by frog
Published in THE ISSUES by frog on Wed, June 29th, 2011
Tags: general debate
General debate, June 29, 2011
Published: June 29, 2011
Comment via Facebook
57 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
Lookin like we need the Antarctic vote to give the Gnacts a say….
I know – keep the Penguin and send them Gerry!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
The fate of new Zealand’s most significant Wetland rests with one man, the environmental clock is ticking and we’re all holding our breath in anticipation…..
http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.com/2011/06/waitunas-fate-in-ministers-hands.html
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
I reckon Happy’s Family wouldn’t know the difference.
I see the Wellington Zoo Board is meeting to decide Happy’s fate
Easy – give him to me!
The Dominion Poll shows something like 50% in favour of keeping him – all other options are rated down in the teens.
My only concern with the zoo is that he’ll get lonely – no danger of that here – I’m clearing out a room for him now….cool!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
A mini Kelly Tarltons at your place? David Farrar could visit so s/he knows they’re not alone?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
ACT on Campus Auckland vice-president Cameron Wayne Browne recently told somebody to “get raped.” Apparently he was having a heated debate on Facebook when he made the unacceptable comment. Being that rape is not acceptable under any circumstances, using such a chauvinistic remark is disgusting! The use of such derogatory language shows a lack of debating skill, not to mention a level of stupidity as thick as a short plank…
Like or Dislike:
6 
3 (+3)
Huge Whale fail on MMP referendum. Looks like the anti camp are going to play dirty.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
National in Breach of Privacy Law
John Key recently sent out a personally addressed letter entitled Budget 2011 – Back to surplus sooner, better services for families. It was sent to people who are not National Party members or registered with National in any way and was mainly targeted at pensioners. There are two ways National might have attained the addresses that they sent their unsolicited letter to: 1. The Work and Income database. 2. The electoral role.
Like or Dislike:
1 
5 (-4)
Todd – shock – horror!!!!!
The National Party has send out…oh no…..they’ve sent people…..ooh, I can hardly bring myself to say it….they’ve sent people…..letters!!!!.
And those awful people put addresses on them. How dare they send letters that have addresses.
You’d better inform the post office that sending letters is now illegal.
And you’d better inform people, that when they look at the phone book, that have to close their eyes in case they see peoples address.
And you’d better tell the Green Party not to do any more mail outs.
Or is it ok for The Greens to send letters but illegal for National?
Like or Dislike:
5 
8 (-3)
The letters were sent to people not listed in the phone book photonz1. I’m not aware that the Green party has sent out any letters where they’ve harvested addresses from the electoral roll or a WINZ database. You might not think it’s a big deal, but it is in breach of the Privacy Act 1993. I look forward to hearing what the Privacy Commissioner says about the matter.
Like or Dislike:
2 
5 (-3)
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
I don’t think you’re correct Valis. The Privacy Act clearly states that the information is only to be used by the agency gathering the information. As far as I’m aware, the Electoral Office is not connected or a function of Parliamentary Services. They’re separate entities.
If other political parties have used the electoral role to send out unsolicited electioneering propaganda, then they’re in breach of the Privacy Act as well.
Being that the letter targeted pensioners, it’s likely that National utilized a database more specific to that sector of the community. That’s why I’ve asked the Privacy Commissioner to look into the matter.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
Todd – there’s 1001 databases of NZ names and addresses. I’m spammed several times a week by people who have put together databases and are selling them.
Nearly every address in NZ (over 2 million) is on the National Postal Address Database that you can get from NZ Post.
You think WINZ and the electoral role are the only two databases in NZ?
If you have solid evidence of illegal behavior then make a complaint to the privacy commissioner.
And if you don’t, then you are making allegations of illegal behaviour without a shred of evidence.
Like or Dislike:
4 
3 (+1)
I think the specific targeting of the letters* at pensioners means that the electoral roll and the WINZ database are the only places the specific details could be gained from.
You’re being thick photonz1 as I’ve already written that I made a formal complaint to the Privacy Commissioner and provided relevant evidence.
Unless you can specifically provide a law that allows political parties to not be bound by the Privacy Act 1993, I think National has made yet another mistake in a long list of stupid administration blunders.
*You can download a copy from the Jackal.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
Todd – From Elections NZ, info about what happens to the details you supply for the electoral roll –
“The roll is a list of voters which any member of the public can look at and is used on election day for voting. We may give this information to scientific or health researchers, political candidates, members of Parliament or political parties. We can also tell them your age group, postal address …”
Again you’ve been caught putting in the boot before you know what you’re talking about.
Lesson – do more research before you break into hysteria for someone sending a letter.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
aarrgghh..!..website is down..!..can’t work..!..site can’t be accessed by readers..!
(bandwith used up..i received no advance warning..curse you orcon..!..)
..can anyone recommend a web hosting service that is competent…and has no caps on broadband use…
..and no onerous charges for storage..(1.6 gig..)..?
help/advice would be appreciated…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Here’s the full paragraph:
What is the information about voters used for?
When you enrol, we will publish your name, the address where you reside, and your occupation in the roll of your electorate. The roll is a list of voters which any member of the public can look at and is used on election day for voting. We may give this information to scientific or health researchers, political candidates, members of Parliament or political parties. We can also tell them your age group, postal address and whether you are of Maori descent. The information is also used to make up lists of people who might be called to serve on a jury.
There are hundreds of databases of personal details that get sold to marketing firms etc. However a Political Party should abide by the law. A paragraph on a website does not override the Privacy Act 1993. When a political party utilizes that information to send unsolicited letters, then that is where the breach of the Privacy has occurred.
Information privacy principles
Principle 1 – Personal information shall not be collected by any agency unless
(a) the information is collected for a lawful purpose connected with a function or activity of the agency; and
(b) the collection of the information is necessary for that purpose.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Todd
1/ It’s clear from the Electoral Roll that it’s legal for the Greens, Nats, Labour etc, to use the roll to send mail.
2/ Being sent a letter (I get lots every day that I didn’t ask for, particularly the ones from IRD) is not an invasion of privacy.
The real question here, is where did your sudden interest in the privacy of older people come from?
And is it a genuine interest?
Or is your prime motovation sinking the boot in?
(regardless of whether anything wrong has been done or not)
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
Call it a run up Test to the Elections Phil
Lines will be down
MMP will be what your Telly says
No one will hear
“and over you Empire, snow gathers
shattered birds, lifeless feathers”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
photonz1
Really! Where has the “electoral roll” said that it overrides the Privacy Act 1993?
Being that National targeted the letter at pensioners, it would be unlikely that they went through the entire electoral roll and picked out people who had listed their occupation thus. It’s far more likely that Paula Bennett supplied a WINZ database of pensioners.
But gaining/using peoples personal addresses for a purpose that the information was not intended for is.
My interest in peoples privacy is my motivation and I’m not hysterical.
Being that the Privacy Commissioner is ignoring my formal complaint, we might never have an answer.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
Explain the privacy breach. If the roll is collected and one of the uses stated is that the information might be given to political parties and science researchers, then the information is being used in the way intended. You can’t breach privacy by using information in the way intended when it was collected. Nor could any party be in breach if they are freely given the information, unless caveats are put on its use. You’ve not demonstrated those caveats exist. If there is a breach, it will be by the Electoral Office, who both collects and gives it out, not by the legitimate receievers of that information.
PS Valis is wrong. You can’t buy electoral rolls and it is illegal to copy them, according to Wellington Library.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Todd says “Being that the Privacy Commissioner is ignoring my formal complaint, we might never have an answer”
Perhaps they’re having a good laugh about your complain before they threw it in the bin.
Receiving a letter – wow what an privacy invasion. Call out the armed offenders squad.
I’d get dozens of these “offences” each week.
What’s next – Hand cut off for spelling mistakes?
Death penalty for jay walking?
And you interest in privacy is your motovation – very funnny.
Keep this up Todd – it’s hilarious.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
The Privacy Act states:
Information privacy principles
Principle 1 – Personal information shall not be collected by any agency unless
(a) the information is collected for a lawful purpose connected with a function or activity of the agency; and
(b) the collection of the information is necessary for that purpose.
The breach occurred when National used the information for a purpose that it was not intended for. Did the Electoral Office give Parliamentary Services a list of pensioners or did National attain pensioner details from a WINZ database? I’m unsure about that specific.
Are people informed at the time they provide their personal details that a political party will send them unsolicited letters? I don’t think so.
Photonz1. Stop trolling. Use Jackal please.
Like or Dislike:
0 
4 (-4)
WHere is the evidence the collection and passing to political parties (because there is no evidence of preference here) is either unlawful or unnecessary – those, according to you, are the two things that would create a breach of privacy.
Just becuase you weren’t given explicit information on how the information might be used does not make the activity a breach of privacy. Adopting that principle would reward stupidity and deliberate obtuseness, and penalise innovation.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Disregarding Privacy Law is not innovation insider.
Who Pays for Pike River?
I think I speak for all of New Zealand when I say our hearts go out to the families of those killed in the Pike River mine disaster. Not only have the families of the deceased had to wait an incessant amount of time for the recovery process to begin, it now appears that it’s been financially mismanaged, and will stall because of a lack foresight by the receivers to set aside enough money to complete the task.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
You misunderstand.
You stated “Are people informed at the time they provide their personal details that a political party will send them unsolicited letters? I don’t think so.”
If your requirement is that information can only be used in the way stated at collection, you will hinder people thinking up new ways of using information and communicating.
And I note you’ve not presented anything that demonstrates how this issue could be an actual breach.
PS did you ask any NZers when you presumed to speak on all our behalf? I feel you’ve violated my rights to holding my own opinion and holding that opinion private. Quite ironic really.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
My you Greens turning all coherent articulate passionate dedicated – go on impress me some more (I think I can bear it!)
Scaring some of the best Trolls clean offsite…well my my
Beautiful Country has a few good people – and I’ve waited so long to hear your voices
An unmistakeable sense of arrival – a hollow trilling resounding in the Chest-exciting!!!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
It’s not my requirement insider, it’s a requirement of law. Gaining personal details by false pretenses is a breach of law. Most New Zealander’s prefer to maintain their privacy btw.
Mark
Where is Gerrit anyway?
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Uh – well – reluctant to Name names – even the treacherous Fascisti
Right-O’s have something they are not saying – very instructive !
I just note again that the Greens hold the Balance of power in the Australian Federal Senate (ie; the last word)
And I suspect here, in the springtime my fine Captains……
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Hero of the Week Award – Anonymous Donor
The Christchurch Earthquake Appeal has received an anonymous donation of $5 million, which is the largest individual donation yet…
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Don Brash’s speech to the Feds today reveals even more about the extremely narrow line his thinking follows.
http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.com/2011/06/brash-bashes-bureaucrats-with-nazi-slur.html
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
http://whoar.co.nz/2011/how-the-meat-industry-turned-abuse-into-a-business-model/
“…As a long-time student of the meat industry, I read Ted Genoways’ extraordinary article on conditions at the “head table” of a factory-scale pig-processing plant with delight.
As a human being, my reaction was revulsion.
In a single long piece, Genoways lays out the crude history of US meat over the past 80 years. We get the unionization of the kill floor in the wake of Sinclair’s The Jungle, the post-war emergence of meat packing as a proper middle-class job, the fierce anti-union backlash of the ’70s, followed by corporatization, scaling up, plunging wages, and then, well, all manner of hell breaking loose, graphically documented by Genoways.
All I can add to the story is to emphasize how forces in the broader economy turned the meat industry into one that profits not by putting out an excellent product – but rather by relentlessly slashing costs.
In his story, Genoways reports that Quality Pork Processors sped up its kill line by 50 percent between 1989 and 2006, while the plant’s workforce “barely increased.”
The strange malady acquired by those workers in Austin, Minn., makes for an eye-popping story; but the rough conditions they worked under aren’t the exception—they’re industry standard.
By 2005, things had gotten so dire for meat-packing workers that Human Rights Watch—typically on the lookout for atrocities in war zones—saw fit to issue a scathing report on their plight. The report’s title says it all: “Blood, Sweat, and Fear.”
WHAT drives such routine worker abuse? What would make a company steadily increase pressure on its workers to the point of endangering them, even as wages flatline?
The surface answer is, of course, because they can.
After the unions evaporated, the meatpacking workforce became extremely vulnerable. By the ’90s, meatpacking had become such an awful job that native-born Americans abandoned the industry as quickly as they could.
Undocumented workers from Mexico and points south, fleeing agrarian decline in those regions, filled the void.
Unprotected by unions, one brush with authority away from deportation, undocumented workers are easy targets for the predatory practices of powerful employers, as Genoways demonstrates…” (cont..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
http://whoar.co.nz/2011/go-vegan-or-go-home-where-others-see-gray-animal-advocate-gary-francione-sees-black-and-white-interview/
“…In the 1980s he was an indefatigable and high-powered young attorney who worked on prominent animal rights court cases with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).
In the early 1990s he broke from PETA and from the organized movement, and in 1996 he wrote the controversial book Rain Without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement – an incisive critique and reenvisioning of the movement.
Francione’s theory is described as the abolitionist approach. He maintains that we cannot morally justify using animals as human resources – and that we should abolish animal use.
He opposes efforts to reform or regulate animal use, arguing that they will necessarily provide limited protection to animal interests – because of the status of animals as property.
Francione is a professor of law at Rutgers University and the author of six books – most recently The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation? from Columbia University Press:
Most animal advocates encourage people to become vegetarians, yet you feel that promoting vegetarianism is a step in the wrong direction for reducing animal exploitation. Why?
There is absolutely no morally defensible distinction between flesh and other animal products, such as milk or cheese.
Animals used in the dairy industry usually live longer than and are treated as badly as, if not worse than, their meat counterparts – and they all end up in the same slaughterhouse anyway.
The meat and dairy industries are inextricably intertwined. As far as I am concerned, there is more suffering in a glass of milk than in a pound of steak – though I would not consume either.
Vegetarianism as a moral position is no more coherent than saying that you think it morally wrong to eat meat from a spotted cow but not morally wrong to eat meat from a non-spotted cow.
We do not need any animal products for health purposes, – and animal agriculture is an ecological disaster.
The best justification that we have for killing billions of animals every year is that they taste good.
That simply cannot suffice as a moral justification…”
(cont..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
As a filthy nicotine addict, my thoughts go out to the inmates (force, emotional/mental black-mail, health scares etc. have never helped me quit) and to the prison staff who will have to deal with these withdrawing addicts, how bout lending them copies of Alan Carrs bible on quitting.
As an abject failure of an example, his book helped me quit for 3 months at a time, hopefully others can do better than me.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Suz – if you want to quit, have you thought of getting yourself a prison sentence?
It’s now a surefire way of quitting, and although very expensive ($90,000 per year) it is fully subsidied by the govt.
Like or Dislike:
2 
4 (-2)
Friday Fun with Photos #7
Dr Brash says he is constantly regaled with horror stories of the “little Hitlers” who far too often seem to populate the lower levels of local and regional government. The comments came up as Brash was advocating for further reforms of the Resource Management Act.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
What a funny little man you are Photonz1…I’m disappointed you didn’t respond to my query earlier in the week as to your need to hang out here, but fortunately other commenters enlightened me as to your intent.
As to my deliberately becoming incarcerated, are you happy to contribute to the cost?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Suz – sorry – I must have missed your querry. There were a number of posts with infantile name-calling so there wasn’t much worth reading for a while.
I’ve actually answered that two or three times already in recent weeks.
I find it boring to go to sites where everyone agrees with you. It’s not very stimulating – more like cheerleading than debating.
A proper debate makes you research your point of view, and I often find out heaps of things I didn’t previously know – so it’s very educational.
I agree with a lot of the things the Greens want to achieve, but think actual results are far more important than the ideology used to get there.
And I’m not very tollerant of hollow politicing.
- Like Todds attack for sending out letters.
- And Metirias attempts to turn Claire Curran wearing a highlanders jersey in Parliament into an issue about sexism.
- The attempt to link insurance for Chch into an ACC issue is pretty lame as well.
And almost all govt decisions will have good and bad aspects, so I try to provide a bit of ballance to what’s often a simplistic one sided point of view
Like or Dislike:
4 
2 (+2)
Photonz1…I can assure you my original query involved no infantile name-calling…as a bit of a right-winger myself, I know I’m treading in dangerous territory here but I appreciate your response.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Suz – I didn’t mean your post. Just several of those around the same time.
I’m not big on the left/right labels. If the Greens have a good idea, I’ll back it. If ACT have a good idea, I’ll back it.
However when parties start to implement policies silely because of ideology rather than results, that’s when problems start no matter which part of the polical spectrum they’re on.
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
I have yet to see Photo back any ideas apart from Neo-Liberal ones from NACT.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
You should try opening your eyes then.
I’ve often and repeatedly backed Gareths idea for compulsory insulation and heating standards for landlords.
It’s a very, very good idea, and I’m sure if the Greens got the right support from the right agencies and advocates they could sell it to the govt as an idea that has huge benefits including health, welfare, economic, power saving etc., (and costs the taxpayer zero).
It ticks all the boxes, with multiple benefits, and have very few negative factors.
Come up with another idea that good, and I’ll back it to the hilt.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
The bottom farms lose the last 20% of their payment. The average farms keep their payment. And the best farms get and additional 20% (the money from the poluting farms who miss out).
So there is a 40% payout difference between the best and worst farms (but keeping the system where Fontera won’t even accept milk from the worst ones).
That way dairy farms still get their full overall payout. But the most environmentally friendly farms are rewarded, and the worst are punnished.
A financial carrot and stick system provides far greater incentives for farmers to do the right thing than the Greens “dirty dairy” campaign which is 100% negative and antagonistic.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
so photo, just to clarify, you want to pass laws that would dictate how private individuals in a private collective distribute amongst themselves their own profits?? Gee, while we’re at it can we make them sell their produce in NZ for a fair price?
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
gee..does anyone remember way back when…when i said strauss-kahn had been honey-trapped/set-up…?
(..because he was urging the i.m.f to ditch the american dollar as the global standard..
..and because he was about to become a socialist elected leader of france…)
..and how many went ballistic that i was defending a rapist…?
..and how so many rushed to judgment on strauss-kahn..?
..well…as it turns out…
..he was…
..and the prosecution case against him has collapsed..
..so..will those who rushed to that erroneous judgment..
..will they now ‘withdraw and apologise’…?
..(should i hold my breath..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
y’see..the alarm bells went off for me very early on..
..when we had those first reports of plucky new york cops getting to the airport just in time to catch the fleeing/sweaty rapist…
..then..as it turns out..he was actually on a pre-booked/scheduled flight..
..after checking out from the hotel..on schedule..
..and those plucky cops only knew he was on the plane..
..’cos he..strauss-kahn..had phoned the hotel to report his left-behind cellphone…
..and could they plse courier it to him at the airport..
..so..the truth..was quite different to the fleeing/sweaty rapist ‘story’…
..eh..?
..from then on the whole thing reeked like a carnivores rubbish bin..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
solka says “so photo, just to clarify, you want to pass laws that would dictate how private individuals in a private collective distribute amongst themselves their own profits?? ”
Where’s the infantile animal noises you usually make? Where’s your oink, or is that quack, or should that be moo, considering the subject?
If you actually read what I said, you’d see I didn’t mention anything about passing laws to do this. That would likely fail badly.
It would only succeed if farmers were behind it.
Solka says “Gee, while we’re at it can we make them sell their produce in NZ for a fair price?”
We’re paying the same as every one else – what you’re really asking is why don’t they sell it to us at a discounted price.
How about you work for 30% less than you currently get, because that’s a bit too much for your employer/taxpayer to pay?
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
photo, where is all the “intelligent debate” that you are always promising but never deliver?
Your naivety is truly outstanding in this post. Why would farmers agree to something that is not in their best interest? And if they were so tractable then their would be no problem in the first place!
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
We are not paying the same as everyone else.
NZ timber, meat, milk and dairy products sell for less in Indonesia, Australia and French Polynesia. (The places I have seen it). According to other people it also sells for less in the UK, USA and Europe.
We are subsidising primary produce exports.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
However when Labour proposed a tax to fund research into cleaner farming, It resulted in emotive talk about fart taxes and tractors on parliament steps even though the research would have ultimately benefited farm production.
Greens have not been negative on farmers. In fact we have been supporting and applauding farmers who look after the land and use more sustainable practices. There are many farmers who are as concerned for the environment and their children’s future as any Green. Why should they have to compete with others who get away with ruining water supplies and overstocking.
We have been negative about farming practices which load the costs of environmental and water degradation onto others.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
hell hath no fury like a scorned period…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
should poor people/the underclass denied healh/dental/vision-care…
..should they don penguin suits..?
..would that help..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
1.29 pm should read ‘period scorned’….(doh..!..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
solka says “photo, where is all the “intelligent debate” that you are always promising but never deliver?
Your naivety is truly outstanding in this post. Why would farmers agree to something that is not in their best interest? ”
You should put more effort into thinking and less into abuse.
Every dollar lost by a dirty farm, would be gained by a clean farm.
So if would be very easy to set a baseline so the payments lost from those below the line are paid to those above it.
Set the baseline at a point where 60 or 70% of farms are above it, and you’ll get the farmers to vote for it as the majority will get paid more.
As farms improve, the baseline moves up too. Those below it have to improve to stop losing money.
But those above it ALSO have to improve as the baseline catches up on them.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
yes, photo, the baseline would keep ratcheting up costing all farmers over the medium term in time, capital and economic efficiency. Most farmers do not want a reduction in profits and increased work loads.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
solkta says “yes, photo, the baseline would keep ratcheting up costing all farmers over the medium term in time, capital and economic efficiency. Most farmers do not want a reduction in profits and increased work loads.”
Oh well – lets all just give up then, and let them put as much crap as they want in the streams.
You’re so blinkered about arguing against people, that you’ve lost sight that you’re arguing against something that would improve the environment.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)