Bryce Edwards

Bryce Edwards (and Bryan Gould) are wrong…Again

Being an academic is a big step down from being a journalist.

Neither actually participate in the game.

Journalists are basically the kind of seedy people who go to dirty movies in a trench coat, while academics are the even seedier people who go to watch the voyeurs in the trench coats.

The problem both groups have is that if they were any good they would be in the game participating and participating hard, rather than pontificating from the sidelines.

So when Bryce Edwards rabbits on about a lot of bullshit it is hard to take him seriously.

If he was any good at politics he would give up his sinecure as a political science lecturer and actually start running campaigns or promoting policy.

When the voyeur of political onanism quotes one of the world’s biggest political failures in Bryan Gould:

“We have a Prime Minister who is not only careless with the truth but who is obliged, for fear of being exposed, to do the bidding of the nastiest and least principled person in New Zealand politics’ – see: Supping with the Devil.”    Read more »

Gracinda? Someone needs to tell them they’re dreamin’

Ok so the name that they’ve come up with for a gay man and childless single woman to lead Labour is…”Gracinda”.

I mean seriously?

These people with single page CVs of nothing jobs and a lifetime in the trough are wanting to lead a party called “Labour”…I doubt either of them have ever had a callous on their hands from using a shovel or doing some other sort of “Labour”.

Bryce Edwards is drinking the Koolaid.

The dynamic duo of Grant Robertson and Jacinda Ardern – now termed ‘Gracinda’ on social media – could well be the Labour Party’s best bet for recovering from its 2014 electoral nadir. The two are probably the most dynamic of the leadership candidates on offer, and have real talent. There will be a strong temptation among the membership to choose their ‘new generation’ message. But there are also some major problems with putting ‘Camp Robertson’ in charge of Labour. While they might have more style than their counterparts, some commentators are pointing to their lack of substance as being a worry for the party’s future.

Read more »

All they need now is Goff to stand

Labour's leadership contest has become a Carnival of CLowns

Labour’s leadership contest has become a Carnival of CLowns

Labour’s leadership spill is fast becoming a farce, like the whole party really.

Labour talks boldly of their membership, but outside of the unions fake membership numbers there are actually precious few members. Certainly nowhere near the numbers the National party has.

Those members though are the hard core, and seriously deluded activists. They drank all the koolaid and everytime there is a new leader they enthusiastically tell everyone that this guy is the “game-changer” that will rid the nation of John Key.

Phil Goff was smarter than Key, better in debates…and choked on “Show me the Money”. David Shearer apparently saved 50 million people while John Key made $50 million, and had a fabulous back story, but was wholly unprepared for back-stabbing inside his own caucus. David Cunliffe of course was the new messiah for Labour, the man to take them back left, the Slayer of Key, the Man, the Chosen One, anointed by the party membership and ultimately a vainglorious idiot who got his beans at the election.

So far David Cunliffe has decided to have one last sally forth to lead Labour. Grant Robertson who has destabilised three leaders now wants his crack at the job. Andrew Little, a man so unelectable he keeps losing in his home town also wants a crack.

To add misery to the leadership spill the man who got his leg over with the wife of a Labour icon and recent stroke victim is now putting his hand up for the leadership despite being the architect of all the failed policies that voters rejected. No doubt we will be told he is a nice guy (as if we can believe that given his personal background), a man with a big brain, but not as big as a planet because David Cunliffe has got that one covered. The problem is for David Parker, quite part from his personal life, is that the narrative just doesn’t work. In politics, nice guys finish last.

Which now leads onto the joke that David Shearer is now trying to resurrect his leadership aspirations, bringing the number of leadership aspirants to five.    Read more »

A Conspiracy Theory


I’ve noticed over the last few weeks that if you reply to a tweet from one of the mainstream media saying something about the Criminal Nana Party, within minutes someone (usually anonymous and with a photo that is picked up from somewhere else) will come over the top and carefully chide you.

Not chide in the Labour or Greens “fuck you” style, but enough to make you think they’re a member of the public who thinks you being rude (which, to be fair, I always am).

I made the connection tonight after replying to a tweet posted by RadioLive reporter Felix Marwick that was chided.  I checked out the tweeter and realised they hadn’t been around for long.

So I checked out some of the others.  They have been around since around early June – ironically around the same time the Criminal and Nana parties joined forces.

Then I saw something else yesterday that grabbed my attention.

Read more »

I hope the NZ Herald know what they’re doing… Bryce Edwards is quite the spiteful liar!


This from Martyn’s union and Kim Dotcom funded hobby blog:

We are losing the voice of Bryce Edwards in an election for a right wing troll who wanted Nicky Hager’s address published so he would be harmed and another right wing troll who pretends to be a Labour supporter. 

It’s interesting to see that even Bryce Edwards isn’t good enough for the NZ Herald.   His continuous claims to be non-partisan are laughable and demonstrably untrue.

But that’s ok.

What the Herald should really worry about is that they are now on the Doc’s shit list.   Read more »

Face of the day


Bryce Edwards


The Internet Party is in trouble for a video placed on its official YouTube channel.


“Are you ready for a revolution? Are you ready to take down the Government?,” the Mega founder asks the crowd.

“Are you ready to extradite John Key?”

The next shot shows the crowd with right arms raised chanting “F*** John Key”.


One lone voice in the wilderness ( my face of the day ) Otago University lecturer and political commentator Bryce Edwards thinks that the Video is a good thing.

Read more »

Bryce Edwards on electoral crimes

Did you know there is a 6 month statue of limitations on any electoral crime?  Yeah… convenient.

There’s a lot about the Liu donations that stinks. We shouldn’t simply believe those parties and commentators that say ‘It was all within the rules of the time’. It’s not clear that this was the case – just as it’s not clear that the rules would prevent this from happening in 2014. Similarly, even if such transactions were within the rules, it’s not clear that the public shouldn’t condemn the parties for getting around the rules.

It’s also entirely feasible that the Liu donations to Labour were funnelled through a law firm trust. As Geddis points out, there was certainly one law firm trust donation made in 2007 by Papakura firm ‘Palmer Theron, Solicitors’ of $150,000 that could conceivably be the Liu money. But this is far from clear.

What’s more, the wine auction in question was apparently carried out in the open, and Labour would have known who the bidders were. So for the Labour Party to claim no knowledge of Liu making those successful bids seems somewhat surprising.

We can all agree that there isn’t necessarily a crime here. We can also agree that the Electoral Act’s 6-month statute of limitation means that this legislation can’t be used to trigger any investigation. So it’s not necessarily a legal problem.

Although it’s also the case that many people are suggesting that the Liu donation might not have actually ended up with the Labour Party as intended. In fact even the Labour Party is giving credence to this idea. This would be a matter under the Crimes Act. Others have pointed out that the Serious Fraud Office could still be involved.

This is why Labour are begging National to fess up.  There is just so much that needs to remain hidden.  And the longer this farce continues, and the more money accumulates under the giant question mark, the more that the Serious Fraud Office is going to have a reason to come “help out”.   Read more »

Political commentator and academic Bryce Edwards declares himself “entirely non-partisan”

Well now, someone’s chucking his toys…  Adam Bennett reports

Left leaning political commentator and academic Bryce Edwards has pulled out of Otago University’s Vote Chat online politics show over concerns the programme is now dominated by National Party supporters.

Dr Edwards has confirmed he would no longer front the interview show which was livestreamed on

“I’ve departed from the project because of differences, in particular ideological ones, but the project will still go ahead.”

The Herald understands former Alliance Party staffer Dr Edwards fell out with students and university staff involved in producing the show over their support for National Dunedin-based list MP and Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse.

“I’m entirely non-partisan and a show like this does have to have some strong sense of balance”, he told the Herald late last month.

* crickets chirping *

My readers aren’t fooled either.  One writes   Read more »

An email from a reader

A reader emails about recent matters and media coverage:

Mr Slater, I am becoming increasingly concerned at how the news is being reported, particularly the circumstances and positions that “traditional media” are taking and the more accurate but divergent paths from commentators – journalists, actually – such as yourself. This is particularly true of the coverage in relation to Ministers  Collins and Williamson. Over recent months and weeks the media have dropped all pretence of impartiality (if it ever was and I know Pete the moderator has his own views on whether journalists in the modern era have an obligation to be objective and impartial. They are his views and I respect them.) However, being a bit old school, I believe the media have a position of power – and by inference responsibility – in today’s information & political  landscape and they clearly taken sides against the government of the day. In essence, the Fourth Estate has become a Fifth Column (someone has probably drawn parallels to that already).

The TV and print media are sources of information for a large section of the public, ie, voters. I would suggest that most of the people who sit down for dinner at 6pm are influenced by what they see; if you control what people see hear and read, you influence how they think. I would describe 3News as 3Views and is opinion dressed up as fact designed for stupid people who need an opinion given to them so they can at least have one. TV One is only marginally better, but I do get nauseous at media commentators from all channels and stations constantly interviewing each other. This is particularly important in an election year where people should be making informed choices about the type of government we will ALL get for the next three years. Unfortunately, they are being fed a one sided or skewed diet of disinformation and selective opinion dressed up as fact. MP’s, regardless of party, are there because someone voted for them. That’s democracy. This vote may very likely have been cast as a result of how media have represented the parties & politicians seeking their vote. If the media want to become an active part of the political landscape and push their own views [policies?] and report in a very selective manner, that’s being dishonest – and nothing to do with journalistic licence. That’s precisely the behaviour they will crucify a National MP for but no-one in opposition gets any scrutiny regardless of the evidence of wrongoing, Cunliffe & Peters to name but two. That is left to journalists such as yourself and ably assisted by the Whaleoil Research Crew.   Read more »

The carnage and fallout continues

The left is in disarray as Shane Jones edges towards the exit door. There is still a month of this while Jones still sits in parliament and there isn’t a thing Labour can do as commentators and journalists pick through the entrails of an eviscerated Labour party.

Michael Fox reports:

Shane Jone’s controversial departure has exposed divisions in the Labour Party, with opinion split on his qualities as an MP and the impact it will have on election prospects.

Supporters say he broadened Labour’s appeal while critics say he was overrated and the party is better off without him.

Left-wing political scientist and commentator Dr Bryce Edwards said the split has been apparent in the wave of commentary in mainstream and social media since the news broke.

“You’ve got a lot of people debating about whether he was a plus or a minus for Labour, whether he was a working class hero for Labour and whether he attracted that so-called blue collar vote, and whether he was a misogynist.”

Edwards labelled it an “identity politics dispute”.

“People are really talking about what Labour stands for and with Jones going does that mean that Labour has more or less ability to speak to so-called middle New Zealand and to traditional Labour voters? And there doesn’t seem to be any strong consensus on that.”

Former Labour MP John Tamihere said Jones represented a Labour constituency that was increasingly being sidelined as interest groups gained greater control.

“The real debate isn’t about Shane Jones, it’s about certain sector groups in Labour having far too much say in advance, well in advance of their constituencies in the street.”

The party was becoming dominated by “liberal academic elites” more focused on social engineering issues such as the so-called anti-smacking law than issues such as creating jobs which had a broader voter appeal, he said.

Jones had “cut through” on the latter, earning support for his campaign against the Countdown supermarket chain, where his accusations of bullying of suppliers led to a Commerce Commission inquiry, as well as his pro-development stance. Tamihere said he reached out to voters turned off by factional politics.

Former Labour candidate Josie Pagani agreed, saying those in the party who had rejoiced in Jones leaving “are guilty of sectarianism at its worst”.

The division in the party was between those focused on social mobility and those focused on social engineering – “we’ll make you better off versus we’ll make you a better person,” she said.

The Labour Party was there to support wage earners and promote better jobs and higher wages “and that’s the thing that unites everybody”.

Read more »