Privatisation - sell to the Maoris

Bill Ralston has raised that hoary old chestnut of privatisation.

National is in a bit of a bind over this as it sadly promised no sales of state assets in its first term. If Bill English is looking at fobbing off a few shares it may take a year or so to arrange it so National can then put it on the agenda in 2011. As I've said before, they should sell shares in SOE's to the Maoris.

What does this achieve?

First, it gets Maori investing in key assets. Second, the profits stay in NZ. Third, selling shares is not selling an asset. Finally, the best thing it does is it gets a chunk of the treaty money back into government coffers so reduces the overall amount paid in treaty settlements!

On all four counts it's perfect politics and perfect sense. The Gnats can let Maori own some key assets (like here ) and thereby assist in Maori self-determination and win some Maori votes; Labour can't wail about the profits going offshore; they also can't wail about selling off state assets (selling shares is not selling the asset); and the rednecks get some of their money back.

Bill, no charge for this advice. You now owe me one. I'll hold you to it.

Bernard Madoff - regulation is the answer

I see Bernard Madoff has been sentenced to 150 years for stealing people's money. Good job.

But why didn't the powers at be regulate the industry by making it illegal to commit fraud or steal money? That would have stopped him.

Obama should act immediately by passing laws making this kind of carry on illegal.

Not a test case

From Granny.

A District Court judge and police say the prosecution of a man who insisted he had flicked his son's ear, only later to be convicted of punching the child in the face, was never a test case for child smacking laws.

The case was widely seen as a test of the anti-smacking laws because Mason publicly claimed that he had done no more than administer a flick on the ear.

But Christchurch District Court Judge Michael Crosbie said the matter would have been dealt with in exactly the same way before the introduction of the smacking legislation.

"It remains a case of an assault on a child, as it would have prior to the legislation being enacted," he told Mason at sentencing.

"You don't accept the facts but you do say that in hindsight you should have been able to manage the situation in a calmer manner and not reacted in the way you described."

Judge Crosbie said a discharge without conviction was not appropriate. "It is clear the jury found there was a punch and you admitted as much to the police."

A punch is a violent act and deserves a prosecution and a conviction. A smack for corrective purposes is not a violent act and should not result in a prosecution and a conviction.

The Judge knew the difference. Therefore this guy would have been convicted under the old section 59. If that is the case why was it changed again?

Making the weather forecasts sexy, scary and political!

After freezing my tits off in the Winterless North, when despite its name, we were having one, I am now sweating in sultry Britain.

The country is enjoying a heatwave and rather welcome this fine news, it is greeted with horror.

And I don't mean the eco-fascists taking a few fine days as a sign of global warming!

No, it is the Nanny State rearing its ugly head.

Watching the BBC weather forecast last night, the presenter warned about the risk to elderly people, their need to drink plenty of fluids and stay out of the heat.

We were even given the phoneline number for NHS Direct for extra advice.

Today's papers also highlight the threat, noting such warnings, and adding that a couple of thousand died in Britain's last big heatwave in 2006.

And of course, there was that French heatwave even further back when tens of thousands allegedly died from the heat.

Talkback radio with Liz Green on BBC Radio Leeds also raised the new warnings.

The horror , the ecopolypse set to befall Britain is the prospect of temperatures topping 30c!!

Perhaps I am being suspicious, but am I alone in seeing some conspiratorial hidden agenda with this?

Well, such warnings do make the weather forecase seem more exciting and dramatic.

Telling someone they might need to stay indoors to stay alive is far more interesting than say 'rug up well' as TVNZ's Jim Hickey does.

I suspect it is all part of a hidden agenda to promote the cause of global warming/ climate change.

The UK Met Office recently unvieled its forecasts for 2080 to some glowing coverage, though there are reports that sceptism is on the increase.

But what better way to terrify a nation's populace into accepting the tax and regulations scams being promoted by big government than putting the fear of God into them should we ever have a rare hot summer's day and claim such taxes will help avoid death and destruction on a large scale!

I guess it also proves an excuse for an embattled government should the hospitals fail to cope with a few extra doses of sunstroke too!

Yankees please stay!!

As America withdraws its troops from Iraq, we are now getting a somewhat different story.

Even the BBC is changing its tune judging by the news last night.

After hearing how the nasty evil BushHitler regime was subjugating Iraqis as well as killing too many Americans and Iraqis, we are now hearing of dreadful consequences that might arise should the Amercian troops depart.

Iraq trembles, says the Times of London, US news company McClatchy also notes the fears of many ordinary Iranians.

The LA Times wonders if the job has been done.

Well, it was certain that 'the Surge' supported by John McCain and opposed by TOWMNBM did work in curbing the violence of the rival militia. Now, the US has been pressurised into a early withdrawal, we might see groups taking advantage. I guess this is what happens when politics takes precedence over military reality.

We can only wonder what the resuly might be of the withdrawal this week.

Is the US pulling out too soon because of leftist campaigning and if so, how much blood might be on the hands of TOWMNBM and his like?

Crap celeb endorsements of our time

I watched a laughable piece of celeb news last night (hey, it's not my fault if the nation's news media now consider celeb gossip to be news stories) about Keisha Castle-Hughes going on a Pacific tour to "document the effects of climate change," courtesy of Greenpeace.

Apparently, it's worth the carbon footprint of sending a boat around the Pacific Islands so that Castle-Hughes can hear old codgers claiming the weather was much better when they were kids, or witness the strangely localised effects of "sea level rise," because she's encouraging the Islanders to hassle John Key about the next Kyoto round when he visits.

"Greenpeace ... are using celebrities like Ms Castle-Hughes" (a direct quote!) to promote govts commiting to reduce carbon emissions by 40% by 2020. I'm not sure why this unrealistic figure was chosen over others (why not 80% by 2015?), but the previous Kyoto round should have taught Greenpeace something by now: getting govts to sign agreements is one thing, getting them to abide by them is another.

I don't actually have strong views either way on climate change (unlike my wife, who's a scientist and therefore has very strong opinions on the politicisation of scientific opinion going on in this area.) For one thing, I don't have the necessary skills to interpret the research (and given the politicisation of that research, you bet it needs interpreting). It certainly seems straightforward that if we continue putting CO2 into the atmosphere at the rate we are, it will cause changes and those changes are unlikely to be pleasant ones. Set against that though are various equally straightforward factors such as:

1. People won't voluntarily make drastic changes to their lives without some clear and present danger to force it.

2. Govts are accountable to the people, and their performance is measured to a great extent on the state of the economy. If responding to climate change = putting a serious brake on the economy, forget it.
In other words - if climate change really does start to have a clearly demonstrable and indisputable effect, then we might see some action. Before that? Nuttin.

Ban the Burka!!!

Even in the rural shires, where I am staying, you cannot escape the Islamisation of Britain.

I have just had a few days in the Cumbrian Lake District and saw several large groups of muslim immigrants, sometimes with the womenfolk wearing burkas and hijabs.

At least they were let out of the house, I guess.

I recall many years ago when working at the Derby Evening Telegraph, writing a front page story called 'Indian Country' which featured the looney left Derbyshire County Council subsidising coach trips to the Peak District so ethnic minorities would learn to enjoy the countryside rather than feel 'intimidated ' by the near 100% ethnic white population that live in the shires.

Anyway, here we are, 15 or so years later and there are obviously sufficient numbers of Indians or muslims or whatever to gather around Windermere in large groups, or hang about the Travelodge in Kendal.

In some some ways it is heartening to see such groups enjoying the delights of a rural Britain built up by its indigenous peoples over the centuries.

The quaint stone houses, the well-kept gardens, the colourful tubs of flowers hanging everywhere.

Which brings me on to Burkas.

French president Nicholas Sarkozy announced a plan to ban them, sparking off a global debate.

And while Gordon Brown will never have the balls to do so, despite having ministers of that name, the issue gained a fair prominence in the media.

There were articles in the Sun and the Daily Mail naturally, interviews on BBC Breakfast and Iain Dale has just blogged a piece on the subject.

As for me, I fully agree with Mr Dale.

Burkas turn women into chattels of their husbands and as others note, there is nothing in the Koran demanding them.

I would also add another reason why Britain as well as Australia and New Zealand should ban the burka, and that is to force a bit more integration from the Muslims into our Western way of life.

For those unhappy with this, well we can always show them the nearest airport.

If such muslim extremists find such Christian societies so objectionable, then why live here.

If they want to live in an Islamist theocracy, there's plenty in the Middle East where they can go!

And yes, when I hear of Briain having 80-odd Sharia Courts, I do despair and can only long for the day when Britain has a government that will stand up for its peoples and culture.

I also hope New Zealand can learn from Britain's mistakes too!

Vegetarianism and celebrities make you fat!!

Yes, it's all the fault of this wanton hussy Dawn French.

The Vicar of Dibley is turning us all into fatties!

Well, actually, the papers did not mention her but rather tv presenter Eamon Holmes and comedy star James Corden.

Apparantly, their fatness makes obesity seem normal, and thus ok.

I thought of Dawn as well surely she is are far, far bigger celebrity in more ways than one.

But nagging aside, don't some of these celebrities look better with a bit of meat on.

Isn't a guy or a gal better with something to cuddle than being some anaemic waif.

Well, if you want to bulk up, remember to avoid eating meat, as that is bad for the planet!

Instead, eat some lettuce but be warned, vegetarianism can make you fat!

So when I get home, I can only hope for a nice bit of meat, even if it does cost much more over here!

And buttons to what the greenies think!

Welfare reform

Lindsay Mitchell talks and writes on welfare reform better than I do or can. But I can give a broad response to this article by Susan St John and Keith Rankin as discussed by Danny Watson on Newstalk ZB this afternoon.

The staggering thing when listening to Watson was the amount of people who called in and virtually demanded the State pay them something when they are made redundant. That was the general thinking: that the State owes us. In a sense it's true. After all, you pay tax (and goodness knows we pay a lot of that) and when you want the service from the State for the tax you've paid you don't get it. ACT tried to point this out a while ago when Rodney Hide gave speeches on Social Contracts. Sure, you have rights viz a viz the State (to an extent) but it mustn't be forgotten that the State also has rights viz a viz its citizens. But in this country people tend to pay a lot of tax for not much return when they need it (as distinct from when they want it). And this applies equally to things such as Health and Police as well as Welfare.

But what got me going was that the callers into the radio show had this overarching sense of entitlement. They saw it is almost mandatory; that the State must provide for them if they come across tough times. Hardly anyone challenged this, least of all the host. No callers that I heard were willing to challenge the concept of the Welfare State as a concept; there was no other option.

Which brings me to the other way of thinking. ACT pointed out many times last year in the lead up to the election that the Labour government had overspent in the approximate amount of $60-$80,000.00 per household over the nine years it was in power. That is, they spent over and above the rate of inflation per household and starved families and workers of this approximate amount. If government spending had been at inflation plus population change, on average each family would have had that cash in their pocket.

Now you can debate all you like about whether they would have spent it or saved or retired debt with it, all of those options aren't bad. Spending it helps the internal economy, and saving it or retiring debt is very useful in New Zealand's overall context. And if it was spent on boats or cars or TV's then when the tough times hit they wouldn't have it to help their families. But that's their problem, not mine. And that last sentence is the crux of the issue: who's problem is this? At the end of the day we are all responsible for ourselves, and if the large majority of us make sensible and wise decisions with our money then collectively, as a country, we will be better off.

Here's the thing about welfare and hits on the problem as discussed by Danny Watson. Sure, if you can't pay the bills their should be a safety net. No one would argue otherwise. But what about the guy on nett $130K with per annum expenditure of nett $100k with 3 kids and a wife who doesn't work? Shouldn't the State pay him $2K per week to help him out, which is what he needs to pay the mortgage and feed the kids etc. If not, why not? What's the difference between this guy and someone on nett income of $35K per annum with no kids and nett expenditure of $33K? At face value the only difference is they need less to survive on. But who judges that? The politicians? No, that's bullshit they they should.

Arbitrary rules do not take into account individual circumstances which is actually what Susan St John and Keith Rankin argue. They're actually correct. So to rectify this we should just keep more of our money because only us, as individuals, really know how much we need to live on and need to support our families. That's why we need a cap on government spending, a cap on rates, a flatter, simpler tax system and more money in our pocket.

But I didn't read those solutions in the St John/Rankin thesis. And I didn't see any assistance in Peter Dunne's "worthwhile" contribution to the issue:

"Revenue Minister Peter Dunne said an update of the welfare system would be a "massive undertaking".

"The system has grown haphazardly over many years. [Revision] is not going to happen this year [or] next year. It will happen over a long period.

What a feeble response from a feeble minister. The sooner the government ships him to the US the better.

Wish I Was Still There.

Adolf and The Cook arrived home last night from ten days of indolent inebriation and elegant gluttony in the delightful Republic of Fiji.

We stayed at our favorite 'el cheapo,' Beachside Resort which is owned and operated by Kiwis Phil and Jane. A fabulous but simple menu with extremely reasonable prices. You must go there. The best fish curry and chicken curry ever. A pleasant air conditioned room for two for around NZ$75 per night and NZ$7 gets you anywhere you want to go in a beat up local cab. Exchange rate currently is 0.75.

Beats the hell out of paying $350 per night at Denarau. We talked to some people who took up one of the 'red hot specials' offered for Denarau. You know the story. Discounted airfares and accommodation. What they didn't tell you was that you can't afford to eat and drink there once you arrive. $60 for a sirloin steak and the cheapest bottle of wine is $60!!!!!!! BTW the hotel buys them in for $13 per bottle.

There were severe floods in January and since our first annual visit in 1992, I have never seen the roads in such a state of disrepair. A taxi driver told us the government has no money to repair them.

We went to the Aussie butcher in Nandi and stocked up on rump steak, bacon, smoked ham, Italian sausages, breakfast sausages, chicken drumsticks - about $80 all up. Flew across to the time share and froze some steak, drumsticks and sausies. That did us for the whole week, along with 2kg of the best rice I have ever tasted.

Now what about the politics of the joint?



Nowhere did I hear a bad word about Commodore Bainimarama. We know a number of businesspeople in the Nandi area and their commentary was revealing along with that of taxi drivers, hotel staff and local roadside stall holders. There is widespread anger and it is directed not at the local regime but at New Zealand and Australia.

The local tourism industry has been crucified by Australia's and New Zealand's intemperate and malicious adverse travel advisories. Adolf and The Cook visited seven resorts while we were there and in our judgment occupancy on average was around ten to fifteen percent. It's hard to calculate but we think that in the Nandi /Coral Coast area alone, probably five thousand full time jobs have been lost.

The truth of the matter is that people visiting Western Fiji are no more in danger than they would be visiting Takapuna or Bondi. (For that matter, neither are those visiting Suva.) When The Cook told her sister in WA that we were going to Fiji the silly bitch asked "Are you sure you'll be alright with all the trouble over there?"

That's the level of irreparable damage which has been done to the livelihoods of ordinary Fijians by our two countries' outrageously irresponsible behaviour. The propaganda has worked.

Since the Commodore took power, corruption in the public service and elsewhere has subsided if not disappeared. Why? Because Fiji is an inherently violent society and people know that if they are caught they will have the shit kicked out of them. It is NOT New Zealand.

Corruption at all levels was estimated to be adding between 25% and 30% to the cost of just about EVERYTHING. For example, you would wonder how it could be that a coastal piece of prime residential land would be quietly rezoned commercial and opened up for resort development. No hearings, no objections. Still wondering? Oh well, it just so happened apparently that the prime minister of the day suddenly became the owner of two choice blocks in a resulting subdivision.

None of Adolf's contacts in Western Fiji could recall ever seeing anyone from New Zealand's High Commission during this past two or three years. It appears our government only hears the opinions of those who are on the insiders' list in the Suva beltway. John Key and Murray McCully are being hoodwinked by left leaning bureaucrats. I'm told our loud mouthed ex High Commissioner (personal friend of Helen Clark) was running around Suva bad mouthing the regime at every opportunity. She was explicitly warned that if she continued she would be asked to leave. Journalists Dreaver and Field were described to me as 'trouble makers.'

There is evidence of huge investment in tourism in the Nandi area. God knows where the people will come from but it appears the capital is flowing in from India and Communist China. Certainly makes the fools from Bridgecorp and Hanover look like the amateurish crooks they are. One rumour doing the rounds is that the Commodore has been offered US$300 mil by the Chinese government. That would be very tempting were it not for the price tag. Residency for between 4,000 and 7,000 selected Chinese immigrants. Selected by China not Fiji, of course.

We met a Fijian school teacher and his wife. He asked us what we thought of the devaluation. It became apparent he was confusing the devaluation of the currency with the reduction of public service salaries by three percent some months earlier. When I asked him if he would prefer to have no job rather than 97% of his previous salary he shuffled his feet and chose to be employed.

You see, now that much of the corruption has been rooted out, he is actually better off financially but of course his Labour affiliated union would not want him to know that. Adolf has seen corruption in Argentina and Brazil. Believe me, the Bainimarama remedy is far more palatable than the South American version which usually involves revolutionaries with AK47s shooting up all and sundry.

Interesting times. Mike Moore is right.

My prediction is that unless John Key and Kevin Rudd wake up very soon indeed, they will be too late to prevent a sea change in the political landscape of the South Pacific. China will have it's Pacific based aircraft carrier and all for less than one tenth the cost of the USS Reagan, while New Zealand's prestige and influence in our neighborhood will have been permanently damaged.

More PC Nonsense

I'll have something to say about Fiji later, when I catch my breath.

However, this caught my eye a few minutes ago.

The first reaction of any prudent insurer will be to decline or load any application from a person who is unwilling to divulge the information sought. Insurance is a privilege, not a right, Madame Schroff.

Less prudent insurers will take on these substandard risks and, as a result, the number of disputes at claim time will increase as information comes to light after the event which should have been available before.

Premiums will rise to cover the additional risk as those who refuse to disclose all information required will find their behaviour brings with it substantial cost. It goes something like this.

Client Joe Nurk, age 52, non smoker

Offer of terms:

Life, standard rates plus 50% premium loading;

Trauma, standard rates plus 150% premium loading;

Income Protection, decline.

Upon release of full medical history, these terms may be reconsidered.

If you don't like it, take your lousy business somewhere else.

California one month away from bankruptcy

The state of California is about one month away from being unable to pay the rubbish collectors. This is pretty serious considering that if it was a country it would be in the top 10 economies of the World. It's GDP provides the US with 13-15% of its annual GDP. As I say, it's pretty serious.

Remember my post on the union-inspired collapse of General Motors? The same factors are at play with California.

The governor readily admits that he sees the crisis as a chance to make big changes to government -- to "reform the system," he said Friday -- with proposals he has struggled to advance in the past.

Among them: reorganizing state bureaucracy, eliminating patronage boards and curbing fraud in social services that Democrats have traditionally protected. The governor also would like to move past the budget crisis to reach a deal on California's water problems that has so far eluded him.

In past years, his plans ran into opposition organized largely by well-funded labor groups and Democrats, who say his proposals are really meant to strangle government. Now he is newly armed with negotiating power over Democratic lawmakers desperate to preserve state programs.

Back on the governor's demand list is a plan to cut the pensions received by state workers, which unions have stymied before but which he thinks may gain traction with a cash-strapped public. Schwarzenegger also views this as an ideal time to once again target growth and fraud in the state's multibillion-dollar in-home healthcare program, which employs 300,000 unionized workers.

His agenda includes anti-fraud efforts and tougher enrollment requirements for the state's food stamp programs, efforts that advocates for the poor say are designed to discourage people from participating. In his radio address, he said the state and counties could get by with a "fraction" of the 27,000 workers now handling eligibility for Medi-Cal and food stamps by using Web-based enrollment.

Schwarzenegger has revived plans to allow local school districts to contract out for services like school bus transportation and lawn maintenance, a proposal favored by the GOP but despised by school employee unions.

Yep, wonderful things those unions. First they engineered the downfall of GM, now it's California. New Zealand ain't that far away.

Hat tip: PM of NZ.

Michael Jackson Tribute

This is going on a bit I realise that. But MJ was a superstar and in my view a true musical and theatrical genius. He was what I would have loved to have been but could, and can, never be: a singer/dancer/songwriter who, in my view, was unmatched. Some of his videos are out of this world in terms of the choreography and dancing.

The top 5 musical artists of my generation that I believe had the most impact are (in no particular order): Jackson, Freddie Mercury, Bono, Sid Vicious, Mick Jagger.

So, after all that, here he is again singing You Are Not Alone live in Korea. If you're real lucky you might even get Sid Vicious singing "Friggin in the Riggin" if I can find it.

Rocking on.....

Inspired by posts over at Crusader Rabbit and Keeping Stock, I thought I'd put up a clip I found on Youtube the other night.



Trevor Rabin, Jon Anderson, Chris Squire, Tony Kaye, Allan White, Steve Howe, and Rick Wakeman. The ultimate YES, (in my opinion).

Pretentious?? Absolutely!

But these buggers can sure PLAY.

Enjoy

G

Adolf is gonna shit when he gets back from Fiji.

I can hear the lamentation now. What have those kids done to our blog.

Enjoy PM...

For Barnsley Bill

Not because I suspect BB is short of incredibly hot and well-armed alien babes to look at, mind you (well, no more so than the rest of us, anyway) - just adding to the discussion here.

Not only for BB, either - feel free to drool all you like...

Freemarket families???

As mentioned earlier, I am over in England at a family wedding.
But why did I come? Was it because I was obligated to or was it because I wanted to?
Actually a bit of both.
But it all raises something Rick Giles of ACT on Campus has been thinking about.
I hope he doesn’t kill me for mentioning the issue, but Rick has been thinking about ‘freemarket families.”
Now, if I got it right, the concept is as follows.
One friend of his lamented that his sister treat him badly because she was his sister and consequently could get away with it.
But friends could not treat the mate badly because they were more in a freemarket , so they would be dumped if they did.
Rick’s idea was to treat family members more on freemarket principles.
For them to remain part of the family, they had to treat him better. And him having greater choice over the issue, was very liberating. It meant he did not have to put up with ‘their crap’ if that was the case.
Because he could drop them, they would raise their standards and better meet his needs. And he would do the same.
Thus, in wider use, we would see families acting better to each other because they could be dumped just like bad friends.
Thus, parents would not be mean or cruel to their children and vice-versa.
Anyway, I think that is pretty much what he was saying.
In some respects, the idea does have merits, especially if it does encourage families to be better to each other.
But can families be treated as some kind of commodity to be traded. Yes, there is free choice in friendships, but isn’t it the blood ties that make families different.
Rick is right in that there does need to be better harmony in many families, but I am usure whether this ‘freemarket’ is the right way to go, even if in every other sphere, the freedom of choice does deliver better standards all round.
We have heard much about how the freemarket might damage families, but what policies can be developed from its principles to help families work better?

I see leading marketeer Von Mises sees families as essential to a free society, when it is the state and the socialists that seek to undermine the family.

Anyway, I’d be interested in your thoughts and it might help Rick develop his on the subject.

Fuck Michael Jackson, Steven Wells, Psycho Milt and Gooner. Farrah is dead.

Go on, have a nostalgic pull. You know you want to.


Had the poster, and as I have mentioned elsewhere I am still amazed I did not manage to pull my guts right out.

Fuck Steven Wells and Psycho Milt, Jackson is Dead!

My tribute to perhaps the greatest performer of my generation. I saw him live at Wembley in the early 90's and it was pure genius.

RIP Michael Jackson - Gone Too Soon.

Fuck Michael Jackson - Steven Wells is Dead

OK, maybe you never read the NME back in the 80s and 90s. Maybe you don't read the Guardian's sport column. You poor, sad fuck. One of the great writers and journalists of our age is dead - Steven Wells, dead of lymphatic cancer at age 49. (As a 47-year-old, I find that bit particularly depressing.)

Read the piece in the Guardian and laugh. The one about refs had me in fits. And whatever you do, don't miss this tour-de-force in the face of imminent death. A sample:

And when the fluid drains out of your scrotal sac, guess where it goes next? Can you?

That's right, for about a week I sport a huge, fluid-filled fringe under the head of my penis, making it look like some weird skinhead Gila-lizard from hell. I tell every male I meet about this.

They are all, without exception, appalled. One says:

"Cancer victim or not, if you don't shut the fuck up right now, I'm going to punch you."

Microsoft. Wankers.

Sigh.
The ongoing computer saga.
New laptop is 6 days old.
I was nervous about Vista, we have all heard and seen the horror stories. The laptop has been working briliantly and I was beginning to relax, downloaded open office, installed myob and made it work. Itunes is going great.
But then I did something that everybody advises against.
I succumbed to the automatic update prompt. 483 megabytes of download later. I have no sound. It is telling me that all my device drivers are upto date, but still no sound.
Windows update should be called; "We are going to snap it off in your ass".
Bill Gates you suck, so does your mate Paul Allen. A plague on all your houses.
And HP can suck my hairy arse as well.
I have tried to find a phone number to call, but we all know how that will end. Some pubescent Indian will but-but down the phone and I will smash the computer into a pile of plastic.
I could take it down to Noel Leemings but all I will get from them is the phone number. And again, I do not want to lose half a year on hold after dialling 0800 WEDONTGIVEAFUCK
ANy ideas?

Berlusconi: not so much "user of prostitutes" as "rapist."

The great statesman and towering colossus of the world stage (in his own view anyway) says "I never understood where the satisfaction is when you're missing the pleasure of conquest."

"Conquest" used in this sense, gentle reader, means essentially that Berlusconi finds sex the most satisfying when women who didn't actually want to fuck him end up with him inside them anyway. Down here in less romantic territory, we have a different name for that than "conquest."

State Houses: Sell the buggers!!!

Having grown up in Britain, I can remember one of the most successful of the policies of Margaret Hilda Thatcher.

It was privatisation and giving council house tenants the right to buy their homes was a central tenet of it.

As Not PC recalls, several million such homes were sold and its impact on British society was most significant.

Naturally, the councils benefited from the proceeds but there was something far better.

When you own something yourself, you treat it differently, you treat it better.

I remember canvassing around the 'council estates' of Coventry South-West for the 1987 General Election.

You could always tell a former council house.

There were new double-glazed windows, a shiny new door and the property was kept in a far better state than others that had not being bought.

There was a political change too. So grateful were the new owners of these homes to enjoy the 'right to buy' that they voted Conservative. At the time Labour opposed the right to buy and I think eventually it had to change its mind.

As Peter Creswell notes, Thatcher created a property owning democracy, with the number of homeowners rockering from around half of the population to nearly 70%.

Of course, it helped that such homes were sold at a discount, and this discount varied for how long the occupant had resided in the home. Thus, you could argue that the tenants had paid for a fair bit of the house anyway.

Of course, there will be purists, such as Cactus Kate who points out an unfairness in government giving such discounts.

But to encourage such a disposal of state housing and for New Zealand to accrue the benefits from such a wider property owning democracy, I would say the discounts are welcome.

National also needs to sell the message that Liarbour opposes such sales and wants to see state house tenants dependent on the state. The message is Liarbour opposes freedom of choice and homeownership. National wants to see, as David Farrar says, a switch from dependency to ownership.

As for putting the proceeds into a pot to build some more state houses, I agree. It is better to see the revenues used to pay off government debt. But alas the pragmatism of the times calls for a measure like this, thus maintaining the levels of state housing provision.

Of course, what National fails to stress is that once someone has bought their state house, they no longer heed one. I cannot see what Moana Mackay is moaning about!

Perhaps National might have been better sharing the proceeds 50-50 between new state house provision and paying off the National debt. That way it could get the best of both worlds and satisfy both camps!

Hat tip: Not PC, Cactus Kate, Kiwiblog

UPDATE: ConservativeHome blog updates the debate over the British experience.

The drug driving law

From Scoop:

People who drive when their judgement and reactions are impaired by drugs are a danger to themselves...,” Mr Joyce said.

From John Stuart Mill's harm principle:

"...the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant...[i]n the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign."

Discuss.

The corrupt cosy cartel of buggins turn government

Now I am at my parents' in rural Yorkshire, I cannot access the internet, but here’s something that has been brewing in my mind for some months.
Barnsley has been thinking about it too, which is why I got the inspiration for this post.
What difference has National made to the country? Is the new government living up to its promises?
Certainly there has been much disappointment over John Key’s stance over the smacking bill and the cancelled taxcuts.
But by and large the government remains popular. And the country seems to plod on as before.
Now, as I have just arrived in Britain, a country engulfed by political scandals and troughery, what about our own corruption?
The corruption we heard so much about during the Helengrad years.
Remember the talk that we should have a Corruption Commission to investigate the activities of our former Liarbour government. Whale Oil, for example, was most vociferous about having one.
But now peace has broken out from National, even if Liarbour fights back with ‘honey traps’ and Mata Haris snaring old and randy goats.
In the meantime, we have Philip Field fighting for his life, but we hear relatively little on this, with the story tucked away in a quiet corner of the NZ Herald.
Granny is pushing on the MPs expenses issue but it appears to have forgotten about the other scandals of the Helengrad years. As for National, it is unusually quiet.
But hang on, those charges of corruption are unprecedented. It is the first time that we have had a sitting MP and government minister facing investigations and charges like this. Wasn’t he Associate Justice Minister too? Surely this adds to the seriousness of his situation?
For the first time, New Zealand has politicians behaving they would in some third World banana republic.
Yet, we shrug it off with little fuss. Did we get so used to scandal during the Helengrad years when its government had more ‘gates’ than the largest country station.
And what of Helen Clark herself. No re-opening into the way she stole Election 2005 with the pledgecard money. And then as she left office for the UN, Investigate uncovers how she bought her job with taxpayer dollars by ramping up the country’s contributions in election year, just in case she lost!
And what about Michael Cullen? Here’s a man who squandered the most benign economic conditions in a generation and showed his fiscal incompetence with the purchase of Kiwirail. Has he behaved honestly and ethically? Yet National buy him off with plum jobs at NZ Post and welcomes Uncle’s appointment to the UN.
Was government all about buggins turn? We have had nine years of Liarbour, now it’s time for nine years of National. National will scratch the backs of Liarbour grandees and give them a secure retirement and when Liarbour is in power again, it too will look after the departing National ministers.
What an incestuous duopolistic arrangement!! What a cosy cartel!!
But hang on? What about the corruption? The scandals, etc, etc. We forget the talk of Liarbour sleaze and all those gates, we forget our outrage at those scandals, we forget about our earlier demands for a Corruption Commission.
Instead, we just get on with government, you scratch our back and we will scratch yours. You keep quiet about our scandals and we will forget yours.
And so the genteel political and economic decline of New Zealand continues....

Turning ortholdoxy on its head over immigration

Fancy one of these?

Well, despite the global downturn they are being given away in record numbers!

At the same rate, the number receiving passports – and with them the right to full benefits – this year is predicted to reach 220,000, smashing the record total of 164,540 set in 2007.

Thankfully, we have another reason other than opening the floodgates to immigration.
The increase has been attributed to a rush of applications ahead of tougher rules that would extend the average waiting time for a citizenship from the present five to eight years.

But it does seem bizarre to be letting more in when there are fewer jobs for them.

Indeed, entry, legal or otherwise, still seems to be rising.

But it is not about jobs as the Mayor of Calais explains.

There, the numbers trying to gain entry to Britain has tripled in 5 years with a shanty town of refugees just trying to cross into Britiain. Indeed, so high are the numbers that Calais police are on riot alert.

And this following Gordon Brown recently talking about 'British Jobs for British Workers.'

When governments globally, like ours for example, has announced some restrictions on the work permit front, it does seem odd that the Brown government is letting in more immigrants when Britiain can least afford them.

No wonder the BNP now has seats in the European Parliament.

But to our Kiwi and Australian readers, if you might be eligible for a UK passport, do go and get one while you can!

Death by a thousand cuts, thanks to the beancounters

Some weeks back I enjoyed a fine lunch put on by a global company who was expanding its operations in New Zealand.
Many other journos were there and there were the usual talks about the state of the market.
One respected business title is seeking staff I was told, but they only want newbies to intermediates, so they can pay them just $30-$40k a year.
Of course they never think to ask whether an old timer might work 3-4 days a week for such a sum, one who is perhaps skilled enough to produce more and better work than the newbie in half the time!
And there’s another well respected title that is not replacing staff who leaves, regardless of the impact on the quality of the publication. The recruitment freeze continues.
Soon after, I had coffee with a guy who had been in publishing for more than 30 years.
He had been made redundant by a large corporate because he disagreed with the direction of the company, and the recession gave the perfect excuse to pay him off.
The old timer wanted the small provincial weekly to have a solid focus on ‘community news’. He wanted more than just filling the white space between the ads with recycled press releases.
However, real news costs, and the publishers aren’t keen to pay for it, no matter how much it might cost them in the long run in not having it.
I guess many of the readers of this blog have decent incomes, incomes so beloved of advertisers.
So imagine how damaging it would be for you to stop reading certain titles.
Indeed, I have heard so many of you say you have stopped reading certain titles because you disagreed with their left wing politics or the tabloidization of the papers, that they contained too much fluff.
So here is an idea, one that may help you save your favourite papers from rampant costcutting.
If you are thinking of cancelling your subscription, before you do, tell the editor or general manager of your newspaper or magazine.
And please do it in large enough numbers that it will be clear to the beancounters that costcutting doesn’t work and in fact reinforces a spiral of decline.
Of course, you think having gone down this route so many times before that they might have learnt by now!

I wuz provoked, yeronner

So, anyone buying the concept that Clayton Weatherston lost control only due to extreme provocation, leading him to kill and extensively mutilate his ex-girlfriend with the, er, large knife that he just happened to have brought with him? Me, not so much...

The Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act

So the referendum is about to commence and no doubt the usual antics will be displayed. Personally I don't find the question that misleading (sorry Mr Prime Minister) as everyone knows it's a vote for or against Sue Bradford as much as the compulsory superannuation referendum in 1997 was a vote against Winston Peters. I doubt the result will be the same this time though (93% against the idea in 1997).


But what is the issue all about? For me it's about the State leaving parents alone and getting out of our households. I mean a smack is neither here nor there in terms of a corrective tool. No, it's not about that for me, I've never smacked my daughter. But there are plenty of daughters, and sons, in Aotearoa who need a good smacking every now and again.


But the more I look at the new section 59 (below) the more I find the whole issue utterly ridiculous bacause under subclauses (a) to (d) a smack is permitted in three occasions of preventative behaviour and one occasion of normal behaviour incidental to parenting, which subsection (2) instructs us is not a smack for corrective purposes.

At the end of the day a smack for correction is prohibited but a smack for prevention is permitted. If a child constantly plays up then that child can be smacked under subsection (c) as long as parents tell the child "that is to prevent you behaving like that again", rather than "that is to correct you for behaving like that".

The question therefore is concerned with changing the word "prevention" to another word "correction" and deleting subsection (2).

The difference is not worth $9 million bucks, and I'm still voting "No".

Parental control

(1) Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of—
(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or
(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or

(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or
disruptive behaviour; or
(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.

(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.

(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1).

(4) To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.

Been there done that , now we've lost the map..

(A warning to the political junkies in our midst. This post has nothing to do with NZ politics which, to be frank, currently bores me rigid.)

Now I have been interested in space exploration since I was about 5 years old and can remember sitting up with my Dad listening to liftoffs of Gemini missions on the Voice of America short wave service.


I also recall the excitement as a 9 year old of listening to man's first moments on the moon, and the drama of the Apollo 13 recovery. All stirring stuff indeed.
So it was with interest that I read last week that NASA has sent two probes to the moon as part of their new program to return men to our satellite by 2020 which GWB announced in 2004.



2020? WTF??


In 1961 after only two manned suborbital flights, JFK committed the US to that marvellous goal of "landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth before the end of the decade", and as we know in 1969 this was achieved.


Eight and a bit years is all it took. All they had to do it with was Werhner von Braun's V2 knowledge, their own PhDs armed with slide rules and log tables, and no computers with any more power than the average cellphone of today.

By today's standards they knew bugger all about the environment in space, orbital mechanics was a science very much in its infancy, and they didn't even know if the lunar surface could support the weight of a space craft.
Yet NASA essentially started from scratch and went on to get the job done. Sure there were tragedies along the way. Lives were lost, notably the crew of Apollo 1, near misses were a regular occurence, Gemini 8 and Mercury Redstone 4 spring to mind, and equipment failed with monotonous regularity but the goal was met despite the cost.

So why will it take the same agency 16 years to repeat the performance??

This question is even more pertinent when one realises that NASA are not going to be using some new propulsion system or a craft that resembles the USS Enterpise. The vehicle they have in mind, the Orion, is simply a scaled up, and souped up version of Apollo.

The computers of today which will be used for engineering design and onboard stuff are many degrees of magnitude ahead of their sixties ancestors and our experience in space time is now measured in thousands of man hours but we still have to allow double the time to achieve the same goal?

Why?

Discuss

G

The State of Britain

I'm at Bangkok, half way on my journey to the UK.

I dread to think what mess the economy will be in when I get there.

Will it be as bad as it was during the winter?

I am sure I will soon be back to digesting the gloom of the 6pm news, with a daily tally of joblosses.

Anyway, as a taster, the Financial Times has a feature with some nifty graphics highlighting the growth of the state and the bankruptness of Brown's Britain.

Have a play around and see how Liarbour really fucks up an economy!!

hat tip: Guido Fawkes

Terrorists find their paradise!!

Well, it's enough to make you sick.

The US government is sending various terrorists from Gitmo to some of the most beautiful places on Earth.

The Pacific paradise of Palau is taking a few and so is Bermuda!

Of course, some choosy buggers don't want to go to Palau.

Other suggested relocations for the former Gitmo inmates include Portugal and Italy.

Canada has said no, and the US is also reluctant, leading to problems for the US government.

Questions are being asked about where they will go and the Senate has rejected plans from TOWMNBM to close Guantanamo Bay.
Polls show Americans oppose closing the prison, with some feeling unsafe should the inmates be be jailed in their own states.

Indeed, if these suspected terrorists were as innocent as the Democratic administration believes, the Donks should welcome them with open arms. Perhaps they should stay in Washington DC, be neighbours with the First Family, the Pelosis and the like; give the liberals a change to put their money where their mouths are.

Anyway, I quite like the idea of living in such a tropical paradise, especially as I shiver through a cold New Zealand winter.

I think I will spend some time with the Taliban and learn how to blow up a bus!

Allah Akbar!

And I can only wonder if TOWMNBM will supply me with some virgins too!!!

Lost for an opinion, for once

I'm not sure what to make of the stuff going on in Iran, really.

On the one hand, it would be great to see the Iranians overthrow the ugly totalitarian theocracy that's blighted the place since overthrowing the previous blight in 1979. And on the other hand, we're constantly quacking on to people in the Middle East about how democracy is, but the moment a vote doesn't go our way we're wanting to see the violent overthrow of the winners.

On the one hand, it's certainly plausible that Ahmadinejad's govt rigged the ballot ridiculously in his favour. And on the other hand, it's also plausible that middle-class liberals in Tehran genuinely have no idea how popular Ahmadinejad's rule is in rural areas and among the proletariat - ie, it's entirely possible that Ahmadinejad did actally win the vote.

I guess on the whole I'm going with "Screw the finer details of democracy, just overthrow the dictatorship already" - but also don't think they've got much chance of actually doing it.

Feeding the pigs: Why Liarbour MPs are the top troughers!!

David Farrar has sparked some uproar with his promise of a series of articles on MPs' pay and their allowances.

His pledge follows the controversies over MPs rorting expenses in Britain and over the recent Mt Albert by-election in New Zealand.

David wants something more balanced than we might get elsewhere.

Now, Peter Cresell at Not PC, calls MPs the country's highest paid beneficieries.

Cactus Kate notes how MPs say they are paid in comparison with jobs in the private sector, but Cactus looks at various MPs and questions how they might have fared in the private sector. For some, it does not look good.

Indeed, as we look at the dishonesty or otherwise of our MPs, such relativities might explain something, like why Liarbour MPs tend to be the most dishonest top troughers, both here and in Britain.

It is because they realise how poor their prospects would be in the private sector that they think they better rort all they can while in parliament.

Adolf at No Minister always recalls an interview given by the wife of an Australian Prime Minister where she says they will be honest because they don't need to steal money. I guess when John Key is worth $50 million, we likewise have nothing to fear from him.

This might also explain why Uncle Helen stole election 2005 with the pledgecards and why she boosted New Zealand's donations to the UN every election year, as was reported by Ian Wishart.

Uncle Helen was feathering her nest, knowing that times would be hard otherwise. How much might our academic PM earn in the private sector? Not much , considering how much she pissed them off, so she had to sucker up to the UN! And if the taxpayer paid, and helped buy her her job, all the better!

And why did Michael Cullen sell out to John Key over NZ Post??, so he could earn more than he would have in the private sector.

Yes, the lack of earning capacity of Liarbour MPs in the private sector does explain a lot, doesn't it?

Fall of Helengrad fuels immigration surge??

Well, here we are, at least six months after the fall of Helengrad and a new regime installed in the Beehive.

Now, might be a fairer time to assess the impact of the new government on immigration and emmigration.

It seems that immigration is fuelling our population growth, with such growth at a six year high.

Apparantly, fewer Kiwis are flying to Australia and Britain and more are coming here from such countries.

So, has this turnaround happened thanks to our new Dear Leader, firmly esconded in our new capital Johnnysberg, or are there other factors at play?

Are the other countries having an even worse recession than we are?

That was certainly the case when I was in Gordonistan at Christmas and I expect the same when I arrive there on Wednesday for a family wedding.

At least this time, I definately intend coming back, entertaining no thoughts at all of staying in Bankrupt Britain.

So blogging might be a little light from me here and at the Fairfacts Media Show for the next 4 weeks.

But back to immigration. Why the turnaround? Where are these immigrants coming from? And is it a good thing?

Yep, pretty accurate

I like these quizzes, they keep me on my toes philosophically
and confirm I am right and everyone else is wrong.


My Political Views
I am a right social libertarian
Right: 7.18, Libertarian: 4.72

MahareyFail. or Massey learnicating.

Massey, excellence.
If you are strugling to understand why this pic is here you should probably not visit again. Perhaps crayons and a few sheets of paper might be more your thing. Or maybe you could enrol in a course at Massey. Might I suggest English for morlocks.

Lack of posting lately is due mainly to the fact that my trusty old IBM thinkpad has been suffering with an overload of toast crumbs. After being on the critical list for a few weeks it finally succumbed this morning and I now have a hastily bought shiny new HP laptop

Tiananmen 2: Let the killings commence!!!

The big story of the day is obviously Iran and Fox News has it live.
Iranian troops are amassing with analysts talking of a new Tiananmen-style massacre.

Already there are unconfirmed reports of 150 dead.
Charles Krauthammer said on Friday that the Iranian government has been considering one, and much depends on possible reaction from the West.
Politics professor Daniel Drezner says he fears the Mullahs will turn to mass murder to stay in power.
The One Who Must Not Be Mentioned on this blog has toughened up his words a little.
We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.
Anyway, this is an unfolding story, with blogs like Little Green Footballs and Gateway Pundit especially offering comprehensive coverage.
In the meantime, TOWMBM has cut funding for democracy programmes in Iran, and above is a young man being shot by Iranian forces.

So now things are hotting up, how shouldwe in the West respond?

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit, Little Green Footballs

Will Key and National be drowned by the 'noise'?

A couple of interesting columns from Bill Ralston and Matt McCarten in the Herald on Sunday.

First, McCarten produces a comprehensive round-up on why National performed so badly in the Mt Albert by-election.

Second, Bill Ralston looks at how a unified Liarbour Party is chipping away at National.

Indeed, both seem rather spot on.

National was a shambles during the campaign and its performance in government has not been as good as we might hope.

With the smacking vote coming so soon after the cancelled taxcuts, Key and National are pissing off their own side too!

I can only argue that the party does need to look at its campaign strategies and its campaigning team.

Did National win the election because of its campaign or despite it?

But just because it won the November war, it must now win the peace.

Of course, the polls, as Roy Morgan showed, National is still well ahead, so maybe the public don't care much about the distractions we have seen like Mt Albert, Richard Worth, etc, etc.

However, Bill Ralston is right to warn about 'noise.'

National does not want to lose perceptions of competence and capability. Percetions always count more than relaity in politics.

Such noise and perceptions would well distract from National's messages on the economy, etc, just has Liarbour suffered from various perceptions like nannying.

Indeed, I guess the government won't welcome the noise from ACT MP David Garrett today who is in trouble for lewd conduct.

At least Rodney Hide has shown strong and sound leadership over the matter, nipping the problem in the bud.

If only we could see such behaviour from John Key, we supporters of the government would feel so much better.

Bring on the meat pies, and the KFC!!!

This should piss off the Greens.

A survey from Japan shows chubby peoople live longer.

Health experts have long warned of the risk of obesity, but a new Japanese study warns that being very skinny is even more dangerous, and that slightly chubby people live longer.
People who are a little overweight at age 40 live six to seven years longer than very thin people, whose average life expectancy was shorter by some five years than that of obese people, the study found.

So ignore the nannying, do what you want.

And bring on the pies and the KFC.

I would if we had KFC in Kerikeri, but instead I am having fish and chips for dinner!

Clash of the dinosaurs!!

Granny gave an interesting compare and contrast by featuring two old dinosaurs.

First was Winston Peters and while Cactus Kate wonders about the workings of his mind, it made me think how much we have missed him.

Isn't politics duller without this cantankerous old buffoon?

One it seems that is now turning to journalism, despite considering its practicioners among his greatest enemies, who helped bring about his downfall.

Life does have it's ironies!!

But back to politics being duller now, which brings me to Phill Goff.

He too is a dinosaur, just like Winnie!

My oh my what a grey little man the current leader of the opposition appears, which is why he won't be around for too long.

His comment about making himself more public just shows the desperation of the man.

No wonder Whale Oil comments that Michele Hewitson made Gaffe appear a plonker.

His comments also outed him as a liar too, Whale Oil points out.

As for me, the piece made Gaffe appear so lacklustre, he surely cannot be prime minister material.

Indeed, I feel the article was yet another nail in the coffin of the current Liabour leader.

After such a dull performance, I am increasingly convinced the party will turn to that international man of mystery, the dynamic and sexy champion of Mt Albert, David Shearer!

Hat tip: Kiwiblog, Cactus Kate, Whale Oil

YES, NO or Cul de Sac

John Key (and Phil Goff) aren't going to participate in the anti smacking CIR.

That's fine but they should realise that having a foot in both the YES and NO camps maybe good politics, but it sure isn't a great reflection on them as people.

To keep all people happy all the time is a complete folly.

If our politicians choose to ignore the voice of the people, outside of election years, then we live in a pretty sick democracy. The result may be non binding, but that is not the point for now.

Leadership is a two way street.

We want to know that our leaders are listening and that we can judge them on their opinions.

The point is to vote YES or NO. Not to park up a cul de sac.

The other point.

If people find the question difficult to understand, maybe a couple of old fashioned commas would have helped.

Should a smack, as part of good parental correction, be a criminal offence in New Zealand?

All the muck in the world won't harm National!!

Phil Gaffe must be feeling worried tonight.

Despite the success of Mt Albert, Liarbour is making no impression in the polls.

Tonight's Roy Morgan Poll has the party up 2 at 32%, but that is still 19% points behind National, who were unchanged.

The government maintains a 15% lead ahead of the opposition and confidence in the government rose strongly.

Perhaps the public have woken up to the dirty tricks from Phil Goff, even if many of the MSM haven't.

We have also seen too many media beat-ups aimed at National that the public cared nothing for, and when it came to important issues like the economy or the budget, National prevailed.

I guess when he finally moves into his new Mt Albert electorate, there will be a BBQ at Dave's place.

How appropropriate that a Shearer will be getting the knives out. It is obvious who will be prematurely shorn. Gaffe looks ever more like a lamb for the slaughter!!!

And I can only wonder if the striking attractive and well-connected Mata Hari, Naleem Choudary , will be making the salad!

Here's an idea for you Pita?

Pita Sharples is now backtracking on his idea for open access to university for Maori.

Obviously, there was too much opposition from the mainstream as well as the government for this nonsensical idea from the associate education minister.

How would any Maori feel who gained entry on merit to a suspicion they got in on grounds of their skin colour.

Do we really have to be so patronising with race based follishness to such a large section of our society even if such patronising comes from their own leaders.

There are also the implications on education standards to consider, the poverty of expectations, the soft bigory of it all, as has been noted in the USA and Britain, which far from helping supposed disadvantaged minorities actually hinders them.

However, Sharples did receive support from some on the right, and it does seem an interesting idea.

Why not have Sharples opening his own university, or some of the Maori iwi opening universities, perhaps with some of the Treaty Settlements money.

Let Mr Sharples put his or Maori money where his mouth is.

We have seen how innovative Maori were with the wanangas.

But he might want to consider this when it comes to entry standards and how well his ideas might actually serve the graduates.

If you want a lawyer, would you pick a maori one if you suspect that lawyer is of a lower standard than a white or Asian one.

Ditto with Maori doctors, dentists, accountants, etc, etc, etc.

People aren't usually too bothered about the skin colour of a professional, but more about their ability to do their job.

Thus, the lower standards promoted by Pita Sharples would end up backfiring on them all.

Is that really what he wants?

Hat tip: Not PC, Cline Heine, Conservative Home

Tall tales from the top troughers

More proof today from the New Zealand Herald about how Liarbour MPs just love sucking on the public tit.

After an earlier expose on all those MPs, mainly Liarbour, campaigning in Mt Albert at taxpayer expense, we have a follow up.

Liarbour MPs seem to have a fetish for hire cars and taxis.

Trevor Mallard, for example, takes taxis from the airport to the city, claiming Mt Albert is on the way.

Obviously, since he is from Wainouamata, near Wellington, we might forgive him for his poor geography, as Whale Oil explains how such a diversion might add $60 to the bill.

This latest row follows on from the reverberations of Britain's expenses scandal that has engulfed its Liarbour government, with its Liarbour MPs being the country's top troughers.

One Tory MP had work done to the moat around his castle, and did blind Liarbour MP David Blunkett really claim for a pair of binoculors?

The official censored report has just been released, though the Daily Telegraph, which revealed the expenses scandal, is said to be planning a supplement with uncensored details.

But back to New Zealand. We still see a Liarbour party addicted to ripping off the taxpayer.

We should never forget how the pledgecards scandal of Election 2005, which they validated, has given Liarbour a thirst for taxpayer funding for itself.

And its MPs are still addicted to proposing new ways of spending our money rather than making it, as shown by Sue Moroney and her parental leave proposal yesterday.

The red leopard has certainly not changed its spending and stealing spots.

Earth calling John and Phill.....

Here are a couple of quotes from the Herald which just couldn't be allowed to pass uncommented on:

John Key says:
"I do think the question is a bit ambiguous and could be read a number of different ways,"

and phil goff says:

"The question implies that if you vote `yes' that you're in favour of criminal sanctions being taken against reasonable parents - actually nobody believes that."

Well gentlemen, if that's your take on what is to me a fairly simple question, then I suggest you both go and see the the GG and hand in your resignations.

No not suggest, how about I DEMAND.

Because if you, who are responsible for creating legislation, find that question, misleading or ambiguous, or whatever, then you are obviously well below the intellectual level required to carry out your roles.

Also John says:

"There's only been the one now documented case and I'm satisfied that the law is working."

This statement is as misleading as any ever made by clark and whats more I think Key knows it.

The obvious retort is: "How many people have had the police on their doorstep, or been put through a CYFS investigation, or been left wondering whether they'll be charged and / or have their families split up, simply for doing what they believe is in the best interests of their families and could do so without fear of criminalisation before bradford's social engineering was legislated?

I'm sure there are more than a few but it'll take an OIA request to get the numbers. Might be worth a crack, but I bet I don't get an answer before the referendum

G

Cooling Climate Demands Fresh Debate on ETS and Climate Change!!

Aren't those frosty nights and polar blasts wonderful? Didn't Dunedin enjoy the snow?

Isn't it nice to have the log fire burning up, even up here in the so called Winterless North.

As we have reported on this blog many times, there is much cold weather about. It is almost like old times!

Yet, despite the growing evidence that climate change is changing back to what it was, our political masters are still pushing ahead with their tax and control scams.

David Farrar today highlights the latest ETS proposals from Environment Minister Nick Smith.

Naturally, the pollies are all for it, as it gives them all something to do through extra regulation.

Indeed, no doubt we will see the new report from the ObamaMessiah on climate change touted as a case for action, even if it is riddled with holes. For example, there has always been storm damage, hurricanes, flooding, etc, etc, long before co2 might get the blame. Event-related deaths are falling too.

Indeed, as Australia debate its own ETS, the climate change minister cannot answer a few sceptical questions.

Then there's issues like non-melting ice caps, coolings seas that arent rising and a cooling climate! Here are some graphs confirming the cooling.

Bloggers like Micky's Muses regularly cover the scam of Global Warming. We also mustn't forget Andrew Bolt, Ian Wishart and Tim Blair.

Here's a fine and extensive piece from the American Daily, noting the climate does change but it is natural, not man-made as claimed..

Newsmax notes more evidence the Earth is cooling, pointing out flaws in Obama's new report.

The Canada Free Press notes scientists accusing the report of scaremongering.

Anyway, here's a website devoted to promoting a belief in climate cooling.

And that's before we get into debate about sun spots and the like.

Either way, while the climate may have warmed up in recent decades the trend does seem to have reversed in recent years. True, there will always be variations. I see the global warmongers are starting to claim the last few years as such a natural variation. But if we can have short term fluctuations, why not have them lasting decades or even centuries.

Why must we hamper our economies for a science that is increasingly unproven as people dig deeper. Just as the right maybe accused of vested interests, surely this applies to the left and the government-funded scientists.

New Zealand certainly needs the debate again before it shackles up its economy.

In the meantime, I am heading off to Kerikeri to buy some kindling for the fire.

Yes we are having climate change, a change back to what it was. And so much for the Winterless North!

Hat tip: Kiwiblog, Andrew Bolt, Tim Blair, Micky's Muses