Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, June 28th, 2026 - 61 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 …
I (and maybe others) had wondered about Chris mercurial Meehan, head of Winton Developments, quite sudden departure…..Health reasons was the apparent line….
Anyway…turns out he was just another in the long list of fallen Bully Boss'..scumbags. (there have been a few lately incl sir Rod Drury…)
Some history on Chris Fbomb Meehan (for those who arent aware?)
What a jerk….
The way the Herald covered this guys departure is all the evidence you need that the once great NZ Herald is a lying piece of shit publication these days.
Well….yes? IMO they are just a Class/Peer Group outlet. Of course they would, and will, present the least damaging possible. AKA…circling the wagons. I linked as it was the only one I saw with Meehans earlier Health issue (even though also paywalled) that had the opening header/paragraph visible.
It looks like the house of cards that's Winton is about to come crashing down. Na, cards have too much substance, it's more like house of wet Zig zags… Some of the stories I've heard of his behaviour make my toes curl, the guy appears to have been totally off the planet.
Looks like the board has exercised their duties under the Companies Act and sidelined him so they have some defence when it all turns to shit and everyone is whistling for their money.
Small hunch that the public gallery at bottom of Stanley hill might be a bit full on Tuesday
Yep, I'm not in any Meehan feedback loop (apart from RNZ/Newsroom) but I would think Local/Employee Knowledge indeed be disturbing.
Begs the question…how did he get so far before it finally imploded?
Over a long working life I have struck all kinds (as I am sure you too) but IMO you cant get past the extreme small mindedness/bullying/meanness of some of our richest employers.
And I have seen and heard all the justification thereof…."Driven", "Ambitious", and of course that fav…."Tall Poppy".
In one Link Meehan is described as Mercurial…..Indeed know of the type : bad tempered arsehole, where you never know from one day to the next what you'll be facing up to. And they nearly always slam it on… PA/Receptionist/Secretary/Labourer.
Anyway….it came in for him. I'd say there are more than a few smiling about.
National's solar scheme offer
It will allow those that are currently rejected by banks to access solar.
It is intended savings would outweigh the repayment amount. There would also be the option of deferral for people who struggled to pay.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/personal-finance/620857/what-would-national-s-solar-scheme-offer-that-we-can-t-currently-get
It would be good if there was also some targeted assistance so savings could fully go to improving living standards of low income earners in this cost of living crisis.
AOC makes the point that the left can't get away with the visionless Starmerism of Chris Hipkins anymore.
"…(I) think we're now in a new time and I think there is greater recognition of the brokenness that led to President Trump in the first place, which is that this growing inequality yields to authoritarianism and that economic instability and the collapse of democracy are intertwined. And I think back then a lot of what I was maligned for and and t told was extreme um is now almost seen as quite common wisdom. the, you know, these billionaires like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk and and all of these folks that have been supercharging uh the corruption of this administration, dismantling uh the very foundations of democracy have proven that you cannot have extreme levels of income inequality and a functioning thriving democracy at once…"
A couple of additional observations. From her look, makeup, body language, etc it is clear she is going to run to be the Democratic candidate in 2028.
Secondly, the way AOC, Zohran Mamdani and their endorsed slate of candidates wiped the floor of establishment Democrats in New York local primary elections is a really powerful example of how the US system of open primaries is actually a damn fine piece of democracy and system for democratic renewal of poltical parties ossifed by years of neoliberal prevarication and subjugation to “the market” and one the NZ left ought to start pushing for as a key democratic reform that would really return power to the voters.
At the moment we had the ludicrous situation where a bunch of gutless careerists, visionless managerialists and neoliberal technocrats in the eviscerated remnants of our two main political parties get to preside over who gets to be leader and who gets to be a MP. It is little wonder that both Labour and National are represented by ponitless David Brent and malignant David Brent respectively and they preside over caucuses characterised by a stultifying mediocrity, increasing corruption and often downright incompetence.
How do open primaries work?
A open primary system for MP selection would involve in, say, my local electorate of Mt Albert, the various contenders to be the Labour candidate have to first win election of all enrolled voters. Enrolled voters may participate in either party's primary, however they can only choose to take part in one parties primary process. That means, for example, if I were to take part in the Labour primary in Mt. Albert I could then also take part in Nationals or anyone elses.
My local MP is the utterly invisible Helen White, whose main activity semms to be to plead on social media for people to take part in interminable surveys, presumably to inform her on what she should think lest – heaven forfend! – she have to offer an opinion of her own to voters. I'd primary her ass into oblivion this afternoon if I could.
Your penultimate paragraph left me confused. Should there have been a "not" somewhere in the final sentence of it?
lol yes. "…could NOT then also take part.."
So hard to get decent sub editing these days.
The huge difference between starmer and hipkins is mmp, hipkins job is to get mid to high 30% s then greens and in my hope top will do the real Overton window realignment.
I've become an absolute convert to tops ubi btw.
Labour exists as a reformist project.
Re-casting it as a vehicle for centrist do-nothings who need to be reluctantly nudged in the right direction is essentially admitting the party is dead and exists entirely as a self-serving zombie entity, shuffling along in an increasingly grusome state of decay.
Why have you become an absolute convert to TOP's UBI?
Do you think the rate on offer is high enough?
Do you believe it's fair that the well to do will also receive it?
How do you feel about the land tax on unrealised gains it relies upon and it's likely impact on rents and the overall cost of owning a home?
how come?
I've become a convert to ACT's hemp policy btw, but wouldn't vote for them in a billion years.
A National Party donor that is a bully? Surely not.
No surprise to see Steven Joyce as a director at Winton. Meehan and Joyce deserve each other.
Meehan has made few friends here in Wanaka. For instance, among other things, his Northlake subdivision was found guilty of polluting the Clutha River.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/113907184/subdivision-developers-found-guilty-of-polluting-of-clutha-river
Meehan royally pissed off the neighbours when Northlake subdivision was in the planning process.
https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/queenstown-lakes/couples-silence-irks-locals
I meant to post this as a reply to Psych's post above BTW.
BG : myself, did realise that : )
And re Mercurial Meehan? Karma?…or, just using a subdivision analogy : the sewer line could no longer hold the highly pressurised sewage…and it burst, showering aforesaid everywhere. This time, most of it stuck to the creep responsible. Good !
Helen White is my MP as well and she is certainly not invisible. From the neon sign on her office in the Trades Hall building, to the regular billboard signs on fences at corners like opposite Pak'nSave on New North Rd, she has been very visible for the whole of the 3 year term.
I have seen her at community group meetings, she has been to Selwyn Village regularly, she visits the Gribblehirst Community Hub which has about a dozen regular groups that meet there.
She lives locally – has done so for decades, and was active in the community for years before she was selected following Jacinda's standing down.
Helen White running for Labour comes with their past baggage. Whereas, TOP is the bright new face which seems to have captured some voters attention.
It will be interesting to see the outcome of that one
David Seymour was once considered "a bright new face", but then we got to see his spandexed rump.
Jacinda was also a bright new face. Now she can't even show her face locally without being hounded.
Looking forward, I think TOP will also disappoint many
A loudmouthed entitled opiniated lot that "hound Jacinda" do NZ and themselves no favours.
By the way, she is still a "bright face". Welcome all over… what does that say about some here?
Top/Opportunity are too fluid in their stance for my liking.
Mercurio an old song comes to mind when thinking about which MP of choice. It should not be one who thinks it stands for 'My Pretensions', as seen in David Seymour and hangers-on in ACT. (Those considering ACT should take note of the words of the song.)
Ain't It Hard by the fast moving Kingston Trio (they could really get us moving – let's be like them)
TOP will split the vote in Mt Albert and National will take the seat. Helen White will be ejected into the usual safety net for Labour's technocratic cardigan brigade who can't do politics, the party list.
I think TOP will take swing votes off both National and Labour (as plenty are sick of both of them) and maybe NZ First and the Greens.
vote splitting is already happening (Greens and TOP). 2023 results:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Albert_(New_Zealand_electorate)#Election_results
Hard to say if TOP are splitting the left or right vote 😁
The Opportunities Party candidate got less party votes than electorate MP votes.
But the difference was very small.
Most would agree the cost of living is a big issue with voters.
So do we think Labour will announce a policy today addressing that?
Brooke van Velden's replacement to be named at ACT's annual meeting.
I have my money on Cruella de Vil but there are other contenders – is Lady Macbeth out of contention? Medusa?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/politics/632689/brooke-van-velden-s-replacement-to-be-named-at-act-s-annual-meeting
It wuz Machine Gun McKee……
What a relief – I feared they'd choose someone awful.
A small insight into the mental and immense emotional toll of the cost of living crisis
We all know the toll covid had on people not being able to go out and partake, the cost of living is doing the same to some now
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/whanganui-chronicle/news/rising-living-costs-force-whanganui-residents-to-choose-between-heat-and-food/5536IAA3NJG4XNH5Q6GU524JKM/
Yo Sanctuary pop in to Helen White's office, bring $500, and join the campaign live.
I think you'd enjoy the muscle and blood of turning g voters and motivating volunteers.
White as an employment lawyer has saved a lot of workers' asses.
She ain't AOC but honestly neither was Ardern.
National Party
plant,talking-head, appointment, Richard Chambers, is under investigation about his conduct towards women after two complaints emerged late last year and early this year.Chambers himself has denied the accusations of course, and claims he doesn't need to stand down at this point. Curious he'd be so definitive about this after relieving Rakesh Naidoo of his duties for the crime of standing for the Labour Party.
Then there's this…Chambers has recently demanded quicker action on employment matters involving police staff:
It's now nearly 8 months since the first complaint and 5 months since the second. I guess Minister Mitchell's mate meant other police staff, not the Commissioner.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/politics/633508/labour-s-ginny-andersen-received-complaint-about-police-commissioner-last-year
"Firearms campaigner Nicole McKee has been named new deputy leader of Act, at the party’s AGM and election year rally in Auckland today."
Oh such a popular choice. Oh no!
I think camouflage suits suit her better than bright pink outfits but I’m no stylist.
Nicole "Guns" McKee is the new deputy leader of the ACT Party after Broke Van Velden found the whole experience too hard.
Karen Chhour must be ruing leaving her car at the airport for 8 months.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360999075/nicole-mckee-named-act-deputy-leader-party-launches-election-campaign
Last week of School term, so this policy announcement makes sense.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/politics/633845/election-26-labour-proposes-apprenticeship-boost-expansion
Had been commenting on same hope too. Just makes sense to Restart/Rebuild our NZ Apprentice base. From that base, IMO…much good will come. (and Labour goodwill)
Further on the Kaitaia Far North Juken mill closing – jobs and local income lost – crisis. An effort from WTU Workers First Union to get the Gnatfatact off their whoopee cushions and try to get them to squeak.
https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2606/S00200/government-twiddling-thumbs-while-the-wood-sector-burns.htm
Weka and chairman.
The ubi as I understand will allow possible incentive people to seek extra hours, no claw backs,
It will get rid of the stupidity of two people having to pretend not to be together to protect thier benifits .
Lower earners with property, (me) will have their property tax offset.
Weka my understanding is they will top up those truly unable to earn extra income, I believe it will free people up employers and employess to have more flexi incomes,
Neither National nor Labour government would adopt a UI and land tax policy 2026-2029.
What policy agreement they would get for C & S, or inclusion in a coalition is hard to know, but it will not be their central policy.
@ bwaghorn
Can you explain to me why you believe poor property owners should pay a tax that is going into a UBI that will also fund the wealthy?
If you don't like claw backs or relationship terms, why not just support the removal of them opposed to supporting a tax that will hit the poor and benefit the rich?
I don't think this captures how a UBI works.
The fundamental problem is that a UBI is not sufficient to live on in this economy. That creates a significant problem for people who can't work. There is also an issue here in that this creates a gap between people in work and people not in work. The basic level of people's income becomes UBI+Some Earned Income and this creates relative poverty between the people in and the people out of work. This may still include plenty of capable people who can't find work (so disability support doesn't compensate this), it's still holding a significant population in relative poverty. Eventually prices in the economy will adjust to this norm (the way state supported rents get adjusted to state rent support payments) so it eventually translates into a structural income gap.
The other thing is (and it's not really the policy problem here) a UBI is just not an incentive for people to find work. There are certainly cases and studies of those cases when people's low welfare incomes get in the way of them getting work and a slightly higher income provides them the ability to get into work, but for the most part it's the minimal benefit rates (which a UBI is lower than) which produce the incentive for people to get into work. This is the basis for Ruth Richardsons vicious 90s welfare cuts, being to motivate beneficiaries to be as motivated to seek work as possible. The actual problem with this overall line of economic thinking however is that just because people are desperately seeking work, that doesn't mean there is enough work available for them to find it. Regardless of how motivated (or unmotivated) people are it's still the amount of work available which ultimately determines how many of them end up finding work.
Also the UBI thinking misses the point that work must be paid work to satisfy the needs of 'cost of living'.
This doesn't look at the amount of unpaid work that mothers and parents do, doesn't allow them opportunity to learn skills to help them in their unpaid work of caregiving and parenting. Think Marilyn Waring*, NZAO female economist thinking about women's reality which is vital to the good outcome of the nation's prosperity..
Also there is much to be done in a moneyed society, and the government could employ beneficiaries on a part-time basis, to do the work that they now contract out to business firms not leave them searching for jobs in an increasingly dispirited way. (One can read stories about hundreds applying for jobs that are low-skilled now. And that will become true for skilled ones with AI.)
We in NZAO do not have a well thought out economic system for a well-run economy of, and for the people. It is guaranteed to bring back conditions that do not allow for many people to realise their human persona and gifts – thinking Dickens. That applies both to the wealthy who never have to place themselves in the same environment of poorer society, and can float on top being self-centred or avaricious; the lower orders muddle around the same but at a lower level!
We are all better than this but it has taken to my old age, reading and thinking, to realise it, plus a little open university that the govt allowed me until they didn't, and left me with a student bill to pay from my low earnings or benefit. So UBI thinking must be governed by bible verses from Corinthians 1.13 (note this you faux-Christian pious politicians.)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2013&version=KJV
that's a great analysis. What do you think about TOP's land tax?
We have a land tax, it's called Rates, and the main point of highlighting that is that whatever magic economic effects (supposed more productive use of land?) are foretold are already in effect.
We should be more realistic about house prices, I don't think there exists any policy which brings them consistently in line with the RBNZ's 2-4% inflation band while a housing bubble is going. We have seen ample economic analysis correctly saying investing all your savings in investment properties for the capital gains is not actually a good investment strategy, its people counting more than their RV unrealistically as their savings before selling and not noticing an investment of those savings would have done better over the same term (some do better of course, and some do worse).
What we should also factor into house prices is how for decades now economic policy has been much more successful at keeping wage inflation down rather than house price inflation.
Yes, this suggested amount of this UBI is not sufficient to live on in this economy.
Yes, people who can't find work will struggle.
Yes, the more jobs there are, the easier it is to find work
However, I'm from the school that believes it's what your wages gets you in return that drives people. For example, if you work hard all week but can't afford to get by, you quickly lose the drive to want to stay in that job
"However, I'm from the school that believes it's what your wages gets you in return that drives people. For example, if you work hard all week but can't afford to get by, you quickly lose the drive to want to stay in that job"
I have no idea what idea you're trying to convey by that.
On the policy docs I've seen so far, they don't understand the needs of people who can't work, and thus their policy is inadequate.
The big risk is if TOP are kingmakers and decide to go with NACT, but Labour aren't that great on welfare either.
I agree about simplifying the whole process though, including removable of abatements. This would help people who can work sometimes but not others not be penalised financially (which is currently the case). It's just a shame that TOP don't have good policy for disabled people, or as Nic points out, people who are in and out of work or can't find a job. The policy looks like it's designed by people who don't understand the realities of being a beneficiary or living in the precariat.
Chairman yes I think it's high enough to survive on .
I think it frees people up to seek added income because no fish hooks.
The rich will always bitch, time to give a fuck about your fallow citizen s
The well to do will lose it/us it on the land taxs ,
It sounds simple so hard to dodge and cheap to run
It's $370/wk 😟
In what world is that high enough to live on?
When rent and expenses, even for a room , is North of $ 300/week.
Indeed, KJT
No one in the world (not even credit agency types or the OECD or IMF etc) takes this opinion seriously.
If it were true ACT would be proposing we go Costa Rica, because we could not afford to participate in collective security.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360997328/why-default-inevitable-under-our-current-fiscal-trajectory
SPC please identify that this is another Damien Grant opinion piece before we give him clicks he doesn't deserve. How in hell is NZ close to defaulting on anything?
In Oz, purported One Nations FB accounts are rage-bait farmers. A recent account was run from Indonesia, with manufactured anti-muslim content. The farmers can get $US20 per.post that generates high clicks. FB is toxic for political debate.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/jun/28/pro-one-nation-facebook-groups-foreign-meme-factories-monetised-content-ntwnfb
Spc possible it's another reason top shouldn't be feared, at best they are a minnow, but we need new ideas, and we need nzf gone, and I believe tpm to under their handling separatist leaders they have now.
In normal circumstances, no government would add a land tax to homeowners costs (not with insurance and rates and water charges rising as they are and the cost of a mortgage to a median income).
One factor that may come into play in the future that might cause a re-think would be higher unemployment resulting from AI and robotics.
The land tax is a diversion from restoration of the estate or inheritance tax we had until 1993 (and which is common in most OECD nations).
people who would otherwise vote on the left, voting for TOP risk another NACTF government.
In the latest Verian/TVNZ poll TOP got 4.6%. If they reached 5%, here's one election result in seats. It assumes TPM get only 2 seats.
Labour: 39
Green: 16
TPM: 2
National: 36
NZ First: 14
ACT: 7
Opportunity: 6
Left: 57
Right: 57
Opp: 6
from https://x.com/Tiare_MP/status/2069543664469278893
Anyone seen a video or transcript of speeches from the Labour Party conference?