http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
If only there was a viable alternative. One that doesn't have a history of >corruption. One that has halfway presentable leaders. One that engages in >politics of policy, not politics of mud slinging.
I lament that such an opposition doesn't exist.
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
On Friday, 9 September 2016 10:41:39 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:2008.
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
Someone bump the Dickbot - it's had its needle stuck in the same track since
Oh, and the gummint's not out of money - it has a surplus now. However theLabour party is so broken-arsed it has to cheat Parliamentary Services into paying Matt McCarten in Auckland as he pretends not to be involved in campaigning.
On Friday, 9 September 2016 10:41:39 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
Someone bump the Dickbot - it's had its needle stuck in the same track since 2008.
Oh, and the gummint's not out of money - it has a surplus now. However the Labour party is so broken-arsed it has to cheat Parliamentary Services into paying Matt McCarten in Auckland as he pretends not to be involved in campaigning.
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:44:19 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
If only there was a viable alternative. One that doesn't have a history of >>corruption. One that has halfway presentable leaders. One that engages in >>politics of policy, not politics of mud slinging.
I lament that such an opposition doesn't exist.
What corruption are you talking about?
As for ideas, the opposition put forwrd quite a few in parliament
recently when National ran ourt of ideas (and the ability to manage
their own bills):
The amendments put up by Labour and the Greens and New Zealand First included:
* Introduce LabourÂ’s Kiwibuild programme which involves the
construction of 10,000 affordable houses a year by the state,
Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:44:19 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to >>>> waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
If only there was a viable alternative. One that doesn't have a history of >>>corruption. One that has halfway presentable leaders. One that engages in >>>politics of policy, not politics of mud slinging.
I lament that such an opposition doesn't exist.
What corruption are you talking about?
It was obvious I was referring to the corruption of Labour. E.g. illegally >using taxpayer money then changing the law to make it legal. That's >corruption.
It is even worse to do nothing - the current government is now payingAs for ideas, the opposition put forwrd quite a few in parliament
recently when National ran ourt of ideas (and the ability to manage
their own bills):
The amendments put up by Labour and the Greens and New Zealand First
included:
* Introduce Labour?s Kiwibuild programme which involves the
construction of 10,000 affordable houses a year by the state,
Forcing hard working New Zealanders to pay for housing they have nothing to >do with is a terrible idea.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:02:37 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:44:19 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to >>>>> waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from >>>>> elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its >>>>> time for a change of government.
If only there was a viable alternative. One that doesn't have a history >>>>of corruption. One that has halfway presentable leaders. One that >>>>engages in politics of policy, not politics of mud slinging.
I lament that such an opposition doesn't exist.
What corruption are you talking about?
It was obvious I was referring to the corruption of Labour. E.g. illegally >>using taxpayer money then changing the law to make it legal. That's >>corruption.
Both Labour and National repaid money that had been cleared as an
election expense by Parliamentary Services but decided that it should
not be by the Auditor General. What is corrupt about that? What are
you talking about?
As for ideas, the opposition put forwrd quite a few in parliament
recently when National ran ourt of ideas (and the ability to manage
their own bills):
The amendments put up by Labour and the Greens and New Zealand First
included:
* Introduce Labour?s Kiwibuild programme which involves the
construction of 10,000 affordable houses a year by the state,
Forcing hard working New Zealanders to pay for housing they have nothing
to do with is a terrible idea.
It is even worse to do nothing - the current government is now paying
out many millions in accomodation subsidies to private landlords
- if
they owned more houses themselves the government would not be helpd
ransom to rapacious property owners.
As it is even Nick Smith says
that the Auckland housing market is out of control.
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:44:19 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>back-rights-under-urgency/
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea- why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
If only there was a viable alternative. One that doesn't have a history
of corruption. One that has halfway presentable leaders. One that
engages in politics of policy, not politics of mud slinging.
I lament that such an opposition doesn't exist.
What corruption are you talking about? The auditor report on the Saudi attempted bribe must be due soon, - or are you referring to something
else?
This?:
https://thestandard.org.nz/government-seeking-to-remove-property-buy-
Or making justice a matter of how wealthy you are?: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/312823/fair-trials-undermined-by-legal-aid-system-ex-judge
As for ideas, the opposition put forwrd quite a few in parliamentconstruction
recently when National ran ourt of ideas (and the ability to manage
their own bills):
The amendments put up by Labour and the Greens and New Zealand First included:
* Introduce LabourÂ’s Kiwibuild programme which involves the
of 10,000 affordable houses a year by the state,
* Extend the “bright line” test for capital gains on the purchase and
sale of a house from two years to five years,
* Tighten up foreign investment,
* Introduce a National Policy Statement on urban development,
*Stopping the taking of a dividend from Housing Corporation and using
this money instead to invest in further social housing,
* Mandating a minimum amount of emergency housing.
(the buggers muddle of National / ACT / United Future managed to defeat
each of those by a very narrow vote - Sinclair and Dunne realise they
have to buy their seats from National . . .)
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:41:47 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
Who to?
Nobody is forcing anyone to live in Auckland. Let the market sort this out.
On 9/9/2016 5:50 PM, BR wrote:Interesting isn't it. Extreme left wing governments nearly always become either dictatorships or oligarchies. Of course many extreme right wing governments have also. There are two differences, the first is that people who have extreme left wing views pretend that they are in favour of "government for and by the people" but are usually lying! The second is that there are fewer extreme right wing regimes. Of course at the end of the day they are all as bad as each other.
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:41:47 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>Ever get the feeling that rich (whatever number) would just love to be >dictator ??????
wrote:
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
Who to?
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green government could
only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green seats
to sustain a majority.
Don't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green government could
only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green seats
to sustain a majority.
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green
seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens*
to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo,
if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying.
*and/or Winston!
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green
seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity
- its time for a change of government.
On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 22:34:16 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of
Green seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the
Greens*
to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo,
if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying.
*and/or Winston!
I can just imagine the terror you have for clean water - Hawkes Bay and Christchurch voters may welcome waters they do not need to boil. .
. .
What else worries you, nobody?
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor <user1@example.net> wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green government could >>> only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green seats
to sustain a majority.
Don't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
A lot of the NZ First vote is protest Nat vote - and they are more
likely to go Green than return to National if Winston decides not to
stand. If Labour and Green cooperate, Peter Dunne may not retain his
seat, despite it including some very wealthy areas. ACT are probably
safe in Epsom, but even there many will be upset that National is now
pushing intensification; they don't want infill housing next door.
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green
seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens*
to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo,
if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying.
*and/or Winston!
On Thu, 8 Sep 2016 18:41:02 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>2008.
wrote:
On Friday, 9 September 2016 10:41:39 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
Someone bump the Dickbot - it's had its needle stuck in the same track since
Oh, and the gummint's not out of money - it has a surplus now. However the Labour party is so broken-arsed it has to cheat Parliamentary Services into paying Matt McCarten in Auckland as he pretends not to be involved in campaigning.
Gosh that's absolutely "wonderful", JohnO! How many days of interest
on our growing debt did last yerss surplus pay for, JohnO?
On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 22:34:16 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green >>>> seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens* >>to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo,
if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying.
*and/or Winston!
I can just imagine the terror you have for clean water - Hawkes Bay
and Christchurch voters may welcome waters they do not need to boil. .
. .
What else worries you, nobody?
Rich80105 wrote:The increase in GST has been a dampener on domewstic business - with
On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 22:34:16 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green >>>>> seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then >>>> get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens* >>>to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo, >>>if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying.
*and/or Winston!
I can just imagine the terror you have for clean water - Hawkes Bay
and Christchurch voters may welcome waters they do not need to boil. .
. .
What else worries you, nobody?
Greatly increased taxation.
Significantly reduced freedoms.Which ones concern yuo most, Allistar? We do not really know how much
Hard working New Zealanders being harmed more than they currently are.Sadly many people believe that to be a leader you have to have already
Labour have no effective leader. They are not ready to lead the country.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:13:35 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 22:34:16 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green government >>>>>> could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number ofDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
Green seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then >>>>> get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the >>>>Greens* to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a >>>>quid-pro-quo,
if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying. >>>>
*and/or Winston!
I can just imagine the terror you have for clean water - Hawkes Bay
and Christchurch voters may welcome waters they do not need to boil. .
. .
What else worries you, nobody?
Greatly increased taxation.
The increase in GST has been a dampener on domewstic business - with
flat earnings, the price increases have meant lower domestic demand.
leading to problems for a lot of businesses. Lower profits have meant
lower tax revenue, leading to higher debt. It is basic mismanagement
over the last 7 or 8 years - with GDP rising largely because of
increased immigration.
Significantly reduced freedoms.
Which ones concern yuo most, Allistar?
We do not really know how much
our security has been compromised by particiaption in the 5-eyes -
certainly most electronic data and communications are no longer
private, and our prison population has soared with little or no effect
on crime rates.
Hard working New Zealanders being harmed more than they currently are.
Labour have no effective leader. They are not ready to lead the country.
Sadly many people believe that to be a leader you have to have already
won an election
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to opposition
MPs.
The sheeer weight of blunders and lies from National are however
making the media get a more balanced view of National - and that is
partly because government secretiveness has become a major issue for
news organisations. With hindsight we can see that John Key was not
ready for government, and has not improved in government - he lowered
taxes for overseas investors and companies at greater expense for the
rest of us.
On 10/09/2016 10:34 a.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green >>>> seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then
get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens*
to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo,
if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying.
*and/or Winston!
The thought that Winston will hold the reigns of power is more
terrifying than the thought of angry little Andy being PM (if he
survives as leader till the end of this year that is).
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to opposition >>>> MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes
Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever
lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own little >>priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to opposition >>>>> MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes
Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own little >>>priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting,
george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That really >he's a great leader in disguise?
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 20:30:14 +1200, Pooh <rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 10/09/2016 10:34 a.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green governmentDon't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green >>>>> seats to sustain a majority.
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then >>>> get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens* >>> to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo, >>> if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying.
*and/or Winston!
The thought that Winston will hold the reigns of power is more
terrifying than the thought of angry little Andy being PM (if he
survives as leader till the end of this year that is).
Relax Pooh. My pick is that if Winston ever holds the balance of power
again he will opt for the best confidence-and-supply deal he can get.
He will not EVER repeat what for him is the nightmare of being a
minority party in a coalition government ;-)
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to opposition
MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes Little an >> inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever
lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own little >priorities
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to opposition
MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes Little an inadequate leader?
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to
opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes
Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>>lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own little >>>>priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting,
george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >>Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That really >>he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause
being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire
to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote -
with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence
of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are
running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling
Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to
opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>>>>lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, >>>>> george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >>>>Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That >>>>really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause
being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire
to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote -
with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence
of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are
running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling
Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to
opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>>>>lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, >>>>> george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >>>>Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That >>>>really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause
being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire
to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote - >>> with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence
of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are
running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling
Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.
Rich80105 wrote:Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>>
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to
opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>>>>>lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>>little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, >>>>>> george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >>>>>Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That >>>>>really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause
being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire
to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote - >>>> with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence
of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are
running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling
Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>>National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>>incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to
opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>>>lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own little >>>>>priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, >>>> george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >>>Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That really >>>he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause
being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire
to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote -
with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence
of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are
running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling
Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to National. >There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with incredulity.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:45:34 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net>
wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to >>>>>>>>>> opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to >>>>>>>>ever lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>>>little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time
wasting, george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think >>>>>>that Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? >>>>>>That really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause >>>>> being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire >>>>> to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote - >>>>> with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence >>>>> of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are >>>>> running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling >>>>> Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>>>National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>>>incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.
likely dependant on NZ First to continue. Do you have a recent poll
that puts them over 50%?
Yep and none more so than the big ones - general elections, which havedelivered successively lower polling for Labour over the last three elections, culminating in their joke 25% in 2014 while the Nats have been remarkably steady.
Rich80105 wrote:No, we were talking about the government wasting the time of the
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:45:34 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com> >>>>>> wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to >>>>>>>>>>> opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to >>>>>>>>>ever lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>>>>little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time
wasting, george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think >>>>>>>that Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? >>>>>>>That really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause >>>>>> being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire >>>>>> to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills >>>>>> that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the >>>>>> extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote - >>>>>> with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence >>>>>> of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are >>>>>> running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling >>>>>> Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National >>>>>> have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>>>>National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>>>>incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.
likely dependant on NZ First to continue. Do you have a recent poll
that puts them over 50%?
We are talking about how poor Labour are doing, not how well Nartional are >doing.
Colmar Brunton poll, June 2016, preferred PM: Key: 39%, Little 7%. Only 7%Irrelevant
of people polled want the current Labour leader to be PM.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:26:50 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 20:30:14 +1200, Pooh <rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 10/09/2016 10:34 a.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green government >>>>> could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green >>>>> seats to sustain a majority.Don't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then >>>> get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens* >>> to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo, >>> if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying. >>>
*and/or Winston!
The thought that Winston will hold the reigns of power is more
terrifying than the thought of angry little Andy being PM (if he
survives as leader till the end of this year that is).
Relax Pooh. My pick is that if Winston ever holds the balance of power >again he will opt for the best confidence-and-supply deal he can get.
He will not EVER repeat what for him is the nightmare of being a
minority party in a coalition government ;-)
So are you picking a 5-way National / ACT / United Future / Maori
Party / NZ First hydra
over a 3 way Labour / Greeen / NZ First combination, Crash?
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:45:34 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>>
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to >>>>>>>>> opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>>>>>lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>>little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, >>>>>> george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >>>>>Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That >>>>>really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause >>>> being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire >>>> to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote - >>>> with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence >>>> of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are >>>> running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling >>>> Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>>National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>>incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
likely dependant on NZ First to continue. Do you have a recent poll
that puts them over 50%?
On Monday, 12 September 2016 12:07:16 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:I don't have a problem with Rich supporting the Labour party, I have a problem with him completely denying the reality that it is an ineffectual party and complaining that others behave badly!
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:45:34 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to
opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >> >>>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever
lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own
little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting,
george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >> >>>>>Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That
really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause >> >>>> being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire
to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote - >> >>>> with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence
of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are
running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling >> >>>> Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to
National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with
incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.
likely dependant on NZ First to continue. Do you have a recent poll
that puts them over 50%?
No but that that's not a necessity as they have formed successive governments >on 45, 47 and 47%.
Just like this one today: >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11708315
Labour on a joke 26%. Sucks to be you, Dickbot.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:40:59 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:No, we were talking about the government wasting the time of the
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:45:34 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to >>>>>>>>>>>> opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to >>>>>>>>>> ever lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>>>>> little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time >>>>>>>>> wasting, george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think >>>>>>>> that Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? >>>>>>>> That really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause >>>>>>> being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire >>>>>>> to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills >>>>>>> that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the >>>>>>> extent that one would have passed had the government not used an >>>>>>> obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote - >>>>>>> with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence >>>>>>> of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are >>>>>>> running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling >>>>>>> Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National >>>>>>> have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>>>>> National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>>>>> incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.
likely dependant on NZ First to continue. Do you have a recent poll
that puts them over 50%?
We are talking about how poor Labour are doing, not how well Nartional are >> doing.
house.
Irrelevant
Colmar Brunton poll, June 2016, preferred PM: Key: 39%, Little 7%. Only 7% >> of people polled want the current Labour leader to be PM.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:13:35 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:The increase in GST has been a dampener on domewstic business - with
On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 22:34:16 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green government >>>>>> could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green >>>>>> seats to sustain a majority.Don't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then >>>>> get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens* >>>> to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo, >>>> if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying. >>>>
*and/or Winston!
I can just imagine the terror you have for clean water - Hawkes Bay
and Christchurch voters may welcome waters they do not need to boil. .
. .
What else worries you, nobody?
Greatly increased taxation.
flat earnings, the price increases have meant lower domestic demand.
leading to problems for a lot of businesses. Lower profits have meant
lower tax revenue, leading to higher debt. It is basic mismanagement
over the last 7 or 8 years - with GDP rising largely because of
increased immigration.
Significantly reduced freedoms.Which ones concern yuo most, Allistar? We do not really know how much
our security has been compromised by particiaption in the 5-eyes -
certainly most electronic data and communications are no longer
private, and our prison population has soared with little or no effect
on crime rates.
Hard working New Zealanders being harmed more than they currently are.
Labour have no effective leader. They are not ready to lead the country.Sadly many people believe that to be a leader you have to have already
won an election - and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to opposition
MPs. The sheeer weight of blunders and lies from National are however
making the media get a more balanced view of National - and that is
partly because government secretiveness has become a major issue for
news organisations. With hindsight we can see that John Key was not
ready for government, and has not improved in government - he lowered
taxes for overseas investors and companies at greater expense for the
rest of us.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote: >>>>>
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to
opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes >>>>>>> Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever >>>>>> lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own little >>>>>> priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, >>>>> george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think that >>>> Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? That really >>>> he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the cause
being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their desire
to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward bills
that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to the
extent that one would have passed had the government not used an
obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote -
with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence
of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are
running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the trolling
Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when National
have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to National. >> There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to opposition >>>> MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that makes Little an
inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to ever
lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own little
priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time wasting, george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
"So, it turns out that we don't just have Nuk Korako to thank for
wasting Parliament's time on debating how best to advertise lost
property auctions that never get held. National Party MP Jono Naylor
and Transport Minister Simon Bridges played their part, too."
The real leadership incompetence is squarely with John Key who didn't
spot this disaster when it first came to his attention, and fold it
into the statute review bill already before the house. Now you may
argue that it was Key's arrogance and ignorance that were as much to
blame, but they are just part of his incompetence, don't you agree?
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:40:59 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:No, we were talking about the government wasting the time of the
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:45:34 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:36:54 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:24:40 +1200, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:34:06 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 9/11/2016 5:33 PM, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
- and naturally the media give more publicity to
government Ministers and the Prime Minister than they do to >>>>>>>>>>>> opposition MPs.
Are you suggesting that it's the lack of media coverage that >>>>>>>>>>> makes Little an inadequate leader?
Could it possibly be that Little is the most inadequate person to >>>>>>>>>>ever lead an opposition party?
If anything he is very well covered by the MSM which has its own >>>>>>>>>>little priorities
You appear to have missed the most recent article on the time >>>>>>>>> wasting, george:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/worser-and-worser
What has that got to do with Labour being leaderless? Do you think >>>>>>>>that Little is an inadequate leader because of poor media coverage? >>>>>>>>That really he's a great leader in disguise?
The subject of the thread is government time wasting - with the
cause being attributed to incompetence of the government, and their >>>>>>> desire to avoid the opposition having an opportunity to put forward >>>>>>> bills that have embarassed government by being widely supported - to >>>>>>> the extent that one would have passed had the government not used an >>>>>>> obscure and anti-democratic rule to prevent it going to a final vote >>>>>>> -
with Bill English lying in that debate. There has been no evidence >>>>>>> of any incompetence by the Oppositin - on the contrary, National are >>>>>>> running scared of their evident competence.
Allistar, you have been sucked in by the distractions of the
trolling Nat supporter george, whio was off-topic as is usual when >>>>>>> National have so badly blundered.
I reacted to the implication that there is a viable alternative to >>>>>>National. There isn't. Any suggestion that there is will be met with >>>>>>incredulity.
You are in a minority. Of course there is an alternative.
The polls suggest otherwise.
likely dependant on NZ First to continue. Do you have a recent poll
that puts them over 50%?
We are talking about how poor Labour are doing, not how well Nartional are >>doing.
house.
Colmar Brunton poll, June 2016, preferred PM: Key: 39%, Little 7%. Only 7% >>of people polled want the current Labour leader to be PM.Irrelevant
On Monday, 12 September 2016 12:07:16 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:on 45, 47 and 47%.
Really? The last poll I saw had National at less than 50%, and most
likely dependant on NZ First to continue. Do you have a recent poll
that puts them over 50%?
No but that that's not a necessity as they have formed successive governments
Just like this one today: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11708315
Labour on a joke 26%. Sucks to be you, Dickbot.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:26:50 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 20:30:14 +1200, Pooh <rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 10/09/2016 10:34 a.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:37:45 +1200, victor wrote:
On 9/09/2016 11:05 p.m., HitAnyKey wrote:
Even more terrifying is the thought that a Labour/Green government >>>>>> could only exist at cost of Labour buying a significant number of Green >>>>>> seats to sustain a majority.Don't need to, ACT and UF are under the threshold so they need
electorate seats from the Nats.
Greens are way over the threshold.
I think what may happen is Nats will be able to form minority gov then >>>>> get the rug pulled with no confidence vote.
You're missing the point. A Labour-led government would need the Greens* >>>> to govern at all; and therefore would need to front with a quid-pro-quo, >>>> if not in money, then in policy concessions. That's what's terrifying. >>>>
*and/or Winston!
The thought that Winston will hold the reigns of power is more
terrifying than the thought of angry little Andy being PM (if he
survives as leader till the end of this year that is).
Relax Pooh. My pick is that if Winston ever holds the balance of power >>again he will opt for the best confidence-and-supply deal he can get.
He will not EVER repeat what for him is the nightmare of being a
minority party in a coalition government ;-)
So are you picking a 5-way National / ACT / United Future / Maori
Party / NZ First hydra
over a 3 way Labour / Greeen / NZ First combination, Crash?
Back to the subject.
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 08:26:32 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
Back to the subject.
Good idea - here it is:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
<off topic post deleted>
On Friday, 16 September 2016 09:07:40 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 08:26:32 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
Back to the subject.
Good idea - here it is:
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
Yawn ... meanwhile, back in the real world... https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/third-highest-growth-rate-oecd
"It's the economy, stupid"
<off topic post deleted>
http://pundit.co.nz/content/if-nuk-korakos-bill-is-such-a-good-idea-why-did-no-one-say-so-earlier
Clearly National have nothing better to do - that they are prepared to
waste time of parliament merely to try and stop debate on ideas from
elected representatatives of other parties.
Out of ideas, out of money, out of compassion, out of integrity - its
time for a change of government.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 229:16:36 |
| Calls: | 2,088 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 11,140 |
| Messages: | 948,523 |