My Right

My Right - rebranded and relocated

2005-04-23T00:14:00.000+12:00

My Right has rebranded and relocated both blog wise and physically - to the tune of a new URL and 12,000 miles respectively.

No politics to be had at the new locale - to much else to do, and in fact in truth - probably no reason to stop by. But www.kiwilog.blogspot.com will be the record of a very belated OE!

Cheers
MR

Good night, My Right

2005-02-11T15:00:00.000+13:00

How things change. Tickets are booked, resignation handed in and preparations are under way - My Right is off to London.

Many things to sort out - so of all the things that exhaust My Right's recreational time - unfortunately Blogging was the one that had to go.

It was an enjoyable little hobby - the to'ing and fro'ing on tax in particular. I guess there are some things in life that even ostensibly intelligent pundits will never agree on. But the ability and willingness to debate and elucidate your position says more about the person than the position they adopt at times. Hence - Jordan, you have my utmost respect - for someone that is wrong... ;-)

I do sincerely hope some things change while I am away. I am not just talking about the Government either! I do worry about National's ability to provide a viable alternative and real leadership, based on a defined vision, not politicking. Act's ability to survive, let's not go there.... At the same time - I certainly do not like the way the current administration sees it as their moral duty to impose their ideologies on us underlings.

Developing a new stratum of middle class beneficiaries will be the legacy of this Government. If, after some reflection in a few years, Maharey and co can be proud of that - then they are more out of touch than My Right thought possible.

But leaving politics aside - I hope New Zealanders (all) take note of a recent Don'ism - "what ever happened to personal responsibility?" My Right holds rather grave concerns for the general direction we are heading in as a country. For want of a better expression - I think we are getting soft. Only showing the units a student passes and ignoring the failed units on NCEA results is case in point. Failure does not have to be entirely negative - it is how you respond to a failure that counts.

Lecture over, posting over, at least for the foreseeable future.......

Tame Iti - Prick

2005-02-03T13:33:00.000+13:00

OK - let us drop the argument about whether the falg is an irrelevant ugly duckling and agree that while it is in place, no prick puts a bullet through it. God this grandstanding makes me sick - lock the prick up and when his mates start kicking holes in things in protest, take them down to.

Protest or Pantomime?

My Right is keen to see how George Hawkins is going to avoid answering this question today:

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

1. STEPHEN FRANKS to the Minister of Police: Did it occur to him to ask the police what evidence they were still seeking when they informed him they were still investigating the Tame Iti case when Tame Iti was seen on television brandishing a shotgun, which he also discharged to shred a New Zealand flag, and what assurance can he give that all New Zealanders are treated equally under the law?

A genuine plea

2005-01-29T13:54:00.000+13:00

Could someone please tell me that this is a piss take before I waste half a day venting.

For real or not? Please say no....

This is from msn conversation with a colleague yesterday(a bit disjointed - but you should follow) - a few conversations later - we still couldn't decide of it was for real. My Right could do some research - but figures Jordan will know.

Frit says:
you busy??

JONAGO says:
what's up?

Frit says:
need you to read something and tell me what you think if you have five mins

JONAGO says:
sure, e-mail it through

Frit says:
http://publicaddress.net/default,1822.sm#post1822

Frit says:
read that and tell me if you think this country is completely fucked

JONAGO says:
oh lord

JONAGO says:
ok...

JONAGO says:
ok, i've got 3/4s of the way through, but is this a piss take? sure I'd like to have some of these laws but not because I'm a prick to others!

Frit says:
what's fucking next - fine smelly people

Frit says:
if you're ugly, $50

Frit says:
public swearing, $2 per word

Frit says:
god help you if you fart in the bus

Frit says:
Grade 1 fart, room clearer, $100

Frit says:
Grade 4 fart, not smelly but audible - a tenner

Frit says:
but if you kill your baby by suffocating it - state funded therapy

Poles apart?

2005-01-27T13:14:00.000+13:00

As the 'change the flag' brigade hit the pavements in search of the 300,000 signatures they need to force a referendum - My Right can't help but think that their efforts, whilst no doubt well intentioned, are slightly misdirected.

My Right is not making the assertion that all those in favour of changing the flag are necessarily republicans, but I am making the connection between some sort of identity crisis (or cultural cringe for the trendier reader) and changing the flag. Linking the identity crisis and the republic / constitution debate allows My Right to link changing the flag with the republic / constitution debate (don't try to understand the logic - just work with me).

Basically I believe the desire to change the flag is driven by a desire to assert and affirm our identity - the simplest way to do that - change the flag. But why not do things properly (and once) and have the debate about what New Zealand actually is?

A new written constitution, becoming a republic, installing The Treaty as our founding document, keeping the status quo - whatever. But lets have that debate, and then crown the outcome with a suitable flag at that point.

This debate seems like constitutional window dressing on a flag pole.

["crown the outcome" - that's awful - Ed]

Fighting the malaise - Brash speaks

2005-01-26T21:13:00.000+13:00

True to form - speak in clear sentences, pick a widely known topic, and tap into the sorts of things that people may be thinking - but have recently been afraid to express. Clearly this can work - seeing Clark do back flips over Orewa 1 was clear, and almost farcical, evidence of this.

But I think in all the dismissive and aggressive dissolution from the mainstream media (which My Right does not intend to link to) - I really believe they are missing the one thing that will resonate with the clichéd 'kiwi battler'. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Labour underestimated the general unease about race relations - it didn't show up in their polling. Would you tell a stranger on the other end of the phone that sometimes Maori extremists (translated as Maori in general when polling) piss you off? No. Brash made having concerns OK.

So I think it may be with Orewa II - and not because we want to bash beneficiaries. Because we are sick of socio-policy-paths (the 'never been in the real world new age do gooders') who are out to save the world. My Right is not advocating natural selection - but the pendulum may well have swung too far.

Jordan is typically analytical in his summation of the speech - but I think he is missing what will show in the polling come Saturday. That the base reaction may well be that Don really has a point, and has struck another nerve.

Further, at least with Don you know what he is saying (as opposed to Social Steve). Many pundits have pointed out that George W (for all of his considerable failings) came across as a straight up simpleton - "you may not agree with me - but you know my intentions".

Overall My Right didn't mind the speech - but has always seen welfare as the simple white elephant of deeper societal issues. But, if mainstream NZ view this speech as an expose of a dangerous drift away from the good old kiwi ethos, then it may be a bit more dexterous than has been acknowledged thus far.

OK - I'm back

2005-01-26T13:47:00.000+13:00

Maybe it took Orewa, or more particularly the way Orewa is been reported, to kick start My Right for the New Year. Mr Farrar and NZ Pundit have already pointed out some the outrageous headlines - so I won't bother. But I will have a look at some of the opinion pieces and throw some thoughts up later.

Parliament back on deck soon, media attacking Brash, Maharey speaking the kind of tosh that would have even the most seasonecd bureaucrat in hysterics.

Yes it's good to be back! Enjoy the drinks tonight Wellington folks - us Aucklanders will just have to be content BBQ'ing and watching the Government 'sponsor' a game of ~~free advertising~~ cricket with our hard earned....

What to do?

2004-12-24T09:53:00.000+13:00

Two meetings and that's it for the year. Not sure what the break will bring blogwise - but all going well, not much. It's been an interesting year - and a fun sort of a habit to develop - next year promises to be a thriller (well - we hope so anyways)....

It seems that there are enough of you out there that swing by, so My Right will be back next year, maybe even spruced up a bit.

My Right wishes every realist the least unsatisfactory New Year possible, to the rest of you, happy holidays.

M R

'Don Brashologist' - bollocks

2004-12-23T13:35:00.000+13:00

Alister Barry is a self proclaimed 'Don Brashologist', which is apparently the title for someone that simply does not like the man and has access to a publisher with a similar mind set to provide him with a soapbox for sharing his views.

Kevin List (from Stoop) caught up with Alister and asked him to scare the be-jesus out of Joe Public with what he thought would happen if Don Brash was elected as Prime Minister. Kevin and Alister then proceeded to put the boot in wherever possible - it is just as well that left boots don't hurt much. But one question and answer did rankle My Right:

Scoop: National seem to be doing their best to portray Don Brash as a man of the people – although he doesn’t really seem to fit the mould of past leaders such as Jim Bolger and even Jenny Shipley?
Alister Barry: No he doesn’t actually like ordinary people – I think he’s probably scared of ordinary people – most of our successful Prime Ministers have been concerned about ordinary people and felt for them. When Don Brash was Governor of the Reserve Bank it was very interesting because he knew his own people – that is financiers and those in the upper strata of society, and gave lots of speeches around the country explaining Reserve Bank policy to them.
He virtually never spoke to women or Maori who were of course the people who suffered from Reserve Bank policy. Neither did he ever speak to any group of workers – for example a trade union meeting or an FOL meeting - despite the fact that he spent most of the day sitting up there in the Reserve Bank building deciding how he was going to f**k with their brains. He was trying to create a level of fear, how was he going to control their behaviour. How was he going to stop them demanding wage increases – that is what he spent his day doing and yet he was never brave enough to meet with them.

To point blank declare that Don Brash does not like people is Philistine. There is also the fact that Alister does not seem to incorporate 'financiers' and the 'upper strata' as 'ordinary people' at all (profession and wealth itself does not characterise a man).

I have meet Don Brash, engaging and pleasant man. I have seen Don Brash on the streets working a crowd of working class New Zealanders, enjoyed himself and was well received. I have seen Don Brash deliver a speech to a group of toffs, comfortable in that setting and very impressive.

News flash Alister - people spend a lot of time talking to their peers - usually whether they like it or not. Why as Reserve Bank Governer was he obliged to press flesh? Does your Bank Manager whip around the community to ask Joe Pub what effects his mortgage rates are having?

EML Awards

2004-12-22T09:09:00.000+13:00

The Eating Media Lunch annual (at least I hope it becomes annual) awards was screened last night. The entire show was good humour, but the two highlights had to be:

The desperate celebrity award - Lesley Martin, "killing your own mother and then writing a screen play about it is showing real dedication".

New Zealander of the Year - Ahmed Zaoui - enough said.

Brilliant.

Almost to 'clear'

2004-12-21T16:29:00.000+13:00

Douglas White QC has released his findings on the John Tamihere koha saga - and everything is looking a little too temperate to my mind. One Labour press statement states:

It was, of course, also alleged that John Tamihere accepted a $195,000 ‘golden handshake’ when he had previously said he would not accept it. This was not strictly a matter that Mr White was asked to consider, but the Report does make some relevant comments:

The payment was not a ‘golden handshake’ of the type that Labour campaigned against in the 1999 election.

To have a random and overtly political throw away line like that does leave the door open for people to view the report on the whole as being slightly charitable.

Labour have been quick to proclaim JT's incorruptibility - but not to the point where he can be reinstated to Cabinet. This seems a little strange.

The move to leave 2 Cabinet posts open for next years post election bartering have been well explained. But on the same day as JT is reported to be deeply hurt by the decision to leave him out in the cold - he and Hellzilla appear side by side in an uncomfortable victory dance.

With the Inland Revenue investigation still running and opposition parties still sniffing around - JT doesn't appear to be clear just yet.

It's not what you do...

2004-12-20T14:46:00.000+13:00

There is a good column in the NBR at the moment that sums up the year in politics, and looks at how things have panned out the way they have in terms of support. Jeff Gamlin does not unearth any great theory or science - but neatly sums up what My Right has long lamented - that Labour simply do politics better than National.

Or in his words:

"In their own ways, both prime ministers worked on the basis that how you do things in politics can be more important than what you do.

For Ms Clark, a cautious approach to how things are done can persuade voters that her policy objectives are also moderate in tone, when this may not be the case at all."

He calls Clark a "process politician", but it goes beyond that. The entire party live for politics - the game. Hence, educated adults are willing to enter the debating chamber and wave jandals around, laughing uproariously (looking like complete wankers and loving it) when mocking someone for something they themselves specialise in (makes good copy when TVNZ obligingly dine out on it though).

As Gamlin observes - nothing can better highlight the quality of the spin from Level 9 than the fact that Don Brash is the one ending the year with the "flip flop" label. "Closing the gaps" has gone, "need not race" is in - this isn't so much a u-turn as a particularly boozy waltz.

As an aside, the NBR also look at how Labour have been allowed to get away with this with almost zero impact in the electorate. Media: Why NZ media oppose business.

All a bit bleak really - or maybe just a melancholy kind of a day....

Researching

2004-12-17T14:41:00.000+13:00

Off to do a bit of research on the Foreshore and Seabed. Looking to confirm that Fish and Chips taste better on the beach, along with some other trifling matters.

Back Monday.

The Press gives National their election campaign message

2004-12-16T14:07:00.000+13:00

There is a dynamite editorial in The Press today that spoon feeds National their Election message for next year. It is cogent, concise and conspicuous only for its simplicity. There are a number of themes that will resonate with the prized 'centre ground' - 'Labour are making beneficiaries of the middle class via rampant redistributionist policy' should be an easy message for National to sell.

I'll resist the temptation to reproduce the entire thing here, but here are a couple of key paragraphs:

Cullen and the Government are unabashed redistributionists. They believe in taking from the inventive, productive, enterprising participants in the economy and delivering, via an army of bureaucrats, to those who are not. Cullen's preferred method of creating a "fairer" society is to turn as many people as he can into supplicants for government benefits of some sort or another, the calculation being that the grateful beneficiaries will reward Labour with another term in office.

The buoyancy of the economy has disguised the fact that the present front-bench are traditional profligate tax and spenders.

Cullen has been spending a good deal of his time recently playing down the size of the surplus and trying to douse calls for tax cuts. He has raised the old bogey that tax cuts could only be achieved by slashing spending in areas like health and education. Voters may at last be recognising that this is nonsense.

Full Editorial - "Awash in money"

Comments from a Just Left tax post

2004-12-16T09:38:00.000+13:00

Comments would have to be what My Right likes most about Blogging. A blog is a nice way for a political sort to throw up some ideas, it is the reaction to those ideas that is most satisfying.

In particular My Right has enjoyed a number of exchanges with Just Left (Jordan Carter) - and hopes that he doesn't mind me lifting an exchange of comments from a recent post of his. It appears that Left and Right types frequent his site:

[original post]Australian Income Tax Rates

From 1 July 2005 the following income tax rates apply in Australia:

0 to 6,000 - 0%
6,001 to 21,600 - 17%
21,601 to 63,000 - 30%
63,001 to 80,000 - 42%
80,001+ - 47%

Interesting contrast with our system, where higher income earners pay less and lower income earners pay more. On the other hand, Australia has compulsory super payments they have to make which we don't...

[comments]The aussies have a capital gains tax as well. The medical levy is the same as the ACC levy. The company rate is 30% so I guess like in NZ self-employed people can cap their income tax to the company tax rate. Tough cheese for salary earners. In aussie you get a tax rebate if you pay your own private medical insurance. This is the way of the future as is a low income tax-free band.

While just comparing tax rates in highly successful Singapore the rates for salaried employees is

0 to 20,000 Nil
20,001 to 30,000 4%
30,001 to 40,000 6%
40,001 to 80,000 9%
80,001 to 160,000 15%
160,001 to 320,000 19%
320,000 plus 22%

Posted by: Simon | December 15, 2004 06:46 PM

I'm in Korea paying 4% tax, there are also levies for pension and health which the employer is supposed to match dollar for dollar (though my employer pays the whole lot including tax, utlities and lunch for me)

Posted by: stef | December 16, 2004 03:05 AM

Read the whole thread here...

The Tax debate is subjective and ideological - but ultimately about balance. We all want the best health care on Earth - but do we want that at the price of complete redistribution? When Jim Anderton is advocating corporate tax relief - you know the balance is way out of whack.

P.S. Jordan, your recent comment re "pissing yourself laughing" if you cut taxes on me before the Election is uncommonly encouraging. I'm pleased you can see the funny side of those evil tax cuts. So please, if you do get another term - continue to laugh it up chuckles and give me some cash back!

Stay staunch Dr Sullen

2004-12-15T13:08:00.000+13:00

Dr Cullen's steadfast refusal to acknowledge that he is over taxing every single working New Zealander has finally gotten to the point that it no longer annoys My Right!!

It was a conversation with the bro, Always Right, that lead to this 'disposition adjustment'. Always is very representative of middle New Zealand with Mrs Right, the job, the mortgage and three Junior Rights. A liberal and socialist at heart, he has disagreed with My Right on many issues - but finally we are united on Tax.

Even Always now thinks Sullen is taking the piss, and Tax is firmly on the agenda as an election issue. Or to quote exactly, "nup, fuck it mate – next year just give me a pay rise".

So there you go - My Right can now listen to Sullen bang on about 'the social wage', Helen talk about 'tax cuts being spending' and smile knowing that this philosophical refusal to acknowledge the blindingly obvious represents the best chance of a change of Government next term.

My Right has always enjoyed Question Time

2004-12-14T18:32:00.000+13:00

But I honestly don't know if I can cope with the spectacle (or debacle) that will be Margaret Wilson as Speaker. To call her pious is akin to saying that Allah can come across as a little sermonic.

Jonathan Hunt at least retains reasonable humour and is, by and large, even handed in his management of the House (a few big calls aside). It is almost impossible to imagine the white haired one in the position. The Clerk must be more than a touch anxious.

So the sisterhood add one more "female first" record to their collection. This has to be the most dire.

Govt to nominate Margaret Wilson for Speaker.

Great Man

2004-12-13T09:19:00.000+13:00

If ever there was a man that epitomsed 'work ethic' - it was Arthur Lydiard. Hopefully the tributes over the next few days will remind us all of what a contribution this man made to the world - not just to the world of sport.

He is considered by many as the father of recreational running and one of the greatest athletic coaches in history. I think of him as a person that believed that hard work could achieve pretty much anything, and then proved it.

Enforcement not the issue

2004-12-09T16:28:00.000+13:00

My Right, like many others, will be sparking up his last fag in a pub this evening. Having always been inclined to go outside for a fag rather than smoke inside, the new law tonight will have very little impact for me.

But change is afoot and today during question time Deborah Coddington asked:

12. DEBORAH CODDINGTON to the Associate Minister of Health: How does the Government expect to enforce the ban on smoking in bars, and what measures will be implemented to deal with patrons and bar-owners who flagrantly disregard the law?

I think this is missing the point - the Government is effectively legislating for a social change. 24 'enforcement officers' will be operating with the backing of every punter brave enough to stand up for themselves and others. It will be an interesting transition to observe.

And not without issue I am sure. Any regular of Courtenay Place will be able to envisage one hell of a mess outside The Sports Cafe - wait for half time of the first big game. In fact - not many of the bouncers on that stretch will be looking forward to tomorrow night at all. I would not like to tell a pissed up punter that I was going to seperate him from his beer before he could have a smoke.

It will be an interesting transition - but I don't think the interest will lie in the 24 enforcement bunnies. It will be how Joe Sensible and Joseph Pissy Eyed Public choose to handle things that will hopefully not create headlines.

You have to eventually lose your rights - surely

2004-12-08T15:15:00.000+13:00

Marc Alexander has come out and said what My Right has long believed - that some people are just bad. Pure and simple - bad. Not victims, not in need of rehab - simply in need of a judicial working over. Try this miscreant for size:

The justice system now has the chance to get it right after being too soft on the Rotorua teen who recently had $43,000 worth of fines commuted to 300 hours of community service and then failed to show up, United Future law and order spokesman Marc Alexander said today.

"The courts were too soft on him to start with. They did him a huge favour and he still thumbs his nose at them and society.

"This yob said himself that he chose not to pay the fines because he 'hated the police'..

Nigel Caleb Wikiriwhi Dixon, 17, of Rotorua, was due to reappear in court on Monday for failure to comply with the community work order, but didn't appear and was being sought by the police when he handed himself in. He spent last night in custody and will appear again in court tomorrow. Dixon was given more of a chance than he deserved, Mr Alexander said, and has shown no willingness to reciprocate.

"It's well past time to get tough with this kid.

"His fine let-off meant that his community work was effectively worth $143 per hour! I'm sure many law-abiding students would love to waive their study debts at that rate over the Xmas break. Instead some punk accumulates a pile of debt and thumbs his nose at the police, our justice system and the Rotorua community. "This was Dixon's ninth court appearance this year. He's had a long history of offending while on bail ... Just how many chances does one guy get?

Surely at some stage society (through the Police and Courts) have to accept that this prick doesn't want to play and remove him until he does.

Pissed off

2004-12-08T09:09:00.000+13:00

A day after Clark tells me that she can't take less of the money I earn off me because it would constitute spending out of her personal pet project budget, comes this gem from Jim Anderton after being absolutely slammed by the auditor general:

Examples of how the money was spent included $2167 for two people to stay at the exclusive Tongariro Lodge, $260 for hiring golf clubs and a $350 dinner at the Kermadec Restaurant in Auckland.

ACT leader Rodney Hide said yesterday that Industry and Regional Development Minister Jim Anderton's so-called "jobs machine" was a disgrace. "Heads should roll for such an appalling administration of taxpayers' money."

But Mr Anderton said the state of the economy and low unemployment were proof his policies were working.

"This is not an evaluation of whether the grant fund has been successful or not."

The programmes had been set up with the intention of not letting them become too bogged down in bureaucracy and red tape.

"I'd be more concerned if people said this is a very bureaucratic system which is useless . . . I'd be more worried about that, to be honest."

To be honest - I'm too pissed off to write anymore. Jim - if your junket department is responsible for reallocated beneficiaries and global economic conditions - then best you get started on eliminating global warming - because you might as well claim that as well.

Helen - tax cuts are not spending - this is spending.

Clark on tax

2004-12-07T14:22:00.000+13:00

In the House today responding to another attack on her Governments over taxation she actually said this:

"Tax cuts are spending".

Nothing could demonstrate the mind set of Clark and co - they simply can not accept that tax belongs to the people that generate it.

More particularly - individuals make better choices for their own spending rather than the Government making those spending decisions for them and chewing up half the cash through bureaucracy.

Civil Unions

2004-12-02T16:54:00.000+13:00

My Right has resolutely avoided posting on the much blogged Civil Unions Bill, having no strong views either way. But one passage from Upton on Line did seem to offer a compact analysis of one side of the argument - as well as highlighting the fact that this debate is not a new one.

Recently departed French philosopher Jacques Derrida put his case thus:

“If I was a legislator, I would quite simply propose the removal of the word and the concept of marriage from the civil code. ‘Marriage’, an incarnation of religious, sacred and heterosexual values with the accompanying vows of procreation and eternal fidelity, is a concession made by the secular state to the Christian church and in particular its monogamous form which derives neither from Jewish … nor Muslim [traditions]. In suppressing the word and the concept of marriage, this equivocation, this religious hypocrisy which has no place in a secular state, there would be in its place a civil union, something contractual, a sort of generalised civil marriage, improved, refined, flexible and able to be adjusted between partners of whatever sex or number.”

You can't deny the lucidity of his argument - agree with him or not!

Don Brash - politician

2004-12-02T09:31:00.000+13:00

An encouraging sign for National types last night as Dr Don appeared on Face to Face with Kim Hill. In a fairly assured performance all round, in front of a rather subdued Hill, Brash showed signs that he might well be able to handle Helen in debates.

The best example was when Hill tried to attack the Orewa speech and suggested that surely Maori were in need of help. After Brash reminded everyone that Labour had almost broken copyright law in adopting the 'need not race' mantra, Hill suggested that Maori were clearly over represented in all the wrong statistics (missing the point completely - but that's another post) - Brash simply asked her, "are they just as able".

Hill was speechless (in itself an unusual but wonderful thing),so sensing a simple winner, Brash repeated the question, nothing. And that was it - potentially damaging issue shut down with a points victory.

Kim Hill is no Helen Clark - but promising performance none the less.

Musings

2004-11-29T13:58:00.000+13:00

My Right was in Wellington recently and had dinner with a close and respected colleague. Conversation quickly moved off work and into broader interests. Blogging is a personal habit for My Right, this conversation illustrated why. It also crystallised My Right's frustrations with political interpretation and perception.

The colleague in question has always held My Right in high regard. Perceived as a caring and empathetic individual and in genial company, My Right was talking openly. When the topic of blogging came up, My Right was asked what his "angle" was - to which he answered - "if I had to label it, typically, but certainly not exclusively, right". There was shock and dismay in equal measure.

The shock was based on said colleagues underlying belief that My Right was well intentioned, generous and compassionate. Somehow being 'right' changed that - WHY??

The dismay was simply due to the colleagues inherent belief that ‘right’ was all about “the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer (copyright, My Right most excruciating cliché dept 2004). Being ‘left’ is a much more virtuous path to follow was the logical extrapolation of this view.

There it was - in one exchange – clarity.

Political leanings make up a fraction of the individual. For My Right being 'right' or 'left' is not about morality, principles, or desired outcomes, it is about process.

To My Right’s mind - morality should drive policy, pragmatism should drive delivery. More often than not, My Right believes that 'rightist' solutions deliver the most desirable outcomes for the largest numbers of people at all levels off society. Does that somehow intimate my moral disposition?

Further - I acknowledge and accept that it is time for many on 'the right' to get over some of their lordly world views. At the same time many on 'the left' need to relax some of their sanctimonious reverence. Too often people adopt a preordained position on every issue dependant purely on whether it is perceived to be ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ standpoint – facile is a word that comes to mind. (If George Bush wanted world peace, Keith Locke would oppose it.)

In an environment where Labour and National are getting closer and closer policy wise and the battle is for 'the centre' ground, it seems that a few fringe issues where differentiation is easy take a disproportionate percentage of the landscape. When it comes to core policy - the spin factor has taken over to an alarming degree simply to assure voters the Labour is ‘left’ and National ‘right’.

An old colleague of My Right's was adamant in the early days of MMP that the most natural coalition was between National and Labour. Doctor Evil once said - "we're not so different you and I". I think they both had a point. If the notion of ‘left’ and ‘right’ fell out of the common vernacular, My Right would be the first to bid it farewell.

(Message to self – blog title is dripping with hypocrisy in light of recent posting)

(Ed – noted)

I thought it had to be a joke

2004-11-26T13:54:00.000+13:00

When My Right watched Eating Media Lunch this week he thought that Jeremy Wells had given up pushing the envelope in favour of moving the entire Paper Plus factory.

There was an interview of the producer of a new porn flick based on Maori and Pakeha pre battle orgies called "Anal Mana". I thought it was to funny to be real, I was wrong...

Scorn for porno movie shot in Taranaki

This could go either way.....

2004-11-25T10:23:00.000+13:00

There is a social policy powwow going on in Wellington this week that is focusing on the effectiveness of social policy, dubbed, “What Works?” - investing in effective social policy".

My Right is encouraged and hesitant about this one. Social Steve Maharey and Pete Hodgson are making all the right noises about "evidence based" social spending;

“In the past social policy has tended to be treated as an area of expenditure without any clear evidence of what particular policies lead to improvements for society and the economy,” the Ministers said. “This government has been taking very important steps to find out which social policies work so it can invest in what is effective and not continue with policies that don’t prove themselves.”

This is hugely encouraging. Well directed and monitored social spending is a good thing. My Right's only fear is that if Government Department's are left to 'self evaluate' their own policy then this could end up being a template budget justification (read - expansion) exercise.

Let's hope that this is not the case and that the central theme of this conference is that Government Departments are spending our money, not their own. They are not sanctioned to create policy or programs deemed 'worthy' in their own eyes beyond the scope that the Government lays down.

More to follow when the findings are released.

One sensible idea - and then straight back to type

2004-11-24T11:55:00.000+13:00

After suggesting, quite rightly, that reducing the Company tax rate to 30% would give all New Zealand businesses a boost - Jim Anderton has reverted back to his officious self. Jim was at the opening of a new business in Palmerston North when he appeared to have a breakthrough of sorts when he said;

“If we work to turn around struggling businesses, we are accused of backing losers. If we work with successful businesses, to accelerate their growth, we’re accused of throwing money at businesses that don’t need it".

Bingo! Bang on Jim. What the critics are saying is rather than a back door scatter gun "I'm Father Christmas" approach - why not sort out the RMA, make it easier for small business to employ (and release) staff, drop the company tax rate..... Generally make doing business in New Zealand easier for every business by getting the hell out of it and allow market forces to play out.

Anyone else haka'd out

2004-11-22T18:29:00.000+13:00

My Right has just been watching the news and seen the coverage of the launch of the new campaign to prevent STD's in our youth - good cause - no issue there.

But must every single official opening, not to mention the opening of most official emails, be punctuated by a haka these days?

Fan bloody tastic

2004-11-18T14:42:00.000+13:00

Court allows ACT to seek Awatere Huata's expulsion from Parliament

Be gone you contempible witch. A narcissistic kleptomaniac, not to my liking at all.

Democracy - Cullen Style

2004-11-17T13:55:00.000+13:00

In true, "we won, you lost, eat that" style - Cullen has once again showed that his arrogance doesn't boarder on contempt - the two are indistinguishable. Ramming through the Foreshore and Seabed legislation is nothing more than a fire fighting exercise, but to treat the public like idiots by denying our representatives the right to debate the Bill is insulting. Cullen today;

"Dr Cullen savaged the opposition today as the committee stage debate began.

"They're going to bash their gums for the next 24 hours with absolutely no purpose. They don't understand the bill and don't understand the law," he said."

They are bashing their gums on my behalf you arrogant prick.

Immoral? I prefer rational.

2004-11-17T13:50:00.000+13:00

In a recent exchnage in the comments of this post on Tax - Jordan (Just Left) finished with the following charge:

"I am perfectly comfortable with returning the gain (after the pain) to those who suffered most, and to whom it would make the most difference. That is what Working for Families does, through tax credits and other mechanisms.

If your position is basically that high income earners deserve this dividend more than low income earners who have families to support, then I charge you sir with being immoral."

Not a charge My Right takes lightly.

Jordan - my position is that I want the best for everyone (and world peace - naturally). I absolutely believe that no member of a decent society should be left behind in poverty, should be unable to afford what is required for a 'decent life' (but does 'decent' now mean having Sky TV?), should enjoy less rights before the law. I firmly believe in all of these things.

But when it comes to tax - I am about balance. Hypothetically, if the current top tax rate was 25 cents (and the lower brackets lower than they are now) and the economy was ticking over and social services were as they are now - would you still argue that 39 cents was appropriate as the top rate? Where does it stop? Will it ever be appropriate to lower the top rate below 39%?

Why does the idea of taking less tax of people on a higher income revolt you so? Do you believe in complete redistribution?

Why don't you take it 100 percent and redistribute it evenly? Because you know that before long a lot of people will think - "screw this, no point working hard if the cheque is the same anyway". I don't want us to be equally poor - I want everyone's wealth to increase - everyone's.

As an aside - we recently debated the benefits of maintaining "work / life balance". My desire for nice things requires money, to earn that money I work long and hard (by choice) - but the balance could certainly be improved if half of my working life wasn't spent working for Cullen.

Police - Government relations take another hit

2004-11-14T11:57:00.000+13:00

5 Police Officers and 1 civvie are to be charged with traffic offences after doing what they were told to by one of the PM's staffers. My Right thought the affair was flogged for all it was worth at the time - the idea of the PM's motorcade doing a few extra clicks does not particular perturb me (as long as no civilians were endangered) - but this response seems extreme.

5 careers prejudiced in a face saving excercise that can do nothing for to ease tensions between the Government, the Police HQ and front line Police. Two of the officers are being chargeed for being a party to dangerous driving. So they are getting done for 'being there', was Helen not there as well?

Don't try to tell me that the officers driving were solely responsible for the decision to speed. Don't try to tell me that Helen did not realise that they were flying and could not have told the lads to settle down (after all, she wasn't that fussed about the rugby in any case).

Here's hoping the officers involved refuse to lie down and cop all the rap themselves. If one thing is clear from this whole sorry saga, it is this; if something happens that could make Helen look bad - be somewhere else.

The Tax Debate

2004-11-12T11:15:00.000+13:00

There is not much to add to the tax debate currently circulating - other than to say that Cullen and co may have to take some medicine and consider returning some cash to those that actually earnt it in the first place. Rodney Hide is leading the charge and sums it up thus:

Re-crunched figures supplied by Treasury on changes to household incomes and taxes dig the Finance Minister into a deeper hole, confirming that Kiwi households have been harder hit in real terms under Labour than even I initially thought, ACT New Zealand Leader Rodney Hide said today.

"Dr Cullen's new figures were compiled hastily by Treasury in an attempt to save the Minister's face over earlier data, he signed out, that showed cuts in nominal net incomes," Mr Hide said.

"I waited for the better news but unfortunately it didn't come - in fact, quite the opposite. The new figures reveal that the average Kiwi household is $1,740 a year worse off, with Labour's extra taxes swallowing up two-thirds of the increase in household income between 2000 and 2004.

"Dr Cullen is right when he says the figures only tell half the story. The 6 percent increase in net income must be offset by inflation. However, under Labour, inflation was at 10.4 percent from 2000-04. The fact is that a dollar today just doesn't buy what it did when Labour took office.

"Inflation and higher taxes have squeezed hardworking Kiwis, meaning in real terms, the average household is nearly 4 percent worse off over the last four years.

My Right has one question - where the fuck is John Key and National?!?!? Key started quite well as Finance Spokesman when he revealed the effective marginal tax rates under Labour immediately after the last budget. But as it was with the JT golden handshake, Act are setting the agenda, and scoring hits.

Key was quoted in a Dominion article a couple of days ago - but the even that had the edge taken off it:

National's finance spokesman John Key said the figures meant taxpayers were forking out $8m more every day.

"The tax bucket is so full even (Progressive Party leader) Jim Anderton thinks it's time to cut taxes," he said.

"Many families are struggling to make ends meet under this high-tax, anti-family Government – not that it appears to care," Hide said.

The ACT leader pledged to cut top personal and company rate to 20c in the dollar.

National has yet to announce its tax policy.

Key should be on this like white on rice - instead some garrulous figures and not much more. The fact that National have not announced there tax policy left the door open for the slightly churlish reporter to make National appear impotent on the tax front.

Whatever the reasons for 'keeping the powder dry' - National should be landing punches - at the moment My Right is not even seeing a solid jab.

Classic

2004-11-11T14:10:00.000+13:00

From this weeks Independent 'Scuttlebutt', some classic Nu Zalan Duc-shin:

That's not what I said

Being a court reporter (of the stenographer rather than journalist variety) can be a challenging job, as Hamilton District Court reporter Jane Stearns pointed out in a recent LawTalk article.

Usual problems include counsel asking questions too quickly, tapping the microphone or having quiet chats with colleagues when their microphones are still on.

However, when Stearns started out, she had the added challenge of being from England and thus having the odd problem understanding every word that Kiwis were saying. "My best effort so far must be when I transcribed, 'I wrote out a cheque,' which I heard clearly.

In fact, the defendant had said, 'I rooted a chick'."

Speaking of campaign themes for National

2004-11-10T11:10:00.000+13:00

My Right missed a big one out from the post below. The Ever Lasting Man (an interesting pseudonym - but every man has a dream - why not go for immortality??) quite correctly points out:

"The trick now is for National and whoever else ties to their boat to get their act together (no pun intended nor Freudian slip) and show the country they are a real alternative. All they have to do is be honest. Labour has always been all about dishonesty this time; they tell porkies yet make the media think its fact or true."

I can't recall a more focus group driven administration in New Zealand history that will commit to something and bail out the minute is proved unpopular. In the absence of critical mainstream media - they can get away with it. The political term is 'spin', or treating the public like muppets.

My Right has often said that Labour 'do politics' better than anyone else, the average New Zealander does not hold politics and politicians in very high regard. Put that together and National simply need to show that this Labour Government are obsessed with staying in power at best, sardonic at worst.

By the way - I don't think nicely worded press releases claiming 'Government Spin' followed by a bunch of statistics is the way to go on this one. Someone get out there and say, "Cullen and Labour are liars - they swore only 5% New Zealanders would be in the top tax bracket - the figure is now 12% - that is lying".

Politics is poll driven Marketing

2004-11-08T16:05:00.000+13:00

Mr Farrar - please make sure the National Party Strategy team receive the following quotte that wrapped up a Nick Byrant piece in the NBR;

"So once again, as in any New Zealand election, it appears the middle is where it's at.

But with more people identifying themselves as right wing than left and so many examples of old-fashioned left-wing intervention from this government, success for the right at the next election must surely be a matter of good communication."

Absolutely! My Right remembers having an outdoor lunch with Jenny Shipley, et al, prior to the 1999 Election. The filthy and accusatory looks from many passers by implied that they thought My Right had a couple of freshly bought slaves in the boot of his car. National has a branding crisis that it must address - and urgently (Ms Boag - they'll call you, don't call them). Byrant's piece is a timely reminder to National that they are under performing, and failing to get their message through, a message that a great many New Zealander's actually want to hear.

Some ideas:

A literal rebranding, drop the blue or at least incorporate some other colour (s). (When Joe New Zealander sees a politician wearing a Blue Button at Election time - they also expect to see someone talking with a silver spoon coming out of there mouth as well).

Candidate Selection! My Right has blogged before on a talented, dynamic, young Maori candidate in the 1999 Election (who missed out that year) being given a disgracefully low list ranking in 2002. It just so happened he would have been perfect to step into the Maori Affairs spokemanship when Georgina stepped aside. (A balanced, fresh and confident line up please. Everything in moderation - even white middle class males like My Right!).

Change the emphasis of the tax policy to highlight things that are stinging all of us - i.e. petrol tax, other stealth taxes and levies. (Broad base support requires broad messages).

Don - liven up mate and throw some sound bites around (they don't have to be personal attacks - you're above that - that's fine). Confident and forceful delivery can get you through the odd gaffe with credibility in one piece - in fact Helen has shown you can get away with saying just about anything if you keep a straight face. (My Right is all for deliberate and considered debate - but getting beaten up by Helen ain't a good look for a future PM).

Accept that on some key policy planks - there is very little difference between National and Labour, focus on idealogy and liberalism. (Helen is quite an inexperienced Mother to be trying to bring up 4 million of us).

Lots more to come prior to the Election - but the NBR column tapped into a long suffered itch.

PNN exposes Keith Locke

2004-11-08T13:30:00.000+13:00

as being a tiresome drum beating bore who can't get his facts straight:

4.11.04 | KEITH LOCKE CARPS, WHINES

Supercilious argument and pious tone all rammed down your throat, and all in order to make Keith feel better about himself. Thanks to PNN for taking the time to dissect one of these trumped up press releases - My Right's doctor has warned him off even reading them.

Challenge to Jordan and Russell Brown

2004-11-04T10:48:00.000+13:00

Place your hand on your hearts and tell me that John Tamihere's honourable 'resignation' was not under orders.

Rodney Hide: In light of the Prime Minister’s response, what has changed since yesterday, when she promised this House due process for Mr Tamihere, and today, when she accepted his resignation? [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: I am not going to warn people about interjecting or making noises while questions are being asked. Questions are entitled to be heard in silence.

Rt Hon HELEN CLARK: As I told the House yesterday there is a process in train—and it still is in train—to have a report on a range of allegations, many of them mounted by the member, concerning Mr Tamihere. That process is going on. Mr Tamihere meantime has decided he will resign.

Bullshit, pure and simple. The spin is as audacious as it is insulting - and rightly pointed out by Hide and Brash yesterday:

ACT leader Rodney Hide and National leader Don Brash accused Miss Clark of doing a deal to ensure Mr Tamihere's support for the controversial foreshore and seabed legislation.

"We know her people were talking to John Tamihere, and here's the deal. Resign, sit in the back seat quietly like a good Maori Labour MP, vote for the seabed and foreshore bill, and you might be back," Mr Hide said.

Dr Brash said Labour was doing deals on an "extraordinary scale". She's playing for time. She desperately needed, and still needs, Mr Tamihere's loyalty."

Apart from Helen and Heather's spin becoming rather insulting - the good news is that political cynicism and desperation will probably cause more issues for Labour than it does save face. Can anyone imagine JT sitting quietly while he is on probation?

Meanwhile - hands on hearts boys - tell me it was his decision to resign.

I never thought I would say it

2004-11-03T14:29:00.000+13:00

But thank you to Peter Dunne. Those of you sad enough to watch, or read the transcripts from, Parliamentary Question Time (whilst clearly needing to consider your levels of self loathing) will be very fimiliar with the following phrase - "Point of Order, Mr Speaker".

Question time is utterly littered with this interuption - typically followed by following response from the Speaker, "The Minister did address the question". Then another, "Point of Order, Mr Speaker", swiftly followed by - "I am not hear to judge the quality of the answer, it may not satisfy the member, but the Minister did address the question".

This banal to'ing and fro'ing goes on day after day. But you do have to have some sympathy for the Opposition (regardless of who is in power) - with the current Standing Orders, a Minister can say just about anything and get away with it.

Well, Peter Dunne has finally worded a Point of Order that will hopefully lead to that entire Standing Order being reviewed - this from Question Time yesterday:

Ron Mark: Does the Minister not remember receiving this letter of 29 September 2002 from a southern communications centre officer, addressed to him, where the officer pointed out a further problem, that being: “I have logged on seven highway patrols working from the Rangiora base, and our instruction is that they are not to attend any events, including traffic accidents.”, and if he does remember receiving that letter and reading it, can he tell us what he has done to ensure that strategic traffic units, highway patrols, excess blood/alcohol units, are all available for general duties call-outs such as the two that we have heard of, most disastrously, in the papers of late?

Hon GEORGE HAWKINS: All staff who are on patrol are available to attend—

Ron Mark: They are not.

Hon GEORGE HAWKINS: They are, and of course one letter from one disillusioned constable does not say what police policy is all about, but Mr Mark might believe anyone. He probably believes in Santa Claus!

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: No, no, the member is going to stand, withdraw, and apologise.

Hon GEORGE HAWKINS: I withdraw and apologise.

Hon Peter Dunne: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I raise this point of order in respect of the ruling that you made regarding my colleague Marc Alexander’s supplementary question. You have long ruled that Ministers are required to address questions, and that you are not responsible for the quality or content of the answer. I think you may have made, as it is, a rod for your own back in that regard. But leaving that aside, in this instance your ruling was that my colleague’s specific question was one of a number of questions contained within the question that had been put to the Minister, and that essentially the Minister was not obliged to address any of them in responding. Now I think that actually takes the ruling to an extent that makes it a somewhat pointless exercise if addressing a question means that, in fact, someone merely has to get up and utter some words.

Mr SPEAKER: I think the member, who usually always raises a point of order when it is valid, has made a very interesting point. I want to give that some consideration, and I will come back with an answer.

Hopefully Hunt sends this to the Standing Orders Comittee at the very least.
Nice work Peter.

Good job

2004-11-02T10:56:00.000+13:00

After failing spectacularly to play victim, whilst simultaneously trying to create New Zealand's very own Jackie O, Donna A and her body guard / husband have are going to be found out for what they are - thuggish thiefs.

MP Donna Awatere Huata and her husband are to go on trial on charges of fraud and perverting the course of justice.

Awatere Huata and Wi Huata will face 19 charges of misusing $95,000 of cheques from the taxpayer-funded Pipi Foundation when they stand trial at Auckland District Court.

Not excatly encouraging when your own Lawyer accepts that there is a case to answer Donna.

Work / Life Balance - a long term perspective

2004-11-01T07:57:00.000+13:00

There has been a lot of blog on the ILO Study on Work - Life balance - but there was one post that struck a cord. Jordan at Just Left is generally reasonable - but My Right does wonder whether his relationship with reality is a touch casual at times. When commenting on the fact that 20% of New Zealander's are working 50 plus hours a week he states:

This goes to the heart of what kind of society we want to build. Do we want to copy the Americans, the Aussies and the Brits with a long-hours culture? Or do we want to follow a more European model where people work fewer hours and fewer days, but are more productive when they do work?

My view is the latter. Not many people are lucky enough to have jobs they love. Those who do are always going to lavish as much time as they can on them. For the rest of the workforce, the saying is very apt: we work to live, we don't live to work. Decent wages and a REAL forty-hour week can help contribute to a whole range of positive outcomes for workers and their families.

I would favour making overtime payments mandatory once 40hrs are passed for people on wages, and some education work for employers about the benefits of having people keep to their 40hr (or shorter) week.

Maybe this is something Labour can look at next term. Higher productivity, shorter hours and more holidays - sounds pretty attractive to me :)

Of course it sounds attractive, if you are looking to emulate the catastrophic attempt by France to 'implement' work/life balance (although, in fairness, Jordan does not advocate dropping the working week to 35 hours).

The point is that work creates GDP for the country - this is good (My Right disputes the argument that 40 solid hours can somehow be equal to, or greater than, 50 solid hours). It creates wealth and opportunity for those that choose to work hard - this is fair. Sometimes you have to work harder and longer to get ahead of the pack - this is life.

My Right has made the choice over the past 6 years to throw himself into his work - typically topping 50 hours, frequently nudging 60. The extra hours were often spent learning new skills, ensuring project deadlines are met, in short - showing out as a dedicated employee eager to get ahead. This has been successful with regular promotions and pay rises.

Where is the balance in that you say??

The balance comes in two years when My Right has Mrs Right and a party of Little Rights to take care of. The ground work is done, the position in the organistion has been obtained and the higher salary level established. In short, it's payback time. My Right will still get the same salary - but will kick back to 40 hours and enjoy the flexibilty his employer now affords him due to his reputation as a honest worker (the ability to work from home etc). This is a choice, please don't take away my ability to better myself when it suits me, by legislating reasons that make it unattractive for my employer to let me do so.

God - that happened quickly....

2004-10-29T08:37:00.000+13:00

After a quick post earlier this morning, I get to work and see this...

Labour president not aware of 'pay back' advice to Tamihere

Blogs honour - I had no idea at the time of the initial post - but good to see that this one is not a goer!

More spin than a Gentle Annie

2004-10-29T08:18:00.000+13:00

The spin doctors have put this one out there to see if it will fly:

Suspended cabinet minister John Tamihere has been advised by senior Labour figures to pay back a portion of the $195,000 payment he received from the Waipareira Trust as a way of salvaging his career. Sources said most of the payment was for bonuses or consulting work but a sum – thought to be about $50,000 – was an ex gratia payment which could be characterised as a golden handshake.
(Later)
Mr Tamihere's defenders have argued that the payments Labour campaigned against in 1999 were paid to executives who were being levered off the public payroll, but Mr Tamihere's payment was for a job well done.

My god - the level of spin from this administration is frightening. Note the careful use of 'sources', standard practice to put it out there and gauge public reaction.

If the public buy it, it becomes 'the position' - if they don't (and in this case - they won't), no one ever said it.

A Claytons interview for Clayton

2004-10-24T17:58:00.000+13:00

A while ago PNN blogged on the Simon Dallow interview with Rodney Hide, where he pretty much put the boot in where ever possible.

So I watched Agenda on Saturday morning expecting some more ‘hard hitting journalism’ – what I got was nothing more than a State Funded (sorry.... "Charter Driven") Party Political Broadcast from Labour’s new trouble shooter and hard man, Clayton Cosgrove.

Susan Wood served him up the questions emailed from Level 9 earlier that day and Clayton read his part of the script. Someone try to convince me that Clayton didn’t know this one was coming:

SUSAN
That sort of success. Now how is he personally taking this because he's looked, I mean he's a scrapper like you but he's looked wounded hasn’t he, and how is he and how are his family?

CLAYTON
Oh to be honest you know you get kicked in the guts so many times and John always you know like all of us you want to respond, you've gotta look people in the eye, but when a process like an inquiry's put in place normally it's the victim that has to say hang on I've gotta grit my teeth because I have to you know adhere to the process, but it is – I'll tell you the roughest thing, and Mr Hide I'm sure will be proud of this, you know when his wife who's a tough individual, you go to the grocer's shop with the kiddies and you know she sees another front page with another spurious allegation and she breaks down and the little ones look at her and say hey Mum why are they doing this to Dad, you know that is tough, that is tough and I'm sure Mr Hide is proud of himself with that.

That was after Susan had declared her undying love for the man and said that some nasty people didn't like liars in an earlier question:

SUSAN
It seems at the moment if we can talk about John Tamahere the man that he inspires this great loyalty from someone like you who's sitting there, you’re almost – you’re holding the faith, it's almost a religious faith you’re holding for this guy. On the other hand there are those who really want to chop him down. What is it about the character or the makeup of this guy that inspires such passion?

The full transcript is available here – I don’t advise it, it is as horrible to read as the programme was to watch. The JT affair has already been blogged to death and will continue to be no doubt – and thank god for that if that sort of crap is all we are going get from our 'Network' current affairs.

Read this

2004-10-21T09:10:00.000+13:00

PNN sums up what National should be screaming about, loudly, and over and over and over....

PNN - Rant Warning - Where Has All The Money Gone?

This could get ugly

2004-10-20T13:34:00.000+13:00

Health Minister Annette King has sipped from the poison chalice that is the Health Portfolio successfully for some time now, but it looks as though things might go sour rather quickly.

The Association of Salaried Medical Specialists is calling on the Government to bring forward the December 1 enforcement date of a health sector code of good faith under new industrial law, requiring striking unions to provide life-preserving patient services.

"Urgent Government action is required if the catastrophic national six-day strike is not to be a complete disaster for patients," executive director Ian Powell said as Parliament was due last night to pass the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill through its final reading.

So, a direct call from an Association of professionals in her portfolio for "urgent Government action" to help avoid an impending crisis, and the response via a spokesman?

A spokesman for Health Minister Annette King said her policy stood of not commenting on industrial issues.

Gutsy.

It happened on your watch George

2004-10-20T13:21:00.000+13:00

Question No 8 in The House today:

8. Hon TONY RYALL to the Minister of Police: Do the police despatch taxis in response to 111 calls; if so, in what circumstances?

No doubt George will hide behind the "I don't comment on operational matters" defence - but really, how many shockers can the police have before the Minister falls on the sword? Police will argue that it is limited resources etc that are the root cause of the issue, and they may well have a case - although the Piha Taxi example looks like a hideous error of judgement, pure and simple.

Whatever the cause of these operational blunders, surely at some stage the Police Minister 'cops it'.

"United Future is just an ego-fuelled irrelevance"

2004-10-19T14:50:00.000+13:00

My Right could not have said it better. In the 'Poll Comment' in this weeks NBR, Nick Bryant successfully describes United Future's contribution to the New Zealand political scene - bugger all. Peter Dunne is second only to Matt Robson in idiotically believing he has a genuine mandate.

I hated that bloody worm at the time, and I hate it now. I was in the audience for 'the debate' that somehow catapulted United Future from complete obscurity to relative obscurity. The debate proved nothing more than lefty types don't mind whooping it up in public - the worm followed the noise level from the audience precisely.

After asking what the good people of Ohariu Belmont see in this sanctimonious prat (Wigram folk seem to be a lost cause), Bryant closes his piece with this;

Finally, some advice that was passed down from a wise old fellow to his son in England early last century: "Son," he said, "never trust a man who waxes his moustache, orders soup at lunch, hunts south of the Thames, and, dinner dress aside, wears a bow tie."

In the absence of hard evidence not to, it's advice I intend to follow.

Hard to disagree.

One happy reader writes...

2004-10-18T11:36:00.000+13:00

"Question: Why was the insurance on Tamihere's urban assault vehicle $2252? Does it mean the trust (taxpayer) has to pay for several previous dic convictions plus probably all his whanau are under 25 with well-endorsed licences (if any).

Quote: "Someone has to pay for my mortgage and family". I know the feeling but unfortunately most of us have to find the money ourselves."

My Right has always had a bit of a soft spot for JT - but this one looks indefensible. If he had been part of the sisterhood - I don't know if even that would saved him.

I hate the fact that many in public service, be it a Trust or Government Department, feel as though they should draw a salary and also have their personal lives subsidised by the State.

Rodney, screw being 'statesman' like for a while and get in there demanding heads.

"It's in my Department, but I'm not responsible"

2004-10-15T08:49:00.000+13:00

Social Steve is having a bad time of it of late, after cock up followed debacle, the last thing he needed was an embarrasing revelation. Queue the release of some preposterously PC bollocks from Housing NZ;

Disclosure of the content of the corporation's training manuals is potentially embarrassing for the Government, which has been trying to dispel suggestions it is pandering to Maori since National Party leader Don Brash accused it of entrenching Maori privilege.

Included in the manuals – prepared by Switch Trainers and Consultants – are a series of statements about what Maori might reasonably have expected when the Treaty was signed in 1840. They include the assertion that:

# There would be limited British settlement areas where British law would apply; and

# The bulk of the country would still belong to the tribes, which would rule themselves as they wished, with some Pakeha settlers there by agreement and observing Maori law.

But what Maori got, the manuals state, was:

# An imposed Pakeha government making laws for all without reference either to the Treaty or to Maori needs.

# The deliberate undermining and destruction of Maori authority and social systems.

# Wars of conquest launched against them by governments.

Asked on Wednesday if he agreed that Maori expected to retain control when they signed the Treaty, Mr Maharey said that was a "little different" from his understanding. But he told Parliament yesterday the assertion was "a fact".

Now it would be easy to dismiss this as the work of a typical Government Department leather elbow cardigan clad plonker - but there is something a bit more disturbing than that. For a long time now the Government has been quizzed on what exactly is meant by "the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi" which has found it's way into all sorts of legislation and Government Department mandates. If this is an interpretation accepted by this Government - God help us.

Treasury on the leash

2004-10-13T11:33:00.000+13:00

The Letter this week refers to the BNZ Weekly Overview (pdf) which reveals that even The Treasury are not spared the whip from the Government's spin machine. This quote from BNZ Chief Economist John Whitehead is just plain frightening:

Treasury are probably engaging in the biggest smoke and mirrors exercise we have seen from them since 1990. But to give their shenanigans the benefit of the doubt the driving force behind these manoeuvres as back then could be from above for political reasons.
There is almost $5b available by traditional surplus measures used in New Zealand for decades to use for both increased spending and tax cuts. The question then is when will we tax payers get some of our money back or does the government plan a major expansion down the track of the economic activities of the state?

There are two disturbing elements here. Firstly that it seems unmistakable that The Treasury are happy to sing from Dr Cullen's, "I love to tax - so you tell them I need it", song book despite the independence supposedly guaranteed by the Fiscal Responsibility Act.

Secondly, and more importantly, this prick has stashed 5 billion dollars of our cash for his own purposes!! Whether those purposes are cynical vote buying, idealogical agenda's or Social Steve Maharey's bad ideas, My Right does not care - it was ours - give it back man.

Message to John Key - get yourself on the front page with some numbers, even if you have to rely on Mr Whitehead to put them together for you.

I hate to bait fate

2004-10-13T11:01:00.000+13:00

But Transit appear to be doing so on what must be one of the most dangerous stretches of road in New Zealand. Seven deaths in 6 months over 5km of road and the response from Transit is 700 metres of wire. Forgive My Right for wondering who will front for cameras from Transit when someone dies somewhere along the other 4300 metres.

But they will have someone watching the wire...

Stuff - "Eye on 'killer highway'"

If Bank's concession speech was forced

2004-10-11T16:16:00.000+13:00

then this article in the Herald was even more so;

Banks gracious, humbled in defeat

After cheer leading for pretty much anyone but him all the way through the campaign, could the Herald not a least acknowledge his professional and polite handing over of the reigns without being snide? Why not humble rather than humbled in the headline for instance? It goes on with little digs and barbs all the way through:

It was a gracious, controlled concession speech: "I have spoken with Mr Hubbard and given him my congratulations." The people had spoken and he respected that, etcetera.

Banks nearly lost his public composure only twice. Thanking supporters, his voice wobbled as it alighted on wife Amanda's name. A minute later, another wobble arrived and threatened to stay.

"All my adult life," he said, "I have had an overwhelming commitment to civic duty," his voice slowed and faltered, "and ... in a small way," he struggled to get the words out ,"to balance the family ledger."

It was a fleeting moment of vulnerability from a man not given to emotional revelation. The "family ledger" is the legacy of Banks' parents Archibald and Kitty, back-street abortionists who were both jailed when he was 18.

The etcetera at the end of the first paragraph just sounded picayune. Not quite the hatchet job the NBR did on Hubbard (insert your own reference to a spectacular back fire here...) - but a bit of balance and respect is clearly out of Julie Middleton's range.

Damn - spoke too soon

2004-10-06T13:39:00.000+13:00

The day My Right accuses Social Steve Maharey of being sensible - he goes out of his way to demonstrate that I was getting a little carried away. This from question time yesterday:

Dr Muriel Newman: Would the Minister have disestablished the Community Employment Group if there had not been any adverse publicity?

Hon STEVE MAHAREY: No, I definitely would not have, because this Government works through those kinds of debates in a very cool and calm fashion to decide what it will do. What we have found on numerous occasions, as the member will know, is that the accusations that were made about, for example, the Pink Kit home-birthing kit for women, the Mâori Women’s Welfare League, and the Porangahau marae committee all proved to be utterly, utterly baseless. We do not react to that sort of criticism; we base our changes on evidence.

Hat Tip to SageNZ for highlighting one of the most glaring contradictions since Michael Moore won an Oscar for a 'documentary'.

About time

2004-10-06T13:01:00.000+13:00

Parliament's health select committee have finally decided to admit that NZ Vets were exposed to Agent Orange in Vietnam and suffered the same side effects as all other Vets exposed.

Overwhelmingly, the committee accepted that New Zealand Vietnam veterans were exposed to a very toxic environment," committee chairwoman Steve Chadwick said.

"That's our key recommendation for the Government to consider."

However, the committee stopped short of recommending compensation or an apology, saying most veterans who made submissions simply wanted acknowledgement.

Today's report would be considered by the Government, and it was up to the Government to decide if it wanted to apologise, Ms Chadwick said.

Thank god for that, given this quote from a report in 1998 seemed to establish the validity of this claim way back when...

Side-effects Laboratory studies made in 1969 established a link between Agent Orange and birth defects, and two years later the use of chemical defoliants was stopped. But it was too late. By then some 5 million acres of forest had defoliated, half of which remains unrestored today. Dioxin accumulated from repeated spraying entered the ecosystem of Vietnam, while tens of thousand of troops on both sides had been exposed to the chemical. Not least, Vietnamese birth defects are now double those of neighboring countries. Scientific surveys, continue to uncover side-effects, the latest (1996) documenting the high proportion of children with spina bifida born to Vietnam veterans.

Other spinoffs of Agent Orange include nerve and urological disorders, skin diseases, and soft-tissue cancers. In 1984 a $240 million settlement was made to Agent Orange victims in the United States, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada (excluding South Korea, the second-largest foreign contingent), but many are still fearful of long-term reproduction in their children."

Although the New Zealand Government did try to keep the numbers of Kiwi's sent to Vietnem to a minimum, to appease ANZUS allies, in 1969 there were over 500 men representing the New Zealand Government in areas where Agent Orange was used.

My Right does not believe that the Government should apologise for the fact that these Vets were exposed to Agent Orange, that was beyond their control. But they should acknowledge that it happened and apologise for the delay in that acknowledgement. In terms of compensation, that is trickier in terms of posthumous payments to widows etc, but we should be taking damn good care of the Vets that are left.

Maharey sounding sensible...

2004-10-05T09:48:00.000+13:00

A piece today by Colin James has outlined Social Steve's plans to tidy up the benefit system and streamline the number of entitlements a case worker may have to consider for each client. Policy detail hasn't been thrashed out - but the intention sound both luadable and sensible:

"But Maharey has been cooking up something much bigger. The working title is the "single benefit" and it should clear the Cabinet in December after some more work by officials to ensure no beneficiary is left worse off at the changeover and to quantify the national cost-benefit.

There are, Maharey says, 10 "base benefits" (among them unemployment, sickness, disability, DPBs and widows) and 36 "add-ons" designed to meet special needs and difficulties. These grew up during the 1980s and 1990s when the focus was tightened on to individual need.

Fine-tuning needs-based payment is a rational approach. But it has led to frontline welfare staff spending around 70 per cent of their time untangling the web of benefit entitlements for those in need. The complexity has also spawned an "advocacy industry" designed to help beneficiaries to get from bamboozled staff what the law says they are entitled to."

National has a real problem now. If Labour can tame the devout social engineer that is Steve Maharey and get him sounding off about rationalising and even reducing bureaucracy, and Trev gets a bit more licence to put the slipper into the odd Powhiri or Scholarship, then without being radical, differentiation for National is nigh on impossible.

As James concluded, "If that sounds like National and Act, don't be too surprised. In this field, as in others, once-mushy Labour has been quietly nudging the centre line. Even Maharey, the one-time sociologist."

Labour will do whatever it takes to retain power - they have proved this on many occasions. If Don Brash has one legacy - it will be hauling Labour back from the idealogical far left (heard much from Margaret Wilson lately) to the sensible slightly right of centre.

It may not get him elected - but it has done us all a huge service.

Lessons learned...

2004-10-04T13:29:00.000+13:00

Look at the state of this guy...

Attention – it's Mr Radical

Now My Right does not condone violence or bullying in schools, but really, cause and effect sparky.

He spent two of "the most intense years" of his life at Shirley Boys' High School before transferring to Hagley at the beginning of 2003.

"I would get picked on every day, separated from the class, yelled at, beaten up, pushed over. All because I was different.

You are not 'different' - you are an attention seeking sap. You may not 'deserve' everything you get, but you do go out of your way to ensure you receive it.

Unbelievable

2004-10-02T13:54:00.000+12:00

The last time My Right was speechless, he said nothing. He said nothing again this morning when he read that the murderer (not technically correct I know, but when a man beats a man to death with his bare hands, it kinda fits...) of David McNee has tried to 'out' another four high profile Auckland men that paid him for sex.

The man who killed interior designer David McNee claims he will expose four other "high-profile" men who paid him for sex.

Phillip Layton Edwards is serving a nine-year sentence for the manslaughter of Mr McNee last year.

Since he was moved from Mt Eden prison to Auckland Prison at Paremoremo last week, Edwards, 24, has tried to send letters to four Auckland men asking for money.

He allegedly told the men he would tell the media that they paid him for sex.

If true, that could raise further questions about the so-called "homosexual panic" defence that some commentators allege saved Edwards from a murder conviction.

Edwards' lawyer Roy Wade argued at the trial that Edwards was guilty of manslaughter because he never intended to kill Mr McNee.

The defence said Edwards was paid to perform a sex act upon himself and that he was provoked when Mr McNee violated their "no touching" agreement.

So here is a guy admitting that he had played 'pitcher' and 'catcher' in the past - but he still paniced and beat an old man to death when he got a little busy handed contrary to their "arrangement".

This one shits me to tears. If at any stage of the trial he said it was 'panic' that caused him to commit the act of violence - hull him back up on a perjury charge as well as the murder charge he was always guilty of.

Getting it on because they don't get along

2004-10-01T16:11:00.000+12:00

The NBR are considering laying a complaint of contempt of court against Dick Hubbard. This is due to Hubbard actually naming the figure he was sueing the NBR for in his original action against the publication.

This seems like a slightly strange law, but it is law, and he appears to have breached it.

This fight seems personal enough to crack on well after the race to become Auckland's favourite show pony. There is something curiously alluring about this ruckus. My Right is just waiting to find out the source of this mutual loathing - it must be something good.

If you thought our question time was funny...

2004-09-28T17:06:00.000+12:00

From The Star (Johannesburg) - date unknown as it was lifted from an old email (bit busy today!):

"The situation is absolutely under control," Transport Minister Ephraem
Magagula told the Swaziland parliament in Mbabane. "Our nation's merchant
navy is perfectly safe. We just don't know where it is, that's all."
Replying to an MP's question, Minister Magagula admitted that the
landlocked country had completely lost track of its only ship, the
Swazimar: "We believe it is in a sea somewhere. At one time, we sent a
team of men to look for it, but there was a problem with drink and they
failed to find it, and so, technically, yes, we've lost it a bit. But I
categorically reject all suggestions of incompetence on the part of this
government. The Swazimar is a big ship painted in the sort of nice bright
colours you can see at night. Mark my words, it will turn up. The right
honourable gentleman opposite is a very naughty man, and he will laugh on
the other side of his face when my ship comes in."

Not even Parekura could top that.

When is a comment not a comment? When it's a post!

2004-09-27T11:32:00.000+12:00

Got an email from Always, he was finally wound up enough to post a comment, and was informed he had typed too much (which with sausage fingers must have given him ample time to think). So, email reproduced below, Always Right debuts:

Mate - I tried to post this comment and got told to naff off cause it's over 1000 characters. Maybe you can post it yourself?

As a taxpayer, someone that participates in the democratic process and a born and raised kiwi - I consider that I am a stakeholder in the government of the day - regardless of whether I voted for them or not.

That being the case - I relate it to a private sector example where I pay for some shares in year 1 and four years down the track the company posts a 7.4 billion surplus and still hasn't paid me a dividend. Nup.

It's good politics from Labour - their voter base as historically and will remain the lower to middle class voters. So Cullen is making damn sure they stay in that bracket with his fiscal policy and sucks in their vote back with the social policy. The main thing is that this bracket remains the predominant one and those in it don't consider for a moment what a tax break could do for them and their families. Just offer the ambulance and they'll hitch a ride!

I commend my right for giving voice to his views - I share them and I wish National would come out and simply take my vote with a well thought out tax policy - it's there for the taking. Defence is another issue that concerns me - but that's a comment for another day.

Quality investigative research from ALAC

2004-09-27T09:13:00.000+12:00

My Right does not remember large parts of his university days, but it seems there must have been more going on than the head down, bum up scholastic endeavour to despatch of four years. Leaving with nothing more than two pieces of paper with letters on them, and an I O U to the government of the day with a five digit number on it, there must have been something more - surely?

That question has often disturbed My Right, which is why this morning I find myself forever indebted to ALAC for producing some quality investigative journalism that explains this mystery. ALAC have revealed that Students prefer drinking to a bit of good old fashioned library time (the most unsurprising revelation since Cher admitted she might have had a couple of running repairs done here and there).

Look out kids, the fun police are on the case, and making Friday classes compulsory could well be the solution to all of societies problems. Thank god for think tanks like ALAC I say, hic.

Question to all lefty types...

2004-09-24T11:24:00.000+12:00

Stuff reports that Cullen is fleecing us and is as happy as a lethargic burgler who has just found the back door ajar, or in the papers words;

Higher than expected tax revenue and profits have helped the Government post a massive $7.4 billion operating surplus which, at 5.3 per cent of gross domestic product, is a record.

Dr Don has issued the obligatory press release stating that the economy is booming and most of us are not actually better off as a result;

"For the first three years of this Government real wage rates actually declined, and only recently has there been a small rise. A less than 4% rise in real wages over almost five years is not much reward for working people.

"With no change in tax brackets, take-home pay has grown at an even slower rate," says Dr Brash.

My Right is realistic, and knows that the lefts fundamental abhorrence of dropping tax rates and letting people decide what is important to them for themselves will rule out a tax relief until after a change of Government.

So my question is this, can you at least look at raising the threshold for the top tax bracket to $80,000??

Is that remotely possible? Do you remember promising that only five percent of earners would be in the top bracket? Have you heard of inflation and real spending power? Can we at least talk about it?

Come on lefties, let sit down and have a chat...

Alison Annan and dictionary.com - they just work together

2004-09-23T16:16:00.000+12:00

Go to www.dictionary.com and type in 'anticlimax'. I was going to use the definition to highlight my feelings towards the painfully predictable ending to her employment dispute, in doing so found a bit of humour. You would think this definition was penned with the whole sorry scenario in mind:

an·ti·cli·max Audio pronunciation of "anticlimax" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nt-klmks, nt-)
n.

1. A decline viewed in disappointing contrast with a previous rise: the anticlimax of a brilliant career.
2. Something trivial or commonplace that concludes a series of significant events: After a week of dramatic negotiations, all that followed was anticlimax.
3. A sudden descent in speaking or writing from the impressive or significant to the ludicrous or inconsequential, or an instance of it: “Waggish non-Yale men never seem weary of calling ‘for God, for Country and for Yale’ the outstanding single anticlimax in the English language” (Time).

So the short version is that Annan walks away with a stack of taxpayer cash and no doubt with her head held high.

But the Auditor General's report could still make her go peacock (or Ostrich even).

To be fair, I don't blame him

2004-09-23T13:43:00.000+12:00

Dick Hubbard is suing the National Business Review for what he refers to as a 'hatchet job' in the September 17 Edition. To be fair I don't blame him.

My Right read the full edition for the first time yesterday and was quite astonished at the vindictiveness and aggression of the onslaught. Many fair points were made about Hubbard milking his one off Triple Bottom Line report, but even by My Right's rather emasculated journalistic standards, you can go too far.

Following a man and his wife into church and, presumably due to Hubbard himself being fairly normal, launching into his wife is just cheap. I like the NBR, but I have the same issue with this as I do with the tosh Michael Moore comes out with.

Message to the NBR - when you have that much legitimate material, there's no need to edit, splice or go looking for peppy personal attacks to make your case.

Newman on Maharey

2004-09-20T14:02:00.000+12:00

Muriel Newman issued a press release today slamming Steve Maharey for being a suited spineless social engineer without the bollocks to admit that throwing other people's (i.e. yours and My Rights) hard earned coin around is what flakes his pastry. She is also not impressed that he runs for cover when a bad idea (however well intentioned) and a dodgy scheme is exposed as, well, a bad idea and a dodgy scheme. Or as the good Doctor puts it;

"Mr Maharey set CEG up to fail. He took it out of WINZ, where it was part of a bigger employment strategy, and foisted the dubious high-risk Social Entrepreneur programme on it. Further, it has had to administer another failed Maharey flagship: the $8 million Community Employment Organisation strategy.

"Then, when the failures hit the headlines, the Minister ducked for cover. He even left the Labour Department to do his dirty work and announce the cancellation of his Social Entrepreneur scheme. As CEG Minister, it is Mr Maharey's future that should be under review when Cabinet meets today," Dr Newman said.

The whole release is worth a read and is hard to disagree with. If Maharey was in opposition he would be calling for a resignation I'm sure.

Finally, the right questions are going to be asked

2004-09-20T13:56:00.000+12:00

And by the Auditor-General no less. Trevor Mallard has "asked the Auditor-General to investigate whether the Annans' overseas travel, which benefited the international college, had been paid for by the Cambridge High School board of trustees."

Quite how this may come into play in relation to the employment dispute is hard to tell at this point, but at least the focus has moved on from the dodgy credits 'scandal' (trivial by comparison).

NZ Herald - Auditor-General to investigate Cambridge High

Blog Lite - off to see Always

2004-09-15T13:49:00.000+12:00

Things could be a little quiet for the next few days. Heading to Wellington to see Always Right and all his little 'to young to know they're Rights'.

But just before I go...

2004-09-15T13:48:00.000+12:00

For some strange reason My Right found Wellington-based "human rights lawyer" (read - any punks Mr 10%) Tony Ellis's mad dash to lodge 18 more claims for Prisoner compensation more than a tad opportunistic. A quick google, and My Right quickly discovered that this was small fry against previous ventures into the realm of "win one, lodge a bundle" compensation battles for Tony Ten Percent.

This from the Wairarapa Times Age, Friday, 26 April 2002:

Smith was found guilty of murdering a man in Johnsonville on December 11, 1995, and of sexual offences against the man’s son. Smith, then 22, was sentenced in August 1996 to life imprisonment and ordered to serve at least 13 years before being considered for parole.

Wellington lawyer Tony Ellis is taking Smith’s case back to the Court of Appeal as a test case for about 1500 convicted criminals who were refused legal aid for appeals.

Last month the Privy Council in London overturned the convictions of 12 New Zealanders who it said didn’t get a fair appeal after they were refused legal aid. The 12 included two convicted murderers, two convicted rapists and two convicted robbers.

In fairness, he may have a case in law. But My Right is often unfair and would have to declare this an unprincipled cash and carry case.

I give it an hour before someone informs me that he is doing it pro bono!

"The best interest of the school..."

2004-09-14T09:11:00.000+12:00

Alison Annan has declared that Cambridge High is better off now that it is paying her $100,000, despite the fact that she is not allowed back on School property. In what bordered on a victory speech:

"I am determined to prove at the full hearing that I should be restored to my full duties as principal of Cambridge High School.

"I believe that the best interests of the school will be served by my return. I am confident that I can work with the commissioner and a new board," she said.

The decision means Mrs Annan is employed by the school's commissioner, Dennis Finn, and is not authorised to return there unless asked to by him.

Mr Finn, who was appointed to the role last week after Education Minister Trevor Mallard dissolved the board, said: "That's not going to happen under any circumstances. As far as the school goes, it's business as usual."

Unfortunately, what this puffed up Pollyanna may be missing is that she has been reinstated for just long enough to lose her job 'properly'.

The Authority ruled that she had "an arguable case" and she will be given the oppotunity to argue said case. Unfortunately her arguable (read - laughable) case is coming up against a concrete one. More to follow...

Compulsory viewing - sometimes

2004-09-13T13:37:00.000+12:00

Speaker Jonathan Hunt has announced that Parliament will be televised live next year. Whilst it would be facetious to speculate as to who will actually tune in (sad types like My Right), I think it is hugely positive move.

Although Question Time is entertaining and depressing in equal measure - it is the debates that will provide some highlights for My Right. Anyone who saw Georgina Beyer's speech during The Prostitution Reform Bill debate would have been contented that impassioned and constructive oratory still exists in the Beehive - now we can all see. Good stuff.

New Kiwi Blog

2004-09-13T11:32:00.000+12:00

Head on over to SageNZ for a good old fashioned right leaning (to the point of falling over) rant. A taste from his first post:

Stepping above the parapet

Sage ventured out into the void. Here I am. opinionated white male. driven from the shores of helengrad by the need to care for my family. driven to distraction by the incredible hypocrisy and nanny statist of pricks like Marjorie Maharey with his Hugo Boss suits, provincial college professor in sociology or some other inane crap.

Welcome Sage - and remeber to keep breathing.

Work with me on this one

2004-09-10T14:37:00.000+12:00

Take a few pieces of A4 paper and put some words on them. Hell, lets even put a picture or two on them. Let's go nuts - make them glossy. Fold them up - put them in envelopes and send them to every single address in New Zealand.

At $1.00 for the printing and paper, 40 cents postage for around 1.5 million of these, My Right gets a total cost of around $2,100,000 (the ~~bureaucratic bunkum~~ intellectual property is paid for already).

Sound simple? So it should. But if you're Labour, you call in the ad agencies to maximise political capital from this venture and throw a tax payer donated zero on the end of that figure - to get a lazy $21,000,000. Don't you love giving them a nice surplus to play with?

From today's Dom: Advertising its extravagance.

Just go away

2004-09-09T15:35:00.000+12:00

Alison Annan wants her old job back because she claims she didn't resign. The Waikato Times Editorial today is pretty much in line with a previous post by My Right. The point is, if she didn't resign she should have been sacked.

Mrs Annan's lawyer claims she was under intense pressure and in a "very distressed state" when she announced her resignation last month. Whether this argument will be used in tomorrow's Employment Relations Authority hearing has not been confirmed, but it must be noted Mrs Annan is no stranger to intense pressure and has been unrelenting to the point of tyrannical in her belief that her methods of running a secondary school were the right ones.

This newspaper has previously stated that by resigning, Mrs Annan took the right, and only, action open to her following the damning report on the school by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority report. Nothing has changed.

The over-riding priority in Mrs Annan's bid for reinstatement is neither the semantic argument nor the emotional circumstances that may have contributed to her decision to resign. It is what is best for the students of Cambridge High School, some of whom have been the victims of an education method exposed as a fraud.

As Russell Brown has said, this smacks of Christine Rankin syndrome. Retain some dignity lady and let it go - there are other ways to get into the Woman's Weekly.

Tuhoe shooting for the stars

2004-09-08T14:15:00.000+12:00

Apparently you need the consent of the Tuhoe people to fly a kite in the King Country. At the select committee hearing in Auckland today some Tuhoe representatives claimed ownership of the air space to the heavens above their land. This from a Ken Shirley Press Release:

"Sitting in Auckland today, the Select Committee heard a submission from representatives of Tuhoe, who claim absolute sovereignty through their rohe with title over the sea extending 400 nautical miles offshore," Mr Shirley said.

"In answer to my questions, they also confirmed their claims of absolute sovereignty over all air space to the heavens above. It was specifically stated that, once the Foreshore and Seabed legislation is resolved, they would be approaching Air New Zealand and other airlines to negotiate compensation for all incursions into their air space.

"They drew the parallel of other sovereign states where missiles are deployed to shoot down unauthorised aircraft. The group also confirmed that it would be approaching NASA and other authorities in respect of their satellites that orbit the Earth.

Shirley finished by stating; "These farcical examples are real, and underscore the folly of the Labour Government's attempts to codify and create an instrument within the Resource Management Act that is based on spiritual belief,".

Can't really add anything to that.

A Coro fans 'perspective'

2004-09-07T13:45:00.000+12:00

From today's Herald:

TVNZ received numerous complaints about its decision to cut into TV One's scheduled programmes to screen live the explosive end to the Russian hostage siege.

However, Friday's bloody climax to the hostage drama was a ratings winner, according to ACNielsen media research. The coverage attracted 13 per cent of the potential national audience - 2 per cent behind Holmes and Rick Stein's Food Heroes, which screened earlier on the same night - and 44 per cent of all viewers watching at that time.

I suppose if "The Street" is your world, you don't much have time for an atrocity that quite rightly shocked the world.

Be it race, religion, whatever

2004-09-04T11:20:00.000+12:00

My Right has been as guilty as others recently when it comes to throwing up a bit of rhetoric. Hopefully the horrific events in Russia last night should remind us all that race relations in New Zealand are actually very good on the whole. There are issues, sure, but on the whole we are a harmonious lot.

The Russian hostage crisis is a sobering reminder of why we should all be more responsible when throwing around phrases like terrorism and civil war.

200 killed in Russian hostage crisis

The crux is in the title

2004-09-02T16:17:00.000+12:00

Idiot at No Right Turn has taken objection to the fact that My Right spends most of his waking hours trying to do his thing for NZ's GDP, and can only commit limited resource to offering thoughts for you atypical folk who come here to read them.

Accordingly, after taking the time to devour the entire Terrorism Suppression Act 2002, he has quite rightly pulled me up on a couple of points of law in order to have a dig. All fair in love and blogging I suppose.

Accordingly - My Right is happy to concede that Margaret Mutu (although as misguided as Helen Clark's stylist) is not a terrorist according to the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002.

But My Right feels the criticism (it's the tone that hurts Idiot) is a touch disingenuous. Take this piece:

"I'm constantly appalled by the right's eagerness to fling charges of "treason" at anyone who disagrees with them, and sadly our local right-wing bloggers are no exception. In response to last week's comments by Margaret Mutu, MyRight suggested that she be prosecuted for terrorism, under the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002." [My Right has not been spoken to like that since the infamous - "I'm not angry, just disappointed" speech from Forever Right Snr in 1989]

At no point did I suggest she should be prosecuted, merely that her ludicrous outburst made a certain piece of legislation "ring a bell". My Right then cautions himself!! Admitting that relating Mutu's words to terrorism may be 'considered reaching' - but no more so than relating NZ to Palestine.

All this under the title "Since sensationalism is the order of the day".

Never let it be said that Idiot does not take himself seriously, very seriously indeed.

We are being robbed people

2004-09-02T10:01:00.000+12:00

John Key has started on what should be a year long campaign to demonstrate what is essentially one of the last defining differences between 'the left' and 'the right' - tax.

National - you take what you need to ensure essential infrastructure, to provide public services, to provide welfare safety net and let people get on with life.

Labour - tax the bejesus out of 'the rich' to 'redistribute' to anyone that will vote for you next time.

Labour increased the top rate of tax by 6c to 39c after the 1999 election saying it would use the money for health and education and promising that only the wealthiest 5 per cent of taxpayers would be affected. That has since risen to 10 per cent with wage hikes.

Prime Minister Helen Clark said yesterday a booming economy was the reason. She indicated Labour was unlikely to alter the top rate.

"In the end you have to weigh up whether you want to give tax cuts or keep pouring the benefits back into health, education and the services that the New Zealand public like and want and deserve and should have."

The doctors no cheaper for me than it was yesterday Helen, I am still repaying my student loan and the only other 'increased service' I have noticed is an increase in people ready and waiting to give me a speeding ticket. Leave enough money in people's pocket for them to afford a decent heater and the power to run it - and they may not need your doctors subsidy.

National need cogently demonstrate that this Government is making life as costly as possible for middle New Zealand. This is John Key's task for the next 12 months, he has started, good luck to him.

I don't like the Green's

2004-08-31T08:34:00.000+12:00

The tree hugging I can take, the little patches on the elbows - odd, but whatever you're into. But this sort of imperious dismissal of a study into the potential viability of nuclear power is just irritating. A Green Party press release yesterday:

Environment Canterbury (ECan) regional councillors voted last night to consider nuclear power as part of planned debates and workshops on energy options for the region.

“Nuclear power is an absolute no-brainer for Canterbury and New Zealand,” said Mr Donald.

“Even the prospect of a nuclear power plant will immediately undermine our clean green image, to the detriment of tourism industry and primary produce exports.

“It is particularly offensive for Labour Party member Dr Ian Robertson, the mover of the motion, to suggest that the Chernobyl disaster did not kill ‘a great number’ of people. Reputable independent studies show that eight thousand clean-up workers died within five years, that there has since been a 12-fold increase in thyroid cancer among Belorussian women and a marked increase in leukaemia across Europe among children who were in the womb at the time. In terms of casualties, Chernobyl was a bigger tragedy than September 11.

“I find it disturbing that otherwise intelligent councillors have voted to investigate nuclear power. It is particularly surprising that two Labour Party councillors who are seeking re-election, Richard Budd and Sir Kerry Burke, have supported this motion that contradicts their ‘2021’ coalition’s vision statement. Helen Clark will not be amused.

No Don, what would be disturbing is if an "otherwise intelligent concillor" was to do anything but consider every possiblity, rather than pander to the antiquated preaching of the minority.

Since sensationalism is the order of the day...

2004-08-26T17:29:00.000+12:00

Further to my previous post, this from the "TERRORISM SUPPRESSION ACT 2002 PART 1 - PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS 5. Terrorist act defined" and skipping to section 2 (note - this Act applies to residents of, and actions within New Zealand).

(2)An act falls within this subsection if it is intended to cause, in any 1 or more countries, 1 or more of the outcomes specified in subsection (3), and is carried out for the purpose of advancing an ideological, political, or religious cause, and with the following intention:

(a)to induce terror in a civilian population; or

(b)to unduly compel or to force a government or an international organisation to do or abstain from doing any act.

I know that relating this piece of legislation to Mutu's comments could be considered 'reaching' - but threatening to bring home Palestine to stop a piece of legislation did make Part B ring a bell.

Time for another "Bring it on" speech to settle things down perhaps?

2004-08-26T09:52:00.000+12:00

It is one thing for a rogue public servant to cry "Civil War" - but for a well known academic and tribal leader to do so is quite extraordinary. Professor Margaret Mutu has come out with this:

"The warning by a senior civil servant of the inevitability of civil war if this bill is enacted is not hyperbole," she said in a prepared statement. [Supporting Piripi's earlier threats].

When National MP Dr Wayne Mapp asked her if she seriously believed civil war was inevitable in Ngati Kahu's district if the bill was passed, she said: "I think that is clearly stated in this paper, which is authorised by Ngati Kahu."

Dr Mapp then asked what she meant by civil war. She said: "The sorts of things that I thought everybody knew about, that happen in Palestine and Israel.

Again, for the second time in a month, My Right found himself biting his tongue, hard. I have long suspected that this woman has a rather casual relationship with reality. But really, is it open season for 'declarations of war' all of a sudden? This woman is teaching the next generation, helpful...

When talking to My Right senior (Always Right), the conversation lead to the ultimate question - do these people irresponsibly 'declaring war' have armies? Did this 'army' recently march on Parliament perhaps?

What would happen if Helen was to turn around and say, "Civil War you say? What an unfortunate state of affairs - but it is your call. See you in 20 minutes."

My Right genuinely hopes Civil War never comes to pass - but if it does, will open the book with 'non-Maori' at 1000 to 1. I suspect Mutu knows this and that a conventional civil war is not an option, so she deliberately raises the prospect of a Palestinian style civil war. In short, terrorist attacks from within, terrifying.

My Right believes the reaction to the first 'civil incident' by the New Zealand majority (Maori and non) would be incredibly swift and would cut down any threat in short order. It would also set us back as a nation by more than time can measure.

The deliberate choice of words and introduction of the terrorist element is extremely deliberate and disturbing. Mutu has taken the rhetoric to another level, it can't go much further.

My Right - not right

2004-08-25T13:15:00.000+12:00

Been hit by the flu - in fact - I feel like I have a bastard behind the eyes, so will probably be no posting until Monday.

From those who were there...

2004-08-23T16:10:00.000+12:00

The Brian Tamaki I'm black and I'm proud show rolled into Wellington today. I have posted earlier (two or three posts down - to modest to link to my own posts ;-) my thoughts on this fiasco. Jordan from Just Left was there and has written about the whole bizarre experience - I won't quote parts of his post - read the whole thing here. Nice narrative and shows how sadly, but inevitably, the day transcended "The Civil Unions" debate and became deeply devisive in itself.

DPF was there, camera in hand as ever. A few shots of the day are here as well. DPF to notes how the leaders in black trench coats would have been comical if it wasn't so sad.

Thanks to both of them - I'll post more once I have had a look at the news (and had a quick read of "The Social Report" - which weighs in at a lazy 180 pages for any insomniacs out there).

This pisses me off

2004-08-23T15:45:00.000+12:00

From today's Dom:

MacMillan was sentenced to 14 years in prison after 17-year-old Jayne Maree McLellan's body was found face down in a stream in the Dunedin suburb of Abbotsford in November 1988.

She had extensive knife cuts to her face, neck and hands, her nipple was nearly bitten off, her lower face was shattered and her skull had multiple fractures from being hit with a concrete post. A river stone had been shoved down her throat to stop her screaming.

A blood-covered MacMillan, 38, was found hiding in nearby bushes. He was later sentenced to 14 years in prison, and was eligible for parole after 10 years.

Graphic, horrific, disturbing. It is certainly all of the above. Now here is the first paragraph from the same article:

A man who raped and killed a Dunedin teenager 15 years ago has won $1200 damages for being refused a copy of a letter that claimed he had lured a young girl into a world of perverted sex and bestiality while he was on parole.

Less graphic - yup, but equally horrific and disturbing. The Tribunal found that there would have been "some" injury to this monster "...in the form of anxiety or distress at the thought that those who are in a position to influence or decide his future, or his conditions, were aware of information that he was not able to respond to." Not even that justification holds in that his lawyers were given access to the letter in question.

Full article from Stuff: Killer gets $1200 for hurt feelings
Don't go there if you have high blood pressure. I wish this was a joke - but you couldn't make this up.

What will you be praying for on Monday??

2004-08-22T13:57:00.000+12:00

It looks like there will a wide range of different groups marching on Parliaments grounds to either support, or object to, the "Enough is Enough" message being thrown out by way of kapa haka by the Destiny Church. So - what will the protagonists be praying for?

Destiny will be there praying that every other New Zealander would get wise and subscribe to their world view. This from the Destiny website;

“God is saying it is time to be a people of the Kingdom.”

At Destiny we have gone beyond church in the traditional sense – we are now churches who are powerfully influencing other churches and our communities for good.

Destiny is taking the church into the Kingdom mandate.

That could be seen as one way saying that 'we are a self serving political movement drumming up support and publicity for next years election using the fear of God', nice.

The Libertarianz will be there praying that everyone else would just leave them be and let them get about there porn, seems fair. This from one of their press releases;

He concludes with some advice for the busybody zealots: "Leave peaceful adults alone. If they offend thee, then just go elsewhere!"

So they will be there taking the trouble to deliver a slighty oxymoronic "come here, come here - go away" sort of a message.

Representatives of the Gay community will also be there to protest about the Destiny 'church' blaming them for a decline in community standards and for destroying the family (not even the tight leather strides will win you in friends from this crowd Pastor Brian - they just do not like you). From the GayNZ website;

Anti-and Pro-Civil Unions marches on Parliament
This Monday GayNZ.com will bring you live reports throughout the day. Stay in touch with the most disturbing anti-gay protest for decades, and the gay community's response!

As for My Right, I will be in Auckland praying for strong winds and rain in Wellington to put as many people off possible attending this sorry Destiny publicity stunt.

Lost in the hype

2004-08-21T13:20:00.000+12:00

Alison Annan is popular with many of her students, super. They are all qualified, the ones that still can't spell think she is grate, and the ones that still can't count give her three thumbs up.

My Right actually likes her stance on school discipline and wonders how there could possibly be any controversy over suspending dope smoking students? She is an old fashioned disciplinarian who set high standards. But that is to overlook other disturbing facts.

To call her a megalomaniac may be to strong a charge - but the pattern of behaviour that led to her downfall does point to this. She was so desperate for success (personal) that she manufactured qualifications for many students - damaging the schools reputation. (The NCEA may have been key to allowing this to happen - but there was no shortage of cynical manipulation.) But there is one thing that stands out to My Right that was initially raised by the TV 3 investigation into Cambridge High. This tucked away in the middle of a lengthy Herald article and grossly under reported;

Staff who disagreed with Annan's educational or disciplinary policies complained that they were bullied or shifted to different positions. An auditor-general's report slammed as imprudent the purchase of life memberships of the Air New Zealand Koru Club for Annan and her husband. A $16,705 payment over three years for Annan's clothing and personal grooming was judged "inappropriate".

Then there was the fact that Annan and her husband, Ron, were major shareholders in Cambridge International College, a private institution offering a one-year programme to foreign, fee-paying students.

A conflict of interest, cried critics. Ron Annan was the director of Cambridge High's international students' programme and Alison regularly made trips overseas to scout for potential students for Cambridge.

There was more including overseas trips paid for out of the School coffers with dubious links to core school business - but forget that - $16,000 on kit and make up alone should have had her out the door back then.

My Right is staggered that people seem to be over looking this. The woman "inappropriately" missapropriated funds, caused great embarrassment to the school and the Ministry. The most embarrassing thing for Cambridge as a community now should be the level of support she is getting.

UPDATE - It appears that a little bit of malfeasance (not to mention a good dose of self righteousness) runs in the family - from today's SST - "Annan's sister also faced school audit". Unbelievable! Enough said.

So the man doesn't lie - so what?

2004-08-19T12:16:00.000+12:00

There is a bit of a beat up on Stuff about Dr Don "bad mouthing" New Zealand to an Australian business audience. Clark has come out and said that this is absurd and that New Zealand "is clearly on a roll" - showing her incredible ability to ignore the issue at hand.

When it was put to him that it might put potential investors off New Zealand, Dr Brash said he was just presenting a factual argument. "This government is damaging our prospects and it's important everybody knows that."

Asked if he thought it likely that his remarks would make someone who was thinking of expanding into New Zealand think again, Dr Brash responded: "I don't know."

"I think they would at least ask some questions of their advisers (about employment law and other problems). It's better to find out now than find out after they've made a commitment of money because that will make them very bitter and disillusioned."

What Brash is saying is that the operating environment for business in Australia is better than in New Zealand. My Right is keen to hear from anyone that would argue against that.

Note the middle paragraph dig as well. A lot of people are attempting to create an image of Brash as poorly briefed and 'iffy' when asked direct questions. He may not be as clear as he should be on policy details on many occasions, granted. But here he is asked to speculate as to how someone might possibly feel about his comments. He didn't know, he said so, big deal (I would like to see the full interview text for what came before and after as well).

Brash is by no means perfect - but I have absolutely no issue with him telling an Australian audience what most of them are already fully aware of. Thoughts people??

Call me a poof and I kill ya

2004-08-18T10:53:00.000+12:00

A good Op Ed in todays Herald by Alison Laurie prompted this - "'Homosexual panic' defence must go."

I'll kill ya - but it won't be murder. Such was the case in the David McNee trial where Phillip Edwards used, successfully, the notion of "homosexual panic" to reduce his conviction from murder to manslaughter. He was guilty of manslaughter but not murder because there was no murderous intent, Edwards' lawyer Roy Wade told the court.

This is seriously wrong - and the fact that the Judge told the Jury to consider a "provacation defence" is also disturbing. A known criminal (street wise one would imagine) is picked up for a "look but don't touch" sex session. Two men go back to the house, the 'client' breaks his side of the bargain and goes to touch - this is not part of the deal.

The key here is the response.

Rather than Phillip Edwards demanding the cash at the moment things went too far (and some extra coin on top for the broken promise) and simply walking out (I wouldn't mind if he helped himself to a couple of bottles of booze for the inconvenience as well) - he proceeds to beat a man to death. With his hands.

How the hell can a lawyer claim there was no "murderous intent"? Christ knows what this punk is capable of if this was just a tickle up (excuse the context). If this sort of defence can fly we will be in real trouble. It appears that we are.

Maori led by losers?

2004-08-17T13:37:00.000+12:00

Alan Duff used his platform at the Act Welfare Symposium to launch a stinging attack on Maori Leadership. There's nothing like gross generalisations and sweeping accusations to dent your own credibility - but some of his points did need making. From Stuff:

Organised by ACT deputy leader Muriel Newman, the conference was about getting people off welfare into work, and Duff's brief was to speak on how welfare was destroying Maori.

But in an off-the-cuff speech that matched his strongest past outbursts against Maori leadership, Duff said the issue was not so much welfare reform as reform of Maori losers.

"You don't know how the blame is being shifted on to you," he said to the 100-strong audience. "By shifting the blame on to white people and on to anyone but themselves, their problems continue to worsen.

"Everyone's too afraid to say it's the Maoris that are the problem."

Duff said Maori radio stations carried "an endless parade of losers" blaming Pakeha for their problems.

I think there is something in what Duff is saying, but to call Maori leadership in general "losers" is going a bit far. The point that did resonate with My Right is how the media and Moari constantly talk down Maori, constantly emphasis negative statistics and generally do their best to tell Maori that they are all victims.

I am not saying that this is completely self fulfilling prophecy - but it can't help. Many of the most successful Maori achieve their success via mainstream institutions and without targeted assistance. Many Maori organisations are working marvelously to support their own communities (the new facility at what was Athletic Park being case in point).

There is no doubt that there are issues when measuring Maori 'problems' against largely European standards and benchmarks - but My Right just wishes that these numbers were not consistently used to explain and excuse future failings.

We know the numbers, we know the issues, Mr Duff, some solutions now please.

A bit hard to qoute at this stage - but here they are

2004-08-16T13:00:00.000+12:00

The speeches from the Act Welfare Symposium are all online here. Hawk over at Darkness mentioned that most spoke without notes so transcripts may be a while coming - and with the man monitoring web traffic - it may take a while to listen to all of them...

The Act Symposium on Welfare Reform is underway

2004-08-14T22:08:00.000+12:00

This Symposium should throw up some interesting ideas on Welfare Reform, My Right hopes it is not simply dismissed as a 'kick a beneficiary while they are down' session by those on the left. Amongst the speakers are the Hon Michael Bassett and the Hon Roger Douglas - I will post on their speeches when they are available.

Muriel Newman kicked of today by opening the Symposium with a speech that detailed the boom of the welfare state - far beyond what Kirk Labour Government had in mind when it implemented the recommendations of the 1972 Royal Commission on Social Security. The full speech is here and highlights some telling statistics:

The result was a ten-fold increase in welfare dependency in just 30 years from fewer than 35,000 beneficiaries right up until the early 1970s, to over 350,000 today.

In 1973, 31 years ago, we had 12,000 sole parents. Today we have 112,000.

In 1983, 21 years ago, we had 8,000 on Sickness Benefits. Today we have 43,000 over five times as many.

In 1983, 21 years ago, we had 18,000 Invalid beneficiaries. Today we have 72,000, four times as many.

If you believe Labour, you would think that unemployment is no longer a problem. Yet, in 1973 31 years ago there were fewer than 2,000 people unemployed. Today there are more than 40 times as many.

She then tells of her personal experience as a solo mother, adding credibility to her desire to return welfare assistance to being a short term solution and enabler:

Welfare reform is an issue I am passionate about not only in an intellectual and political sense but, because in the mid 1980s, after 18 years of marriage, I found myself as a sole mother with two young children on welfare. Ive lived the day-to-day existence. Ive seen the wasted lives. And Ive experienced the seductive grip of a system that begins by helping but ends by destroying self-esteem, confidence and hope. I escaped; many others did not.

Hopefully all politicians and commentators will forget the personalities and political leanings of the speakers and look pragmatically at the ideas espoused.

Every decent society must help those in need, it must help those people become valued and valuable members of society. That is not at issue here, at issue here is whether the welfare system in it's current state is addressing or inadvertently adding to the problem.

'Muzzling' state workers? It's not just 'state' workers

2004-08-14T21:28:00.000+12:00

Haami Piripi insists that people working for the state, and taking home over 100,000 tax payer dollars for the bother, should be allowed to carry with behaviour that has the effect of "undermining of confidence in the neutrality" of their employer.

Piripi stands by his submission and his right, as a private citizen, to make such public statements. He is wrong. This is not a issue about being Maori, or having the right to speak freely, it is exclusively an employment issue.

If My Right was to get legless at a private function and deeply offend (using extreme and volatile language) one of his employers key clients, he would be rightly censured. Further, he would likely be in the possession of a written warning the following Monday.

Piripi ".. think(s) it has significant implications for Maori public servants who come from communities who expect them to advocate for them."

If you want to be an advocate for your community, all well and good. But you owe a duty of care to your employer as well. If you can't say what you feel you must without having a detrimental impact on your employer, then you resign - simple.

It took a couple of days

2004-08-12T12:03:00.000+12:00

But today's Question Time should be some good viewing. Further to the post below - Ron Mark will kick off the fun with Question 9;

9. RON MARK to the Minister of Police: Is he satisfied that police are sufficiently resourced in order to respond to all facets of crime?

Then Tony Ryall will put the slipper in;

11. Hon TONY RYALL to the Minister of Police: Which police districts operate quotas or performance measures where officers are expected to issue a certain number of tickets every hour or day they are on traffic duty, and does he agree with this system?

George is priceless when he under pressure. I'll post the highlights later.

"Police didn't take over Traffic, Traffic took over the Police."

2004-08-10T19:15:00.000+12:00

That from Greg O'Connor who has just articulated what we all already knew on Holmes - that the Government has turned the entire Police force into a glorified Traffic Unit.

Police are given a directive to order a certain number of tickets, if they don't, they lose funding. Yet the senior Police hierarchy to date have stood by their Minister and maintained that this is not a quota. In what way is it not? Please don't tell me it is policy excused by data manfactured by the contemptible LTSA.

My Right feels sorry for the Police. They are hand cuffed by Beehive revenue gathering policy, to quote Mr O'Connor, "They have lost any discretion" - without discretion, they lose the public. I will be interested to see George Hawkins in question time tomorrow (if he even fronts) - he must be in for some vociferous questioning for this.

The Police deserve better than this, more to follow.

Nothing like a good protest to get the family together

2004-08-09T13:00:00.000+12:00

My Right does not have strong views on the Civil Unions Bill, it is very much in the "it has very little impact on me, but seems fair enough" basket. The debate that has surrounded the Bill has much more interesting than the Bill itself to my mind. This press statement in particular caught the eye, from the Civil Union Bill Support Society:

'The sight of black shirted youth from Destiny Church marching through central
Auckland on Sat 7th against civil unions and other progressive law reforms is
appalling' says Des Smith of the Civil Union Bill Support Society

'It is disturbing to see these children being used by their bigoted and intolerant parents. How will they grow up in today's world? Will they be the future gay bashers? Should they discover that they themselves have a homosexual orientation will family pressures lead them to consider suicide? I hope not but the risk is there'

'The march is reminiscent of the rise of Hitler in Nazi Germany. How ironic it is that they should be using the well known Martin Luther King slogan "Enough is Enough". King stood strongly for justice and equality and opposed intolerance'

'Is the Destiny rally at parliament later this month going to provide a further
opportunity for children to be misused?

If so it will be very evident that Destiny followers do not espouse the same wholesome family values as thousands of other heterosexual or gay and lesbian families throughout NZ'.

My Right had the pleasure of witnessing this 'protest' whilst sitting in the traffic jam it caused and would be astonished if anymore than a handful of the 'protesters' knew what their cause was that day. Kids everywhere were enjoying a good play on the road in downtown Auckland, and adults, as indifferent to the kids whereabouts as they were to the "protest" itself. Tamaki was in a pair of leather strides that could have caused moral outrage on their own.

Nothing more than a recruitment drive and publicity seeking bollocks for Destiny in the name of intolerance - and the Police let them hold up central city traffic for it. Surely there is a vacant carpark somewhere in Auckland for these guys to bring there kids up in.

There's no pleasant definition of "Bilious"

2004-08-05T10:23:00.000+12:00

OK - so Damian has caught me out, and done me a favour. The Cracker has detected some 'blog envy', and he knows a hit seeker when he sees one. (My Right can only speculate that Damian discovered my bile whilst carefully monitoring his own traffic).

My Right thought it a touch vapid to resort to the traditional "Russ Brown-baiting" that many on the right tend to resort to when trying to get things going, so I moved my supercilious gaze to Cracker. As he correctly notes, on this occassion, I agreed with the majority of what he had said. But saying "I agree" on it's own was hardly going to elicit a response - so instead, antagonistic praise was the order of the day.

So, found out, insulted, and thoroughly fulfilled by the whole carry on.

Anyone keen to make a call on this one??

2004-08-05T08:15:00.000+12:00

A judge has been accused of sending the wrong message to men who assault their spouses by throwing another lifeline to a wife-beating overstayer.

The allegation has been levelled at District Court Judge Philip Recordon after indications yesterday that he would consider letting Tuvaluan overstayer and kidney patient Senee Niusila walk free on charges of assault and threatening to kill his wife.

It should be a given that this guy, who is already an overstayer, should be turfed out immediatley. But given that Niusila needs life saving dialysis (at a lazy $70,000 for the kiwi tax payer) it appears he will be allowed to stay as long as he undertakes an 'anger management' course. It is clear to My Right that this decision was made with more weight given to extraneous circumstance than the actual law that applies to every other New Zealander.

"His life is in his hands, not mine," Judge Recordon told the court - 'because I am going to be responsible for his death, so I have instructed the next judge to be if he is bad again', he may or may not have added. Most opposition MP's have come out and said - let the courts judge the law, anything beyond that is a matter for the Minister of Immigration - and I think they are right.

Mr O'Connor, all yours.

The Mallard - an indegenous duck

2004-08-01T16:59:00.000+12:00

OK - there is a lot to like in Mallard's speech on where we are as a Nation and as New Zealanders. The full text of the speech is here - but some of the highlights for My Right are quoted below:

There has to be frank and open debate on what New Zealand is about, and on the futures we can share together. Partisan and sectional politics on these issues will get us nowhere. People who sand-bag themselves into die-hard positions will not be part of creative and positive solutions. (An easy and simple enough conclusion - but needed to be said)

Michael King was passionate about New Zealand and about the emergence of a unique New Zealand identity. He rightly pointed out that for most New Zealanders, regardless of their ethnicity, home is here, Aotearoa New Zealand.

He argued that just because one group has been here longer than another does not make its members more New Zealand than later arrivals, nor does it give them the right to exclude others from full participation in national life. (A bit of name dropping never hurts)

(And most particularly, this)The Treaty was open-ended, not a straitjacket. It was a preliminary agreement to an on-going relationship under the same law and government. The terms of that relationship have changed over the past 164 years.

The sad thing about the speech (and dramatic repositioning of Labour) is that it is purely political. He had the nerve to base his speech around the Orewa speech and say this, "Nor will race-based politics and race-based policy-delivery. Services must be on the basis of need and not because of a sense of race-based entitlement". Now - call me a touch partisan, but I would have thought Dr Don could fairly expect to copyright the phrase "need not race" in New Zealand politics? Mallard also states fairly early in the speech;

The National Party has dug itself into a bunker and thinks there’s a race war going on. National is the North Korea of New Zealand politics. They're spreading fear by threatening to go nuclear on race relations. Such a party cannot create a New Zealand that is unified and at peace with itself.

This dig is particularly interesting in the back drop of todays lead story in the SST quoting the prospect of "civil war" (also see post below).

In what is clearly a blatantly vote recovering repositioning of Labour - My Right can't help but think Mallard would have come across a lot better, and a touch less cynical, if he had simply delivered his speech and left the politics out of it. But there are some interesting (read - irrational) responses to issues starting to flow from Level 9 of the Beehive, and how this goes down with Labour internally could definately take the gloss of this weekends Poll results.