Fran O’Sullivan

Fran O’Sullivan outlines her thoughts on the Green/Labour power sabotage:

It’s blatantly obvious that Labour and the Greens have been attempting to short the returns the National-led Government expects to receive through next week’s Mighty River Power float.

Yup, and the gloating of the likes of Gareth Hughes in his now infamous Hey Clint moment was brutally apparent.

[T]ilting at the style of the political intervention and asking the two parties to withdraw their interventionist plan is a waste of space. Not because of their own rationale in doing so (this was soundly based). But because Labour leader David Shearer and Greens leader Russel Norman don’t give a damn about such requests at the midway point of the electoral cycle.

The 10 leading business lobbyists – including major leaders such as BusinessNZ’s Phil O’Reilly and the Chamber of Commerce’s Michael Barnett – who sent a public letter to Labour and the Greens this week – know this in their bones.

They know that the two parties are “not for turning” (at least in the short term). It makes political sense for the politicians to damn the power companies as rapacious commercial beasts, led by overpaid directors and chief executives who will suck all the spare cash out at consumers’ expense.

This tactic works well for Labour and the Greens with their own political power base. Their supporters hate fat cats. Demonising the power company bosses could rile them enough to ensure more of Labour’s and the Greens’ voting base actually turn up to cast a vote in 2014. Or so the hope goes.  Read more »

 Loading ...

Nominees from yesterday are:

Patrick Gower: Inventory2 says;

Sorry WO, but it has to be Pedro Gower, if only for all the shit he created with the Shearer/Cunliffe debacle.

Rachel Smalley: Pete George says;

While probably not strictly speaking a political journalist I think Rachel Smalley deserves a mention as an up and comer. She inteligently eases information out of interviewees.

Larry Williams: Many commenters picked Larry but the best comment was from Inventory2 again;

 Larry Williams comes second for the way that he always baits Barry “Pinko” Soper; gold!

Fran O’Sullivan: Not strictly a political journalist but does provide good commentary on political matters.

Felix Marwick: Second fiddle to Helen’s handbag carrier, Barry Soper, but Pete George notes;

And less visible but a reliable and reasonable journo to follow on Twitter is Felix Marwick from Newstalk ZB.

NB: Although many loyal readers nominated me for this award I can hardly put myself in a poll on my own blog. I thank you all though for the nomination and comments.

Fran O’Sullivan looks at Judith Collins in yesterday’s Herald:

[I]t’s a reasonable bet that with just one arched lift of an eyebrow and her trademark lip curl this Cabinet minister would have no difficulty conveying to her colleagues (and Opposition politicians for that matter) what she really thinks on issues even before she sails forth with a cutting verbal putdown.

Dame Jenny Shipley – who had the moxie to orchestrate a bloodless coup against Prime Minister Jim Bolger when she was out of New Zealand – would have run Collins close when it comes to sheer political stealth.

But as Collins yet again demonstrated this week, her “take no prisoners” style is far more dangerous when it comes to gaining political scalps than that of any other Kiwi politician in Parliament today. NZ First’s Winston Peters tries it on. But Peters has lost the fire of old. John Key can be cutting. But Key tends to be sportive in his delivery rather than deadly. He’s still the politician who likes to be liked.

Labour has plenty of firepower. But much of it is lined up behind leader David Shearer rather than in the front row.

All of this is by way of asking whether Collins has what it takes to be National’s next leader.

This week Judith Collins did something that was difficult politically, but nonetheless important. She went with her gut instinct and did what she believed was the right thing to do for the country. It is  along, long time since we had a politician who was like that.

The National faithful like Collins. She plays them adroitly as is obvious at party conferences where she schmoozes with aplomb.

But where her biggest strengths lie are in her ability to stand her ground when she’s convinced she is right, as she has ably demonstrated with the Binnie report; her ability to politically manoeuvre opponents off the chess board with ruthless efficiency, as she showed with Judge and two other ACC directors; and the guts to demolish a Cabinet predecessor’s policy positions where she believes he has over-egged the legal response, as with former Justice Minister Simon Power.

So, it’s obvious that Collins is not frightened to make hard calls. To her, chewing out Justice Binnie was not a difficult thing to do.

And Binnie’s churlish reposnse was laughable..running the lines that Labour like to run against Judith Collins.

She may have been an “Auckland tax lawyer” as Binnie sniped in retaliation for the swipe at his own prowess, but Collins also served as president of the Auckland District Law Society and vice-president of the New Zealand Law Society before entering politics – two positions with far more experience and more cachet that Binnie accorded her.

Binnie response just marked him and his report as hopelessly compromised.

This is Collins’ biggest political call to date. She has raised the stakes hugely.

There has been obvious suspicion that her actions in this affair were guided by the belief that Bain does not deserve compensation.

But the quality of the Fisher critique ought to persuade her critics that she was justified in asking for a review of the Binnie report.

There remain issues as to whether at the process level Bain has been treated fairly.

Collins’ real test will come with the quality of the final Cabinet decision-making. It’s a high-stakes game that she must win if she’s to be National’s next leader.

Well…to be blunt…who else is there? Steven Joyce? Possibly, but then he is said to be pushing for David Carter to be the next speaker…in order to pander to the South Island and Bill English’s mob and to get Nick Smith back into cabinet…that is for another post, but the fact that he thinks this is a good idea shows just how out of touch with the party he has become.

I loathe tl;dr (too long; didn’t read) posts but over this issue I will do one as paying (or not) for content online is the most important issue for the future of bloggers and new media and one I have put a great deal of thought into both for The Truth and this blog.

When Bernard Hickey announced with much fanfare and bravado he was setting up www.journalism.org.nz others were telling Hickey what he wanted to hear but I was instantly skeptical at the stunt and said so in full.  Socialists do not part with their own money and this was a left wing vehicle.  Hickey skited he would cover stories other MSM would not.

The first issue was Hickey’s arrogant attitude to the project and relationship with www.interest.co.nz.  I continue to write this blog and am editor of The Truth.  I cannot do both jobs without help and appreciate the staff at The Truth for their work so far.  It is not as easy as it looks but I am spending less time on it as I learn the job.  Surely Hickey could see the level of time required, most of it on his own?

The second issue was Hickey clearly relied on the unreliable in Selwyn Pellett.  A wealthy man but not one who parts with coin as freely as others on the right to fund projects like this.  A man with his own agenda who spends a disproportionate amount of his time arguing senselessly on Twitter as a “critical friend” of the Labour Party.

Selwyn Pellett claims to not be a member of the Labour Party but tweeted attendance at the recent Annual conference.  John Tamihere was not a member at the time and not allowed.  Pellett is a “critical friend” who does not even believe enough in the Party to join it.  It shows a level of commitment that equalled his to Hickey.

So Bernard Hickey cans the project the same week he sells his Epsom home for $1+ million and moves to Wellington, for no apparent reason than his daughter is at University there.  Hickey’s reasons were:

1. Underestimating the time and salary sacrifice involved

Every small business needs cash to start-up.  Most have a period where the owner receives no income.  Hickey left interest.co.nz according to his original release on 1 November.

Why didn’t he release the website idea with a breaking story to show what he would produce?  Fact is he hasn’t had one memorable toe-curler since the Crafar farm face-off.  He has limited his role in the media to commentator/Labour parrot and Herald on Sunday columnist.

I have come to the conclusion that the need to support my family through freelance journalism and commentary will not leave sufficient time for me to continue to take the lead role in journalism.org during its formative stage.

In other words, despite grossing $1+ million on the house according to NBR, he was not prepared to do what most small business owners have to do and mortgage the house to back himself and put equity into the new venture.  Not having enough time to devote to the project and wanting to spend more time with his family are euphemisms for “I should have thought more about it before chucking my toys at interest.co.nz and bragging I could do this”.

2. Everyone lied about paying for the start-up

We will have to fight for funding in an economic environment where philanthropy is less evident than in more prosperous times and where we need to be wary of the difference between verbal commitments to donate and actually putting a hand in one’s pocket.

The economic environment really has nothing to do with it.  According to Hickey the economy has been in crisis for years. The bottom line is that people will not front with cash until they see what is on offer on the website.  The NBR for example created their online product BEFORE people signed up.  Even on Hickey’s online poll on the website there was fair indication not many people were interested enough to click a box.  Everyone will slap you on the back congratulating you and saying they will sign up because it is easy to say that.  Most are lying, especially socialists. I have told Hickey what to do, break a big story to launch it in style, not a whimper and fizz.

3. Pellett must have pulled out

He had previously acknowledged it was risky to rely on one large donor – if they lost interest or wanted to make the site a vehicle for their own views.

You do not have to be a genius to see what happened.  Hickey found out Pellett is a control freak and wanted to push his own agenda.  He has some awfully weird ideas that even Hickey could not suffer.  Remember Hickey predicted a 30% drop in house prices at one point, then changed his mind?  His commentary is all over the place and unrealistic.  Hickey’s effort on Sunday is a perfect example.  There was no real reason to write that column.  It lacked purpose and was merely parroting prior World According To Bernard Hickey.  To be blunt, Hickey has gone stale.   He has pigeon holed himself into a ridiculous prediction man.  The latest large failure was predicting the Eurozone would collapse in October 2012.    Compare Hickey to Fran O’Sullivan who does not go around  making outrageous (incorrect) predictions to get attention.  She produces an endless stream of new material and perspective twice a week and has done for decades.

Hickey has now worked out precisely why New Zealanders just buy property and wait for it to appreciate in value as an investment before selling it.   He has written about potentially becoming a property investor.

While there is no shame in business reporters not being in business themselves, the massive miscalculation of  start-up capital and funding is facepalm material.  The only people interested in Hickey’s sort of alarmist Chicken Little stories are people who will not pay for the news.  They are also as I have said, socialists and as I told my new largest new fan; grumpy, old media Brian Edwards unequivocally on The Nation – socialists do not part easily with money and make terrible paymasters.  It is why his now political polar opposite and my largest new critic ; grumpy, old media Bill Ralston, got realistic about life and changed his colours.  Capitalists and corporates pay the bills.  Socialists just want everything for free.

Or do they?

Keith Ng scored how much for writing about a planned hack? But even at several thousand dollars a story in funding and donations from the public it will never be enough to fund Hickey’s lifestyle full-time given the amount of time you have to put into a story.  As I have found in my new position as an Editor  it takes enough time at The Truth to get everything out each week, let alone produce investigative reporting where you may spend hundreds of hours for nothing.  Phil Kitchin for example is testament to three stories a year max, and he has scraped the barrel from his semi-retirement this year in quality after doing precisely what investigative reporters do not and allow themselves to be captured and kidnapped by a PR hack.  David Fisher has gone soft and is filling his Herald space interviewing Kim Dot Con’s hired help.

Hickey also insulted large chunks of the business mainstream media by all but saying they were in the pocket of corporates so not doing their job as well as he could independently. They will all be chuckling at his failure, some were led to believe Hickey actually owned interest.co.nz.

To fund actual news reporting, particularly the sort Hickey wanted to produce, you cannot start without a large amount of cash to support yourself and time.   That is why you need a very wealthy and consistent funder to support you to develop your website and content.  Or raise the funds yourself.

I just hope Hickey is now less sanctimonious in his writing of others in New Zealand business, taking risks (or not), capitalism and the natural lust in economic models for money, power and profits.

He has proven in this mis-adventure to be just like everyone else.

Fran O’Sullivan excoriates the ineptitude displayed by David Shearer going large on pillow-talk rumours of his spinster Fran Mold:

It is astonishing that the Labour leader is so lacking in political worldliness that he did not demand bullet-proof evidence be presented to him before making his allegations. Now he is left floundering as the Prime Minister challenges him to “put up or shut up”.

Yesterday’s revelation by NewstalkZB’s Barry Soper that the prime source of the leak was a former GCSB official who is in a relationship with the Labour leader’s spin-doctor Fran Mold also compounds Shearer’s predicament.

He won’t confirm or deny the Soper revelation saying he doesn’t “declare his sources”.

But with no sense of irony, Mold later released a press statement under Shearer’s name saying the “PM must confirm or deny Dotcom comment”. (Realpolitik dictates that John Key doesn’t have to do anything until Shearer produces the video, Fran.)

It Key wants to get heavy he could demand that the GCSB fully investigates the links between Mold, her partner, his former close colleagues at the external intelligence agency and Shearer to see if they have breached the law. It’s doubtful Key would want to prolong the Dotcom embarrassment given the other issues on his plate. But the State Services Commission did appoint an investigator to try to track down the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Mfat) leaks.

Senior Labour figures must be rolling their eyes at the way their leader’s crusade has blown up in his face.

Shearer is finished…the only interesting questions that remain concern whether or not Frn mold did it on purpose to aid her pal Grant Robertson and when they finally knife Shearer. It is obvious that the caucus has let Shearer charge on ahead while they all looked busy doing other things.

David Shearer has scored a glorious own goal – the caucus knives will be sharpening.

They have been sharpened for quite sometime, they have just been waiting for the right time to plunge the knife in.

Courtesy of Fran O’Sullivan, who is a specialist in looking at things that way herself.

 More experienced hands like Phil Goff – who so comprehensively fitted up Foreign Minister Murray McCully by quoting directly from Cabinet papers to expose a restructuring fiasco at Mfat – will be looking askance. So too that master of the political dark arts Trevor Mallard.

Jane Clifton gives us a fascinating insight into what the Press Gallery girls gossiped about at the water coolers photocopier in the “old days”.

The new member for Te Tai Tokerau was slim and fit, had a full head of wavy hair, and was generally agreed to be the most attractive male specimen to hit the lobbies in a long time.

How does Tau rate now? May we ask?

It is pretty damn hard for a proud Maori to go red but Tau may be blushing the next time he comes into contact with the Cougars of the Gallery – Jane, Audrey and Fran knowing they once had a giggle the same way the Gen Y’s now do for Simon Bridges, Gareth Hughes and Chris Hipkins.

I don’t know what Tau has done to offend a lady but Clifton has now publicly shanked him as her “wild card” choice and bet heavily for Maurice as the next Speaker.

Fran O’Sullivan has used her column today to write a speech that John Key should give:

Mr Speaker, I rise today in this House to introduce legislation to vest all natural resources – water, geothermal steam, airwaves, aquifers and, for the avoidance of doubt, all minerals, ironsands, magma, rare earth deposits, coal, lignite, methane and uranium in this country and the exclusive economic zone that surrounds our shores – in a new Crown entity representing the combined interests of all the people of New Zealand.

Mr Speaker, my Government considers natural resources like water, geothermal steam, and the aquifers that underpin our rich agricultural plains to be public goods that are part of the common wealth of all New Zealanders.

For the avoidance of doubt – and I know many in this Parliament today will regard this as fanciful – the legislation will also extinguish any “rights and interests” that Maori might claim now and into the future to the commercial use of solar power, the wind, the tides, the navigational properties of the stars and the moon. This will also include the magma and lava flows which have enriched our soils over the centuries and will do so again in coming volcanic explosions.

She goes on…

Mr Speaker, there are some in this House that believe the global financial crisis is over. They do not understand that the United States has embarked on a third wave of quantitative easing – or printing money. I have strong concerns that the US is at the edge of a financial cliff. I am also concerned that China – the powerhouse of our neighbourhood – is having to embark on another multi-billion-dollar infrastructure spend to keep domestic growth moving. And that our nearest neighbour, Australia, is slowing down.

That slowdown is also affecting New Zealand as the wave of redundancies in export-sighted industries continues.

Mr Speaker, these are the issues that cry out for the burning attention of my Government.

But I am disappointed that trifling and vexatious claims are now being advanced at the very time we wish to deal with the major water issue.

For the avoidance of doubt, let me say my Government will strongly resist the claim filed by Ngapuhi seeking commercial rights over the wind.

With John Armstrong’s column and comments from Fran O’Sullivan (who was once famously described as a right-wing blogger by Helen Clark) I’d like to ask readers a series of questions.

1. Should I compile a Daily Politics post, with some short commentary on the issues of the day in competition to Bryce Edwards?

2. If yes, then what format/design/style/focus should it take…should it include a wide range of links like his…but with more balance etc?

3. Morning or Afternoon?

4. Would you subscribe to it, and/or sponsor it?

After all time is money, and to compile links and write a summary would consume a large amount of time that could otherwise be productive in smashing pinkos.

5. Volunteer to provide parts of the Daily Politics post as a contributor, flagging and identifying useful links both domestic and internationally?

I ask this question because Bryce has staff…university flunkies, clearly of the same political persuasion as him, compiling his links.

6. Include international politics? If so which countries…I’m thinking UK, Australia, Pacific and US mostly with interesting titbits  that pop up from time to time. I am finding the distinct lack of coverage of the US elections in our papers somewhat frustrating…and reporting on Fiji is dreadful universally by the MSM in New Zealand.

I welcome your collective wisdom.

Bernard Hickey has created his own sort of buzz for his new website www.journalism.org.nz

Hickey is taking his begging bowl out to the public to pay for his news. After one day he has wowed only 99 people in the public to  lift their fingers to a mouse.  It will be a long road to get them to part with their credit card details.

Here is where I stopped and had a moment of reflection. I always thought Hickey was at least the majority owners of interest.co.nz.  Apparently not. The company that trades as the website is wholly owned by businessman David Chaston.  The NBR claims it has “the whole story” but they’ve stopped short of saying the obvious that the Whale can.

Weasel words for – the sponsor is p*****, this will smooth it over.

So here we have Bernard Hickey slaving away as a serf for how many years building and fronting interest.co.nz past its inception as an interest rate site, writing about business, making prediction and comments about the suitability of others to run businesses and all the time since 2008 he never had an equity interest? What?

And now Hickey appears to us all to have chucked his toys out of the closet, what do we make of interest.co.nz?

I have had whispers around publishers that the alleged asking price is $2-3.5 million as a tyre-kicker expression of “interest”.  Based on what valuation model I do not know so I cannot for the life of me work that one out.  It looks from the outside like the company did not even have a restraint of trade on their front person.

Hickey said in his Red Radio uninterrupted advertisement interview that he has had “long chats” with Russell Brown (is there any other kind?) and Selwyn Pellett was providing  ”logistical support around technology needed to produce this and legal issues”.  Which are weasel words for – Pellett is Bernard’s new boss.  Where Pellett goes we know Labour goes.  He even sits as a “critical friend” on their review committee and even called loudly for Goff’s head to be rolled when Labour could actually have done so. Pellett is not so much a major funder of Labour (yet) but a major mouthpiece pushing for policy direction to help himself primarily under the general guise of “exporting” and of course more corporate welfare.

Hickey and Pellett have teamed up for the Productive Economic Council and the secret handshake Fabian Society (the website had disappeared as I compiled this post). It is all a bit obvious really.

This new website is a vehicle for the left.  Perhaps terminally slow paying Scoop and Russell Brown are going to join forces for a one stop SuperBlog of whining high-pitched left-wing c*** calling for higher taxes and a left-wing government while “exposing” the evils of big business all the while link whoring off them.  Martyn Bradbury should be free to join in the fun too if real estate sales slow down due to this whole “housing affordability” crisis.

The wonderful thing about journalists, and what I actually enjoy about them is their bitchiness and vigour  in protecting their turf.  You have to handle them I have found rather niiii……cely and in a co-operative fashion.  Within hours of the announcement by Hickey, I had half a dozen tips about the new operation and what has happened at interest.co.nz.  In public they are all patting Hickey on the back.  True to her normal form, Fran O’Sullivan is one of the only old school journalists honest enough to front in discussion groups defending Hickey’s attack on journalism in a form of attack of her own.

Hickey thinks it will be all fun and games and “nice guys” but he may find that the NZ Herald is not too keen on his new venture.  Why give Hickey a high profile column and free-reign to build his profile when you are launching your own new tabloid format that Hickey has directly attacked and you have your own investigative reporters and business section?

We aim to gather a group of supporters able to fund, build and flesh out a community of journalists and the platform they need to report, analyse and publish the news that matters. That means investigative, probing, enterprising and explanatory journalism, rather than celebrity-driven churnalism and PR.

New Zealand needs a strong and vibrant fourth estate that challenges, probes, questions and holds to account those people, institutions and forces that affect the lives of all New Zealanders.

The Whale’s advice to anyone thinking of getting involved in writing for this new venture is pretty simple – do not make the same mistake Bernard has made since 2008.

Hickey is planning to promote both his and Pellett’s anti foreign-ownership, pro-corporate welfare, financial doomsday, pro-tax reform and pro-Labour/Union stories.

At least get paid properly.