Agree, Gareth. They'd be crazy not to start with less obviously sensitive assets like the port and airport shares, and in any case there will be political timing to consider at both local and national levels.
it'll be much easier to force it on the rest of the country
And this should not be seen as an "Auckland issue".
Perhaps Jimmy Mason needs to own his own behaviour a little more than he seems to want to.
And there's bugger all chance of that while his cheer squad keeps finding reasons why it's not his fault. Feminists made him do it, your honour. Just a light punch. He's a "good man". Blah blah blah.
There's a name for that behaviour. Oh, that's right - "enabling", isn't it.
anyone who thinks that S&P is a credible source of creditworthiness information is "batshit crazy".
Credit rating agency Standard & Poor's is exactly the right sort of bogeyman to scare Kiwis into accepting a tough - but realistic - Budget.
They don't have to do anything except sit there like little Miss Muffet with her asset-rich pie.
Nice. I imagine in practice it's like all those internal coups by politicians who are happy in their current role and have no plans to become leader. Who needs a plan when you have motive and opportunity - though it will require the engineering of a crisis, maybe the discovery of a budget blowout after inspecting the books..
I have never seen Top Gear
Sacrilege. How on earth do you expect to understand the XT adverts?
Found this - presume the Act site will have details, given that it's hardly a secret and is consistent with the rest of their beliefs:
Act wants councils to privatise their commercial activities and to supply water on a "fully commercial basis"
Then I said, "What was that an ad for?" His reply? "Wellington."
And the first time I saw the Welli advert I thought it was for Melbourne.
the audience they're marketing to
Visitors from Wellington. :)
Auckland heeft meer meh.
Steve put it entertainingly elsethread:
"Auckland, wanna score some infrastructure?"
I also believe most members of the public - like say a certain eyewitness - know the difference between a "smack" with an open hand and a "punch" with a closed one. One is also most likely to be described as a "slap" when administered to the face.
The verbal gymnastics are offensive anyway. If you want to say that all men have some god-given right to hit their children hard then have the balls to say so. If you insist vast numbers of parents are being prosecuted for slapping their kids on the legs, then show us the proof. I'd suggest you find a different poster-boy in any case, no matter how cuddly you find him.
Candyman, Candyman, Ca....