In case it gets deleted

Commenting at The Standard is always precarious, knowing that deletes and bans can be doled out at any time while lprent and other commenters abuse with impunity. An insidious imbalance of power.

No one deemed ‘enemy’ is immune.

Naki man:

“What team rules did Catton break, alwyn?”

How about treason
ungrateful [Deleted – we have standards even if you and Plunkett do not – MS], that about sums it up.

Calling her an ‘ungrateful cow’ was deemed to be beneath The Standard standards. But Lynn Prentice soon demonstarted that there are double standards. In response:

Oh piss off you complete jerk.

To allow people to have the opportunity to state what their opinions are is exactly why I volunteered into the army.

Having gutless stupid gits like you slagging off people because they speak their mind is exactly why I would like to kick bigoted arseholes like you and Sean Plunket out of my country.

You are a stupid dickhead..

He joined the army to protect his right to slag people off with he edit/ban finger hovering?

In his next breath he took aim at me:

Sean Plunket is in my opinion a rather stupid arsehole, a blowhard who clearly is incapable of thinking, and the type of fuckwit bigot who makes me ashamed of ever having put on uniform to defend him.

He is an absolute disgrace of a kiwi. My bet is that he has never bothered to do much for his country. He appears to be the type of shiftless bastard who only ever helped himself – a neolib fuckwit. Hopefully he will rot in hell.

And you are not much better.

I don’t know if Plunket fought for his country to protect the right to abuse people. I suspect Prentice didn’t exactly fight for his country either. He certainly doesn’t fight for free speech.

It’s a cardinal sin (a breech or blog policy) to criticise authorsd and moderators at The Standard and I’ve been banned before for criticising their abusive double standards and abuse of power.

I’ve always used YourNZ to put things on public record that are at risk of disappearing elsewhere so that’s what I’m doing here.

Reference Taxpayers Union Press Release on Eleanor Catton


And Paul is appropriately promiment there. He must have been on their stalker roster last night. Seven times on that one thread he tried to disrupt me. And he did similar with others, including targetting Wayne Mapp. Attack and disrupt and  blame the target for derailing the thread. Ironically his first hit was “Warning. Peter George is attempting to derail the thread.” He’s learnt that off others, it’s a Standard tactic.

Such is free speech on The Standard.

Prentice: “To allow people to have the opportunity to state what their opinions are is exactly why I volunteered into the army.”

He must have spent his time in the Army peeling spuds, he certainly doesn’t seem to have learn anything about abuse of power or free speech.

Views on Greece

Some differeing views on Greece at The Standard. Anthony Robins posted Greece to reclaim its future?

Greece now has an anti-austerity government after “the radical leftist Syriza” achieved a majority (by reaching an agreement with a small right-wing party). The result is very much a rebellion against long-standing problems in the Greek economy and the austerity measures put in place after the “global financial crisis”.

No doubt Greece will be looking to the Iceland precedent. In the wake of the crisis Iceland defaulted on its debts. There was short term pain, but in the longer term it is working out well for them (e.g. here here here here).

If Greece follows suit, perhaps voters in other debt=laden countries will start asking questions too…

There’s a few who seem to hope that this is the start of the anti-austerity/anti-neoliberal revolution. But not everyone, as Nadis responded:

The big difference between Iceland and Greece though is that Iceland had its own currency. Without the ability to devalue (Syriza has unequivocally stated they will remain in the Euro, and why not when they are subsidizing you in the 10s of billions per annum), Greece cannot follow the Icelandic model.

The Icelandic response was nothing more than a standard bank nationalisation, currency devaluation approach to a fiscal/balance of payments crisis which led to a period of high unemployment, high inflation but ultimately the devaluation led to the conditions for economic growth.. And they did add in some nice populist touches.

We’ve had the same thing here in NZ in the past as well as in numerous other countries.

Greece’s only option (based on announced Syriza policy) seem to be beg the EU for better terms on existing debt. Locked into an unsustainable currency, and without the ability to borrow Greece has no other options. Defaulting on debt would lead to what? A withdrawal of EU support, massive fiscal deficit and no ability to fund any domestic spending. And in return for being a good EU citizen they’ll probably get what they need – relief on EUR10 billion of debt repayments in the next 5 months, a face saving de-troika- ing, higher domestic taxes especially on the avoiders, subsidies for the very poor.

I actually think Tsipras’ toughest job will be meeting the expectations of the bulk of his supporters. Very easy being a radical in opposition, but whenyou are in charge of a bankrupt country with no resources, reliant on external charity – well that’s a bit harder.


Another difference between Iceland and Greece is the level of national indebtedness. Iceland was mostly bank debt, Greece is mostly sovereign debt. Sov debt is harder to default on and remain a connected member of the international community.

Note lso that the Icelandic crisis pushed Iceland closer to Europe with a formal EU application in addition to existing membership of EEA and NATO. On hold now while they wait for a referendum but it is supported by the largest left and right parties.


Greece has, is and likely will decide to continue to exist on the charity of the Germans. Unless they decide to man up, leave the Euro and regain the tools to manage their own economy, all this talk of “Greece taking contro;”, “Greece showing the EU who is boss” etc is fantasy, a dangerous fantasy that will continue to punish the poor of Greece.

Exit the Euro, devalue the currency by 50%, haircut Greek debt by 60%, and get on with being under-productive waiters for the rest of Europe – thats what Greece should do.

For a country with the tradition and intellect of Greece, it’s a disgrace where they are now, but that’s what widespread corruption and decades of living beyond your means on the charity of others does for you. London, Frankfurt, Paris and New York are full of extremely smart, well educated able Greeks who have voted with their feet.


They need to address a national culture of corruption which is why tax collection – the most fundamental government power – doesn’t properly exist in Greece.

Back to the hope for a revolution of the indebted. Pascal’s bookie:

If Greece goes, a precedent is set. Spain and Italy could go too.

Germany benefited greatly from having a periphery built in to the EU. Till it went pear shaped, not least due to Germany’s own short-termism. If your success is built in part on the debts you hold from crack addicts, it’s a problem you aren’t blameless in.

It could get messy and yes, it’s everyone’s problem there.

As the saying goes, if you owe the bank a thousand dollars and you’re broke you have a problem. If you owe the bank a billion dolars and you’re broke then ther bank has the problem.

There’s many varying opinions but one thing’s for sure, Greece and Europe have entered very interesting political and economic times.

Blog vultures

In the previous post Left versus lefter Martyn Bradbury proves to be the champ of chumps but one barb against Lynn Prentice does have some (partial) merit.

Blah blah Lynn – you are a Labour Party middle class stooge from the old school. 60 years olds using ‘dickhead’ as vernacular is embarrassing.

I’m not 60 and I know Lynn is younger than me so that part is nonsense (although he does come across as a cranky old bugger).

But Prentice is an old school Labour activist floundering in the 21st century, as he demonstartes in a response to me at The Standard.

I said “perhaps left wing blogs will stop their bloody mindedness, stop attacking anyone deemed to not fit some narrow ideal, and stop infighting (as per today) and support the recovery instead of scrapping over who gets to dig deeper holes.”

Prentice responded.

It’d be nice. However there is the usual problem. We could “turn the other cheek” to left blogs, right blogs, blogs that think they are in the ‘centre’, politicians, media or whoever. However experience tends to show that when we do that all it does is simply encourage idiots to attack more.

Confronting crap is an important part of political debate.

They usually go off to create stupid myths that consist largely of people telling each other that they have heard for someone else. It then causes considerable extra work explaining to thick buggers who can’t think (umm a face comes to mind) that regardless what they’d heard, it didn’t happen.

These days I’ll ignore some of it, do a few warning shots. If people don’t take the warnings then I will go into problem fixing mode. That consists of wading in when the tactical position is suitable, ripping their entails out and spreading them on the ground for the vultures.

He thinks that’s what he does. And he has a very loose leash on his resident vultures at The Standard. It might have been effective in public bar political arguments last century but when printed in permanent public record in new century social media it looks at best big dickish.

If it happens again, then I will simply escalate how badly I eviscerate. If it gets too irritating repetitive then I figure out a debilitating meme to cover them with to see if I can increase the risk of peritonitis. It isn’t pretty, but it is usually highly effective eventually at preventing people trying to climb somewhere on our sites carcass.

But it isn’t effective. Prentice doesn’t seem to have comprehended the sating about repeating the same old mistakes.

However the reflex is almost entirely reactive. If people stop attacking stupidly then I will usually stop ripping into them (unless I start thinking that they are a real danger).

I do find it pretty damn irritating when fools start trying to claim silly crap like blogs screwing them up because they’d prefer to believe it rather than looking at real problems. Like what in the hell are their MSM liasons and politicians doing? Having a single “senior MP” playing silly games is a hundredfold more damaging. Chris Carter for instance.

Blogs may have a major impact on general public opinion. They sometimes do if they manage to get the MSM interested – because you’re trying to affect millions of people. That was the success of the dirty politics resonance chamber until Hager nobbled it.

Despite the grand dreams of Cameron Slater in particular blogs rarely have a major impact on general public opiniion. The vast majority of people don’t know that Whale Oil or The Standard exist let alone carfe about there attempts at influencing opinion.

And as Slater has discovered if they repeat the nasty bastard approach it is more likely to turn opiniion against them. They might have small wins but eventually the shit catches up with them.

But where blogs have an effect is inside the political parties and chattering classes. The reason for that is obvious. There are only a few 10’s of thousands there. In the case of political parties, when politicians start working at cross-purposes with their party members that starts showing up in the public sphere pretty damn fast these days.

When blogs keep working at cross purposes to decent debate it contributes to making their associated parties look like dirty rabble.

If a politician can’t convince their own members that a course of action is the way to go, then I suspect that they will fail badly with the public as well. David Shearer being a particularly good case in point. perhaps he should have read the blogs?

The most vociferous participants on blogs like The Standard and Kiwiblog (comment at Whale Oil has been neutered and is now a tame chorus) are not a good target for parties to impress. Many of them are the unsatisfiable idealists and extremists.

Reading The Standard will give a neutral observer little idea about Labour Party thinking and behaviour is likke. It is likely to do little other than deter an imvolvement in poltical debate or with Labour. Most people don’t want to walk into an abusive uninviting environment.

So the blog becomes little more than a poor advertisement for it’s associated party, discouraging decent debate and contributing to widespread disillusionment with politics.

And Prentice and his entrailing and wailing is one of the biggest culprits, one of the left’s worst enemies of progressing and rebuilding in the 21st century. Which is a shame because The Standard could be far more effective if it encouraged far less vitriol.

Ditto Kiwiblog and National, except that David Farrar has a hands off approach and isn’t a recidivist arsehole.

Political blogs could contribute a lot to the political discourse in New Zealand. Unfortunately when some olf the biggest are controlled by the likes of Slater, Prentice and Bradbury the prospects don’t look great.

It’s their own entrails that they are spreading out, and their own vultures picking over the bones.

Maybe there simply isn’t the market for positive political blogs.

Which would be a pity because the voting public are fed up with dirty politics and dirty blogging.

It baffles me why Prentice things that being a blowhard arsehole will achieve anything positive.

Left versus lefter

Clash of the blowhards.

Lynn Prentice at The Standard: The prince and the pea

I have pointed out before that Bomber Bradbury is wee bit unsuited to the two way dialogue of the blogs. A fragile prima donna who doesn’t like to be contradicted by the people he gallantly slags off in his routine piques of bitchy ranting. Updated with Bomber proving the point as his manufactured myths fall apart.

In response Martyn Bradbury at The Daily Blog BLOGWATCH: Has Lynn Prentice apologised to his best blogger for outing him yet?

Having this clown lecture me about blogging when he cut Presland’s throat for the Labour Party is like Whaleoil lecturing people on ethics.

And Prentice then has a slanging match with Bradbury on the Daily Blog thread. It isn’t pretty.

But in this case on Bradbury’s initial accusation he is repeating is false, Greg Presland’s identity was known long before Bradbury’s claimed ‘outing’, and proof is provided of this.

But that’s not good enough for Bradbury. He has posted an update on his post:


That precious little chump over at The Strandard, Lynn Prentice, has claimed that because Greg Presland’s identity was known by the Standard clique, then somehow that makes it okay for Lynn to have allowed Jossie Pagani  to have slagged him the way she did. Talking with Greg afterwards, he was shocked that Lynn would throw him under a bus like that. That was the point of this post, their sad need to avoid the manner in which they treated Greg is desperate and nasty.

Very much like Lynn Prentice.

He has gone onto make all sorts of allegations in the comments section here and his spite is a reminder of what a grumpy old twisted fool he is. The fact remains Scoop has massive internal issues, his claim that I have some sort of vested interest in Scoop collapsing is just the most ludicrous assertion I’ve ever heard. Try better next time please Lynn, even Slater can concoct a better conspiracy than that.

You are just lying now Lynn.

This is dirty debating, using an ‘update’ to try and win an argument. Read all the comments to see the reality.

And the fact remains that Bradbury keeps smearing Scoop – that’s what started this spat. And he keeps making false claims about Presdland’s ‘outing’. So he deserves a bollocking.

But to see the two biggest left wing bloggers slanging off like this is not a good look for the prospects of a left wing recovery.

Hopefully this is a clearing of the air that will result in a bit of introspection (unlikely with both of them) and some resolve to use the left’s main political forums to look like they want to have their side back in government some time this century.

Andrew Little has a huge task in front of him. The Labour caucus has a big challenge to reform and rebuild.

But if the left wing blogosphere continues to look like a self ravaging rabble the perception of a recovery will be difficult.

“Mass surveillance is being pushed on us”

Anthony Robins posted about The mathematics of surveillance saying it can’t work. Obviously it can never be 100% successful.

But Robins also implies that mass surveillance is “being pushed on us” and “that it is being used for unstated goals”.

But there’s not proof of mass surveillance in New Zealand and ikt is illegal.

Mass surveillance cannot accomplish its stated goals. It is likely that many within the security / government system understand this full well. But mass surveillance is being pushed on us anyway. This means of course, that it is being used for unstated goals.

It’s been stated a number of times that we don’t do mass surveillance in New Zealand.

Key releases GCSB documents

Prime Minister John Key has released a series of documents ‘setting the record straight’ over claims the GCSB had spied on New Zealanders.

Mr Key responded quickly to Edward Snowden and Glen Greenwald’s freshest claims – that “if you live in New Zealand, you are being watched” – this afternoon.

“Claims have been made tonight that are simply wrong and that is because they are based on incomplete information.

”There is not, and never has been, a cable access surveillance programme operating in New Zealand.

“There is not, and never has been, mass surveillance of New Zealanders undertaken by the GCSB.


And GCSB spies respond to mass surveillance allegations

The Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) has responded to election week allegations it carries out mass surveillance on New Zealanders, denying its programmes are for anything other than cyber security.

It’s been likened to scanning of everything on your computer with virus protection but on a country scale. It’s also been said that large companies and organisations have been assisted in cyber protection.

Early September this year, somewhere in the world unknown computer hackers set their sights on New Zealand. Boffins in charge of security at Telecom, now called Spark, saw a cyber-attack coming in, a big one.

Its internet and email system went down on the Friday and stayed down for 72 hours.

The experts are still trying to work out exactly what did happen when foreign hackers took control of 120 home computers.

Cyber-attacks happen across the world every hour of every day. It’s these sort of attacks the GCSB says it is trying to prevent – shadowy hackers from all over the world, sending out complex viruses to damage big businesses or Government departments, or even getting inside and taking them over.

My guess is that most people would be happy to have their home computers protected from being taken over.

There is no direct proof that the GCSB is hovering up the metadata of ordinary New Zealanders, but the cable programme 7148 and the approach to Spark are possible indications that last year it was on the cards and it may be again.

Mass surveillance/collection of all metadata of New Zealanders by the GCSB is illegal. There are very specific legal processes involved in allowing targeted surveillance.

Not legal. No proof.

Mass surveillance is not being pushed on us. What is the unstated goal of implying that it is?

Standard sucked into Blomfield versus Slater dirt

Lyn Prentice posted on The Standard today:

Yesterday I got contacted about Cameron Slater’s current address. Apparently the arsehole of the kiwi blogosphere hasn’t been paying his court ordered judgements against him that have been incurred in recent years. The person who contacted me wanted to serve a notice to bankrupt him.

An image of the bankruptcy notice shows it is Matt Blomfield versus Cameron Slater. It was originally posted with both addresses but they have been redacted. There is ongoing court proceedings between the two. I don’t know if this is a reasonable course of action by Blomfield or a stunt or an attempt at harassment. I won’t take sides between Blomfield and Slater except perhaps the opposite side to both of them. It’s not unusual for them to be going hammer and tongs and both have records of playing dirty. What is unusual is that Prentice has allowed the Standard to play such a part. It’s not the first time, in a previous slanging match The Standard posted a statement from Blomfield. It would appear that this time Blomfield has gone to Prentice to set up this publicity. And Prentice has obliged boots and all. Commenters have suggested it may not be the wisest thing to do (my view too) but it’s been done.

Apparently this has to do with the long running Blomfield defamation case. It has to do with court ordered judgements unrelated to his Slater’s current rather forlorn appeals as he continues to waste the time of the courts. Both in the court of appeal on the defamation and the privacy court about accessing dubiously obtained (probably stolen) private information to write the Blomfield posts.

I’d be surprised if Prentice doesn’t know exactly what it’s about. He keeps saying he wouldn’t risk putting The Standard in legal jeopardy, His blog, his choice to get in the middle of Blomfield versus Slater. Prentice also gets stuck into a continuation of Prentice versus Slater.

Is the blogosphere going to shift from being a space where people can express their honestly held opinions within the legal constraints of society, or is it a place where the malicious can hire a liar to defame others? It is pretty obvious which side I am on in this debate. It is important that this debate is held within the legal systems rather than the kind of lynch mob justice you appear to favour.

That’s rather ironic considering the lynch mob mentality he actively nurtures and at times leads at The Standard.

But unlike you I look at what was in the claims that Slater was making about Blomfield and are subject to this defamation action. That is what Slater will eventually have to defend and to date he appears to be doing a piss-poor job on that. Trying to pull in claims and areas extrinsic to that are as unlikely to sway me as they would a court. We don’t allow deliberate campaigns of smearing on this site. That is why you have limits on what you can do. I don’t want to waste my time in court in the way that Cameron obviously likes doing.

The bolded bit is brazen bull. Prentice supports and encorouages smear campaigns on The Standard. Slater’s wife Juana posted a comment:

I realise your blind hatred of Cam prevents you from looking too closely at the hand that feeds you the info ( Matt ) but sorry to burst your bubble but he has neglected to tell you some pertinent facts. 1. The court costs are in a Trust account and will be released when the Appeal process is complete IF Matt wins. If he doesn’t Matt will owe Cam court costs. 2. Cam has the money but has no legal obligation to pay the money until the appeal has been completed and Matt knows this. 3. Matt is trying to serve papers as part of his ongoing campaign of harassment.Something I know you all enjoy as you are his mate but nevertheless harassment is what it is.

Prentice replied:

Hi Juana, I already answered Marty about the “hate” bit. But I will repeat it for your benefit. I think your guy is a irresponsible arsehole who brings the rest of the blogging communities into disrepute. I intensely dislike being tarred with the same label as him because there are very few of us who act like such a complete scumbag. Perhaps you should consider that before trying to smear me. I don’t “hate” him (never met him for that matter). I dislike his actions and how they reflect on me. I wish he would desist from doing posts like those he did about Blomfield and many others. I’m prepared to exert some effort to help that to happen

I agree that Slater “brings the rest of the blogging communities into disrepute” more than anyone else in New Zealand. But it’s very ironic to see Prentice worried about being tarred by bad behaviour, of those bloggers with significant influence I’d rate him  second to Slater on the arsehole scale – he brags about being an arsehole (as Slater does). He’s a distant second but he surely he’s not blind to how much his own blog being tarred by bad behaviour.

Everyone who isn’t interested in the likes of arsehole scumbags like Cameron Slater attacking them in public and getting paid for it should also be interested in it. Since that kind of arsehole behaviour happens to be what I am interested in not spreading across our local blogs, I keep reporting on aspects of this long running case.

I doubt anyone at The Standard gets paid for attacking people in public but it’s common and supported by Prentice. He leads by example. I wouldn’t call them arsehole scumbags but there’s a few regulars who’s primary role at the Standard appears as arsehole scumbag behaviour. And being a willing party to Blomfield’s bankruptcy action doesn’t look very flash either. Prentice seems to have decided to lower himself to closer to Slater’s level. Marty commented:

I realise the enemy of our enemy is The Standard’s friend, but I’d be terribly careful snuggling up to Blomfield. His portrayal as a random drive by shooting victim of Slater is going to end up in tears. The man is, at best, no better than blubberboy. As for publishing his home address on the Internet… wtf? I don’t know anything about money, but going for bankruptcy when there isn’t a clear indication that the person is indeed bankrupt and is instead stalling on paying a debt, isn’t that just being a total prick for the sake of being a prick? Anyway. Don’t let your hatred for Slater blind you to this man. He’s a P.O.S. himself, and you’re being used.


I know it will be against the rules to discuss it here, so I won’t, but Blomfield’s true nature and true involvement in things outside the law have so far been carefully suppressed by everyone who knows better, because it doesn’t suit the Slater-must-be-silenced campaign. ALL I am saying is for lprent and The Standard not to to be seen as part of Blomfield’s fan club. There will be a time when that’s going to have some unwanted blowback. The last thing I want is for The Standard to join Bradbury as a source of justified ridicule.

Blomfield versus Slater seems par for a dirty course. A Prentice versus Slater escalation is risking a lot for The Standard. I’d be surprised if turns out to be worth the short term feeling of gotcha. Marty again:

Well, I didn’t want to be helpful to Blomfield, as he’s at least as despicable as Slater, and they deserve each other, but how hard is it to find Slater’s current address? Seriously? Which makes me go back to my previous point – you are allowing yourself / the blog to be used by this guy, and two wrongs don’t make a right. If you think that “bankruptcy” will silence Slater, I need to confess I don’t understand your thought process. You are allowing yourself and the blog to be used for someone’s personal harassment, and you are using your long term goal of ridding the world of Cameron Slater as your justification. Come on lprent, take a deep breath, walk away. We have more important things to achieve rather than help Blomfield out with his personal vendettas.

Whale Oil is at risk of crashing and burning. Doing dirty too long and pissing on too many people was bound to backlash. It would be a shame to see The Standard go the same way. Two major blogs down would be a significant loss to the blogosphere.

Left versus right, blog versus blog

I posted Left wing wishes and fantasies and Right wing wishes and fantasies without comment so they could be seen sas they were posted by those who’s ideas of policies they were.

Note that it doesn’t represent ‘left’ versus ‘right’ thinking, ikt represents views on one left leaning blog and one right leaning blog..

The Standard comments would represent something like the left half of the left.

And the Whale Oil comments are fairly far right, and with a narrow range of views given that many people have been banned from Whale Oil for not complying with their moderation policies. People with differing ideas and views top Slater and Belt have been ecluded from commenting by design.

There is little input on both threads from where the bulk of New Zealand voters sit on the political spectrum, the centre, centre-left and centre-right.

The Standard thread has a wider range of policy ideas and wish lists. It’s a fairly unfettered environment. It includes comments by Standard regulars but there’s also a number from infrequent commenters.

The Whale Oil thread is dominated by anti-Maori and anti-Treaty of Waitangi comments, probably because that was the first thing posted on and Whale Oil has become sheep dominated – if you keep agreeing with Slater you are less likely to be banned.

It also included grizzle of the moment, Muslims and immigration.

So the two threads are representative of views of The Standsard and Whale Oil rather than of the left and the right.

There is little likelihood of most of these policies geting anywhere near Parliament via either National or Labour,

Left wing wishes and fantasies

A post at The Standard – Andrea Vance on Andrew Little’s game plan – asks:

What do you want/expect to see in Andrew Little’s state of the nation?

The resonse was a number of wishes and wishlists.


I would like to see him define the debate on Labour’s terms – so, say, talk about jobs, wages, salaries and fairness in a world of the 1%ers. Within that framework talk about looking at a UBI, about workplace reform – maybe with German style workplace councils to stimulate productivity (but also introduce backdoor worker organisation without using the dreaded “trade union” words) and worker buy in.

UBI = Universal Basic Income is a minimun wage/benefit set at a ‘livable’ level.

Talk about the need to create a fairer society through better wages. In other words, make the argument where National are not delivering anything at all to the vast majority of Kiwis – wages and salaries.

Oh and how about saying that under Labour a bunch of scoundrels and pirates in rusty old fishing boats would not be allowed to humiliate our Navy and plunder fish stocks in the Southern Ocean.


The want lists includes.

  • Concrete policy on climate change. Divest from fossil fuels.
  • A clear independent foreign policy based on peaceful cohabitation of the planet with other cultures and nations.
  • Pull out of TPPA deal
  • Significant tax increases for the wealthy and corporations.
  • Massive investment in public transport
  • Investment in regional NZ.
  • Rebuild NZ’s local manufacturing in areas where .
  • Promote sustainable farming practises.
  • Build 100,00 state houses.
  • Change laws on rental properties to dis incentivise Multiple ownership of property.
  • Stop all foreign ownership of businesses, land and property.
  • Nationalisation of energy, transport, water, telecommunications, health and other core national interests.
  • Political donations only through membership of a political party and at a low rate of say $30. So the numbers of your supporters, not the wealth is what counts.
  • The reinstatement of genuine public broadcasting.
  • Democratic workplaces..cooperatives, worker owned companies.
  • Highly subsidised public transport
  • The conversion of inner city carparks into green spaces

I think an unqualified apology for the events of 1984 to 1990 would make for a cleansing break from Labour’s tragic embrace of neoliberalism.

Colonial Rawshark”

A full time youth jobs guarantee for those 25 and under. 37.5 hrs per week at the minimum wage, where you are expected to perform to a full employment standard.


A return of freight back to rail. Especially in regions with high truck traffic levels, and highway gridlock.

Lastly cartridge of dangerous and hazardous waste by rail. Never should Petroleum and oils be carried by road.


I’ll just be grateful if we could just have one Labour leader until the 2017 election.


A caucus that spends less time waiting for their turn in government while playing internal politics and more time on making sure that they win a general election.


I would like to see the Labour Party categorically state that the policies of greed and self-interest, as promoted since the Labour Party of 1984, do not work and that people simply do not go about their lives on the sole basis of greed and self-interest (bizarre thought isn’t it).

…. then link that statement to the current government, plus failures the result of those policies such as leaky homes, the GFC, Pike River, etc

Murray Rawshark:

I think there needs to be an unqualified apology for the events of 1984 to 2015. Without the Lange regime, this year would be very different politically and economically.

Miracle Worker:

The day I see Andrew Little take on John Key over South Canterbury Finance, which is John Key’s biggest achilles heel by a country mile, the issue that will bring him down and banish him from the political landscape for good, as well as set National back for at least a decade, is the day Labour will win back my vote.

Until that day comes, I have written Labour off as National-lite. When Labour KNOWS how corrupt Key and his cronies were over that issue and they do nothing about it, they are just as corrupt for turning a blind eye to it. I am sick of listening to their empty rhetoric and bullsh*t.

George Hendry:

@ Paul’s list –

# Divest from international ‘reserve’ (with a snap of our fingers we create the money you need, but you’re not allowed to try this trick ) bank system

# Exercise sovereign right to create independent government-backed local currency

# Hand over SIS and GCSB files to ordinary citizens spied on, ‘illegally’ or otherwise

# Stay alive if possible – look out for extrajudicial assassination drones with which PM is comfortable


He probably should be promising a public broadcasting channel.


I’d like Andrew to show to all Kiwis that he has the vision thing and that he has the passion to take us along with him.
I’d like him to demonstrate that he is a quick but not hasty decision maker, that he is thoughtful and analytical and then committed to his decisions.

I want him to show that he is a team builder who supports his bench with his big strength and toughness.
Andrew needs to continue showing that he knows himself and that he is very comfortable in his own skin. The public want to see his character and to understand the role it plays in his leadership style.

Policy Parrot:

1. Most voters are employees – tailor policy to them.
Over 70% of FTE workers are employees. It is our challenge to remake society so that one again can be successful through thrift and hard work as an employee, not solely through property trading or business ownership. Increases in minimum wage, industry specific wage floors, guaranteed union representative access, changes to work trials etc. Improve and expand the current apprenticeship system.

2. Making the tax system work
Making the tax system fairer. Sure the tax system would be simpler with a single rate of tax, but this rate needs be to discounted at the lower end so that lower income people can both survive and contribute to society, and thus compensatorily needs to be elevated at the higher end in order to pay for the discount at the lower end.
There needs to be a commission into tax to address horizontal fairness (i.e. all sources of income being treated the same for tax purposes), closing loopholes through a system design which also achieves the social policy objectives, and cracking down on tax fraud through omission and false statements. Establish a department within IRD specifically to help SME’s deal with tax/regulatory issues.

3. Regional Development + Extractive Industry
Regional development through direct central government investment, i.e. moving some staffing resources back into regional cities, tax incentives for large manufacturing businesses to locate their factories in regional New Zealand. Continue to allow extractive industries in negotiation with the local people in regions such as Northland, East Cape, West Coast – with the stipulation that a portion of profits be reinvested in the same regions. Encourage regional diversification. Make use of Solid Energy as the main/dominant operator of all mining/extractive operations wherever possible – as it is a SOE, and thus theorectically subject to political and social considerations in a different political environment.

4. Living and Transport
Improve and update the KiwiBuild policy – perhaps a new moniker as well. Build warm and dry, energy efficient houses in communities serviced by public transport. There needs to be another 50k state houses built.
Build up feeder/domitory towns that have public transport available/potential.
Reintroduce commuter rail to Christchurch, and improve existing services in Auckland and Wellington.

5. Education Sector
Increase the hours available in the 20 hour free scheme to 30, and lower the starting age to 2.
Continue with the excellent school fee policy.
Reintroduce funding for the night courses scrapped by National.
Review NCEA to make sure it is delivering its policy objectives.
Changes to the student allowance eligibility criteria, i.e. if there remains an income threshold, there should also be an asset test, and increase the weekly borrrowing limit for living costs for those dependent on student loans.
Review the whole tertiary funding sector with a view to eventually establishing universal student allowances at a living level, with minimum pass/grade levels required.


I would like to here that the ordinary people matter to him, and his labour party.
that he will work to bring back the 40hour week and 8 hour day. I would like to here him differentiate labour from the greens. I would like to here precisely how labour is diiferent from national.


For me to vote Labour again I would like to see Little concentrate on the key economic concerns of people that have been ignored for the past 30 years and are issues that National will never deal with in a million years.

a) Apprenticeships – Re introduce the old apprenticeship system for trades. Its senseless that the hands on trades such as hairdressing, florists are learnt in a classroom rather than the practical hands on experience of the old apprenticeship system. Higher education institutions have been coining it out of the young for far too long and fail with their theory learning only to give these youngsters the practical experience that the employer needs. Its time to send them down the road as these youngsters not only end up with not having the practical experience required, but also end up with a huge hefty student debt to pay off.

b) Food costs – Why are we paying what we do for food in our supermarkets. What is the breakdown for the cost of milk, bread and butter. Its interesting that the only Labour Party member to mention this issue was looked down by Labour as a filthy closet National Party supporter and that this issue was not picked up by any other member when he departed the party. Why is that? Is there more to this issue than the general public knows and are Labour too scared or just simply don’t know how to tackle it.

c) It is not only the employees that are getting a hard time, there are also plenty of self employed or contractors that don’t get a fair deal when dealing with the bigger corporates. Offering support for these people would help with a fairer society for businesses rather than big corporates being the dominant players.

d) Workers definitely need representation, since the introduction of the ECA Act in 1991 (which Labour did nothing about during their 9 years of power) wages for Kiwis have become low and no longer give people the income to meet soaring living costs.

e) Unions are the dinosaurs of yesterday, a new method of worker representation needs to occur. Unions fail to give people the choice of their representation ie: if you work in a shop than your union is the shop workers union despite if you think they are good, bad, effective or jack shit useless. It needs to change where workers despite their role, get to choose the group that represents them therefore keeping those that choose to represent workers do as the worker wants rather than what they want.

f) Living costs – Again, like the food, why are we paying what we do for rates, power, insurance, housing and transport (petrol) costs. Are these costs valid in that is what it costs to provide these services or are the 1%ers coining it off the rest of us?

Little needs to return Labour back to their original tradition of looking out for the key economic concerns of people. He also needs to recognise that the welfare reforms National have made are necessary and need to stay. Labour fell into the trap of allowing welfare to become a alternative to working rather than a helping hand. Little also needs erode the PC ideology that currently dominates the Labour Party. PC ideology that does nothing to help the average family put food on their tables.


Seems to me at this stage he needs to play to his strengths and focus on education/training — which he would have had a lot to do with during his EPMU stage — perhaps with a dash of innovation and supporting of manufacturing. At the moment, he just needs to be solid, play a straight bat with no outrageous hook shots.

The Chairman:

Little may like to point out market voids (such as housing, export growth, employment, etc) and explain how a hands on Government will fill these voids – i.e. build more homes, create new export focused SOEs, thus grow our wealth and provide more decent paying jobs.


Less anger, more smiles, more reason, more about what he’s going to do to lead this country (if that comes his way), less about sniping at the current government, but more about saying what he would do. Have more of a global view.

He could also do with a good media adviser to help him come across more clearly, engage with voters, speak more clearly – keep people engaged for the long game.

Te Reo Pisstake

A long time commenter at The Standard used to call themselves The Voice of Reason. The way they conducted themselves made that name look like a pisstake. A few years ago they switched to a Maori translation, Te Reo Putake. I don’t know what the Maori word for pisstake is.

Te Reo Putake could reasonably be described as a resident troll at The Standard, seemingly more intent on dirty attacks on others rather than conbtributing anything of any worth to discussions.

He seems to have had a particular obsessiion about me since before the 2011 election. He even went to the extent of ringing Channel 9 before I was due to have an interview to initiate an embarrassing question. He should be embarrassed by that.

He frequently deliberately lies in smear attempts. A standard dirty politics tactic. See Te Reo Putake lies at The Standard again.

He seemed to go quiet during election year for some reason but it’s hard to say, he may be a bit liberal with the use of identities – Curious pseudonym mix-up at The Standard.

Te Reo Putake has returned with the same lying pissiness. He trolled me yesterday:

Stopped clock, MS.

It’s just a shame Pete’s too busy writing the follow up post to his innocently and totally unintentionally racist dog whistle about aoteroa/new zealand to comment more. You are writing that post, aren’t you Pete? You promised, remember? Y’know, the one where you discover that on being outed as a racist you suddenly realised you really love te reo and maaaris and why can’t we all get along?

In the meantime, here’s a song:

Typical lying smear attempt. And it wasn’t just me being TRP’d on. Further down the same thread:

Te Reo Putake

Um, what race dya reckon’s been abused, Moz? I’d hate to think you’re lumping together many different peoples because of a shared characteristic. There’s probably a word for that, but buggered if I can remember what it is.

‘North’ responded:

So apart from that aspect TRP, viz. Morrissey’s reference to “race”, what’s your take on the thrust of what Morrissey says, as neatly encapsulated by Ropata:Rorschach @ 22.1 ? You know…….the incendiary being “Free Speech” when deployed against the unfashionable while much less directed in reverse is heinous speech.

Disingenuous is your feigned loss of memory about the “probably” applicable “word”. Care to come right out and say what it is you think Morrissey’s up to…….”many different peoples”…….”shared characteristic” ?

Would “hate to think” you’re trying a gratuitous, irresponsible, snippy, Bassett move on Moz. Would “hate to think” the elusive word(s) begin with ‘A’ and ‘S’ with a hyphen chucked in there somewhere. “Je Ne Suis Pas….” for such passive aggression……if that’s what you’re up to.

I know you have plenty of wiggle room here TRP. That obviates the need to respond dismissively, or from high-horse, or even vulgarly…….as of late seems your wont.

On another thread yesterday:

Yep. We’re the country that stuck it to France when they were fucking the Pacific and now we can’t even put the fear into a motley crew of high seas poachers. Mind you, my gut feeling is that the current Government aren’t all that bothered about it. Plenty more fish in the sea and who are we to interfere in the workings of the free market?


Only when you’re spouting RWNJ fantasies, Paul. Great list, keep talking like this and we’ll always get on. Read some Marx and we could almost be twins.

And a couple of days ago:

It’s not being imposed, you racist tool. And yes, you are racist. You’re only trying to cover your arse by saying you’d prefer ‘aotearoa’ here on TS; that was something you managed to omit from your actual dog whistle post on yawn NZ.

Typical ‘voice of reason’. Making things up to try and smear. A pisstake on Te Reo.

(More insulting to Te Reo than a pisstake but that’s what I’m doing, it will give him something to feign offence and rant about.)

Presland practising what he preaches against

Greg Presland has tried to link a 3 News item on Andrew Little seeking a new press secretary to same old ‘Dirty Politics’ – TV3, Cameron Brewer and more of the same. He makes claims but provides no proof.

One commenter “suggested people be a bit less precious” – I think Bill is right. Less preciousness and more positives would help Little and Labour far more than trying to talk up very tenuous links with one of last year’s most negative political stories.

TV3 chose to approach Brewer nominally for independent PR advice.  Brewer is well known as one of the nastier right wing Councillors on Auckland Council.  He is as blue as they come.  He is apparently in partnership with the infamous Carrick Graham and Ricardo Sumich, who also has exquisite National Party links.  Graham is one of the three people whose reputations were most damaged by Dirty Politics.  But this background was not mentioned by TV3.  Instead they just referred to Brewer as a “former Press Secretary”.

Sure TV3 used a couple of snarky soundbites from right wing Cameron Brewer. A crappy but normal approach. But it is relevant that he has been a press secretary.

However he wasn’t the first or most quoted person they went to for commentary, that was Auckland University politics lecturer Jennifer Lees-Marshment.

Should an item like this be a PR puff piece and only seek favourable comments? That would be worse than what they’ve done with this.

The connection to ‘Dirty Politics’ is a stretch. Going by the index Brewer didn’t feature at all in the book.

He is apparently in partnership with the infamous Carrick Graham and Ricardo Sumich, who also has exquisite National Party links. Graham is one of the three people whose reputations were most damaged by Dirty Politics. But this background was not mentioned by TV3.

Why should 3 News have mentioned a tenuous link like that? They never have time to go into detail about the histories and associations of every person interviewed.

Even worse is that the TV3 story has been seeded by earlier posts by David Farrar and Cameron Slater.

There is no evidence of this. Is Presland practicing what he preaches against, dirty politics?

Farrar’s post on it was at 2.00 pm on the 15th of January. He quoted a Stuff report from the previous day, last updated at 13:37 January 14. As did Slater and his post on it was also on the 15th. Why would TV3 be ‘seeded’ by just one of several posts a day about Little on Whale Oil?

The original Stuff report said:

The advertisement has already prompted senior press gallery reporters to plot creative ways to thwart another expected result – weekly meetings with key press gallery journalists.

So it’s very likely that 3 News journalists already knew about the position being advertised. Press secretaries are often sourced from the ranks of press gallery reporters. It is certain to be a topic of gallery conversations. They wouldn’t need Farrar and Slater to bring it to their attention.

Presland laments:

The video is utterly appalling.

I didn’t think the TV3 report was bad considering it was a political filler in the silly season.

It was publicity for Labour. It got Andrew Little on the 6 o’clock news and overall I don’t think it was negative for him at all. And it helped advertise the position, surely that’s a good thing.

Claiming this is a continuation of ‘Dirty Politics’ is creating a negative about what should be a positive, getting Little in the news and getting the best possible press secretary for him.

As Brewer was quoted:

“The Labour Party haven’t been on the news at 6pm in a positive light since Adam was a boy, so this is a huge ask,”

He’s right, it is a huge ask. Trying to seed it into being about ‘Dirty Politics’ won’t help shine ‘positive light’ at all, it’s just futile glowering on a dark past.

Slater is right about one thing, when you wrestle with pigs you get dirty. Presland’s post tried the ‘Dirty’ approach. That won’t help.

Getting more positive will help Little and Labour more.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,377 other followers