Politics of New Zealand

Some thoughts on Winston and Northland

As we have seen TV3 is touting a poll that shows Winston Peters is supposedly ahead in the race for Northland.

Do I believe this?

Sure…Winston should be ahead, I’m surprised he isn’t ahead more.

TV3 commissioned this poll literally just hours after Mark Osborne had been selected for National. He is an unknown to the wider electorate.

Winston, the dear old trougher has been around politics for more than 40 years. He is as well-known to everyone as lines on their palms of their hands.

He should have come first in that poll.

But are Northlanders really as stupid as TV3 has led us to believe?

A man over 70 years of age, who couldn’t walk 100m briskly let along run it without risk of a coronary or stroke is the “Force for the North”…more like a spent force, or a farce.

He bangs on about his beloved Northland but spent a lifetime running in seats in Auckland and the Bay of Plenty. He got spanked by Lockwood Smith in his only real selection in a general seat and ran off to play in Hunua, which proved a temporary assignment. Remember when he was happy to be the member for Tauranga, until a young whipper snapper with a croaky voice kept?him out. Now he lives in Auckland and yet professes his love for Northland.

A love so fickle that NZ First hasn’t stood a candidate in Northland for three consecutive elections…this is the “force for the North”?

The media love promoting Winston, and they never hold him to account. When did you see anyone in the media hold the old trougher to account for any of what I have outlined above? ?? Read more »

Political Doppelgangers

Elizabeth McCombs 1933

Elizabeth McCombs 1933

Helen Clark

Helen Clark

Seriously folks I’m starting to think that time travel exists. It’s either that or she is a vampire.

Read more »

The Hitchhikers Guide to Irrelevance

Laila Harre – the hitchhiker’s guide to irrelevance.? She now?ought to be appropriately careful about whose bandwagon to climb?aboard.

Two sisters, hitch-hiking just south of Dannevirke on Sunday, seemed a little unusual. Upon stopping to give them a ride, it was discovered the women were Laila and Niki Harre.

On their website “rethinkthesystem.org“, they say:

“After the 2014 election result, Laila wanted to go bush and Niki wanted to go on a pilgrimage to inspire social change. So we made a pact to spend February on the road in a quest to explore new ways of living well together. We want to discuss all possibilities. Even (especially) those that seem impossible given our current political establishment, the media, and the narrow field of public debate.”

They have been on the road since February 1, visiting towns from Thames through the Bay of Plenty to Gisborne, Wairoa to Napier.

They had public events arranged in many of these places and were heading to Featherston on Sunday, February 8.

They say: ?? Read more »

Don Brash’s Orewa speech the media wouldn’t report

The other day Don Brash and Gareth Morgan fronted at Orewa. Contrary to the media reports it wasn’t actually the Orewa Rotary Club but only its premises?that was used.

The media reported extensively the nonsense that Gareth Morgan spouted but barely mentioned what Don Brash had to say.

So I called up Don and asked if I could publish his speech.


Thanks for inviting me here today, and for the opportunity to comment on what Gareth has said. I didn?t see the speech in advance of course, so these comments are just immediate reactions based partly on what Gareth said a few days ago in a speech to a Ngapuhi audience.

Let me say first that there are some of Gareth?s views with which I agree. He said in his Ngapuhi speech that he is opposed to separate Maori electorates, Maori wards (and by implication the Maori Statutory Board in Auckland) and quotas for Maori in educational institutions. Granting any group special rights is contrary to Article 3 of the Treaty he said, and I totally agree with that.

It?s also patronising, and implies that Maori aren?t quite competent enough to have their voices heard in the political arena without a special leg up. Of course that is nonsense: when I was in Parliament, there were 21 Maori in Parliament ? roughly the same percentage of Members of Parliament as Maori are in the wider population ? only seven of them elected in the Maori electorates. The other 14 were elected in general constituencies or were placed in a winnable position on a party?s list.

Similarly in Auckland: the first election of councillors after the super-city was established in 2010 saw three people of Maori descent elected ? not in Maori wards but on their own merits ? and again three Maori out of a total of 20 councillors meant that Maori on the Council were in roughly the same proportion as Maori in the general population.

But as explained in his Ngapuhi speech his basic position seems to be that ?

?.. the Treaty is whatever a reasonable person?s view of the following four taken together leads them to ? not any one taken in isolation, but all taken together:

  • Treaty of Waitangi
  • Te Tiriti O Waitangi
  • Principles of the Treaty
  • Post-1975 Consensus on the Treaty.?

Read more »

Is Auckland Council corrupting the consultation process

Auckland Council are as dumb as a bag of hammers and notorious law breakers of the highest order.

Last week I brought to the attention the absurdity of the Auckland Council Community Engagement survey for the Long Term Plan that included questions over funding alternatives for Auckland that – in my opinion – were deliberate and railroaded residents into voting for one of two options – (1) fuel tax; or (2) motorway congestion charges.

Auckland Council cannot do either of those things and the government has poured cold water on the ideas for years. But try they will.

Today I want to focus the gun sights on the lawfulness of the consultation.

Because it appears Auckland Council are again failing to fulfil their duties under the Local Government Act. Deliberately.

When I read the Local Government Act I am drawn to Sections 76AA, 82A and 95A which outline how consultation/engagement is supposed to be carried out.

While I may?not be a lawyer, it’s not rocket science and there are very specific requirements for Councils to fulfil in order to discharge their duties. One can’t simply issue a glossy printed brochure with some questions and expect that it will suffice.

For example – Section 76AA ‘Significance and Engagement Policy’ – sets out that before consultation a Council?must?adopt a policy that clearly outlines how the Council will undertake enagement with the community and in receiving back responses – how it will determine what that means. I doubt Auckland Council has a policy and I’d like to take a good look at it if it exists because this particular Council has a legacy of spin doctoring and the is every reason to suspect they will merely present the results of the consultation in a way that supports the pet projects they want.?? ? Read more »

Dirty Politics cartoons without Whaleoil or Cameron Slater

Believe it or not this year there were some cartoonists who managed to draw political cartoons about Dirty Politics without including a reference to Whaleoil or Cameron Slater. Their main target was our Prime Minister John Key. He didn’t get as many cartoons about him as Cameron and Whaleoil but he still did pretty well considering that he is important enough to have access to Cameron’s phone number and texts Cameron sometimes ( although Cameron is not pro-active about texting him back and often just replies to be polite )

When asked by the Mainstream Media whether or not he thought it was wise for him to engage with the Prime Minister, Cameron replied that John Key is the leader of the National Party and he gives out his contact details to all Political leaders and Politicians not just John Key. Some may not like John Key but he is recognised as the Prime Minister of New Zealand and therefore deserves the courtesy of access to New Zealand’s number one award winning blogger and journalist.

Read more »

Here is some REAL dirty politics

Not from National, nope…not from Labour, though the wanted to be in coalition with them…here is some real dirty politics being played by NZ First.

And Winston was so sanctimonious over it all in the parliament last week.

Still he is so shameless he will carry on, ignoring that it was one of his MPs digging the dirt with illegally obtained information.

The husband of a former NZ First MP has lost his job after inappropriately accessing the criminal records of a former party official.

The Corrections Department confirmed manager Dennis Taylor, husband of Asenati Lole-Taylor, is no longer employed after an investigation into a complaint by former director and Mana electorate chairwoman Marise Bishop.

Her historic drink-driving convictions were divulged to senior party members when she sought re-election at a 2012 convention. ?? Read more »

Are NZ’s Political Commentators Morons?

One has to wonder about how stupid New Zealand?s political commentators are.

They seem totally immune from either common sense or numerical analysis.

The biggest moronic statement is that National in its third term is like Labour was in their third term.

Lets fact check this with some basic analysis that a monkey could probably put together in about 15 minutes unless they were working for Fairfax, when it would take them three days and they would still come up with the wrong conclusion.

Rough Monkey Analysis of 2005 election result v 2014 election result:

2005 v 2014 Elections ?2005 2014 Difference
% Vote Seats % Vote Seats
Labour 41.1 50 25.13 32 -18
New Zealand First 5.72 7 8.66 11 4
Greens 5.3 6 10.7 14 8
United Future 2.67 3 0.22 1 -2
Jim Anderton 1.16 1 -1
National 39.1 48 47.04 60 12
Maori 2.12 4 1.32 2 -2
ACT 1.51 2 0.69 1 -1
Total 121 121 0

Some of the really obvious things that come out are:

  1. In 2005 National went very close to winning, losing by 2%.
  2. In 2014 Labour were only just over half of Nationals vote, losing by 22%.

So the Fairfax monkey doesn?t get too confused lets leave it with those two simple facts.

And ask the monkey to come back with an answer to the question why is a comparison between the 2005 and 2014 election results relevant?


Boag vs. Slater 2.0


On Friday night the poisonous lying scumbag that is Michelle Boag was on?the?Paul Henry show…with my mate Willie Jackson.

Willie called her a sycophant repeatedly, which she is. She probably believes she was the one who got John Key into parliament but his biography and various public statements say otherwise much to her unending disappointment.

However she made a statement during her brief and incredibly made up performance.

“The thing is that Cameron appears to support the National Party and if he really was a supporter of the party he wouldn’t even try to contact Key,” says Ms Boag, who believes that Key hasn’t had any contact with Slater for months.

What would she know.

She went on to describe me as toxic etc and said if she was advising John Key he should dump me.

Yeah…so given her claims about benefitting or not benefitting the National party shall we look at our prospective records. ? Read more »

I might be the ‘most toxic blogger in the land’ but I can’t be ignored

Apparently, according to the Dominion Post?editorial writer I have a new title. The “most toxic blogger in the land“.

The report says Jason Ede, a special adviser in John Key’s office, told Slater – the most toxic blogger in the land – about the SIS report on Goff and even prepared a draft blog for him about it.

Why do work when there are others who will do it for you.

I did a review of Question time and the Urgent debate and searched for my name.

Q1: Mentioned 13 times by Russel Norman.

Q3: Mentioned 8 times by Andrew Little. The site mentioned once.

Q5: Mentioned by Phil Goff 10 times.

Q7: Mentioned 4 times, not by Winston Peters I might add but by Megan Woods. ? Read more »