Open Forum – Saturday

21 September 2018

Forum

This post is open to anyone to comment on any topic that isn’t spam, illegal or offensive. All Your NZ posts are open but this one is for you to raise topics that interest you. 

If providing opinions on or summaries of other information also provide a link to that information. Bloggers are welcome to summarise and link to their posts.

Comments worth more exposure may be repeated as posts.Comments from other forums can be repeated here, cut and paste is fine.

Your NZ is a mostly political and social issues blog but not limited to that, and views from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome. Some ground rules:

  • If possible support arguments, news, points or opinions with links to sources and facts.
  • Please don’t post anything illegal, potentially defamatory or abusive.

FIRST TIME COMMENTERS: Due to abuse by a few, first comments under any ID will park in moderation until released (as soon as possible but it can sometimes take a while).

Sometimes comments will go into moderation or spam automatically due to mistyped ID, too many links (>4), or trigger text or other at risk criteria.

Free speech is an important principle here but some people who might pose a risk to the site may be limited.

Next Post

68 Comments

  1. robertguyton

     /  September 22, 2018

    Victory!

    “Back in 2017, Greenpeace activists Russel Norman and Sara Howell protested against a foreign seismic survey ship as it explored for oil. The protest violated National’s “Anadarko amendment”, a law specifically outlawing protest against the oil industry at sea. But today, despite MBIE’s efforts to persecute them, they were discharged without conviction:
    Two Greenpeace activists who disrupted an oil exploration vessel have been discharged without conviction.

    Greenpeace executive director Russel Norman and fellow activist Sara Howell appeared in Napier District Court in July to apply for a discharge without conviction after admitting a charge of interfering with an oil exploration vessel.

    […]

    Judge Tompkins said if Norman and Howell were convicted they would receive a more serious penalty than Mulvay [who had been given diversion] “when all three were equally involved in exactly the same sequence of events”.

    The Judge said the gravity of the offending was low and the effect of convictions for the pair would be out of all proportion to the gravity of the offence.”

    • Ray

       /  September 22, 2018

      I sure as your time as a school master will remind you “getting off” is not a “not guilty” result and can only considered a “victory” in the sense of it is different when a Green breaks the law, no consequences, being reminded of another Green leader who set alight to a patch of gorse inducing a no burn period.

      • Griff.

         /  September 22, 2018

        The Judge said the gravity of the offending was low and the effect of convictions for the pair would be out of all proportion to the gravity of the offence.”
        In other words the judge upheld the right to protest over nationals attempts to protect the oil industry from legitimate protest .

      • robertguyton

         /  September 22, 2018

        ” discharged without conviction:”, Ray! Good news indeed! So, not guilty, so far as I’m concerned. A great victory in the face of National’s disgraceful kowtowing to Big Oil. He’s a brave fellow, that Russel Norman!

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  September 22, 2018

        Who was the fool who set fire to gorse ? They could have started a bush fire. I haven’t been in a big one, but was closer than I’d want to be to one in Wellington. There was no danger, but seeing and smelling it gave a feeling of what it must be like in a big one, if one magnified it 1000x. Horrible.

        David Garrett was discharged without conviction but pilloried and treated as if he’d been found guilty and sentenced…which he was, but by the ignorant and mean-spirited, not by the court.

        • robertguyton

           /  September 22, 2018

          “if one magnified it 1000x. Horrible.”
          Yeah, “”There was a very tiny gorse fire which was out by the time they [Fire Service] got there,”
          What was it Garrett did? Light a “tiny gorse fire”?

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  September 22, 2018

            The bush fire near me was in Owhiro Bay; the whole hillside was ablaze and the smell was appalling. I can’t remember now how much was destroyed; it wasn’t like the Australian ones, but it was bad enough.

            A tiny gorse fire can very quickly get out of hand. Wind, heat, dryness and fire….what kind of fool takes that risk ?

            • robertguyton

               /  September 22, 2018

              Dozens of farmers, every year, across the country. Are you anti-farmer, Kitty?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  September 23, 2018

              Don’t be ridiculous. You are trolling now.

  2. robertguyton

     /  September 22, 2018

    Oh, and Ray, your “Green leader who sat alight to a patch of gorse” is FAKE NEWS, or in other words, complete and utter rubbish 🙂 You are most welcome to try to prove otherwise.

    • Ray

       /  September 22, 2018

      This article would suggest otherwise Robert, I note her husband took the rap and though she did know there was a ban, he “claimed” he did not
      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10362592

      • robertguyton

         /  September 22, 2018

        Ray, in what way does “the article suggest otherwise”???
        I think you’re being …less than straight with this little issue, for reasons known only to you!
        Still, a cut and paste from the article that supports your claim will clear things up.

        • Ray

           /  September 22, 2018

          Here you are Robert, NZTV report
          Pretty sure any farmer claiming this as reason for a breach of the Act regarding water would not get your support.
          Note not fake news or utter rubbish, it happened.

          “The Green Party leader Jeanette Fitzsimons and her husband are in trouble with the Thames Fire Service for breaching a fire ban.

          Fire officers were called out to their Coromandel property on New Year’s Eve, after a fire was lit in windy conditions.

          The Thames Valley rural fire officer Allan Gamble says once it had been put out, officers told Fitzsimons and her husband about the ban, which had been well advertised.

          He says it’s disappointing that the leader of the Green Party was involved and says breaching a fire ban is a serious offence.

          Fitzsimons says her husband’s breach of a total fire ban was unwise, but there was no risk of anything nearby catching alight.

          She says she and her husband were aware of the fire ban and it wasn’t a wise thing to do. “

          • robertguyton

             /  September 22, 2018

            Ray, I can only assume you are taking the piss. The Green Party leader, “involved”? Married to the guy who lit the fire, that’s all. Trying to make political capital from that is…feeble, Ray. Are you telly unable to see that Jeanette wasn’t involved or are you…unable to see that Jeanette was not involved? In which case, I can’t help you further. The facts don’t support your case. They do mine.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  September 22, 2018

        He must live in a cave. Whenever there’s a fire ban, it’s well publicised and nobody could be unaware of it.

        Didn’t know, my foot.

        • robertguyton

           /  September 22, 2018

          Ancient history, Kitty, ordinary member of the public, no harm done – what’s your beef?
          In any case, a fire in a cave would be considered a “contained” fire, yes?
          No issue.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  September 22, 2018

            It was an issue, Bush fires have been started by less, and lighting one in strong wind is incredibly stupid. Some huge fires have been started when some fool threw a cigarette butt away. I was in Australia just after a really bad one, and will never forget seeing the total devastation, everything in the area black and the only signs that houses had been there the concrete garage floors; everything else had been destroyed,

            It should have been obvious that I meant that he must live in a cave where there was no communication with the outside world.

            It’s inexcusable to have any sort of fire outside in hot, dry, windy weather. Ask the people in Australia and California what they think. Ask the firemen here who’ve had to try to put them out here .

            • robertguyton

               /  September 22, 2018

              Are all of the fires, regularly started by farmers, year after year, that “jump the fence” and get out of control “inexcusable”, Kitty? Have you railed against the practice of burn-offs, which occur up and down the country, resulting in out-of-control, very, very expensive fires that have to be quenched, at the publics expense? Or are you fiddling here, with a non-event, for political gain? Nothing happened, where elsewhere, there was much loss of forest and field, public money and fire-fighter’s time. Hmmm?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  September 22, 2018

              Don’t be deliberately obtuse. What political gain could I have from condemning fools who start fires that then get out of control ? It’s more by good luck than good management that this one didn’t. Nobody thinks that their burn-off will start a huge bush fire.

              Do you think that deliberate law-breaking is quite all right if certain people do it ?

            • robertguyton

               /  September 22, 2018

              Burn-offs, getting out of control? Farmers do it year in, year out; costs the rate payers sorely. This one didn’t; mole-hill, not mountain. What about those many that do Kitty? Rail against those, do you?
              Politics, eh!

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  September 23, 2018

              Don’t be absurd. This goading and putting words in my mouth has become trolling.

              Change the record, the needle’s stuck on that one.

  3. phantom snowflake

     /  September 22, 2018

    Trigger Warning: I’m about to link to Whaleoil! Yes I can’t believe it myself. Corky will be ecstatic. Anyway; what does it mean when Winston Peters and Cameron Slater are both claiming that (a) The identity of the leaker of Simon Bridges expenses is well known, and (b) The leaker is definitely part of the National Caucus??
    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/09/winston-to-bridges-reveal-to-the-public-who-the-leaker-is-or-i-will/

    • I wouldn’t trust claims by either of them. Slater is well known to make accusations he never backs up with evidence, and same for Peters.

      Peters was just recently criticising people for making speculative accusations, which was highly ironic given his history.

      They could be right, but without producing evidence they are just trying to sound like they know.

      • phantom snowflake

         /  September 22, 2018

        Yes, a great deal of scepticism here also but Cam or Winnie may be the proverbial stopped clock

        • Slater is unlikely to go as far as naming anyone himself (and he won’t want anyone named on WO) as he heads into a defamation case in a few weeks where he is accused of making false and defamatory allegations.

          • phantom snowflake

             /  September 22, 2018

            However he seems happy to drop hints which rule out some of the National Caucus as suspects.

      • robertguyton

         /  September 22, 2018

        “Now, they’re trying to find somebody who we know—that is, the identity of the leaker in the National Party, and guess who’s paying for the inquiry? Why, the New Zealand taxpayer, through the Leader of the Opposition’s leadership office funding. The New Zealand taxpayer’s paying for this absolutely mindless, hopeless inquiry, the end pathway and result of which we already know. So why don’t we just cut to the chase here? Pay the money to over to us, and we’ll give you the answer. Ha, ha! It is phenomenal.”

        Good points, Winston! Winston wouldn’t be so overt if he didn’t have the facts, Imo. Fun and games all round. Makes National look a shamozzle!

        • Peters has a record of making overt accusations and never fronting up with the evidence. He does it either just to attack someone politically (dirty politics), or to try to get someone like the police to investigate to find evidence to back his assertions.

          Do you approve of this sort of dirty politics Robert? Only when it’s someone from a party you oppose?

          • robertguyton

             /  September 22, 2018

            Peter’s isn’t playing dirty here, Pete. He’s saying that he knows full-well who the leaker is and that many others know also (all of Wellington, by other accounts, the Young Nat’s as well! Who doesn’t know???). If that’s true, there’s nothing underhand about what he’s saying at all. Dirty politics is a National Party activity, you know that Pete!

            • I consider it playing dirty accusing people (and it smears multiple people) and parties with no evidence, implying that he knows. And Peters has a long record of this, with a low hit rate.

              If Peters knows why wouldn’t he just name someone? Because it’s dirtier leaving a smear hanging over the party.

              Robert, do you think that ethics only applies to the Green Party?

            • robertguyton

               /  September 22, 2018

              Winston’s not a Green, Pete! Peter’s is doubtless giving Bridges the opportunity to reveal his own caucus leaker, to give him at least a little credibility. Sounds as though the identity is widely known. Bridges will know the name that’s being bandied about. All he has to do is ask that person, then he’ll know for sure. If he hasn’t already. Which I reckon he has. Bridges has dropped himself into the poop with his pronouncements and is now like a worm on Winston’s hook.

          • robertguyton

             /  September 22, 2018

            In any case, Pete, who’s Peters attacking here? No one. And trying to get the police to investigate? They already have!

    • robertguyton

       /  September 22, 2018

      Busted! Bridges is going to have to spend weeks cleaning the egg off his face!

      • Gezza

         /  September 22, 2018

        😮 What do you mean busted? Has the leaker been publicly named?

        • Some of the public seem to know. You’re from Wellington, Gezza; surely you know! Winston’s playing a game of chess with Bridges – Bishop to Queens…whatever.

          • Gezza

             /  September 22, 2018

            Winston’s always done this sort of thing, total baloney probably. He doesn’t even know who leaked his superannuation details but you and everyone else does.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  September 22, 2018

        Poop, worm on hook, egg on face…mixed metaphor time.

  4. Corky

     /  September 22, 2018

    You devil, PS…a walk on the wild side once in a while is good for the soul.

  5. sorethumb

     /  September 22, 2018

    But that is not what elements – Maori and non-Maori – attempting the radical Maorification of New Zealand society want. They are after Maori hegemony over the rest of the country as close as they can achieve to the status quo prevailing before the Treaty of Waitangi. Nothing less can sate them. Maori language is the means they have found to reach this goal, not least because the Crown has let itself become hogtied into promoting and bankrolling it to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars to date, with much more to come. Government intervention is essential to the Maorificationist enterprise, which is dependent on commandeering the state’s power and wealth to make Maori pre-eminence mandatory in New Zealand. Without government intervention, Maori language usage would settle into an equilibrium state of natural supply and demand, which is not fit for purpose in the Maorificationist context. Instead, Maihi Karauna is advocated as the government’s strategy to impose Maori monoculturalism necessarily underpinned by acceptance of Maori racial supremacism.

    The legal definition of a Maori, as found in the Electoral Act 1993 and the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993, states, “ ‘Maori’ means a person of the Maori race of New Zealand; and includes any descendant of such a person”. This sweeping definition, which has been used by Statistics New Zealand since 1998 in its own formulation to collect statistics on Maori, plainly includes all so-called “white Maori” in its ambit – those New Zealanders who have some remote or diluted Maori descent. If you have even one Maori ancestor then legally you are racially a Maori, period. No actual dearth of Maori so defined should stand in the way of propagating Maori language, considering how many New Zealanders can lay claim to at least one Maori biological forebear. Yet we are incessantly informed that there is a crisis underway because of the falling number of racial Maori speakers of Maori language.

    https://www.nzcpr.com/maori-myths-and-legends-deconstructing-the-maorification-of-new-zealand/#more-27402

    • sorethumb

       /  September 22, 2018

      In the light of what is good about liberal, universal citizenship and constitutionalism; in the light also of the serious practical and theoretical incoherence of discourse of rangatiratanga versus sovereignty, it is in my view better not to talk the way Fleras and Spoonley not only describe us doing, but clearly wish us to. We may of course have no choice; but then, as they would join me in insisting, might is not right. All in all, this is a good book for getting debate going.
      Andrew Sharp
      University of Auckland
      http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/003231870005200114

      • sorethumb

         /  September 22, 2018

        Ah, but Andrew. What did Jan Thomas say? …..Hmmmmm?

    • PartisanZ

       /  September 22, 2018

      Oh my goodness … The fundamental premises of Michael Coote’s NZCPR missive are misplaced and misguided terrors one might attribute to a hyper-paranoid lunatic …

      ” … elements – Maori and non-Maori – attempting the radical Maorification of New Zealand society … are after Maori hegemony over the rest of the country as close as they can achieve to THE STATUS QUO PREVAILING BEFORE the Treaty of Waitangi. Nothing less can sate them.”

      ” … the official name of the country is subtly undermined by the government in putting “Aotearoa” first, meaning in practice “Maori first”, and that the objective is one of social engineering and cultural gerrymandering.”

      “Maori language must spread beyond Maori minds to parasitize the brains of non-Maori. More than that, non-Maori will be required not only to learn Maori language, but also to collaborate with advocacy, empowerment, implementation, imposition and enforcement of the Maorificationist agenda …”

      I find it laughable … especially considering the number of socially aware, political and tech savy Maori people I meet …

      Social engineering did largely succeed in the guise of Rogerednomics, but one must remember that this ‘Maorification’ Coote’s is ranting about came along with neoliberalism – hand-in-hand – mau ringa – not as a protest or backlash against it …

      These are the social policies and legislation enacted by four now five consecutive governments, Labour and National … the same one’s that bought us “a level playing field”, globalization, the ‘Free’ market, foreign investment coupled with immigration and Ruthanasia …

      So where do the Right Brigade stand on Rogerednomics and neoliberalism?

      • sorethumb

         /  September 22, 2018

        ‘fraid I had to give you the thumbs down. This is just Paul Spoonley’s agenda in Recalling Aotearoa It Is Written.

  6. sorethumb

     /  September 22, 2018

    Recalling Aotearo Paul Spoonley Augie Fleras

    the book has a moral tendency and purpose, though sometimes the prescriptive
    points are disguised as conceptual or factual ones, or simply imprecations to recognise the realities of practical politics. As a moral background it sets out to propose, that of all the possible understandings of our history, the best is one which begins with the colonisation by the British of another people’s land. Further, the most morally valuable events since then have been those of Maori resistance to Crown sovereignty in the name of tino rangatiratanga, together with those recent events (both in practical politics and in people’s minds) which are able to be expressed as part of a history of continued de-colonisation, the tide of which continues to rise, and which the reader is urged both to recognise and to swim with. All other events and thoughts tend to be dismissed as self-seeking, obtuse and insensitive. Such a background is asserted rather than defended; and it is probable it cannot be defended in the authors’ own terms, which are perspectival and relativist, and ill-equipped to deal with truth claims.
    Against this background, the authors’ more precise prescription is that Aotearoa/New
    Zealand, should-recognising (and ’recalling’) the facts of past and present-remodel itself as
    both a bicultural and a multicultural society. It should also re-constitute itself as a bi-national
    polity in which Maori, as the indigenous nation of the land, become true partners with Pakeha
    ’at the level of official languages, national images and symbols, prevailing agendas, and
    institutional frameworks’. Such a partnership should not, though, detract from ’multiculturalism in providing due recognition of ethnicity in New Zealand’. The process of change, the authors warn, will not be easy because of ’resistance from vested interests and established agendas’; and a state of ’uncertainty and expediency is likely to persist until such time as conventional thinking accepts ’recalling’ partnership between two consenting peoples, both of whom are sovereign in their own right, yet inextricably interlocked as partners in jointly exploring post-sovereign possibilities’. The book is, in post-modern parlance, an ’intervention’ in the cultural politics of our country.

    Andrew Sharp
    University of Auckland
    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/003231870005200114

    • sorethumb

       /  September 22, 2018

      Valerie Morse/Sue Bradford/ Green Party wisdom.

      • PartisanZ

         /  September 22, 2018

        ” … remodel itself as both a bicultural and a multicultural society. It should also re-constitute itself as a bi-national polity in which Maori, as the indigenous nation of the land, become true partners with Pakeha.”

        YES!!!!! YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!

        Things are moving rapidly now, as they must …

        In geopolitical time 22 years is no time at all … and there’s a lot of mahi to do before we ‘celebrate’ our bicentennial in 2040

        Oh those words are music to my ears …

        Tehehehe … He’s even identified you in there sorethumb … “resistance from vested interests and established agendas’” …

        • PartisanZ

           /  September 22, 2018

          … although he left out the words “irrational” and “paranoid” …

          • sorethumb

             /  September 22, 2018

            Except that the universities want to ban Don Brash because Maori culture is beyond critique. The government is having to BS every step of the way.

  7. sorethumb

     /  September 22, 2018

    Biculturalism vs Western Civilisation.
    Jan Thomas wants a Te Tiritti led university, however a classics lecturer objects to the way that down dissent”
    https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2018/09/massey_lecturer_calls_for_vice-chancellors_resignation.html

    So he is essentially citing the classics whereas Thomas is saying that Brash’s view are hate speech. That’s where the wheels come off biculturalism as it is based on an undeveloped set ot ideas.

    • sorethumb

       /  September 23, 2018

      Jan Thomas wants a Te Tiritti led university, however a classics lecturer objects to the way that shuts down dissent”
      ………..
      Biculturalism only works if you aren’t allowed to critique it and that is o.k in so far as we have tokenism but if PZ says

      Things are moving rapidly now, as they must …

      In geopolitical time 22 years is no time at all … and there’s a lot of mahi to do before we ‘celebrate’ our bicentennial in 2040

      Oh those words are music to my ears …

      So now we have involuntary te reo lessons
      A Ngai tahu officer advising farmers on Maori values and practices (as though he outranks them because they have been making things tick for hundreds of years – authority without competence)
      a rewriting of history that writes off all Pakeha achievements.
      researchers in quantum physics have to ok it with the Iwi.
      etc

      • PartisanZ

         /  September 23, 2018

        For 80% of the population of Canada, French lessons are “involuntary” …

        Farmers may benefit from Maori advice? Some may even welcome it? They benefit from the advice of ecologists … many of them “tree hugging greenies” nei? Farmers, I believe, are responsible for the vast majority of native forest preservation via QEII Trust …?

        Sure, farmers earn export dollars … But if “making things tick” as an industry means grossly polluting the environment and not paying the real cost of that … also known as socializing the losses … then that actually ISN’T genuine competence, is it?

        The Right Brigade’s horror and panic about mainstream history being “revisionist history” and “rewriting history” is nothing short of delusional paranoid alarmism … for a specific purpose, with a specific aim … managed paranoia … an aspect of “managed democracy” or inverted totalitarianism … The maintenance of the status quo … All very well if there’d only ever been White people here …

        We have an agreement … Te Tiriti o Waitangi …

        I’m all for dissent …

  8. Corky

     /  September 22, 2018

    Muslims dealt to and they don’t like it. They seem to forget they are in America.

    • lurcher1948

       /  September 22, 2018

      A close friend is he, Corky as WE ALL KNOW PG dosnt let racists post, or does he, im moderated and IM NOT A RACIST RIGHTWING PIG… but im a voter from the centre

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  September 22, 2018

        Corky overstating and generalising again.And not realising that these people ARE American.

      • Corky

         /  September 22, 2018

        Of course you are , Lurchy. It’s not a racist post. American Muslims…American law…not sharia law. Seems like these Muslims don’t want that,.

        • Gezza

           /  September 23, 2018

          Seems fair enuf to me. America is not a Muslim country. If you want your lives governed by Muslim law, emigrate to a Muslim country. There wouldn’t be many in the US keen to do that I suspect.

          • Corky

             /  September 23, 2018

            That Muslims behave in such a way doesn’t surprise me. What got me while watching this clip was the obvious annoyance and anger at not getting their way. Their faces told a grim story for the West.

            I think we also need to remember the reportage would have been santised for public consumption during news time.

      • sorethumb

         /  September 23, 2018

        Racist = “I can’t argue that” “Don’t say it!” “Wah!!!!!!! I want my Mummy!”

  9. robertguyton

     /  September 22, 2018

    Where’s Paula?

    • Blazer

       /  September 22, 2018

      Paulas never been the same since…she ‘zipped it’…tweetie.

      • robertguyton

         /  September 22, 2018

        Ha! That’s good, Blazer. I wonder if they’ve pulled that zip..too tight?

  10. lurcher1948

     /  September 22, 2018

    You know when the altright kiwiblog run by david farrar is struggling for importance when they KEEP posting dribbles from the $7000000 mike hosking, but then [I don’t think he is] and mike hosking are employed by NZME.and yes national is still on the opposition benches, SUCK ON THAT RIGHTIES

    • robertguyton

       /  September 22, 2018

      Lurch, as they call you here – I hope you read my explanation yesterday where I tried to clear up the confusion around my comment about Mike Hosking which may have seemed was aimed at you! I enjoy your comments, I don’t care at all for anything involving Hoskings. I hope you’ll respond somehow, saying you understand the confusion.
      Robert

  11. lurcher1948

     /  September 22, 2018

    God to all the nasty right wingers HERE who HATE pensioners, GET A LIFE TOSSERS
    WE VOTE and its 8 more years tossers
    why you wait heres some music