by frog
Published in THE ISSUES by frog on Sun, August 1st, 2010
Tags: general debate
General debate 1st August 2010
Published: August 1, 2010
Comment via Facebook
56 Comments
Hide comments with a score of
or less
Hide comments with a score of or less
Leave a Reply
Please use 
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Backgrounder on proposed ironsand mining
http://www.greens.org.nz/factsheets/backgrounder-proposed-ironsand-mining
any idea if iwi plan to develop the iron sands if their customary title claim is successfull?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3908099/Taranaki-coastal-rights-claim
http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/fsinfo.htm
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0401/S00186.htm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Q&A-Interesting choices:
Candidate 1-Vote for me because I’m an experienced National man from way back and don’t really have a vision.
Candidate 2- Vote for me because I am offering the impossible.
Candidate 3-Vote for me because I have a vision somewhere between the other two and I promise to be more careful with my card.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Loved how Holmes kept cutting off Prendergast from declaring her love for Banks. Duncan Garner on The Nation is almost obscene with his relentless attack on Goff, slipping in his ‘he can’t win’ sound-bite over and over. What a d*ck!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
With regard to Metrias 2002 remit that the greens adhere to the Maori version of the treaty of Waitangi you’d need another category 4-Vote for me because I am offering the unworkable, inadvisable and disadvantaging (to) the vast majority.
Like or Dislike:
4 
10 (-6)
Duncan Garner on The Nation is almost obscene with his relentless attack on Goff, slipping in his ‘he can’t win’ sound-bite over and over. What a d*ck!
You gotta admit that it is pretty unlikely though Robert, Chris Carter has made an ass of himself and revealed just how weak Labour really are.
I am no fan of the Labour party (I don’t think they have been a “real” labour party for some time) but it is worrying to have such weak opposition.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“it is worrying to have such weak opposition”
I think the opposition should act as auditors initially until the bad government policies are more obvious (national and labour are centralist parties after all) and then go for the throat on those issues.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Shunda barunda-watching performances in the house makes me think that it is not that we have a weak opposition it’s just that National has such a grip on Government that no arguments can get traction.
National-”We’re pushing through this ideologically based, vaguely conceived legislation.”
Labour & Greens-”This is stupid because there is no evidence to support it (lots of evidence tabled against the legislation is produced) and it is potentially damaging. Where is research and justification?”
National-”We don’t have to provide evidence because it is what the people on talk back radio and television polls want, and we have a mandate because we won the election. We do have some hand picked advisors but if they don’t agree with us we don’t accept their advice.”
Labour & Greens-”At least follow good process to make sure people can have input into shaping the legislation”
National -”We have created the impression of crises so that we can push this through before anyone who really understands the issues can really respond, we think select committees are a waste of time too.”
Labour & Greens-”We have sizable petitions and large street marches that show considerable concern from the public.”
National-”We ignore any demonstrations organised by Unions and environmentalists because they aren’t our kind of people (how dare they want to reduce company profits by demanding fair employment conditions and sustainable industry!). Anyway we have smiley John to smooth things over and will back down on the odd thing that doesn’t really matter to us, it gives the impression that we listen.”
I think it is a pretty difficult environment for any opposition, especially when mainstream media often lacks depth in reporting and swallows spin.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Sprout everything that you just said above would still be true if you exchanged “National” with “labour” when they were governing.
That is why I find the attitude of moral superiority from the left laughable.
Two drips out of the same tap as far as I can tell.
Politics appears to be all about picking the least bad of a bad bunch.
Quite frankly the left calling for fair play is completely hypocritical, National are using exactly the same rules and tactics that Labour put in place. Labour wrote the rule book and national are using that “infrastructure” to push their own agenda.
Round and round we go………..
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Shunda-Labour wasn’t great but they didn’t abuse urgency like National has, did use the select committees to actually consult and critique, and often used real research to drive policy. I even found Labour Ministers did engage with the wider community and didn’t run from the likes of protesting teacher aids (and call the Armed Offenders Squad to deal with them). As an educator we generally find Labour Ministers respect and engage with our profession and real professional consultation can occur, even if we may disagree with some outcomes. With this National governement much is done under urgency with little attempt to consult or engage.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Labour had 9 years to fix the Neo-lib FU and did not!
They continued with the ruinous to NZ exporting businesses, and windfall profits to the money go around merchants, reserve bank act, to name only one thing. A lot of those who brokered the abandonment of principles in 1984, when the countries assets were given away to cronies, are still there.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Sprout, would the Greens really be any different?
A lot of people felt that they committed the same “sins” over the anti smacking issue.
Is there any reason why the Greens would be different?
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Shunda – you know perfectly well that Sue Bradford’s bill was a private member’s bill and that Sue is no longer in the Green Party.
Are you simply being obstreperous?
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Robert, is that a real word or a type of vegetable? either way I don’t know what it means!
Anyhow, I thought you wanted me to vote garden party!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Oh I remember the days of antismacking jousting on frogblog! There was this guy called greenfly (you would like him Robert) fought like cats-n-dogs we did!!
Then he just disappeared (with his mutant carrot pic) so sad.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s both Shunda and has many meanings beyond those which can be grasped by paramecium like you and I. I once saw the word inscribed onto the surface of a sea-captains glass eye and he too was completely unaware of it’s meaning.
Never speak flippantly of the Garden Party Shunda, unless you’re willing to go the distance in the Cage with it’s creator.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Jousting! Is that how you remember it! Me too.
Gree..greeen..greenfl.. Nah!
Doesn’t ring a bell.
Must’ve been an aberration.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
I looked up those words Robert, and yes I am being stroppy! Frog blog is not as much fun when we all start agreeing!!
The problem for me is I seem to make no friends on either the extreme left or right, am I destined to be stranded in political “no mans land” forever?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
” Frog blog is not as much fun when we all start agreeing!!”
I don’t agree
Why do you see the ‘centre’ and apolitical?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Earlier in the year, Judge Kiernan noted that Dakta Green presented a convincing argument for cannabis law reform,”
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1007/S00383/campaigners-outcome-a-victory-for-kiwi-cannabis.htm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Robert, Sue is still a member and the Party supported her bill and still do.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Valis – that’s very true and carelessly put by me. I meant that she was no longer a Green MP. That the Greens supported and support her bill is entirely right and proper. National and Labour did as well, as I recall, in fact wasn’t the figure 98% of all MPs?
Sue was right, the Greens were right, National and Labour MPs and most others were right to support the bill.
Seems Shunda’s still swimming against the very strong tide.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Them’s jousting words!!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Why do you see the ‘centre’ and apolitical?
.
I am not sure I follow what you mean, please advise!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The arrogant dismissal off the concerns of the 80 odd percent who were uncomfortable with the bill, Sue Bradford’s obvious contempt for democracy and the sloganeering characterization of anyone who disliked the bill as a child beater by some proponents was not very helpful for the image and re-election of Labour or the Greens.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Yeah Kerry, but that John Key eh! He had every chance to stop the madness but he just ignored the 80 odd percent, turned his back on them!
Treated New Zealanders like mugs, turned a deaf and arrogant ear to their pleadings.
Unforgivable.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Sorry Shunda – meant as
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You heard it first on Shundamumble!!
.
http://shundamumble.blogspot.com/2010/07/vicious-rata-attack.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Articles 23-24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights make interesting reading when you consider many of the proposed changes and views being promoted by NACT.
Article 23.
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
I did not mention that unmentionable stooge of the Neo-libs.
Neither am I taking sides in the smacking debate. I did not like either extreme. I do support real democracy though. http://kjt-kt.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-democracy.html
The NACT’s have actually learn’t the lesson from Labours defeat well. Acting as if they are responsive to public concerns while carrying out a stealth attack on New Zealanders.,
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“So how would Harawira feel if one of his seven children came home with a Pakeha partner?
“I wouldn’t feel comfortable. Like all Pakehas would be happy with their daughters coming home with a Maori boy – and the answer is they wouldn’t.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10662429
Like or Dislike:
3 
5 (-2)
thumbs down = support for Hone Hawawira?. Coming from the green Party i’m not surprised.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
Sorry Shunda – meant as
.
Well is the “centre” apolitical? or is it just territory various parties pass through at different times?
I have never really liked the parties in NZ that are called centrist, but then, are they really centrist or just trading off the political connections of the individuals involved?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
A link to “It’s a Shambles Mrs Tolley” the National Standards song from a teacher’s perspective.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USRrYiRtzms
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The most common comment at our school is what was all the fuss about?
Perhaps the shambles is really the teachers and schools who struggle to implement them when others have no problem at all.
From that point of view they are probably starting to detect schools with issues already.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
So you are surrounded by people who can’t grasp the implications of the Tolley/Key blunder photonz1.
No wonder you struggle to see the problem yourself.
Your conclusion that it’s ‘teachers and schools’ that are the problem is no surprise at all!
Straight from Key’s book of demeaning, destabilise, demote book of political strategy, that one!
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Sprout,
The UN articles you push leave out one stakeholder in the employment and job creation process.
The Employer.
His/Her job is to provide the funds, purchase the infastructure, set up the distribution channels, created the sales, that makes employment possible.
Any UN charter expounding those attributes?
No?
Wonder why?
Suggest the reason is the UN only sees state funded jobs as real jobs, hence the socialist attitude that the employer owes the employee all that what the articles outline but burdens the employee with none of the risks.
Dreamland stuff.
One without the other simply will not work.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Gerrit-As a teacher there are times when we feel that individual rights need to be tempered by an understanding of responsibilities and a broader understanding of when an over emphasis on individual entitlements can impinge on other’s rights. But as regards employment in New Zealand the rights of the employer are not under great threat.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a necessary document because in a global perspective there millions of people who live an existence where basic human rights are ignored and those in employer roles routinely exploit their workers to extreme levels. This may not be such an issue in New Zealand but many of the changes in employment law espoused by this government will tip the balance unfairly in the employers favour.
It seems bizarre that in a time of higher unemployment, where people are desperate to gain employment and hold on to a job, that the government sees fit to erode employment conditions. Tighter employment law can be justified where there is reliable evidence of wide spread abuse, but this isn’t the case. For every anecdotal case of an employee ripping off an employer one could easily find examples of employers abusing employees. We need balanced research (not just a survey of employers) to establish the realities.
The inequities of income make New Zealand amongst the worst in the world, we are a low wage economy where it is possible to sack employees without reason, outside the public service we have low levels of union membership and the government has sidelined pay equity work because it is “unaffordable”. This isn’t an environment where workers are holding employers to ransom.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Perhaps the shambles is really the teachers and schools who struggle to implement them when others have no problem at all.”
Photonz1-Obviously your school is one of the 6% of schools where the principals stated they have no problems implementing a system that is still being created and Ministry information constantly changes. This is from a recent survey of over 700 principals where 94% expressed major difficulties or misgivings.
Almost 100% of Southland principals have decided to boycott training because of the poor standard previously. These represent a cross-section of deciles and most have ecellent ERO reviews. To say that nothing is wrong with the standards is to imply:
-School principals are generally incompetent.
-All of our education academics and authorities are misguided in their criticisms.
-That you can introduce a radically different education system in a few months without a research base or trial.
-The fact that the Minister refuses to answer questions from the profession isn’t an indication that she can’t.
-The fact that the recent review of the Ministry of Education’s performance, that showed a reluctance to implement Govt policy, doesn’t imply issues with that policy.
-That a Real Estate agent is qualified to dictate to the teaching profession without consultation.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
….and many thanks to the Greens who came to the Sea Shepherd fundraiser in Wellington Friday Night….they saved the best band til last!
Steel Burning – o to be back at my old job – I be booking them right across the US.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
There’s some ‘Southland Steel’ right there sprout!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Here is ERO’s overview of Salford School, one of the stronger opponents to National Standards. The Principal of Salford was also threatened by a Ministry official for opposing implementation under the guise of a “random audit” that was actually targeting outspoken principals. I’d like to see how Photonz1 could explain how National Standards would add value to this school and why disciplining or sacking the Principal would serve any useful purpose.
http://www.salford.school.nz/EROReport09.pdf
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Frog – are you preparing something about the induction of calves?
This will be bigger than sows-in-crates, imho.
Here is a link to one on-going discussion from Ele (tint of blue) at Homepaddock.
Let’s be active on this issue, please!
http://homepaddock.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/first-they-came-for-the-pigs/
[frog: Sue Kedgley put out this media release on induced calving earlier today.]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
http://robertguyton.blogspot.com/2010/08/silence-of-calves.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
(this one is well worth the read…)
http://whoar.co.nz/2010/redefining-education-cultivating-the-soul/
“…What is the defining myth of our times?
I’ve heard our culture described as materialistic … but we don’t seem to love the material world all that much.
I’ve also heard our philosophy labeled as “the myth of fact.”
Although I do see the academic world mad in its pursuit of facts, all carefully defined and counted, I think more simply that we are devoted to the myth of things.
We pride ourselves on the things we possess … and we go to school to learn things.
The things we learn are all sorted out and grouped together:…
We learn mathematical things and scientific things and even psychological things.
When I taught at universities, one of the problems I ran into — and no doubt one of the reasons they didn’t give me tenure —
– was trying to create thing-type exams for material that was not reducible to things.
It isn’t easy to adapt philosophical and religious issues to a multiple-choice exam.
At school, students cram for an exam.
“Cram” means to fill up or stuff.
Well, if you’re stuffing yourself for an exam, you must be filling yourself with things.
That’s how we imagine education: filling our minds with stuff.
The Greeks of old had a different idea that they called paideia.
This was education conceived as creating a cultured person who would be a mature citizen and leader.
Imagine if our focus in education was on the person rather than the things studied.
We’d be concerned that a student grow up and learn how to deal with life … and help others deal with it as well.
This education has two purposes: self-ripening and leadership.
In a thing-centered culture, we believe that our job is to teach the young what they need to have a job and support themselves.
Students are left on their own for learning how to cope with life’s existential challenges …
… how to relate well to others …
… how to lead maturely in business and government …
… how to raise children … and how to be married.
How to develop taste and values …
… and come to grips with human mortality … and make a contribution to world culture–
– these are largely left alone by educators …
…with the hope … apparently … that people will find their way unconsciously.
It’s a false hope …
… and the quality of our leadership in business and government … with some notable exceptions …
… betrays the failure of that hope.
Some things have to be taught … and eventually we discover that the most important things aren’t things at all.
They’re qualities of character … and hard-won values … and matters of taste.
The reason we have so many tasteless things in our society … is that we don’t teach taste …
… and the reason we confuse moralism with ethics …
… is that no one taught us the difference…”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“To watch the courageous Afghan freedom fighters battle modern arsenals with simple hand-held weapons is an inspiration to those who love freedom. Their courage teaches us a great lesson-that there are things in this world worth defending. To the Afghan people, I say on behalf of all Americans that we admire your heroism, your devotion to freedom, and your relentless struggle against your oppressors.”
President Ronald Reagan – March 21, 1983
Darn! Now I’m configgered!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Agree, Mark. Similarly Saddam Hussein committed his worst crimes when he was still a friend of the US, but he was supported as his actions (against Iran for instance) furthered US foreign policy. Favourite joke during the lead up to the second gulf war: We know you’re hiding chemical weapons, we have the receipts!
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Har Good One Valis!; Have just started reading Robert Fisk’s book, “The Age of the Warrior.”
Already learned enough to thoroughly recommend it.
Am finding it a Real eye-opener!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Afraid I’m still trying to find time to read Fisk’s The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East which stares at me daily from the shelf.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s a mighty big tome and Fisk demands a fair amount of concentration.
“The Age of the Warrior” is a collection of articles over the last ten years – each chapter an entity of three or five pages – in that sense I find it more accessible in that I’m reading it in bite-sized bits.
It’s quite Topical and gives a closer view of the issues on the table.
Phil Goff gets up in the House and Tamps ‘em up Solid!
The Nats are vaguely reminiscent of Playtime at Primary School.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Right Honourable Prime Minister”.
The Rise of the Bile.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
No Right Turn had a good take on that, Robert:
And the Right Honourable Sir Robert Muldoon, I might add.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Why not Phil Goff?
Upon watching Parliament today – he was most impressive – so were several other Labour MP’s.
I reckon they are definitely a stronger Team (than the Govt.) – and should perhaps adopt a unified team approach to Leadership.
The National/Maori contribution seemed full of snide and smug poses.
Not a fetching look at all.
Today was something of a crossroads in the House and I think the opposition handled themselves in a mature manner.
I’m tired of Spin – I prefer the more authentic word ‘Lies’.
No comment on the Greens because I’m mightily biased….You Guys… (as Robert de Nero would say…)
Was a great day ’til Toad mentioned Muldoom – now I’ve had a Prozac milk-shake, a frontal lobal whisking – I may go on.
Mulldoom was the Chairman of the IMF and widely regarded as an economic Master – until the following Labour government saw the Books.
Sly old Rummy, he fooled most of the people, all of the time…lets not go back there – I should weep – never, in the field of Human Opportunity has so much, been so lost by so few, to so many.
NZ Thirst will replace ACT in the House (infinitely more amusing) but I predict the Greens will grow steadily, through those Political Charms heretofore unseen: Honesty and Integrity.
The keeping of Promises.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Good comments Mark – love reading the thoughts from a clear head.
Listen to the radio much?
http://robertguyton.blogspot.com/2010/08/plainsfm-radio-interview.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks Robert! No 0ne has accused me of that before – specially since a couple of Bogans tried to kick my head off this year – will tune in.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i agree with mark that that questiontime was a ‘crossroads’..
..i’m not one for false compliments…but i hafta say..
goff/labour did look ‘good’…
..and i think that the rest of the labour team sees key is giving them more than enough ammunition to fight an election campaign on stark ideological/policy-grounds…
..(they just have to get/reach back to their ‘roots’..and address the glaring inequalities that have become new zealand..)
and key/national just looked like a braying bunch of fools…
..and anyone wanta open a sweepstake as to when key/national will stop answering every question with..
‘boo-hoo..!it’s all labours’ fault..!’…?
that one is getting way way past its’ use-by date…
and the hard thing for key here is that he presented/sold himself as a transformational leader…
all that he’s transformed..is the amount of tax he has to pay…
…and he is slamming gst on the rest of us…
..and borrowing squillions to fund it..
..’underwhelming’…is an understatement…
but the news of the wage-gap with australia increasing under his governance…
..just emphasises that ‘crossroads’-argument..
and his squirming/spinning ‘explanations’..are kinda sad…bordering on clownish…
..goff and labour are on the right track…
and of course..most of the analysis is based on f.p.p.-thinking..
anyone with half a brain can do the math…
that ‘certainty’of a second term…is the most glaring example of that f.p.p-thinking/delusion…
..and i repeat my prediction that key will go down in the history books..
..as ‘one-term-john’…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)