Sue Bradford

Yet another dog attack that Nanaia Mahuta said wouldn’t happen after dogs were chipped:

“The changes are aimed at better dog control, such as addressing dog attacks on people and, as often happens in rural areas, dog attacks on other people’s stock. Any dog can potentially bite – even family pets.”

That is what she said in 2006 when sponsoring the dog-chipping law. Like Sue Bradford’s anti-smacking law it hasn’t worked as it was intended. It was spurious then and it is spurious now to suggest that chipped dogs are safer and child abuse will stop because of silly misguided laws.

A 15-month-old boy was savaged by a pitbull as he wandered into the dog’s yard to play with a Christmas present he had received hours earlier.

The vicious Christmas Day mauling of Ozyris Beeching – whose family say he is lucky to be alive – came after the local council had been warned several times about the dog’s temperament, his distraught mother told the Herald yesterday.

Tracy Beeching said her family were getting ready to drive a few blocks across Edgecumbe in the Bay of Plenty for a Christmas breakfast with her brother’s family when little Ozyris wandered next door with his new toy lawnmower.

He entered the front yard shortly before 10.30am and came within reach of the tethered pitbull, which attacked the infant, biting him on his face and stomach.

Nanaia Mahuta needs to get in her car and drive down tot he Bay of Plenty and go and apologise that her law hasn’t stopped another child being mauled by a dog. She would have been far better sponsoring a law to stop people having silly first names…it may have saved this child.

Sue Bradford’s law that she told parliament would ensure the kiddies were protected has failed another child. There really should be a Sue Bradford Wall of Shame with which to place the names of children who were beaten, bashed, tortured and killed but were never protected by her law.

A Rotorua boy assaulted by a woman with a broom has been described by mental health authorities as one of the most emotionally damaged children they have seen.

Bonita Naera (aka Marsters), 57, was yesterday sentenced in the Rotorua District Court to two years in jail after being found guilty by a jury in October of assaulting a child in her care with a weapon between August 1 and August 18, 2009.

Judge Phillip Cooper said Naera hit the child with a length of wood or possibly a broom and the child, who was 7 at the time, suffered a broken arm.

Naera had two previous convictions for assaulting children, dating back 18 years.

Jail is too good for people who do that to children. Two years is certainly not long enough for the systematic emotional, psychological and physical torture visited upon her children.

The Green party looks like yet again being a party of opposition. Never trusted by Labour and distrustful of National, they are becoming a pollyanna party, but where that focus on the optimistic ignores that they have never been part of a government. Karl du Fresne accurately and succinctly explains:

Everyone commented on what a great campaign the Greens ran. Certainly they seemed to pick up a lot of former Labour supporters, and their electoral appeal can only have broadened since the departure of polarising figures such as Sue Bradford and Nandor Tanczos. In fact it looks as if the Greens are re-positioning themselves as a mainstream party of the centre-left (watch out Labour) rather than one on the beansprouts-and-sandals fringe. Russel Norman’s stylish suit and tie are a clue to that; the eccentric garb of the late Rod Donald is already a distant memory.

But just wait: the Greens have yet to be fully tested. They have never been exposed to Minor Party Curse, the fatal affliction that strikes small parties once they formally become part of coalition government arrangements. That’s when the stresses start to tell and party discipline starts to fall apart.

As long as a party remains outside government, as the Greens have done, it can safely occupy the moral high ground. Its high-minded principles are unlikely to be compromised. But the moment a party is drawn into a coalition, deals are done and principles get stretched. Ambitions are unleashed and tensions arise between idealists and pragmatists. It happened to the Alliance and it happened to ACT – both parties, like the Greens, with a strong ideological base. Being in government also means a minority party is subjected to much more intense media scrutiny. All things considered, the Greens might have a more assured future if they remain in opposition. A memorandum of understanding with National may be as far as they can safely go.

The Biggest Loser: Steven Joyce & National

So focused on protecting his own power Joyce refused to let John Key give the David Cameron speech to get rid of MMP.

As I have been predicting for a long time, National will not have viable coalition partners in 2014. Joyce’s short term focus on protecting his own power means the political environment became much, much tougher for National long term. You can see the proof of this in the gloating posts from left wing sites who know that the real battle was won in the referendum.

Biggest Winner: Russel Norman

Russel somehow managed to get the batshit crazy wing of the Green Party not to speak too much. He was was greatly aided by the departure of Keith Locke, Sue Bradford and Sue Kedgely and ran a professional, disciplined campaign that didn’t go off on a stupid leftwing tangent. 13 MPs is a huge tribute to Russel.

Unfortunately for Russel he is going to continually have to contend with the kind of dickhead that wants to sabotage National signs. Joylon and his merry men caused a massive diversion and embarrassment, and while the looney activist wing of the party are still around Russel is always going to have to watch the enemy within harder than the enemy without. Russel still managed to emerge from this with some credit with his prompt and unconditional apology to National and offer to remedy the situation.

Sue Bradford is proud of the vandals and disgusted with the Greens leadership:

But Mana Party candidate and former Green Party MP Sue Bradford said she was shocked by the Greens’ response and in previous times the party would have been proud of Mr White’s actions.

“I feel quite sad in a way because I’m sure there were good Green activists that were part of this action and I’m sure they did it believing they were doing a good thing.”

Nice to know that Sue Bradford condones illegal breaches of the Electoral Act, it probably explains why the Mana party continually breaks the law with their signs.

Even Hone has a campaign launch:

Hone Harawira launched his Mana Party yesterday declaring he was standing for the rights of all poor New Zealanders.

“We are not just a party for Maori, we can no longer be a party just for Maori.”

The party was launched in Otara at Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Piripono with a campaign video called Tinorangatira Boy by Envisio. Candidates Angeline Greensill, James Papali’i, Misty Harrison, Sue Bradford, John Minto, Annette Sykes and Harawira addressed the full school hall.

Candidates told jokes as well as inciting a passionate and emotional response from the audience.

The most broken arsed lefty party in the land has a campaign launch. But Labour doesn’t. They were probably plotting how to be more nasty instead of running a launch.

Sue Bradford will split the vote as she is even more real than Carmel Sepuloni, meaning the least real Paula Bennett will win easily thanks to her pig hunting, hard work and tart cart.

This must be really disappointing for the more real Carmel Sepuloni.

She would never have thought she would be competing against an even more real woman like Sue Bradford who has been a lot more real for a lot more years.

With Labour’s current poll ratings the Septic Tank is unlikely to get back in.

Sue Bradford is set to announce in Waitakere for the Mana Party:

Former Green Party MP Sue Bradford is expected to announce within days that she will contest Waitakere, going up against Social Development Minister Paula Bennett.

Sometimes life is just cruel, even when you are “more down to Earth, more authen­tic, more gen­uine” than your oppo­nent.

I notice that Mallard has had another swipe at the Government for doing what it’s supposed to - and that’s letting KiwiRail make its own operational decisions when it is buying new trains.

I find this outrage just a little hard to handle - given that he was the shareholding Minister explaining why Air New Zealand should be free of political meddling when it was considering the oursourcing of engineering work…

Air New Zealand—Engineering Outsourcing

Tuesday 21 February 2006 Hansard source (external site)

1. SUE BRADFORD (Green) to the Minister of Finance: Does he believe that, as 82 percent shareholder of Air New Zealand, he should have been more proactive in finding a solution that would keep Air New Zealand’s engineering work in New Zealand?

Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Acting Minister of Finance): No. I would hope that the airline and unions talk further, but as a matter of policy the Minister of Finance, as shareholding Minister, does not intervene in the operational affairs of the airline.

Sue Bradford: Has the board of Air New Zealand shared with the Government shareholder its long-term strategic plan for this business; if so, does it show that what is happening at the moment is just the beginning of a whole series of changes that will lead to lay-offs and cuts in wages and conditions?

Hon TREVOR MALLARD: As Acting Minister of Finance, I am not privy to the details of the briefings between the board and the Minister of Finance.

Sue Bradford: Is the Minister aware that Air New Zealand has also put the jobs of over 100 cleaners on the line by putting cabin-cleaning work out to tender; and as a majority shareholder does he see any role at all in trying to get it to reverse its decision, especially in the light of Labour’s own industrial relations policies in the areas of contracting out and job security?

Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Yes and no.

Sue Bradford: How does the current Air New Zealand strategy of business transformation, which seems to involve slashing wages and jobs and contracting out, align with the Government’s strategic priority, as outlined by the Prime Minister last week, of economic transformation; if it does not, does the Minister think there is some way in which these two strategies can be aligned?

Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Without going into a lot of the detail, I think it is fair to say that many members of the House are aware that the future of Air New Zealand itself was at very serious risk when the Government bought back into it, and it is not out of the mire yet.

Clearly the pain killers and his impeding defeat in a cycle race are clouding his judgment. The crippled campaign manager just can’t get his facts right and continues to insist that National to do something which in the first instance is illegal and secondly something he knows can’t be done anyway.

He is struggling, along with his crippled party for relevance and so just flings murk from wherever he can dredge it up from.

A very interesting day in politics.

National’s candidate Jami-lee Ross has covered the electorate in his bill boards. Driving around it is a sea of blue. I haven’t seen a single Labour sign anywhere. Perhaps Labour needs to borrow Conor Roberts to get their campaign off the ground.

Matthew Hooton on Radio Live today at 12:30 is pretty certain that Hone Harawira is bolting to form the new left wing party with Sue Bradford as co-leader.

Bomber of course is wetting his pants at the prospect, though I am not sure the electorate in general is going to be too happy at the prospect of seeing Sue Bradford’s face back on the public teat. iPredict, meanwhile is showing a surge in the likelihood that such a party will be formed.

Still in a democracy it is a contest of ideas and with Hone Harawira holding his seat and the new left wing party grabbing 3-4% and stealing 5 seats the next parliament could well be very interesting.

But for Labour to govern they would still need Winston Peters to make a come back, completing the spectre of the evil left. There is a slight problem with that however and the rise of the new left party. My deep throat spies in NZ First tell me that Winston’s strategy is all hard right.

Could Winston Peters be making a play for the Act party’s neglected members. My understanding is that Winston will make his play on three core policies that will attract the FU vote. But at least one of those platforms is going to put him in direct conflict with a prospective coalition partner that features Sue Bradford.

One of NZ First’s major policy planks will be to campaign to reverse the anti-smacking law. They hope to hoover up the constituency that John Key ignored when bypassing the wishes of nearly 90% of the population. Winston only needs to pick up a few per cent out of those opposed to Bradford’s bill and he is a shoe in again. The problem though is that in campaigning on such a platform will he then chuck it in to form a coalition with Bradford’s new left party and Labour?

Winston at least will for once be acting with some consistency as he voted against Bradford’s bill in 2007. What are his other two major platforms? Well that is a secret for now but rest assured this blog will release them shortly. Suffice to say the policies are more hard right than anything remotely close to a party that will include Hone Harawira, Sue Bradford and Matt McCarten.

Meanwhile Duncan Garner is blogging that Ruth Dyson is a goner in Phil Goff’s line up. One wonders if Goff should stop at stabbing only Dyson. He will however have to watch out for her retribution as that is now nigh on guaranteed. Ask any Labour insider and they will tell you that Dyson is the most spiteful, even evil, person in caucus.

January 1, 1970 1:00 pm viaReplyRetweetFavorite

@