I do get a little grumpy at the event being called a 100 year event as if that can’t be planned for
That was rolled out back in 1992, when the drop in Southern lake levels was blamed on the eruption of Mt Pinatubo in the Philippines, and Aucklanders were reduced to taking cold showers. Electricorp Chairman the late John Fernyhough blatantly ignored being held to account in a TV interview by chanting "one in 100 years".
Three factual errors in that one sentence. Although maybe I’m just not clear who “you” encompasses.
I’m talking to you, in the supercilious prick persona you’ve been maintaining since your original stupidly provocative reply to Ian Dalziel. If you wish to be cute about it that’s your problem.
You’re certainly surprising me with insights into my own character
You'd be up for an endless procession of surprises if you took the trouble to find out what's really going on in a part of the world you're happy to talk down to. Even after several terms as an MP Tim Barnett was gracious enough to declare himself to be genuinely shocked by what he discovered through simply doorknocking. And that, of course, was before the earthquakes.
Remember, this was in response to Ian suggesting that there’s no candidate becuase of “arrant madness”. How is it condescending to point out that the party’s stuck with acting in accordance with its own constitution?
O poor petal. And you a card-carrying jewel-of-nature paid-up party member!
Condescension and contempt for the ordinary voter appears to be as natural as breathing to you. Khrist only knows what your concept of "grassroots politics" might be. I'd bet it's from the same claptrap factory that came up with "core values".
It seems Lianne saw she could do more for Chchch as Mayor than as a Labour politician, and whatever that says to the electorate needs to be clarified…
My now-retired next door neighbour remembers Lianne as a proactive and effective union person from the days when she worked in the hospital kitchen. That appears to be enough to ensure her loyalty, and for me it’s what drives on the ground politics, rather than any top-down pronouncements from Party insiders.
I was munted out of Chch Central by the 2010 quake, and now reside in Megan Woods territory. While I accord her a lot of respect for taking the inevitable loser role against Bob Parker when he first ran for Mayor, I do rather wish that she was more proactive. Also Clayton Cosgrove has gone disappointingly quiet. There are days when you could be forgiven for feeling that the Party of Social Justice doesn't give at rat's.
BTW has anyone been to Burwood Hospital lately? Three years down the track you can wander the grounds for half an hour before finding a living soul who'll direct you to the functioning parts of the place.
Because the Labour party has an ancient and complex democratic constitution that prescribes the timing and process for electorate selections. Personally I think it needs a thorough overhaul, but considering the changes already made in the last 2 years, it’s going to take a while. Sorry. If you find it too slow, feel free to join and help out.
Want to talk about Chch Central issues, but you’re merely a long-term resident? Pay your sub and step inside where we can safely patronise you. So the boneheaded condescension that nearly cost Labour Chch Central in 2008, and lost it to Nicky “differently abled” Wagner last time around, appears to be still all the go in Party circles. It was there in spades the first time Brendon Burns and his consort came doorknocking, but to their credit they rose to the occasion after the earthquakes. For all his good works Tim Barnett never quite shook the condescension. Even in his last term he was still making some rather uncomfortable discoveries about the people he represented.
If Burns had been given a sensible place on the Party list he’d presumably have been in there providing some much-needed advocacy for post-quake Christchurch. Hopefully the next candidate will understand that there’s more to representing the electorate than tying a bunch of black & red balloons to your car aerial.
I think DeepRed was drawing on items like this Joe.
With respect, that appears to be a prediction of wasting away rather than becoming unsustainably bloated.
FB is already showing signs of collapsing under its own weight.
Got a link for that? Because without knowing what you mean by "collapse under its own weight" it's a little reminiscent of Robert Metcalfe's 1995 prediction that the entire internet would go “spectacularly supernova” and “catastrophically collapse” within a year.
But countenancing a state ban on a website used by more New Zealanders than any other? And not just individuals, but whanau and groups and organisations, many of whom rely on Facebook as a platform to support and stay in touch with each other?
Clark would have done well to visit Kiwibank's Facebook page. The 'discussions' that erupt over the non-performance of the bank's overloaded servers on the evenings when benefits and pensions come through can rival Kiwiblog.
If the industry they are a part of prevents that occurring and worse causes them to behave in ways they personally find unbecoming, then it seems to me that you can’t have the discussion about the way journalists behave towards each other without considering the nature of the industry as well.
That's been the elephant in the room through most of this thread. For anyone who's inclined to lift their perception of the media above the personal, the real misgivings aren't about individual journalists, but about apparent editorial decisions. I won't speculate about why particular stories suddenly appear to die, but it appears to happen all the time. The impression is that talented journalists don't necessarily enjoy editorial support. I imagine that kind of ongoing frustration is vastly more corrosive than what the public might think of you as an individual journalist.
I remember an ABC Radio panel discussion where one of the participants deliberately scandalized their colleagues by describing the Sydney Murdoch Telegraph as an "excellent newspaper". Having got their full attention he went on to explain that it was an excellent newspaper of its type - i.e. a newspaper that takes the fears and anxieties of its readership and delivers them up to those with a vested interest in entrenching the status quo. While we don't have anything quite so blatant as the Telegraph in NZ, that still appears to be a pretty fair analysis of why some editorial policies are pursued.