Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, January 9th, 2025 - 60 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Some good Green news for a change…
Their organisation uses the non-profit donation-driven model. It's a good example of the original `neither left nor right, but in front' ethos that originated the Green movement.
Glad that they're thinking of prevention, rather than just doing a cleanup job without changing the way people live.
Now if only that approach could be applied to dairy waste in this country.
I understand Boyan Slat dropped out of university (he was studying engineering) to do the ocean cleanup. He's really started something.
Regulatory Standards bill – by Mike Friend
Could it not be repealed by a future regime?
The explainer, link posted by Incognito here the other day, says there are barbs in the legislation: that firms can sue the government of the day if they lose money as a consequence of legislative change. This is a direct corporate benefit, where (multinational) corporations are given power against NZ as a nation.
People are starting to wake up, when it's almost too late. There's a couple of letters on the subject in today's Post, one of them making the very point that I've been pushing – that the TPB is being used to distract attention from the real danger of the RSB (but doesn't add that the media are being compliant in the business).
Do you have a link to those letters; I’m interested (obviously).
You might have to wait till tomorrow, if my attempts to find them are anything to go by. Entering this URL right now only brings you yesterday's offerings:
https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360540343/post-letters-editor-january-9
If you like I could transcribe the contents. Might violate some sort of copyright, but what the hell – Stuff/The Post make it too hard altogether to get at things (can't log in at all right now because of unspecified "difficulties").
No need to breach copyright and I can wait a day or so.
Sorry, Incognito: something queer going on. I've just tried getting to what should be the on-line letters page for 9th January. I can reach the ones for the 8th and the 10th, but the one for the 9th is simply not there. Whether that's intentional or just an "unfortunate" glitch I wouldn't like to say. Meanwhile, I still have the hard-copy version ready for transcription if wanted.
(I've sent The Post a feedback email about this, but I won't be holding my breath for any meaningful response.)
Ok, thanks for trying and letting me know, but please don’t sweat it, it’s mainly to satisfy my curiosity and not all that important really.
And from further into that piece:
Luxon is laughing at us but so also is Winston. All his rhetoric about NZ sovereignty is out the window with this piece of legislation. He also has given over to the urge to grovel when confronted by the money men.
I doubt if Luxon, a typical corporate boot licker promoted beyound his competence level, , has the capability, however his string pullers have almost infinite resources.
Thank you!
It is clever tactics by this Coalition Government, not just ACT, to try and sneak in the Regulatory Standards Bill in the shadows of the Treaty Principles Bill; even the cynical timing of the two submission processes would support this suspicion. The alleged ‘crashing’ of parliamentary website for submissions on the TPB is further grist on the mill of a wannabe conspiracist by creating another useful distraction from the real danger that is the RSB.
The opposition has been conspicuously silent on the Regulatory Standards Bill. Do they lack the intellectual power or just will power to deal with this?
I found only one meagre Blog post on the Labour website from just before Christmas: https://www.labour.org.nz/news-rule_czar_bill_a_right_wing_power_grab
Nothing on the Green Party website.
Zilch on Te Pāti Māori’s website.
In contrast, the opposition has been spending much (too much?) oxygen on the Treaty Principles Bill, as expected (by the Coalition Government and its tacticians).
QED
Te Pāti Māori have been emailing members directly over the Regulatory Standards Bill. I've been firing off the some of the posts and comments from the standard to Te Pāti Māori staffers I know.
I'm Bloody worried about this Bill, and others are starting to see it's ability to wreak our country too.
Good to hear that but that amounts to off-radar opposition against a dangerous Bill that flies under the radar that needs strong visible opposition and at least as much activism as the Treaty Principles Bill. I really hope that our politicians and their staff of advisors are not a bunch of wannabe amateurs who’ve been hamstrung by incompetence, disinterest, and summer apathy.
Guyon Espiner's reprise of the case against the shifty Casey Costello this morning on RNZ was damning, and he basically came as close as possible to accusing her of being corrupt without actually saying ("you might say that but I couldn't possibly comment" stuff from Guyon).
But one little thing stuck out foe. Casey has refused to be interviewed by Espiner for over a year now. Espiner noted "she appears on other platforms". And I wondered why the MSM doesn't damned well call a spade a spade and fight back. Espiner could have said that she appears of far right misinformation platforms without affecting RNZs credibility. And why doesn't he just door stop Costello if she won't be interviewed? Sure, it is a last resort dirty trick to lie in wait with a film crew outside a miniasters flat – but also, a minister who refuses to be accountable deserves to be confronted and it would make for some juicy ratings….
That ACT is a totally bought and paid for project to steal NZ, shouldn't be news to anyone.
Seymour and his bunch of twits, are "useful idiots", But his strings are operated by some very wealthy and devious actors, with access to the worlds top propaganda and "smoke and mirrors" merchants.
She's got the good ol' buf Jacinda didnt appear on Hosking's show defence
An in-depth critique of establishment leftism:
There's a fault-line running between aspirational left idealists and moderate left politicos which I've observed more than half a century. The first bunch want a better world (like me). The second bunch want to join the establishment as power brokers.
Gabriel Winant is an associate professor of history at the University of Chicago, a member of the executive council of AAUP/AFT Local 6741, and a member of the Dissent editorial board. https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/exit-right/
Trudeau, the paradigmatic liberal exemplar, recently announced his intention to resign – after his approval rating clocked in at 16%, down from 65% a decade back when he became PM of Canada. The liberal option is a feeble simulation of progress.
Indeed. Both "bunches" take ultimate victory by the left for granted, and rather than make certain of it, they prefer to concentrate on ensuring that their "bunch" will be in the driver's seat afterwards.
Worked out all right for the Bolsheviks after 1917; not such a happy result for the Republicans in Spain in the 1930s.
Token democracy is all the establishment really wants…
This govt assumed that apparent democracy would suffice. Users discovered the facade. Reminds us that simulation is a left/right shared political strategy. Authenticity takes time & money, so establishment operatives avoid it.
The thought about the site being bombed by outside actors came to me last night. On a networked PC, I was able to easily resend my submission by going back to the start of the filled-in form. That seemed like a double verification set up to deter simple spamming.
A transparent access system to our legislation process means that anyone, or any entity in the world, can hijack that process. I believe, from now on a formal verification process will have to take place for people to make submissions, and be identified, as citizens, permanent residents, or local and extra-national companies or organisations.
This smacks of Big Brother, I know, but is the only way I can see that we can protect our democratic process.
Good point, seemingly, but I'll leave it to any experts in the tech admin field.
Given that democracy is our commons, the procedures that implement it ought to be robust. If they can't be transparent as well, folks will trend towards a lack of faith in the system. Therefore it is in the public interest that assurance is provided.
I don't mean the usual bland assurance from any Nat/Lab PM that they still have confidence in the minister responsible. I mean a statement from the head of the dept that they believe their system is delivering what's required – or that they aim to rectify any operational problem by a specific date. Yes I know everyone expects National and Labour to keep hiding behind their 19th-century evasion of public service accountability but we can give them a pat on the head and encourage them to enter the 21st century now, telling them it ain't really that scary.
This commentator thinks governing the country is just another version of Game of Thrones………Star Wars even…….definitely not Get Smart………
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360542182/verity-johnson-labour-dont-waste-crisis
Well, media imagery aside, she's trying to persuade Labour to be proactive. Labour knows its better to rely on realpolitik, from your link:
Only works if Lux keeps on losing. So far he's not obviously a loser to mainstreamers, as indicated by his poll relativity with Hipkins. Most swing-voters are mainstreamers watching him sail a tight ship, no sign of mutiny. And Kieran's body language since the election signals to us he ain't aiming to be an alternative leader…
Luxon compared to Ardern is an exceedingly lucky Prime Minister.
He has dealt with zero crises, zero Ministerial fuckups, and has had plenty of luck esp with law and order.
Ardern dealt with successive political and natural crises of increasing magnitude throughout her first term, each shifting her attention away from programme delivery.
We should presume Luxon will continue to be lucky – in no small part because so many developed-economy governments have near-identical policy frameworks.
If Chippie isn't up to it I hope the Opposition leadership vacuum gets filled fast – for all our sakes.
Love Verity's burn: "It feels like we’re being led by a bunch of Teletubbies who learned governance from Youtube, a one half-day leadership workshop and a lifetime fan-girling Maggie Thatcher. And the only thing we agree on is that it feels like we don’t have a plan."
Of course the plan is to open up NZ to internationals ready to strip our resources, by removing all protections in the way and by making that process hard to reverse for future governments.
It's a tradition down under to pontificate with ones new lightsaber onto paper about the fate of the nation in the summertime.
When the sand is beneath the feet, rather than snow, sometimes politicians get flighty and plan a coup – which gives the winner the chance to turn the Crown representative into their sock puppet reading out their speech to parliament.
It is different this year. Leaders of the opposition do not get rolled when there is a loss of confidence in the governments ability to fill out a stocking like Rhys Darby (aka Terry Pole lifeguard).
https://www.reddit.com/r/OurFlagMeansDeath/comments/ugsgik/i_need_more_of_rhys_darbys_legs_in_season_2/
Instead we get the attempt to end the Treaty and indigenous people as an obstacle to a neo-liberal regulatory straight-jacket so international capital obtains sovereign power over future of the nation state. Why? Because the Atlas Network mocking jay (the mockingjay is a bird that was created through the unintended mating of mockingbirds and jabberjays, a bit like a donkey and a horse making a mule) brays TINA TINA.
Argen TINA, Argoing back to Stralia.
Fact-checking Meta’s misinformation about fact-checking and censorship, i.e., Zuckerberg is full of shit.
https://theconversation.com/meta-is-abandoning-fact-checking-this-doesnt-bode-well-for-the-fight-against-misinformation-246878
FYI, here on TS fact-checking is mostly done by the community and they effectively call out commenters for spreading mis- and/or disinformation. When the commentariat is vigilant and informed the Mods have light work, as it should be.
Parliament's select committee has allowed more time (to 1pm on 14 Jan) for people to make submissions on the Treaty Principles Bill.
Only problem is the Parliamentary website still lists the bill as having closed for submissions on 7 Jan. It does not appear on the list of bills awaiting public comment, so no electronic submissions can be made.
I suppose I can chisel out my submission on a stone tablet and carry it to Wellington.
A distraction from making submissions on the bill the C of C intends on making legislation.
https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/the-dangerous-bill-flying-under-the-radar/
The theme of the submission, legislation that establishes an order of rule over the nation on behalf of an ideology that is inimical to the values that others want for their democracy, is so obviously of a partisan template that it is unacceptable governance.
By design it is not of any consensus, it as an imposed regime.
The next administration should and would remove it, from day one.
Reference to it as part of a revolutionary agenda to make investor capital sovereign, rather than the nation state citizen – as exemplified by the attempt to diminish the Treaty (trade agreements) and indigenous rights.
Trump considers declaring national economic emergency to impose tariffs.
He's not in power yet, and I said I wouldn't comment until he was, but national emergencies are the excuses of any any anti-democratic state to remove citizen rights, and, in this case, to shit all over international trade treaties.
I watched an interesting doco on Merkel, and one of her interviewers said “Trump is someone who doesn’t believe in international laws, but in ‘deals’.” This is Trump playing mind games to push the boundaries of existing trade treaties. Does he know what he is doing? Instead of co-operative partners in Mexico and Canada, he will engineer them to compete with the US in common markets.
Given enough time, the rest of the world will route themselves around the US economic system. BRICS looks more enticing by the minute.
Xi will be smiling!
The CFR portal provides the global public with an insight into its advisory framing for US politicians, so its take is worth considering…
I hope Trump doing the loose cannon thing will catalyse more focus and enterprise in developing this alternative system.
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-brics-group-and-why-it-expanding
Interesting discussion about dedollarisation, removal of the $US as the international default reserve currency, which is one of the aims of BRICS.
"Bank of America economist Claudio Irigoyen recently discussed international fears surrounding U.S. debt levels and the impact that debt could have on the dollar in the long term. Irigoyen says the U.S. will likely not default on its massive debt load, but global economists are concerned the U.S. will instead choose to erode away the value of that debt via inflation.
"If the U.S. moves to a point where the preferred policy is one of financial repression that allows to inflate the debt away, the market will start wondering about alternatives to the dollar as a store of value," Irigoyen said in a note."
Face time with the white guy keeping up with fashion trends.
https://youtube.com/shorts/9EyOeXHBDJY?si=zF4a8R7RYr9d9EpW
Very cool to see the Danish King playing such an important part in the relationship of Greenland to Denmark both now and in the future. Very important now given Trump's stated desire to simply take Greenland over for the USA.
Imagine if our Governor-General or indeed King Charles stepped in to the current Treaty of Waitangi contests now underway.
https://www.reuters.com/world/greenland-leader-meet-danish-king-amid-trump-bid-take-over-territory-2025-01-08/
France and Germany have noted that NATO faces a threat from both the west and the east from those that do not respect international borders.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg9gvg3452o
T may not invade – he could just do a fly-over.
That puts it between Invercargill (14th) & Napier (13th) on our city population list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_New_Zealand
I wonder if he called for military intelligence advice to form that opinion.
Hopefully whoever Trump finally gets to run the State Department has an Under Secretary well aware of the existing substantial defence treaty the US already has with Denmark over Greenland, which dates back to WW2:
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp
Maybe the Director of National Intelligence …could be asked at her confirmation hearings if she has knowledge of the winter Avalon … as per article 6
Are you sure you mean the Tropic of Cancer? That is, after all, south of the entire US except for Hawaii. Or are the islands you are talking about places like Cuba?
Are you colour blind reading the word north?
Cancer = North
Capricorn = South
He damn well should step into the RSB business. If proposing to surrender New Zealand's sovereignty in this shameful manner doesn't constitute conspiracy to commit treason, then I don't know what does.
King John did something of the kind in 1215 to wriggle out of honouring his side of the Magna Carta – surrendering England to the Pope and receiving it back again as the latter's vassal. He was rightly reviled for it. (The arrangement didn't last, since both parties conveniently died the following year, but unfortunately faceless international "courts" don't disappear quite that readily.)
Using Google Trends, interest in NZ in the Treaty Principles Bill peaked in mid-November 2024 and early-January 2025.
The highest peak was at 11:00 PM on 7 Jan 2025.
Are you sure about the time? A peak at 11 pm seems to be very late in the day to happen if the interest was from people in New Zealand.
Why don’t you fact-check it?
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now%207-d&geo=NZ&q=%2Fg%2F11ldyg6m46&hl=en-US
That is what it says but I find it very hard to believe. Even a night owl like me would be considering getting ready for bed.
I've never used Google Trends, or even heard of it but that is very late in the day for something to peak.
Are you sure about that? You did comment in a thread that was about Google Trends not that long ago: https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-02-10-2023/#comment-1970639.
Anyway, I refer to Kat’s reply to you yesterday: https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-07-01-2025/#comment-2020817.
TTFN
I come here only in the wish to bring some enlightenment to the ignorant. Some are able to be reasoned with. Many are not.
Now just answer the question. Do you really think that the peak interest in this topic occurred at 11 pm? Really? Is there not the slightest doubt in your mind?
IF only. You challenged my quote of the NATO articles. As if I had made an error of fact by doing so (11 above).
I am well aware with where the tropic of Cancer is. It is a line of latitude about 23 degrees 37 minutes north of the equator. Greenland is, IIRC, above the 60 degree line of latitude. Why would they be considering places which may be more than 4,000 km south of Greenland and which, down near the Tropic of Cancer are surely not considered to be in the North Atlantic?
I wasn't accusing you of misquoting the item. I was wondering why somewhere so far south of Greenland should be of interest to the question of defense bases in Greenland.
To include all islands of NATO members … north of the Tropic of Cancer covered them all (including Puerto Rico and Greenland).
OK, now I understand where I was getting confused. Thank you for the explanation
I thought you were talking about the agreement Ad linked to in 11.2.1, which was only talking about Greenland defense arrangements.
I didn't realise that you actually talking a much wider agreement that was the NATO agreement as a whole and as such it had concern for the much wider territorial area. I was looking at just a limited part of it of the area that concerned the linked to document.
I looked at the NATO articles and there was of course no specific mention of any extra territory island, just all those north of the tropic of cancer.
Thus the UK was on its own as per the Falklands.
Alwyn, is there the slightest possibility in your mind that online interest in ACT's Treaty Principles Bill in NZ did actually peak one hour before submissions on the bill were due to close [11:59 pm, 7 Jan], as per the evidence? Perhaaps consider the possibility that your ‘evidence’ is merely a personal reckon.
The closing date for submissions has now been extended to 1.00 pm Tuesday, 14 January 2025.
Consultation on another ACT pro-exploitation, anti-sovereignty bill, the Regulatory Standards Bill, closes 11:59 pm on Monday 13 Jan 2025.
https://thestandard.org.nz/this-govt-legislation-will-change-our-country-like-never-before-learn-about-it-like-your-country-depends-on-it-because-it-does/
"Alwyn, is there the slightest possibility … "
The possibility did occur to me but I thought it most unlikely that there were that many people who would still up to be putting in submissions at that time. There aren't a lot of comments being posted on blogs at that hour are there?
It would of course be a likely possibility if they were created by bots in an automated attack, as suggested in the RNZ story.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/kahu/record-treaty-submissions-could-be-result-of-nefarious-activity-tech-expert/JQGQVDGHKRDIXPHHJKJSI4TALA/
I hadn't thought of that possibility when I made the original comment. That one was simply based on the idea that people may leave things late but they don't usually leave things until 11 o'clock at night and I wondered whether there was something wrong with the way the Google numbers were being put in the wrong time bracket.
The graph @12 shows the trend in the (relative) number of times the search term "Treaty Principles Bill" was used in NZ, not the trend in the number of submissions on the bill – a record 150,000 on 7 January.
Is conflating "Interest over time" with submissions on the bill an example of your "wish to bring some enlightenment to the ignorant"?
That RNZ article suggests that an automated attack was unlikely.