Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The Hager saga continues

303 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 Newer→ Last

  • WH,

    Sure. But you equally have to expect that putting up a win-at-all-costs suggestion is also going to get some disagreement.

    Okay. But there's a lot of space between being a perennial also-ran and selling out.

    If things carry on as they are, there'll be nothing left to protect.

    Since Nov 2006 • 797 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen R, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    I just don’t understand why the Greens could even begin to think working with National is a sane idea. First up today, day 1, take away workers right to have a break at work.That’s a National first Policy that will pass.How could the Greens work with a Party prepared to do that?

    Now personally, I'm quite one for face spiting nose cutting but...
    As I understand it, (and I'm by no means a Green insider) The Greens make a decision based on whether the situation would be better if they engage than if they didn't.

    In this situation, The National Government is going to do what it's going to do. If the Greens manage to make the situation better by coming to an understanding on some issues (or perhaps we should say, "Less Bad") then they might well do that.

    With your example, Maybe National is going to remove smoko breaks and poison the rivers if the Greens do nothing, and by engaging, maybe National only removes smoko breaks. Should the Greens engage or not?

    I think a case could be made that they should salvage what they can. There would probably be other costs (such as potentially losing some support for choosing to have anything to do with National) and I'm sure the Greens would consider that, especially since they do a lot of their policy decisions in concert with their wider membership.

    Unlikely, yes; insane, I don't think so.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2009 • 259 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Stephen R,

    So the same as Maori Party then, who believe it’s better to be engaged. Just fantastic. Frankly I’d like parties to stand by their principles rather than ” make deals with the Devil”
    One begins to understand why people cant be bothered voting. I would and are happy to support the Greens but I wouldn't if they support Nactional Muf in any way.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    In previous parliamentary terms, the Greens have had agreements with both Labour and National over specific programmes like home insulation. This does not seem to have interfered with their ability to define what they stand for.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19728 posts Report Reply

  • Alfie,

    Getting back to the original subject... Nicky Hager is initiating legal action against the Police following the raid on his home.

    Dunedin • Since May 2014 • 1436 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Sacha,

    This does not seem to have interfered with their ability to define what they stand for.

    That may be your perception .Just feels shifty to me. I've dealt with too many cons in my life to look the other way and the fact that the Greens helped implement the insulation programme doesnt change the fact that whilst some kids may feel a bit warmer now, there are many more starving and more families struggling and I cant support Nactional for that slice of a carrot when someone else gets a stick shoved up their rectum. On principle, it just doesn't feel right, call me old fashioned.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to WH,

    But there’s a lot of space between being a perennial also-ran and selling out.

    There is. Labour is in little danger of being a perennial also-ran, having been the government periodically since the 1930s, and it's also not really time to worry about the shocking length of time National's been in government, since they've never once had less than three terms in power since then. But fears that Labour could sell out are a little better grounded, since they've done it before, and there are plenty of people clamoring for it.

    It's hardly like they need much pushing. We are talking about rich, powerful people, after all. The forces driving them to sell out are way, way more powerful than anything I will ever be able to bring to bear. But what little I have I'm going to use as my conscience dictates.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10654 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    That may be your perception

    Their voting support remained the same.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19728 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    the fact that the Greens helped implement the insulation programme doesnt change the fact that whilst some kids may feel a bit warmer now, there are many more starving and more families struggling

    you can't fix every problem with one policy.
    politics is way more grey than high-contrast.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19728 posts Report Reply

  • mark taslov, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Winston was the winner.

    During the election there was some mention of this being Winston’s last term, has there been any formal announcement or is it just speculation?

    If so, NZFers would seem the obvious first stop in the vote hoovering operation.

    Te Ika-a-Māui • Since Mar 2008 • 2281 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Sacha,

    politics is way more grey than high-contrast.

    ...what, no high vis-a-vis?
    good policy makes for good polity...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7947 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to mark taslov,

    ...some mention of this being Winston’s last term

    Does that mean he's petering out?

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7947 posts Report Reply

  • mark taslov, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    Heh. MSM asides, so who knows. He always struck me as someone who’d strop till he drops with no heir apparent, leaving mobocracy in his wake.

    Te Ika-a-Māui • Since Mar 2008 • 2281 posts Report Reply

  • WH, in reply to BenWilson,

    It's also not really time to worry about the shocking length of time National's been in government, since they've never once had less than three terms in power since then

    That's a remarkably flippant way of dismissing the democratic objectives of the Labour movement. I don't know what we're doing here if not discussing how to prevent National from winning.

    During the last forty odd years, Labour has been in government twice. The Fourth Labour Government was elected after Muldoon bankrupted the country. The Fifth Labour Government was a response to the Shipley/Peters meltdown. It would be nice if we were more than a cleaning crew for National's fuck-ups.

    It's hardly like they need much pushing. The forces driving them to sell out are way, way more powerful than anything I will ever be able to bring to bear.

    I can't really comment on this because I genuinely don't know what you're talking about.

    My own view is that the next Labour-led government should look something like the Clark/Cullen years. That means incremental increases in government revenue, consistent surpluses and strategic intervention as circumstances allow (e.g, KiwiBank, Air New Zealand, the Railways).

    If the rest of the Left wants to go a great deal further than this, let it do it on a private sector basis, in the way Maori tribes and the cooperative movement do. We could build an alliance of successful businesses to countervail the BR; set up our own media organisations. The only realistic chance of the old style Left ever getting what it wants lies in creating our own proving grounds. It would be better than sitting on the sidelines and whining.

    But what little I have I'm going to use as my conscience dictates.

    Okay, I think we broadly understand each other's positions. Shall we leave it there?

    Since Nov 2006 • 797 posts Report Reply

  • mark taslov, in reply to WH,

    The Fourth Labour Government was elected after Muldoon bankrupted the country

    However incomplete, comparisons have been made. Looking forward, and all other things considered, it’s worth remembering that the straw which eventually broke the camel’s back was ideological in nature. Not to imply that National could have won in ’84, simply that Marilyn Waring’s insurrection gifted Labour a lot of momentum, helping Labour to cement an ethical standpoint that would become an intrinsic part of our national identity. With a less defensive approach, currently one could name a number of ideological lines Labour could draw in the sand to better protect the rights, privacy and the independence of ANZ and our people.

    Te Ika-a-Māui • Since Mar 2008 • 2281 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to WH,

    It would be nice if we were more than a cleaning crew for National’s fuck-ups.

    Maybe that's exactly what Labour is? The work horse that saves the day. Maybe that's what labour are best at?Maybe they understand struggle best and if so I'm ok with that.Like most here I want fairness, but really what if labour are the best there is to keep it real? The reality now is, some one else is in control, and this selfish greedy corrupt behaviour will combust as we are already seeing signs of. Those that are opposed to the status quo must shout and scream and bring all of it to the attention of the public just as Hager is doing. We should all join and support his purpose (including Greens) and say ' not fucking good enough!!" not "well maybe we can make a deal?" There is good and bad and I know which one is worth fighting for.right now.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to WH,

    That’s a remarkably flippant way of dismissing the democratic objectives of the Labour movement.

    It's just putting your comment that the sky is falling because it's been 6 years since Labour had power into perspective. I don't want National either, but this is not even a slightly exceptional place to be. In my life, we've been here twice before, and both times, the next government was a Labour one.

    My own view is that the next Labour-led government should look something like the Clark/Cullen years.

    And the All Blacks should bring back Buck?

    Okay, I think we broadly understand each other’s positions. Shall we leave it there?

    Sure. I'm still going to challenge any statements that the only way forward for Labour is to give away ideology, though. But if you agree to stop making them, I'll stop challenging them. It certainly isn't my vision that the only way the Left can make progress is to make businesses that outcompete the current Masters of the Universe. It's so packed with contradictions that it's scarcely worth addressing. The Left isn't going to go getting a haircut and starting up a small business with an eye to a 250 year comeback, just because that would be convenient for Labour.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10654 posts Report Reply

  • WH,

    Losing elections? Not worried. Economic policy? Not really an issue. 9 years of National? Sky not falling.

    Bring back Buck
    Neoliberalism is, bizarrely, a compromise position
    you might be overstating the impracticality of idealism
    the only way the Left can make progress
    haircut

    You talk a lot of shit, Ben. I'm tired of responding to your straw men.

    It's so packed with contradictions that it's scarcely worth addressing

    I've read a few of your 8591 comments I've felt the same way about. Are you even a Labour supporter?

    I think we're done.

    Since Nov 2006 • 797 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to mark taslov,

    Heir of the dogged...

    He always struck me as someone who’d strop till he drops. with no heir apparent..

    ...and life in the Thorndon 'Bauble' can't be all bad...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7947 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    beLabouring a point...
    To be honest I don't understand the MSM and others' massively vocal preoccupation with the Labour Party's leadership search - at this point it is really only relevant to voting Labour Party members, once a leader is decided then the general populace and pundits can weigh in on that person's merits and possible contribution to the country...
    ...in the meantime I'd rather the focus of media was on what the National Govt is doing or planning on doing, and following up on all the loose ends they left in the wake of Dirty Politics and other revelations and disingenuousness.

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7947 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to WH,

    Losing elections? Not worried. Economic policy? Not really an issue. 9 years of National? Sky not falling.

    Yes, that is how democracy works. It's also spilt milk - National will get their 9 years controlling the NZ economy. It would have been nice if for the first time ever Labour had been able to restrict them to 6. That would have been historic.

    Are you even a Labour supporter?

    I'm a swing voter. I've voted for Labour more often than any other party, but not exclusively for them, and not for the party in the last 3 elections (although I've supported the local candidate consistently). So the answer is "it's complicated".

    I think we’re done.

    That's up to you. I've been debating here for a bloody long time so don't expect me to be going anywhere. Your positions that I've read are mostly compatible with mine except for appearing to be a lot quicker to suggest jettisoning viewpoints. I prefer to just argue strongly with them.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10654 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    following up on all the loose ends they left in the wake of Dirty Politics

    this, yes

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19728 posts Report Reply

  • Angela Hart, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    me too, there's no sense of what is really important.

    Christchurch • Since Apr 2014 • 614 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    an informed public is important to democracy

    if you are in Chchch on Oct 31st go to this meeting:

    THE TPPA – TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT – What Is It And What Does It Mean For Me?

    Friday 31 October, 7.30 – 9 pm,
    at the WEA, 59 Gloucester St

    This seminar will help to explain how the TPPA would affect your everyday life; from your access to the internet, the cost of your health care and medicines; and the rate of your wages, to how it will straitjacket governments’ ability to make laws that protect the environment and mitigate climate change.

    Speakers:
    Professor Jane Kelsey The investor state dispute settlement process and how this will affect us (by video link)
    Dr Erik Monasterio The effect of the TPPA on the cost and access to medications and the effect this could have on cultural minorities, and patients with serious mental illness
    Beverley Ballantine How the TPPA will affect our access to the internet

    All welcome!
    Entry by gold coin donation.
    Supper to follow
    Canterbury WEA Ph: 366 0285
    Web: cwea.org.nz

    ----
    I see Tim Groser has 'assured' us that the TPPA will not affect Pharmac's ability to source cheaper generic drugs, Hah!
    - Can you say 'Max Bradford & deregulated electricity market' kiddies?
    I knew you could....

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7947 posts Report Reply

  • Angela Hart, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    I see Tim Groser has 'assured' us that the TPPA will not affect Pharmac's ability to source cheaper generic drugs, Hah!

    Another example of a statement reported by the MSM without challenge, supporting information or evidence to the contrary.

    Police are going for Hager
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11347582

    Christchurch • Since Apr 2014 • 614 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.