http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
A nice change would be for you to stop lying.
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New
Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Yet you support more of our money being taken from us. Hypocrisy?
Time for a change.
There's no credible alternative.
And why are we paying for this?
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everRubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective >opposition.
Tony
Every government and opposition party has done this for decades.
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 22:43:21 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Selective deleting which changes the apparent attributions is a form
Every government and opposition party has done this for decades.
Rich before going of on your usual tangent.As I said to Tony, provide some evidence.
Read Tony post again.
and he is correct
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades. "
Every government and opposition party has done this for decades.
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective opposition.
Tony
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everRubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
assertion?
You may want to look here: >http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get >agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non
hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "-
even though one of them did manage to get majority support in
parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their
spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious
Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the
Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition
have offered to support that happening, but National have refused -
wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their
priorities . . .
If I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proof that I am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have others) so will not stoop to your level.Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective >>opposition.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netIf I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proof that >I am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have >others) so will not stoop to your level.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everRubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with >>>>bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is >>>>this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>>>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
assertion?
You may want to look here: >>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html >>
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get >>agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non >>hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "-
even though one of them did manage to get majority support in
parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their
spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious
Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the >>Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition
have offered to support that happening, but National have refused -
wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their
priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective >>>opposition.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took two >minutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government - fancy >that!
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party
National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:14:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netYes - bothe are equally guilty as I said
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:If I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proof >>>that
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades. >>>>Rubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre >>>>assertion?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with >>>>>>bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is >>>>>>this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>>>>>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
You may want to look here: >>>>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get >>>>agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non >>>>hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "- >>>>even though one of them did manage to get majority support in >>>>parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their >>>>spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious >>>>Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the >>>>Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition >>>>have offered to support that happening, but National have refused - >>>>wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their >>>>priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an >>>>>effective
opposition.
I am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have >>>others) so will not stoop to your level.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took two
minutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government - >>>fancy
that!
So you think that the very author of the plan by National to stack the
list of members bills with anything to prevent opposition bills is
exactly a balanced commentator on bills by opposition parties?
I don't particularly like Farrar but he is no worse than your left of centre >blogs
Even in the comments on the url you gave rubbished Farrar on some of
the bills. The first of the three went through to the second reading >>(perhaps unusual for the government to have allowed that to pass?) and
then failed the second reading with National supported by the Maori
party and ACT, against Labour/Green/NZ First and United Future. Not
such rubbish to have gained support from all of those . . .and
certainly no comparison with the lost luggage advertitising silliness.
In your totally biased opinion but nor are the blogs you drool over.
Hint - a party hack/spin merchant like Farrar is not a credible
commentator when talking about other parties - certainly not up to the >>likes of Andrew Geddis . . .
As I explanied above the intent of oposition bills is to getNo that is rubbish, they convey a very similar intent by both major parties >which is what I said in the beginning when responding to your really silly post.
The statistics you quote below merely confirm that National have
followed through on trying to stack the list instead of putting bills >>through supported by the government - what information were you trying
to convey?
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party >>>National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
Tony
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:14:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:If I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proof >>>that
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades. >>>>Rubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre >>>>assertion?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with >>>>>>bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is >>>>>>this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>>>>>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
You may want to look here: >>>>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get >>>>agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non >>>>hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "- >>>>even though one of them did manage to get majority support in >>>>parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their >>>>spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious >>>>Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the >>>>Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition >>>>have offered to support that happening, but National have refused - >>>>wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their >>>>priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an >>>>>effective
opposition.
I am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have >>>others) so will not stoop to your level.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took >>>two
minutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government - >>>fancy
that!
S you think that the very author of the plan by Naitonal to stack the
list of membrs bills with anything to prevent opposition bills is
exactly a balanced commentator on bills by opposition parties?
Even in the comments on the url you gave rubbished Farrar on some of
the bills. The first of the three went through to the second reading >>(perhaps unusual for the government to have allowed that to pass?) and
then failed the second reading with National supported by the Maori
party and ACT, against Labour/Green/NZ First and United Future. Not
such rubbish to have gained support from all of those . . .and
certainly no comparison with the lost luggage advertitising silliness.
Hint - a party hack/spin merchant like Farrar is not a credible
commentator when talking about other parties - certainly not up to the >>likes of Andrew Geddis . . .
The statistics you quote below merely confirm that National have
followed through on trying to stack the list instead of putting bills >>through supported by the government - what information were you trying
to convey?
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party >>>National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at Pundit
and discovered this: >http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako!
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:14:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netYes - bothe are equally guilty as I said
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netIf I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proof >>that
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everRubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre >>>assertion?
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with >>>>>bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is >>>>>this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>>>>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
You may want to look here: >>>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get >>>agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non >>>hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "-
even though one of them did manage to get majority support in
parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their
spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious >>>Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the >>>Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition >>>have offered to support that happening, but National have refused - >>>wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their
priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an >>>>effective
opposition.
I am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have >>others) so will not stoop to your level.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took two >>minutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government - >>fancy
that!
S you think that the very author of the plan by Naitonal to stack the
list of membrs bills with anything to prevent opposition bills is
exactly a balanced commentator on bills by opposition parties?
Even in the comments on the url you gave rubbished Farrar on some ofI don't particularly like Farrar but he is no worse than your left of centre blogs
the bills. The first of the three went through to the second reading >(perhaps unusual for the government to have allowed that to pass?) and
then failed the second reading with National supported by the Maori
party and ACT, against Labour/Green/NZ First and United Future. Not
such rubbish to have gained support from all of those . . .and
certainly no comparison with the lost luggage advertitising silliness.
Hint - a party hack/spin merchant like Farrar is not a credibleIn your totally biased opinion but nor are the blogs you drool over.
commentator when talking about other parties - certainly not up to the
likes of Andrew Geddis . . .
The statistics you quote below merely confirm that National haveNo that is rubbish, they convey a very similar intent by both major parties which is what I said in the beginning when responding to your really silly post.
followed through on trying to stack the list instead of putting bills
through supported by the government - what information were you trying
to convey?
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party
National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:14:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netIf I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proof that
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everRubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre >>>assertion?
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with >>>>>bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is >>>>>this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>>>>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
You may want to look here: >>>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get >>>agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non >>>hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "-
even though one of them did manage to get majority support in
parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their
spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious >>>Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the >>>Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition >>>have offered to support that happening, but National have refused - >>>wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their
priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective
opposition.
I am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have >>others) so will not stoop to your level.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took two >>minutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government - fancy
that!
S you think that the very author of the plan by Naitonal to stack the
list of membrs bills with anything to prevent opposition bills is
exactly a balanced commentator on bills by opposition parties?
Even in the comments on the url you gave rubbished Farrar on some of
the bills. The first of the three went through to the second reading >(perhaps unusual for the government to have allowed that to pass?) and
then failed the second reading with National supported by the Maori
party and ACT, against Labour/Green/NZ First and United Future. Not
such rubbish to have gained support from all of those . . .and
certainly no comparison with the lost luggage advertitising silliness.
Hint - a party hack/spin merchant like Farrar is not a credible
commentator when talking about other parties - certainly not up to the
likes of Andrew Geddis . . .
The statistics you quote below merely confirm that National have
followed through on trying to stack the list instead of putting bills
through supported by the government - what information were you trying
to convey?
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party
National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:14:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot neteffective
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everRubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre >>assertion?
andEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with >>>>bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is >>>>this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New >>>>Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
You may want to look here: >>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get >>agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non >>hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "-
even though one of them did manage to get majority support in
parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their
spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious >>Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the >>Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition >>have offered to support that happening, but National have refused - >>wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their
priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an
thatIf I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proofopposition.
twoI am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have >others) so will not stoop to your level.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took
fancyminutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government -
that!
S you think that the very author of the plan by Naitonal to stack the
list of membrs bills with anything to prevent opposition bills is
exactly a balanced commentator on bills by opposition parties?
Even in the comments on the url you gave rubbished Farrar on some of
the bills. The first of the three went through to the second reading (perhaps unusual for the government to have allowed that to pass?) and
then failed the second reading with National supported by the Maori
party and ACT, against Labour/Green/NZ First and United Future. Not
such rubbish to have gained support from all of those . . .and
certainly no comparison with the lost luggage advertitising silliness.
Hint - a party hack/spin merchant like Farrar is not a credible
commentator when talking about other parties - certainly not up to the
likes of Andrew Geddis . . .
The statistics you quote below merely confirm that National have
followed through on trying to stack the list instead of putting bills
through supported by the government - what information were you trying
to convey?
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party
National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
On Saturday, 13 August 2016 19:21:57 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:you hypocritical little wanker.
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:14:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netIf I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proof that
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Rubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New
Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
assertion?
You may want to look here:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get
agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non
hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "-
even though one of them did manage to get majority support in
parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their
spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious
Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the
Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition
have offered to support that happening, but National have refused -
wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their
priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective
opposition.
I am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have >> >others) so will not stoop to your level.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took two
minutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government - fancy
that!
S you think that the very author of the plan by Naitonal to stack the
list of membrs bills with anything to prevent opposition bills is
exactly a balanced commentator on bills by opposition parties?
Even in the comments on the url you gave rubbished Farrar on some of
the bills. The first of the three went through to the second reading
(perhaps unusual for the government to have allowed that to pass?) and
then failed the second reading with National supported by the Maori
party and ACT, against Labour/Green/NZ First and United Future. Not
such rubbish to have gained support from all of those . . .and
certainly no comparison with the lost luggage advertitising silliness.
Hint - a party hack/spin merchant like Farrar is not a credible
commentator when talking about other parties - certainly not up to the
likes of Andrew Geddis . . .
Yet you yourself routinely post comment from left wing blogs and commentators,
The statistics you quote below merely confirm that National have
followed through on trying to stack the list instead of putting bills
through supported by the government - what information were you trying
to convey?
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party
National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at PunditMeaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako!
Tony
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at PunditMeaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako!
Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles... >Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would appear, that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up reasons why they should go.
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at Pundit >>>> and discovered this:Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako!
Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles... >>Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would appear, >that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up >reasons why they should go.
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at Pundit >>>>> and discovered this:Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako!
Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles... >>>Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible opposition, >something you appear to not accept.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding them to >account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to find >real leadership and some real intellect.So you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it is most >unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political party I >cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you are to >the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really because there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked reasonably good >under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 23:00:38 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 22:43:21 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>Selective deleting which changes the apparent attributions is a form
Every government and opposition party has done this for decades.
of lying, Liberty. I did not make that statement - it was Tony, as you >acknowledge below. .
As I said to Tony, provide some evidence.
Rich before going of on your usual tangent.
Read Tony post again.
and he is correct
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades. "
Read also the Subject of the thread - this Bill of a low ranking
National MP is "The Worst Bill ever". No wonder he is so low ranking,
but what is appalling is that the Bill has the backing of the National
Party.
Other governments have actually had ideas of their own, have had a na
agenda they are want to get through, and have used sitting time
productively, and treated member bills with respect. This government
is the first to deliberately use their own members bills to stack the
ballot with time wasting bills, the first to use a financial veto to
stop a bill which had majority support of MPs. No, not every
government has stopped as low as this one inwasting thetime of the
house to avoid putting up sensible bills themselves.
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 02:10:18 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>effective
wrote:
On Saturday, 13 August 2016 19:21:57 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 21:14:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:24:00 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Rubbish - can you provide any references supporting this bizarre
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-everEvery government and opposition party has done this for decades.
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is >> >>>>this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New
Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Time for a change.
assertion?
You may want to look here:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/09/members_bills_ballot_17_september_2015.html
After a list of members Bills, Farrar gives stistics by political
party and then says:
"If the other 20 National MPs got a bill in the ballot (or could get
agreement of the hierarchy for their bills) then the chances of a non
hostile bill being drawn would increase from 14/71 to 34/91 or from
20% to 37%."
Note that bills from Opposition members are deemed to be "hostile "-
even though one of them did manage to get majority support in
parliament
So this appears to be a new tactic by National, led by their
spinmeister Farrar, to "screw the scrum" by putting forward spurious
Bills that, in this case, could have been more simply handled by the
Statute Revision Bill going through at present - indeed theOpposition
have offered to support that happening, but National have refused -
wasting the time of parliament is too important to their
"game-playing" - the interests of New Zealand are low on their
priorities . . .
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an
thatIf I was to follow your usual path I would be asking you to provide proofopposition.
twoI am wrong but I have taken you to task about that idiocy before (as have
others) so will not stoop to your level.
Try this http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/three_silly_bills.html ut took
fancyminutes to find it and none of the bills are by the current government -
commentators, you hypocritical little wanker.that!
S you think that the very author of the plan by Naitonal to stack the
list of membrs bills with anything to prevent opposition bills is
exactly a balanced commentator on bills by opposition parties?
Even in the comments on the url you gave rubbished Farrar on some of
the bills. The first of the three went through to the second reading
(perhaps unusual for the government to have allowed that to pass?) and
then failed the second reading with National supported by the Maori
party and ACT, against Labour/Green/NZ First and United Future. Not
such rubbish to have gained support from all of those . . .and
certainly no comparison with the lost luggage advertitising silliness.
Hint - a party hack/spin merchant like Farrar is not a credible
commentator when talking about other parties - certainly not up to the
likes of Andrew Geddis . . .
Yet you yourself routinely post comment from left wing blogs and
I am sorry that you cannot disciminate between hard facts and opinion expressed on political blogs such as Kiwiblog and others.
Farrar is of
course skilled in selected facts that in themselves are intended to
lead to a biassed conclusion, but I am not aware of any policital bias
in any of these:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
and
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
Since those are the references I have provided in this thread, and
Tony was the one to post a political blog in defence of the members
bill, just what left wing bias are you accusing me of?
The statistics you quote below merely confirm that National have
followed through on trying to stack the list instead of putting bills
through supported by the government - what information were you trying
to convey?
And on 11 August the following lists the number of bills by party
National – 26/34
Labour – 26/32
Greens – 13/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 79/94
And on 7 April the following
National – 23/34
Labour – 29/32
Greens – 14/14
NZ First -12/12
Maori – 1/1
ACT – 1/1
Total – 80/94
Wow fancy that - it is you that's spouting rubbish - again!
Tony
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netMultiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would appear, >>that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up >>reasons why they should go.
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at Pundit >>>>>> and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako!
Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles... >>>>Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they areBullshit
about as credible as the government
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government
that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot
expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a
story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as
easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts
recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support
partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only
has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level
of support.
Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of course, talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties.The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding them to >>account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to find >>real leadership and some real intellect.So you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako
to account - what more were you expecting?
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it is most >>unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political party I >>cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you are to >>the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really because >>there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked reasonably good >>under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government,
Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sickEven more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote accordingly.
of the old government, and because they think the new government will
do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition
is not really terribly relevant.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that
does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done better but that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr
brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 08:05:02 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 23:00:38 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 22:43:21 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>of lying, Liberty. I did not make that statement - it was Tony, as you >>acknowledge below. .
Every government and opposition party has done this for decades. >>Selective deleting which changes the apparent attributions is a form
As I said to Tony, provide some evidence.
Rich before going of on your usual tangent.
Read Tony post again.
and he is correct
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades. "
Read also the Subject of the thread - this Bill of a low ranking
National MP is "The Worst Bill ever". No wonder he is so low ranking,
but what is appalling is that the Bill has the backing of the National >>Party.
Other governments have actually had ideas of their own, have had a na >>agenda they are want to get through, and have used sitting time >>productively, and treated member bills with respect. This government
is the first to deliberately use their own members bills to stack the >>ballot with time wasting bills, the first to use a financial veto to
stop a bill which had majority support of MPs. No, not every
government has stopped as low as this one inwasting thetime of the
house to avoid putting up sensible bills themselves.
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
And you went of on your usual tangent talking shit.
The fact remains the opposition have used private member bill
to promote their socialist agenda for years.
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netMultiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would appear, >>>that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up >>>reasons why they should go.
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at Pundit >>>>>>> and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako!
Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles... >>>>>Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they areBullshit
about as credible as the government
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government
that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot
expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a
story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as >>easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts >>recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support
partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only
has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level
of support.
Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of course,
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding them to >>>account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to find >>>real leadership and some real intellect.So you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako
to account - what more were you expecting?
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it is most
unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political party I >>>cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you are to
the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really because >>>there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked reasonably good
under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government,
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties.
Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sickEven more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >accordingly.
of the old government, and because they think the new government will
do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition
is not really terribly relevant.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that
does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done better but
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr >>brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo you patronising liar.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netMultiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would >>>>appear,
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>Tony
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at Pundit >>>>>>>> and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute >>>>>>>>
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako! >>>>>>> Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles... >>>>>>Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up >>>>reasons why they should go.
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they areBullshit
about as credible as the government
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government >>>that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot
expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a
story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as >>>easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts >>>recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support >>>partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only
has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level
of support.
Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of >>course,
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding them >>>>toSo you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako
account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to find >>>>real leadership and some real intellect.
to account - what more were you expecting?
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it is >>>>most
unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political party >>>>I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you are >>>>to
the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really because >>>>there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked reasonably >>>>good
under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government,
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties.
Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sickEven more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>accordingly.
of the old government, and because they think the new government will
do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition
is not really terribly relevant.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that >>>does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done better >>but
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr >>>brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu
the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a
fair summary?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo you patronising liar.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would >>>>>appear,
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>Tony
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute >>>>>>>>>
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako! >>>>>>>> Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post.
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles... >>>>>>>Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up >>>>>reasons why they should go.
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they areBullshit
about as credible as the government
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government >>>>that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot >>>>expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a
story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as >>>>easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts >>>>recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support >>>>partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only >>>>has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level >>>>of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding them >>>>>toSo you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako >>>>to account - what more were you expecting?
account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to find
real leadership and some real intellect.
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it is >>>>>most
unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political party >>>>>I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you are >>>>>to
the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really because >>>>>there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked reasonably >>>>>good
under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of >>>course,
Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sickEven more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>accordingly.
of the old government, and because they think the new government will >>>>do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition >>>>is not really terribly relevant.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that >>>>does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done better >>>but
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr >>>>brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu
the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a
fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change the sense
of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because they have
poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I wrote?
Tony
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . .
waiting . . .
And you went of on your usual tangent talking shit.
The fact remains the opposition have used private member bill
to promote their socialist agenda for years.
Putting private members bills forward is what successive opposition
parties have done, endeavoured to get legislation through that they
believe may have the support of a majority of parliament, when the
government does not want to give it the same priority.
That is quite different from a government deliberately stacking the
list of private member bills with rubbish bills
purely to make opposition bills less likely to be drawnSo what's the problem.
of this Bill it achieves nothing, could have been included in theNo talking twaddle.
Statutes Revision bill already before the house, and is merely a
deliberate waste of time for partisan political purposes by the
government. Such a level of cynicism and lack of interests in the good
of the country is indeed a new "innovation" by the current government.
See the difference?
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
On 2016-08-11, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com> wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New
Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Yet you support more of our money being taken from us. Hypocrisy?
Denmark is a country with one of the higest tax rates in the world.
The Danes have no problem with this for they believe that those
taxes are spent wisely.
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannot choose and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and they have little or no policies.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo you patronising liar.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>dot nz> wrote:Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would >>>>>>appear,
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at >>>>>>>>>>Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute >>>>>>>>>>
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako! >>>>>>>>> Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>> Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up >>>>>>reasons why they should go.
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they areBullshit
about as credible as the government
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government >>>>>that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot >>>>>expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a >>>>>story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as >>>>>easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts >>>>>recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support >>>>>partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only >>>>>has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level >>>>>of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding them >>>>>>toSo you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako >>>>>to account - what more were you expecting?
account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to >>>>>>find
real leadership and some real intellect.
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it is >>>>>>most
unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political >>>>>>party
I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you >>>>>>are
to
the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really because >>>>>>there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked reasonably >>>>>>good
under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of >>>>course,
Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government will >>>>>do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition >>>>>is not really terribly relevant.Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that >>>>>does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done better >>>>but
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr >>>>>brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu
the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a
fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change the >>sense
of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because they >>have
poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition
incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less
credible than the government?
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of membersAs you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for decades and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it was deliberate stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the
Subject of ths thread?
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:faute
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot >>>>>>net dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>>wrote:
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again >>>>>>>>>>> at
Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-
Nothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannot choose and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and theyNo you patronising liar.Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to >>>>>>>dig up reasons why they should go.Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george? >>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it >>>>>>>would appear,Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>>> Tony
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc >>>>>>>>>>> Korako!
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party >>>>>>>>>articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they are about as credible as the >>>>>>governmentBullshit
- but then we are not expecting an election for over a year from >>>>>>now. What we do have now is a government that is not performing. >>>>>Opinion and not well supportedYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
Many of the shortcomings are identified by opposition parties - >>>>>>often before mainstream media, but you cannot expect the media to >>>>>>acknowledge that they are not the first to a story! Opposition >>>>>>parties cannot of course get legislation through as easily as the >>>>>>government, but there have been some credible attempts recently as >>>>>>National loses the invariable support of its "support partners" Yes >>>>>>of course it is disappointing that the opposition only has the >>>>>>support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar >>>>>>level of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties. >>>>>>Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government >>>>>>will do a better job - how well they have performed at being in >>>>>>opposition is not really terribly relevant.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is >>>>>>>holding them to account because the oppositiion is woeful - time >>>>>>>for the opposition to find real leadership and some real intellect. >>>>>>So you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk >>>>>>Korako to account - what more were you expecting?
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and >>>>>>>it is most unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of >>>>>>>any political party I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as >>>>>>>you are to the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - >>>>>>>shame really because there were times during the last Labour >>>>>>>government when they looked reasonably good under strong >>>>>>>leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, >>>>>of course,
Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party to object to everything - Labour and >>>>>>the Greens do not do that, but that does not mean that they will be >>>>>>a weak opposition.They may be worthy in the future but not right now.
What terrible things has the government done that you think should >>>>>>have been beterr brought to the attention of the public, Tony?Can't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done >>>>>better but that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu >>>>the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a >>>>fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change
the sense of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because >>>they have poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I
wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition >>incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less credible >>than the government?
have little or no policies.
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for decades and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of members >>bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the
Subject of ths thread?
was deliberate stacking of the list of members bills by National with
stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
Tony
This may be pertinent:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11694247
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this fordecades
and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it wasdeliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:49:41 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
This may be pertinent:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11694247
No it is written by a labour apoligist.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:What evidence was that? If you have evidence it should be easy for yu
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannot choose >and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and they have little or no
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:No you patronising liar.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>>dot nz> wrote:Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig up
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george? >>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would >>>>>>>appear,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at >>>>>>>>>>>Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute >>>>>>>>>>>
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako! >>>>>>>>>> Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>>> Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
reasons why they should go.
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they areBullshit
about as credible as the government
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government >>>>>>that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot >>>>>>expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a >>>>>>story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as >>>>>>easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts >>>>>>recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support >>>>>>partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only >>>>>>has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level >>>>>>of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties. >>>>>>Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government will >>>>>>do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition >>>>>>is not really terribly relevant.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding themSo you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako >>>>>>to account - what more were you expecting?
to
account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to >>>>>>>find
real leadership and some real intellect.
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it is >>>>>>>most
unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political >>>>>>>party
I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you >>>>>>>are
to
the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really because
there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked reasonably >>>>>>>good
under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of >>>>>course,
Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that >>>>>>does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done better
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr >>>>>>brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
but
that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu >>>>the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a >>>>fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change the >>>sense
of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because they >>>have
poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition >>incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less
credible than the government?
policies.
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for decades
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of members >>bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the
Subject of ths thread?
and provided evidence of that.
You have not demonstrated that it was deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
Tony
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 23:26:13 +1200, Liberty wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:49:41 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
This may be pertinent:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11694247
No it is written by a labour apoligist.
That's the whole point. A Labour apologist drawing attention to a menu
of Labour failures.
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:36:55 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:And you have not provided evidence that National are doing this any more than any other government - as usual you ask others to disprove your lies.
On 8/15/2016 8:56 PM, Tony wrote:
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for >>>decadesObviously he has no recourse to the Internet where he can peruse
and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it was >>>deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
(to his hearts content) the history of private members bills that
have been introduced to the House over the history of the house.
Or if he doesn't have access he could always visit his local library
where, with the assistance of staff, could get the same information.
Either from the Parliamentary archives or the Libraries Internet connection
And still neither Tony, nor you, have been able to show that Labour
stacked provate member bills to try and prevent National bills getting >through when they led government . . . .
Desperation setting in, george?
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 03:56:43 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netOnce more you are expecting others to disprove something you have made up. What evidence do you have that National have behved anyworse than any previous government. You are making stuff up.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:What evidence was that? If you have evidence it should be easy for yu
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannot >>choose
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>dot nz> wrote:No you patronising liar.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>>>dot nz> wrote:Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig >>>>>>>>up
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george? >>>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would >>>>>>>>appear,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, >>>>>>>>>>>>Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at >>>>>>>>>>>>Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute >>>>>>>>>>>>
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako! >>>>>>>>>>> Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>>>> Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party >>>>>>>>>>articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
reasons why they should go.
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they areBullshit
about as credible as the government
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government >>>>>>>that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot >>>>>>>expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a >>>>>>>story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as >>>>>>>easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts >>>>>>>recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support >>>>>>>partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only >>>>>>>has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level >>>>>>>of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties. >>>>>>>Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government will >>>>>>>do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition >>>>>>>is not really terribly relevant.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding >>>>>>>>themSo you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako >>>>>>>to account - what more were you expecting?
to
account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to >>>>>>>>find
real leadership and some real intellect.
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it >>>>>>>>is
most
unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political >>>>>>>>party
I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you >>>>>>>>are
to
the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really >>>>>>>>because
there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked >>>>>>>>reasonably
good
under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of >>>>>>course,
Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that >>>>>>>does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done >>>>>>better
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr >>>>>>>brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
but
that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu >>>>>the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a >>>>>fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change the >>>>sense
of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because they >>>>have
poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition >>>incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less
credible than the government?
and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and they have little or >>no
policies.
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for >>decades
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of members >>>bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the >>>Subject of ths thread?
and provided evidence of that.
to give an example of a politician under the Labour-led government
doing what National have done?
Another piece of sarcastic crap from you - please improve your ability to debate without sarcasm.You have not demonstrated that it was deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
I showe that the idea came from David Farrar - intentionally reducing
the chance of an opposition MPs' bill being drawn by adding a lot of
National MP private member bills. Did you miss that?
The increase in
NAtional MPs putting private members bills forward is evidence thatDon't be silly, of course it didn't because there is no evidence of game playing - just your opinion.
Farrar's game-pying struck a chord with National, and led directly to
this stupiod bill.
It is your reading of posts that appears to beWell it would appear so to you, after all you cannot see how attrociously your party is led.
incompetent.
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:49:41 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKeyOf course it isn't a different isuue - only a retarded 5 year old would think so.
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 03:56:43 -0500, Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:Nothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannot
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>>dot nz> wrote:No you patronising liar.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot >>>>>>>>net dot nz> wrote:Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others. >>>>>>>>Opinion polls sugges that they are about as credible as the >>>>>>>>government
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to >>>>>>>>>dig up reasons why they should go.
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george? >>>>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it >>>>>>>>>would appear,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again >>>>>>>>>>>>> atMeaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>>>>> Tony
Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une- >>faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc >>>>>>>>>>>>> Korako!
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party >>>>>>>>>>>articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Bullshit
- but then we are not expecting an election for over a year from >>>>>>>>now. What we do have now is a government that is not performing. >>>>>>>Opinion and not well supportedYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
Many of the shortcomings are identified by opposition parties - >>>>>>>>often before mainstream media, but you cannot expect the media to >>>>>>>>acknowledge that they are not the first to a story! Opposition >>>>>>>>parties cannot of course get legislation through as easily as the >>>>>>>>government, but there have been some credible attempts recently as >>>>>>>>National loses the invariable support of its "support partners" Yes >>>>>>>>of course it is disappointing that the opposition only has the >>>>>>>>support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar >>>>>>>>level of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties. >>>>>>>>Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government >>>>>>>>will do a better job - how well they have performed at being in >>>>>>>>opposition is not really terribly relevant.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is >>>>>>>>>holding them to account because the oppositiion is woeful - time >>>>>>>>>for the opposition to find real leadership and some real intellect. >>>>>>>>So you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk >>>>>>>>Korako to account - what more were you expecting?
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and >>>>>>>>>it is most unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of >>>>>>>>>any political party I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as >>>>>>>>>you are to the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - >>>>>>>>>shame really because there were times during the last Labour >>>>>>>>>government when they looked reasonably good under strong >>>>>>>>>leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, >>>>>>>of course,
Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party to object to everything - Labour and >>>>>>>>the Greens do not do that, but that does not mean that they will be >>>>>>>>a weak opposition.They may be worthy in the future but not right now.
What terrible things has the government done that you think should >>>>>>>>have been beterr brought to the attention of the public, Tony? >>>>>>>Can't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done >>>>>>>better but that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu >>>>>>the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a >>>>>>fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change >>>>>the sense of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because >>>>>they have poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I >>>>>wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition >>>>incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less credible >>>>than the government?
choose and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and they
have little or no policies.
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of members >>>>bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the >>>>Subject of ths thread?
decades and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it >>> was deliberate stacking of the list of members bills by National with
stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
Tony
This may be pertinent:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11694247
Quite a different issue - unles you are referring to National trying
to divert from its own problems by attacking the Opposition? The
stacking of private members bills came about because Labour was
putting up Bills that United Future and the Maori Party wanted to
support - all a consequnce of the poll-driven Nats feeling threatened
and out of ideas . . .
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 03:56:43 -0500, Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:faute
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot >>>>>>>net dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>>>wrote:
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again >>>>>>>>>>>> at
Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-
Nothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannotNo you patronising liar.Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others.that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to >>>>>>>>dig up reasons why they should go.Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george? >>>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it >>>>>>>>would appear,Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>>>> Tony
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc >>>>>>>>>>>> Korako!
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party >>>>>>>>>>articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Opinion polls sugges that they are about as credible as the >>>>>>>governmentBullshit
- but then we are not expecting an election for over a year from >>>>>>>now. What we do have now is a government that is not performing. >>>>>>Opinion and not well supportedYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
Many of the shortcomings are identified by opposition parties - >>>>>>>often before mainstream media, but you cannot expect the media to >>>>>>>acknowledge that they are not the first to a story! Opposition >>>>>>>parties cannot of course get legislation through as easily as the >>>>>>>government, but there have been some credible attempts recently as >>>>>>>National loses the invariable support of its "support partners" Yes >>>>>>>of course it is disappointing that the opposition only has the >>>>>>>support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar >>>>>>>level of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties. >>>>>>>Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government >>>>>>>will do a better job - how well they have performed at being in >>>>>>>opposition is not really terribly relevant.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is >>>>>>>>holding them to account because the oppositiion is woeful - time >>>>>>>>for the opposition to find real leadership and some real intellect. >>>>>>>So you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk >>>>>>>Korako to account - what more were you expecting?
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and >>>>>>>>it is most unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of >>>>>>>>any political party I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as >>>>>>>>you are to the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - >>>>>>>>shame really because there were times during the last Labour >>>>>>>>government when they looked reasonably good under strong >>>>>>>>leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, >>>>>>of course,
Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party to object to everything - Labour and >>>>>>>the Greens do not do that, but that does not mean that they will be >>>>>>>a weak opposition.They may be worthy in the future but not right now.
What terrible things has the government done that you think should >>>>>>>have been beterr brought to the attention of the public, Tony? >>>>>>Can't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done >>>>>>better but that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu >>>>>the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a >>>>>fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change >>>>the sense of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because >>>>they have poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I >>>>wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition >>>incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less credible >>>than the government?
choose and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and they
have little or no policies.
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of members >>>bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the >>>Subject of ths thread?
decades and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it
was deliberate stacking of the list of members bills by National with
stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
Tony
This may be pertinent:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11694247
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . .
waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades."
The secound part is also true but was off topic to my post so it was sniped.
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective >opposition.
Tony
It is a fact that a government stacking the system when its MPs have
And you went of on your usual tangent talking shit.
The fact remains the opposition have used private member bill
to promote their socialist agenda for years.
Putting private members bills forward is what successive opposition
parties have done, endeavoured to get legislation through that they
believe may have the support of a majority of parliament, when the >>government does not want to give it the same priority.
That is quite different from a government deliberately stacking the
list of private member bills with rubbish bills
In your uniformed opinon.
by their own members
purely to make opposition bills less likely to be drawnSo what's the problem.
The opposition were only pushing their socialist barrow.
Government Back benchers have every right to submit bills
Then again according to Rich
Every MP is equal.
Coalition of loses MPs are more equal.
- in the case
of this Bill it achieves nothing, could have been included in theNo talking twaddle.
Statutes Revision bill already before the house, and is merely a
deliberate waste of time for partisan political purposes by the
government. Such a level of cynicism and lack of interests in the good
of the country is indeed a new "innovation" by the current government.
See the difference?
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
On 8/15/2016 8:56 PM, Tony wrote:
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for decadesObviously he has no recourse to the Internet where he can peruse
and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it was deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
(to his hearts content) the history of private members bills that
have been introduced to the House over the history of the house.
Or if he doesn't have access he could always visit his local library
where, with the assistance of staff, could get the same information.
Either from the Parliamentary archives or the Libraries Internet connection
On 8/16/2016 3:52 PM, Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:He's losing it.
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:36:55 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:And you have not provided evidence that National are doing this any more than
On 8/15/2016 8:56 PM, Tony wrote:
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for >>>>> decadesObviously he has no recourse to the Internet where he can peruse
and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it was >>>>> deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent. >>>>>
(to his hearts content) the history of private members bills that
have been introduced to the House over the history of the house.
Or if he doesn't have access he could always visit his local library
where, with the assistance of staff, could get the same information.
Either from the Parliamentary archives or the Libraries Internet connection
And still neither Tony, nor you, have been able to show that Labour
stacked provate member bills to try and prevent National bills getting
through when they led government . . . .
Desperation setting in, george?
any other government - as usual you ask others to disprove your lies.
Tony
And didn't follow my sage advice obviously
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 03:56:43 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netOnce more you are expecting others to disprove something you have made up. What
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:What evidence was that? If you have evidence it should be easy for yu
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:Nothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannot >>>choose
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>>dot nz> wrote:No you patronising liar.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>>>>dot nz> wrote:Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others. >>>>>>>>Opinion polls sugges that they are
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to dig >>>>>>>>>up
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george? >>>>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it would >>>>>>>>>appear,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200, >>>>>>>>>>>>>Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again at >>>>>>>>>>>>>Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une-faute >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc Korako! >>>>>>>>>>>> Meaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>>>>> Tony
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party >>>>>>>>>>>articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
reasons why they should go.
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
about as credible as the governmentBullshit
- but then we are not expecting anOpinion and not well supported
election for over a year from now. What we do have now is a government >>>>>>>>that is not performing.
Many of the shortcomings are identified byYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
opposition parties - often before mainstream media, but you cannot >>>>>>>>expect the media to acknowledge that they are not the first to a >>>>>>>>story! Opposition parties cannot of course get legislation through as >>>>>>>>easily as the government, but there have been some credible attempts >>>>>>>>recently as National loses the invariable support of its "support >>>>>>>>partners" Yes of course it is disappointing that the opposition only >>>>>>>>has the support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar level >>>>>>>>of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties. >>>>>>>>Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government will >>>>>>>>do a better job - how well they have performed at being in opposition >>>>>>>>is not really terribly relevant.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is holding >>>>>>>>>themSo you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk Korako >>>>>>>>to account - what more were you expecting?
to
account because the oppositiion is woeful - time for the opposition to >>>>>>>>>find
real leadership and some real intellect.
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and it >>>>>>>>>is
most
unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of any political >>>>>>>>>party
I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as you >>>>>>>>>are
to
the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - shame really >>>>>>>>>because
there
were times during the last Labour government when they looked >>>>>>>>>reasonably
good
under strong leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, of >>>>>>>course,
Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party toThey may be worthy in the future but not right now.
object to everything - Labour and the Greens do not do that, but that >>>>>>>>does not mean that they will be a weak opposition.
What terribleCan't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done >>>>>>>better
things has the government done that you think should have been beterr >>>>>>>>brought to the attention of the public, Tony?
but
that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu >>>>>>the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a >>>>>>fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change the >>>>>sense
of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because they >>>>>have
poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition >>>>incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less
credible than the government?
and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and they have little or >>>no
policies.
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for >>>decades
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of members >>>>bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the >>>>Subject of ths thread?
and provided evidence of that.
to give an example of a politician under the Labour-led government
doing what National have done?
evidence do you have that National have behved anyworse than any previous >government. You are making stuff up.
Another piece of sarcastic crap from you - please improve your ability to >debate without sarcasm.
You have not demonstrated that it was deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
I showe that the idea came from David Farrar - intentionally reducing
the chance of an opposition MPs' bill being drawn by adding a lot of >>National MP private member bills. Did you miss that?
The increase in
I have posted the article for you again.National MPs putting private members bills forward is evidence that >>Farrar's game-pying struck a chord with National, and led directly toDon't be silly, of course it didn't because there is no evidence of game >playing - just your opinion.
this stupiod bill.
Again your pathetic attempt to change the subject shows though. TryIt is your reading of posts that appears to beWell it would appear so to you, after all you cannot see how attrociously your >party is led.
incompetent.
Tony
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:36:55 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:And you have not provided evidence that National are doing this any more than any other government - as usual you ask others to disprove your lies.
On 8/15/2016 8:56 PM, Tony wrote:And still neither Tony, nor you, have been able to show that Labour
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for >>>> decadesObviously he has no recourse to the Internet where he can peruse
and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it was
deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
(to his hearts content) the history of private members bills that
have been introduced to the House over the history of the house.
Or if he doesn't have access he could always visit his local library
where, with the assistance of staff, could get the same information.
Either from the Parliamentary archives or the Libraries Internet connection >>
stacked provate member bills to try and prevent National bills getting
through when they led government . . . .
Desperation setting in, george?
Tony
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . .
waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades."
So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
The secound part is also true but was off topic to my post so it was sniped.
sniped?
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective >>opposition.It is a fact that a government stacking the system when its MPs have
Tony
And you went of on your usual tangent talking shit.
The fact remains the opposition have used private member bill
to promote their socialist agenda for years.
Putting private members bills forward is what successive opposition >>>parties have done, endeavoured to get legislation through that they >>>believe may have the support of a majority of parliament, when the >>>government does not want to give it the same priority.
That is quite different from a government deliberately stacking the
list of private member bills with rubbish bills
In your uniformed opinon.
other ways of getting bils through is quite different from Opposition
MPs using the only way of getting Bill considered.
Do you agree?
by their own members
purely to make opposition bills less likely to be drawnSo what's the problem.
The opposition were only pushing their socialist barrow.
Government Back benchers have every right to submit bills
Then again according to Rich
Every MP is equal.
Coalition of loses MPs are more equal.
"Coalition of loses" what is that?
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 16:53:20 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:Wow so you like really big men do you?
On 8/16/2016 3:52 PM, Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:He's losing it.
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:36:55 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>And you have not provided evidence that National are doing this any more >>>than
On 8/15/2016 8:56 PM, Tony wrote:
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for >>>>>> decadesObviously he has no recourse to the Internet where he can peruse
and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it was >>>>>> deliberate
stacking of the list of members
bills by National with stupid bills So your question is incompetent. >>>>>>
(to his hearts content) the history of private members bills that
have been introduced to the House over the history of the house.
Or if he doesn't have access he could always visit his local library >>>>> where, with the assistance of staff, could get the same information. >>>>> Either from the Parliamentary archives or the Libraries Internet >>>>>connection
And still neither Tony, nor you, have been able to show that Labour
stacked provate member bills to try and prevent National bills getting >>>> through when they led government . . . .
Desperation setting in, george?
any other government - as usual you ask others to disprove your lies.
Tony
And didn't follow my sage advice obviously
And the saga continues - but now with the Gerry Brownlee defence!
Pundit
AUGUST 16, 2016
POLITICS
mea culpa, mea culpa, mea máxima culpa
by Andrew Geddis
Gerry Brownlee has made me see the error of my ways. Two plus two
equals five, and Nuk Korako's #noluggageleftbehind bill is a sterling >contribution to the very fabric of New Zealand's democracy.
As some of you may have noticed, I put up a couple of blog posts last
week in which I said some less than charitable things about
Tutehounuku (Nuk) Korako's members bill, the Airport Authorities
(Publicising Lost Property Sales) Amendment Bill.
I called it "abysmal". I said it will "literally achieve nothing at
all." I suggested that Mr Korako "doesn't seem to understand what it
is his proposed bill will even do." For heaven's sake, I even
described his proposal as the "Worst Members Bill Ever"!
The real reason for this bill was, I suggested, to act as stuffing for
the members ballot so as to reduce the chances of one of the
opposition members' bills being drawn and debated. Then, feeling
pretty good about myself and my political perspicuity, I sat back and
waited for the plaudits to flow.
But I began to become a bit nervous about my position when it found
echoes of support from both Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams on
Monday's RNZ National's 9-to-noon show. On the usually reliable
assumption that if both of these gentlemen agree with something, it
most likely must be wrong, I wondered whether I had made some sort of
ghastly mistake.
And then on today's NBR website came confirmation of my fears. In a
story by Jason Walls hidden behind their paywall, Gerry Brownlee
(National's leader of the House), let it be known in no uncertain
terms that I had completely overstepped my place and taken on airs
that weren't for the likes of the little people.
When asked about Prof Geddis¹s comments, Mr Brownlee said it was
³quite sad.²
³Professor Geddis is demonstrating a degree of arrogance that can only
come from academics,² he says.
³Ultimately, if you took that to its nth degree, it¹s an attack on
democracy. For him to pontificate this is a bill unworthy of
Parliament is just completely inappropriate,² Mr Brownlee says.
And so, to the people of New Zealand - but more importantly, to the >institution of Parliament and the very concept of democracy itself - I >apologise. I have seen the error of my ways. I shall no longer make
the arrogant assumption that the statutory requirement that my
University "accept a role as critic and conscience of society"
requires me to speak out if I see foolish or wrongheaded lawmaking.
Instead, I will do my duty to democracy and assume that whatever MPs
(at least, government MPs) do is completely fine and not to be
questioned in any way, shape or form.
So, having noted my error and repented of it, future blog posts will
consist entirely of paeans to how well the Government is managing the
rebuild of Christchurch and stern injunctions to readers to simply let >Parliament get on with whatever it wants because it knows best.
http://pundit.co.nz/content/mea-culpa-mea-culpa-mea-m%C3%A1xima-culpa
Whoeda thunk that Tony is Gerry Brownlee!
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:49:41 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 03:56:43 -0500, Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:13:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>dot nz> wrote:Nothing in particular but just about everything in general. They cannot >>> choose and keep a leader, they are full of personal attacks and they
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:05:01 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>>>dot nz> wrote:No you patronising liar.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:36:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot >>>>>>>>net dot nz> wrote:Multiple times in this newsgroup by me and several others. >>>>>>>>Opinion polls sugges that they are about as credible as the >>>>>>>>government
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:41:36 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:that this government is pretty poor. You spend your time trying to >>>>>>>>>dig up reasons why they should go.
On 8/13/2016 7:40 PM, Tony wrote:Anything except addressing the issue, "right"", george? >>>>>>>>>Ironically it might just be "the" issue. You are convinced, it >>>>>>>>>would appear,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 19:21:56 +1200,
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
My apologies for replying to my own post, but I looked again >>>>>>>>>>>>> atMeaningless in the context of my response to your silly post. >>>>>>>>>>>> Tony
Pundit
and discovered this:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/cest-pire-quun-crime-cest-une- >>faute
It seems there may be more mileage in the passion of Nuc >>>>>>>>>>>>> Korako!
He must spend hours trawling the net for anti national party >>>>>>>>>>>articles...
Obviously an unhealthy obsession with Mr 7%
I on the other hand believe the real issue is the lack of credible >>>>>>>>>opposition,
something you appear to not accept.
When has that issue been raised?
Bullshit
- but then we are not expecting an election for over a year from >>>>>>>>now. What we do have now is a government that is not performing. >>>>>>>Opinion and not well supportedYou are deluded, nothing is further from the truth.
Many of the shortcomings are identified by opposition parties - >>>>>>>>often before mainstream media, but you cannot expect the media to >>>>>>>>acknowledge that they are not the first to a story! Opposition >>>>>>>>parties cannot of course get legislation through as easily as the >>>>>>>>government, but there have been some credible attempts recently as >>>>>>>>National loses the invariable support of its "support partners" Yes >>>>>>>>of course it is disappointing that the opposition only has the >>>>>>>>support of roughly half New Zealanders - just as it must be >>>>>>>>disappointing for the government parties to only have a similar >>>>>>>>level of support.
talking about the leadersjip of at least two opposition parties. >>>>>>>>Tony - most people elect a new government both because they are sick >>>>>>>>of the old government, and because they think the new government >>>>>>>>will do a better job - how well they have performed at being in >>>>>>>>opposition is not really terribly relevant.
The government is less than perfect and absolutely no-one is >>>>>>>>>holding them to account because the oppositiion is woeful - time >>>>>>>>>for the opposition to find real leadership and some real intellect. >>>>>>>>So you dont think that the 'various commentators have held Nuk >>>>>>>>Korako to account - what more were you expecting?
I am not a supporter of any political party, I never have been and >>>>>>>>>it is most unlikely that will change. But if I was a supporter of >>>>>>>>>any political party I
cannot imagine being so blind to the shortcomings of that party as >>>>>>>>>you are to the appalling incompetence of Labour in opposition - >>>>>>>>>shame really because there were times during the last Labour >>>>>>>>>government when they looked reasonably good under strong >>>>>>>>>leadership.
So it is time for who to go?
Tony
If someone has to go at an election that is normally the government, >>>>>>>Feel free to deliberatly misunderstand, you are good at that. I was, >>>>>>>of course,
Even more delusional than normal, of course people remember and vote >>>>>>>accordingly.
Some expect an opposition party to object to everything - Labour and >>>>>>>>the Greens do not do that, but that does not mean that they will be >>>>>>>>a weak opposition.They may be worthy in the future but not right now.
What terrible things has the government done that you think should >>>>>>>>have been beterr brought to the attention of the public, Tony? >>>>>>>Can't think of any terrible things, some things could have been done >>>>>>>better but that is always true of all governmrnts is it not?
Tony
So you think that the government has done nothing worth opposing, bu >>>>>>the opposision have done a poor job of discrediting them - is that a >>>>>>fair summary?
I said the government has done nothing "terrible", why did you change >>>>>the sense of what I wrote?
And I said that the oppositiion is woeful and I believe it is because >>>>>they have poor leadership, why did you change the sense of what I >>>>>wrote?
Tony
Can you point to anything in particular that makes the opposition >>>>incompetent or their leadership woeful, or the opposition less credible >>>>than the government?
have little or no policies.
As you very well know I have stated that all parties have done this for >>> decades and provided evidence of that. You have not demonstrated that it >>> was deliberate stacking of the list of members bills by National with
Does any of that excuse the deliberate stacking of the list of members >>>>bills by National with stupid bills such as that referred to in the >>>>Subject of ths thread?
stupid bills So your question is incompetent.
Tony
This may be pertinent:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11694247
Quite a different issue - unles you are referring to National tryingOf course it isn't a different isuue - only a retarded 5 year old would think so.
to divert from its own problems by attacking the Opposition? The
stacking of private members bills came about because Labour was
putting up Bills that United Future and the Maori Party wanted to
support - all a consequnce of the poll-driven Nats feeling threatened
and out of ideas . . .
Tony
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:26:39 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . . >>>>waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades."
So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
sniped?
The secound part is also true but was off topic to my post so it was sniped. >>
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an effective >>>opposition.It is a fact that a government stacking the system when its MPs have
Tony
And you went of on your usual tangent talking shit.
The fact remains the opposition have used private member bill
to promote their socialist agenda for years.
Putting private members bills forward is what successive opposition >>>>parties have done, endeavoured to get legislation through that they >>>>believe may have the support of a majority of parliament, when the >>>>government does not want to give it the same priority.
That is quite different from a government deliberately stacking the >>>>list of private member bills with rubbish bills
In your uniformed opinon.
other ways of getting bils through is quite different from Opposition
MPs using the only way of getting Bill considered.
Do you agree?
by their own members
purely to make opposition bills less likely to be drawnSo what's the problem.
The opposition were only pushing their socialist barrow.
Government Back benchers have every right to submit bills
Then again according to Rich
Every MP is equal.
Coalition of loses MPs are more equal.
"Coalition of loses" what is that?
Labour,Greens and NZF
lost 2008,2011,2014 more than likely 2017
would have lost in 2005 if they hadn't cheated.
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:28:02 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:26:39 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . . >>>>waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades."
So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
I'm not familiar with that one - was that a National MP? What support
did it get in the house? And how many private member bills were
there from the government at that time, compared with ones from the Opposition?
sniped.
The secound part is also true but was off topic to my post so it was
effective
sniped?
Time for a change of Labour and Green leadership so we can have an
opposition.It is a fact that a government stacking the system when its MPs have >>other ways of getting bils through is quite different from Opposition
Tony
And you went of on your usual tangent talking shit.
The fact remains the opposition have used private member bill
to promote their socialist agenda for years.
Putting private members bills forward is what successive opposition >>>>parties have done, endeavoured to get legislation through that they >>>>believe may have the support of a majority of parliament, when the >>>>government does not want to give it the same priority.
That is quite different from a government deliberately stacking the >>>>list of private member bills with rubbish bills
In your uniformed opinon.
MPs using the only way of getting Bill considered.
Do you agree?
by their own members
purely to make opposition bills less likely to be drawnSo what's the problem.
The opposition were only pushing their socialist barrow.
Government Back benchers have every right to submit bills
Then again according to Rich
Every MP is equal.
Coalition of loses MPs are more equal.
"Coalition of loses" what is that?
Labour,Greens and NZF
lost 2008,2011,2014 more than likely 2017
would have lost in 2005 if they hadn't cheated.
Perhaps you meant losers - loses is a different word
by their own members
purely to make opposition bills less likely to be drawnSo what's the problem.
The opposition were only pushing their socialist barrow.
Government Back benchers have every right to submit bills
Then again according to Rich
Every MP is equal.
Coalition of loses MPs are more equal.
"Coalition of loses" what is that?
Labour,Greens and NZF
lost 2008,2011,2014 more than likely 2017
would have lost in 2005 if they hadn't cheated.
Perhaps you meant losers - loses is a different word
The Government moved to put the Bill in its proper place by dealing withIf it wasn't so silly it would be funny.
it quickly, on the spot and in one session. Winston Peters the King-
maker blocked that in its tracks and ensured that "Parliament will now
have four debates and a full public consultation process on the weighty >subject of lost property at airports."
Who's being irresponsible now?
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:28:02 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:26:39 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . . >>>>>waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades."
So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
I'm not familiar with that one - was that a National MP? What support
did it get in the house? And how many private member bills were
there from the government at that time, compared with ones from the >Opposition?
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:32:35 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:That's the trouble with sarcasm - it can backfire as well as being only half way witty (as in half wit).
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:28:02 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:26:39 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . . >>>>>>waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades."
So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
I'm not familiar with that one - was that a National MP? What support
did it get in the house? And how many private member bills were
there from the government at that time, compared with ones from the >>Opposition?
You should keep up with the play then.
the worst fat fingered or drunk typists ever. Remember when
"Coalition of loses" what is that?
Labour,Greens and NZF
lost 2008,2011,2014 more than likely 2017
would have lost in 2005 if they hadn't cheated.
Perhaps you meant losers - loses is a different word
The person operating the Dickbot account today has on several occasions pointed out obvious typos.
This is amusing given that the usual Dickbot operators are among
Just more rank PKB hypocrisy from Dickbot. Ho hum.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11695484
The Government moved to put the Bill in its proper place by dealing with
it quickly, on the spot and in one session. Winston Peters the King-
maker blocked that in its tracks and ensured that "Parliament will now
have four debates and a full public consultation process on the weighty >subject of lost property at airports."
Who's being irresponsible now?
Liberty <liberty48@live.com> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:32:35 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>That's the trouble with sarcasm - it can backfire as well as being only half >way witty (as in half wit).
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:28:02 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:26:39 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com> >>>>>wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . . >>>>>>>waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades."
So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
I'm not familiar with that one - was that a National MP? What support
did it get in the house? And how many private member bills were
there from the government at that time, compared with ones from the >>>Opposition?
You should keep up with the play then.
Tony
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:33:45 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
Liberty <liberty48@live.com> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:32:35 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>That's the trouble with sarcasm - it can backfire as well as being only half >>way witty (as in half wit).
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:28:02 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:26:39 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com> >>>>>>wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . . >>>>>>>>waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades." >>>>>>
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
I'm not familiar with that one - was that a National MP? What support >>>>did it get in the house? And how many private member bills were
there from the government at that time, compared with ones from the >>>>Opposition?
You should keep up with the play then.
Tony
There has never been an MP named Sue Moron - I didn''t get past that -
but it is notable that Lieberty cannot answer a simple question.
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:58:38 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKeyYou can't prove that so why don't you express it as an opinion rather than as a "fact".
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11695484
The Government moved to put the Bill in its proper place by dealing with
it quickly, on the spot and in one session. Winston Peters the King-
maker blocked that in its tracks and ensured that "Parliament will now
have four debates and a full public consultation process on the weighty >>subject of lost property at airports."
Who's being irresponsible now?
Winston learned all he needs about campaigning (and its finances) and
shallow posturing from his long membership of the National Party
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:33:45 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netBullshit
dot nz> wrote:
Liberty <liberty48@live.com> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:32:35 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>That's the trouble with sarcasm - it can backfire as well as being only half >>way witty (as in half wit).
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:28:02 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:26:39 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:05:26 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com> >>>>>>wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:58:14 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:So where is your evidence in suport of that statement?
Rich you are a lying little shit.
I did not quote you. I quoted Tony.
So provide some evidence of the assertion if you support it . . . >>>>>>>>waiting . . .
I know you are a bit thick. It was on this thread.
"Every government and opposition party has done this for decades." >>>>>>
Sue Morons parental leave is classic example.
I'm not familiar with that one - was that a National MP? What support >>>>did it get in the house? And how many private member bills were
there from the government at that time, compared with ones from the >>>>Opposition?
You should keep up with the play then.
Tony
There has never been an MP named Sue Moron - I didn''t get past that -
but it is notable that Lieberty cannot answer a simple question.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Same reason you didn't express your comment as an opinion. Why be so
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:58:38 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKeyYou can't prove that so why don't you express it as an opinion rather than as a
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11695484
The Government moved to put the Bill in its proper place by dealing with >>>it quickly, on the spot and in one session. Winston Peters the King- >>>maker blocked that in its tracks and ensured that "Parliament will now >>>have four debates and a full public consultation process on the weighty >>>subject of lost property at airports."
Who's being irresponsible now?
Winston learned all he needs about campaigning (and its finances) and >>shallow posturing from his long membership of the National Party
"fact".
Tony
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 01:13:33 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netExactly which comment are you referring to?
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Same reason you didn't express your comment as an opinion. Why be so
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:58:38 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKeyYou can't prove that so why don't you express it as an opinion rather than as >>a
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11695484
The Government moved to put the Bill in its proper place by dealing with >>>>it quickly, on the spot and in one session. Winston Peters the King- >>>>maker blocked that in its tracks and ensured that "Parliament will now >>>>have four debates and a full public consultation process on the weighty >>>>subject of lost property at airports."
Who's being irresponsible now?
Winston learned all he needs about campaigning (and its finances) and >>>shallow posturing from his long membership of the National Party
"fact".
Tony
snarky, Tony?
Incidentally Rich who are you talking about?
mean while on another post of Richs.
Maybe it was one of the other Richs
Given the rank hopeless incompetence of "Double Dipton" Blinglish,
Shon-key and the rest of the Nasty Nat mob, Labour/Green will
continue to work hard towards victory in 2017. That's what you get due
to the lack of credible government.
There has never been a "Double Dipton" Blinglish, Shon-key
Basically Rich if you are going to be moralistic wordsmith
you have to be squeaky clean.
You are not squeaky clean. you are covered in turds.
On 2016-08-11, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com> wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New
Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Yet you support more of our money being taken from us. Hypocrisy?
Denmark is a country with one of the higest tax rates in the world.
The Danes have no problem with this for they believe that those
taxes are spent wisely.
Money is only a resource. It enables society to function and for the Government to provide goods and services to the people of the country.
Time for a change.
There's no credible alternative.
You must have a very limited vision, and limited hope.
On 2016-08-11, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com> wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New
Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Yet you support more of our money being taken from us. Hypocrisy?
Denmark is a country with one of the higest tax rates in the world.
The Danes have no problem with this for they believe that those
taxes are spent wisely.
On 8/17/2016 5:48 PM, Liberty wrote:
Incidentally Rich who are you talking about?
mean while on another post of Richs.
Maybe it was one of the other Richs
Given the rank hopeless incompetence of "Double Dipton" Blinglish,
Shon-key and the rest of the Nasty Nat mob, Labour/Green will
continue to work hard towards victory in 2017. That's what you get due
to the lack of credible government.
There has never been a "Double Dipton" Blinglish, Shon-key
Basically Rich if you are going to be moralistic wordsmith
you have to be squeaky clean.
You are not squeaky clean. you are covered in turds.
Nope. The turds objected to the stench and moved south of Hastings
On 12 Aug 2016 06:09:34 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@clear.net.nz> wrote:
On 2016-08-11, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com> wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worst-members-bill-ever
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83065781/mps-to-debate-lost-luggage--is-this-a-waste-of-time
And why are we paying for this?
from the second url above:
"It has become a tactic for the Government to flood the ballot with
bills to limit the chances of an Opposition bill being drawn. But is
this taking the mickey?"
Natoinal are not really serious about governing New Zealand for New
Zealanders - its all a game to them - onour money!
Yet you support more of our money being taken from us. Hypocrisy?
Denmark is a country with one of the higest tax rates in the world.
The Danes have no problem with this for they believe that those
taxes are spent wisely.
I would take that statement with a grain of salt.
The country is a socialist cesspit. >http://www.snopes.com/denmark-socialism-brutal-meme/
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:58:38 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11695484
The Government moved to put the Bill in its proper place by dealing with
it quickly, on the spot and in one session. Winston Peters the King-
maker blocked that in its tracks and ensured that "Parliament will now
have four debates and a full public consultation process on the weighty >>subject of lost property at airports."
Who's being irresponsible now?
Winston learned all he needs about campaigning (and its finances) and
shallow posturing from his long membership of the National Party
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 16:50:57 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:58:38 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11695484
The Government moved to put the Bill in its proper place by dealing with >>>it quickly, on the spot and in one session. Winston Peters the King- >>>maker blocked that in its tracks and ensured that "Parliament will now >>>have four debates and a full public consultation process on the weighty >>>subject of lost property at airports."
Who's being irresponsible now?
Winston learned all he needs about campaigning (and its finances) and
shallow posturing from his long membership of the National Party
And you have the gall to accuse others of changing the subject?
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (1 / 7) |
| Uptime: | 55:07:56 |
| Calls: | 2,097 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 11,143 |
| Messages: | 950,134 |