Public Administration.

A Google search came up with several more references which confirmed the belief he graduated from Havard Business School including:

. . . Outside politics, the Harvard business graduate is intensely private, living in a Herne Bay mansion. . .  at TV3

And at Facebook:

https://m.facebook.com/david.cunliffe.labour?v=info&expand=1‎

To connect with David Cunliffe, join Facebook today. Join Log In. David Cunliffe …. School of Government and Harvard Business School, where I graduated with …

And the Vancouver Sun:

Cunliffe is a former diplomat and health minister who has a master’s degree from Harvard Business School.

And GayNZ:

He has tertiary qualifications in social science and a Masters of Public Administration from Harvard Business School.

And the Labour archive:

He was a Fulbright Scholar at Harvard University’s John F Kennedy School of Government and Harvard Business School, where he graduated with a Master of Public Administration.

All of which confirm the impression he’s not, until now, bothered to correct, that he is a graduate of Harvard Business School.

He isn’t responsible for what other publications say about him, but he must have been responsible for the original entry from which the others were taken.

A CV shouldn’t be ambiguous and whether it was deliberate or intentional Cunliffe’s was.

It’s been corrected but it still leaves a question over why he felt the need to embellish his  record.

An employee who did as much would be at risk of losing their job.

If we can’t trust him to tell the truth about himself, can we trust him at all?

Irony or hypocrisy?

Is this irony or hypocrisy?

Grey Power has been campaigning against the partial privatisation of a few state assets, among which are a couple of power companies.

It fronted the petition to get a politicians’ initiated referendum on the issue.

But it chose a private company with which to negotiate a deal for its members.

There’s both irony and hypocrisy in that.

 

 

Mega hurdle for mega wannabe MP

Another man with an over-inflated view of his own importance is considering standing for parliament.

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom appears poised to run for parliament.  

The German millionaire, who is fighting extradition to the United States where he faces copyright charges, took to Twitter today to acknowledge his plans to enter politics. 

“My embryonic NZ political plans leaked by whistleblower. Still looking for partners. Not ready yet,” Dotcom tweeted. . .

But Keeping Stock points out there is a mega hurdle for the mega wannabe MP – he’s not a citizen.

Residents can vote but only citizens can stand for parliament.

1.2          Candidate eligibility

To be a candidate you must:

• be enrolled as a voter,
• be a New Zealand citizen, and
• not be disqualified from enrolling.

There’s another hurdle too:

The main grounds of disqualification for enrolment that could affect eligibility to be a candidate are:

• the person is a New Zealand citizen who is outside New Zealand and has not been in New Zealand within the last three years,
• the person has been sentenced to imprisonment.

Dotcom received a suspended prison sentence.

The very capable PR people Dotcom employs probably wouldn’t be bothered by electoral law in their quest for publicity but you’d think a journalist might do some basic cheques checks on eligibility before publishing the story.

Update – A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Graeme Edgeler has corrected me – overseas convictions don’t count and NZ ones only count while the sentence is being served.

Labour like Labor

Kevin Rudd’s opinion of himself as Labor’s, and Australia’s, great hope is not shared by voters.

With just a week to go until election day in Australia, Labor is almost certainly heading for a landslide defeat.

Sydney Morning Herald columnist Gay Alcorn writes:

. . . I have been around too long to predict election outcomes, but it is looking as though September 7 will be a day of reckoning for a party that has come close to destroying itself. Labor seems so hollowed out that perhaps it had no choice but to grasp onto an American-style campaign centred around one man, Kevin Rudd, the man who more than any other contributed to the party’s predicament.

Perhaps Rudd’s elevation will mean that Labor will avoid the ”catastrophic defeat” it faced under Gillard, and it will console itself with that. But there is so much heaviness in Labor’s campaign, weighed down as it is by bad memories and bad blood. . .

Put a u in Labor, change the leader’s name and this could have been written about the Labour Party here.

It too is hollowed out, weighed down by bad memories and bad blood.

It will have a new leader in a couple of weeks but it won’t have a new culture.

Hat tip: Keeping Stock

Clark part of Auckland housing problem

The imbalance between supply and demand for houses in Auckland which is the biggest factor behind swiftly rising prices there didn’t happen overnight.

It has been building for more than a decade and local and central governments should have been addressing the issue years ago before it got this bad.

Who was leading the government for nearly a decade as the prices soared?

Oh yes, Helen Clark and she’s part of the problem of houses owned by foreigners.

Rob Hosking points out:

It’s a mark of how bogus the housing debate has become that Labour’s figures about foreign owners of New Zealand houses almost certainly include former leader Helen Clark and her four houses. . .

Labour says more than 11,000 foreigners own houses here they don’t live in.

. . . What Mr Shearer didn’t say is the figure comes from “non-resident” taxpayers who pay tax on houses they own in New Zealand.

Most of those are ex-pat Kiwis who are renting out property they own here while working overseas.

How could Labour put out a policy so badly researched?

This conversation on twitter explains it:

 

1.   Rob Hosking ‏@robhosking 50m

   Shearer’s ‘foreign investor’ figures are mostly expat Kiwis – people like Helen Clark & her four houses [PAID] http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/shearers-foreign-investor-figures-are-mostly-expat-nzers-rh-p-143493 …

    
2.   Megan Campbell ‏@MeganCampbellNZ 36m

   .@robhosking This is frustrating. It took you less than a day to find the holes – why aren’t Labour peer reviewing before policy release?

    
3.   Rob Hosking ‏@robhosking 22m

   @MeganCampbellNZ Own arse. Both hands. Lack of a GPS navigational device not to mention basic hand/eye co-ordination.

But it gets worse – Labour’s policy is not only based on faulty figures, it also contravenes the Free Trade Agreement with China that was negotiated by the last Labour government.

1.   Bill Ralston ‏@BillyRalston 12m

   Lemme get this right. Labour’s housing ban stops expat Kiwis from buying homes here but the FTA lets Chinese buy, along with Aussies? WTF?

    
2.   Toby Manhire ‏@toby_etc 9m

   @BillyRalston very slightly rushed out policy, you reckon?

    
3.   Bill Ralston ‏@BillyRalston 8m

   @toby_etc I think someone in Shearer’s office had a brain bypass.

    
4.   Megan Campbell ‏@MeganCampbellNZ 4m

   @CactusKate2 @BillyRalston @toby_etc C’mon you can’t put this FAIL on the ‘office’. Good politicians ask questions &understand own policy

    
5.   Rob Hosking ‏@robhosking 2m

   @MeganCampbellNZ @CactusKate2 @BillyRalston @toby_etc EXACTLY. Blaming minions is what Aaron Gilmores of this world do, not would-be PMs.

Oh dear, faulty figures based on incomplete understanding and no idea about the FTA a Labour government negotiated – is anyone in Labour thinking?

Hat tip: Keeping Stock

P.S. – in case you think I’m guilty of Clark derangement syndrome.The post is to show Labour’s shortcomings – in government for not recognising and acting on the growing imbalance between supply and demand of houses and now for this ill-thought out policy –  not to comment on her investment decisions about which I have no criticism.