Some things are so predicable that Imperator Fish can write about them years ahead. Like the typical reactions to the Labour list. Let us observe the predictability of the right and others to it today. Marks for any bit of originality, but don’t be surprised if there aren’t any.
The Labour list for 2014 has been announced.
This morning’s news from the Fairfax/Ipsos poll is that 81% of New Zealanders hate coat-tailing and want it gone. I agree with them. So does Labour. So do the Greens. So do Internet MANA. National, of course, relishes coat-tailing. So – to the 81% – if you want 2014 to be the last election with any coat-tailing, vote for a change of government. In the meantime of course, we have Crazy Colin Craig who thinks that Key’s job is to give just him a seat, entirely of his own accord, with no “insipid” discussions about the quid pro quo. Good luck with that.
John Key claimed he didn’t know about the big shift in the US-NZ surveillance relationship in 2009. Now he claims he always likes to be fully briefed on intelligence matters. Robert David Steele points the way from such anti-democratic governance & misinformation, to an open source everything revolution.
I had a conversation at our farmer’s market this morning about how my election campaign was going and the person I was speaking to had the view that all politicians don’t actually do much, apart from talking. I find that this thinking is actually fairly common, many people talk about the nonsense that goes on in Parliament and how all politicians are as bad as each other, “It doesn’t matter who you vote for, nothing really changes.” I find this view really frustrating, but at the same time I can see why people may feel this way.
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 …
Ok, so according to the NZ Herald Donhua Liu is alleging that a fund raiser was held on Sunday 3rd of June 2007.
That is the Sunday in the middle of Queens birthday weekend. To say that is hardly credible is an understatement. No-one schedules fund-raisers on Sunday. They certainly don’t do it in a long weekend. And can’t the journalists at the Herald read a calendar?
Updated: This mornings Herald story looks like being more about face saving than accuracy, and the interview on Morning Report make the journalistic process at the Herald look even more dodgy.
Scott Yorke makes some excellent arguments in favour of a full police investigation into the Liu saga.
In a speech today Colin Craig has confirmed that he will be standing in Murray McCully’s seat of East Coast Bays.
The Whaleoil blog is in court on Monday. There is a full day session in the High Court in Auckland looking at the appeal by Cameron Slater against Judge Blackie’s decision in the District Court that the blog is not a news medium. Therefore Slater was not a journalist, and was therefore not able to protect his sources who provided stolen material to allow him to apparently defame Matthew Blomfield. The decision will probably provide case law about the status of blogs in the law and the responsibilities of news mediums.
I’ve been around the Labour party campaigners for a long time. I’d have expected to hear of auction sales of near to $100,000 by rumour if nothing else. It is possible that I didn’t. But then so is time travel. Quite simply the NZ Heralds reporting of Liu’s letter without any corroboration or details about where and when isn’t what I expect from journalists. It is what I expect from Whaleoil – a simple smear. I hadn’t realised that the Herald was that desperate.
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 …
Bryan Gould writes on this in the latest post on the AUT Briefing Papers website. Gould quotes from Senator Elizabeth Warren’s classic speech “Nobody got rich on their own. Nobody.” Gould’s conclusion – A renewed debate about the purpose of government is well overdue – amen to that.
David Cunliffe’s message to members and supporters (repost from email) It’s been a tough couple of days for everyone in Labour, but I […]
David Cunliffe forgets an eleven year old pro-forma letter. John Armstrong calls for him to resign. Then it turns out this was a […]
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 …
So it turns out that Immigration released letters from David Cunliffe and Chris Carter in support of Donghua Liu. However, the Department of Internal Affairs refused to release the letters sent by Mr Williamson and Mr Banks under the privacy and commercial provisions in the Official Information Act. This looks like a blatantly political release decision to advance the interests of the government of the day. Transparency of official information applies to everyone, not just the government’s enemies.
John Key’s alleging that hundreds of thousands flowed to Labour from Donghua Liu, but as the Nat’s smear campaign unravels, even the $15,000 can’t be found. Who do we trust – an unnamed ‘party source’ in the Herald, or Party records? $15,000 is a sizeable donation that is likely to be noted or remembered. And where’s Donghua himself in all this – surely he could clear this up very quickly…
Overshadowed by the political smears that have dominated the past few days, the Tick for Kids campaign has been launched to put our children at the centre of the election campaign.
Emmerson in todays Herald captures the essence of what John Key is doing there. How a picture can convey more than thousands of words.
We all know from reading Nicky Hager’s The Hollow Men (or watching the documentary) that the National Party actually advocates for a small section of society. Their policies rarely support most New Zealanders and after each period of a National led Government we have costly messes like leaky buildings and dead miners as the aftermath. This isn’t to say that Labour shouldn’t take responsibility for not repealing dodgy legislation, but National has always stood for less regulation, fewer protections for workers and the environment and an upward flow of money to the already rich.
Rob Salmond offers some advice to the National smear team. When you screw up and start contradicting each other’s stories, you look like a pack of low-rent numpties. And it reveals your tactics for all to see, which is what you were trying to avoid in the first place. Bill English and John Key should really communicate so they don’t trample over each others stories. And the spectacle of Michael Woodhouse changing his mind within hours about when he first saw the letter, and what he did with it? Pure comedy
David Cunliffe does not recall signing a letter 11 years ago which did not advocate for Donghua Liu’s application for residence yet gets pilloried by the media for stating that he did not advocate for Mr Liu. Michael Woodhouse denies telling John Key about the letter, then says officials from his office briefed Mr Key’s office on the letters and then his office admits that he told Key’s office about the letter yet there is no media criticism of what clearly is an attempt to hide a smear campaign. Is this yet more evidence of media bias?
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 …
My comment at The Daily Blog responding to a section of one of Martyn ‘Bomber’ Bradbury’s post got moderated out. That does rather reinforce what my comment said. So I will simply repeat it here. The political scene is a very bad place to have as sensitive ego in as Bomber has. Most people involved around the political scene will have different opinions and they usually aren’t hesitant in expressing them. It appears that young Bomber lacks the backbone to withstand that diversity without having a fit of pique.
So, the Deputy Prime Minister insists that no-one from the ruling National Party knew of an eleven year old letter from Labour’s David […]
There is a very long but worth reading post over at The Political Scientist. If you’re serious about campaigning in NZ at present, then it is definitely worth setting aside the time to ponder it. In particular the demographics and the occupational changes across Christchurch that may affect this years election outcome. Tony Milne also has a good post on Christchurch and its continuing travails..
The great tragedy in New Zealand trade policy came in the 1990s when we almost literally gave away the farm, dismantling most of our tariffs unilaterally to “demonstrate” how much fun life is with no tariffs. You can’t get much more fundie than that. And now – quelle surprise – we have basically no cards to play when negotiating with other countries. Who would have thought it?
Yesterday wasn’t a good day for Labour. But it’s not the end of the world – because we know how this game goes.
Stand up: fight back: We know what we are up against. We’ve seen the depth of the negative, right wing campaigning. NZ wants and needs better politics, and a more inclusive society.
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 …
The weak and transparent smear attempt from National says more about them than David Cunliffe.
Yesterday, we learned that the government was reviewing its future contribution to peacekeeping missions, with an eye to turning us into an American footstool. As I pointed out, this would be a major shift in our foreign policy, and one we need to stop. Unfortunately, we’re too late: Cabinetagreed to the change last October. In secret, without consulting the people on behalf of which those troops will be deployed.
Lincoln Kidd was killed in a forest just before Christmas last year. He was 20. Rebecca Macfie wrote powerfully about him and his family […]
It is a damn form letter written to immigration by electorate offices every day. Prepared by electorate office staff. Signed in a stack by the MP. Requesting information about a constituent case or even a drop-in to the office. I’ve seen many of these per day going on in a neighbouring electorate office. Their files are strewn all over immense file directories. It is seldom that the MPs meet with the people until after the information is received from immigration. It isn’t “advocacy”. It is just dumpster diving for crap by National’s researchers.
