So John Key and National are ‘masking’ their donations by using restaurants and other events, where participants are making donations or paying over the top for services.
Its seems a clear strategy to get around the election donor law
Not even close. The way it was structured increased transparency.
Fair enough. And they could say "given the margin of error, at 4.9% in our poll, New Zealand First effectively has a 50-50 chance of getting back into Parliament".
I have it at 46% :-)
I have some sympathy here. Explaining confidence intervals in a three-minute news item is not something I'd like to try and do.
"Our poll shows National is (highly) likely to have 56 to 58 MPs."
I was pretty confident of two things:
a) that the US model, or something like it, was indeed where the National/ACT policy was eventually headed...
ACT has announced its opposition to incentive funding for schools:
Hekia Parata’s idea of giving bureaucrats more power to calculate how much schools should be paid shows the worst of National’s centralising instincts, according to ACT leader Jamie Whyte.
“Parents know how well schools are performing. It is also parents who pay the tax to fund the schools. It should be parents who have the power to influence school funding.
“No government can collect and process as much information as parents already have, and no government can know parents' varying preferences for their children's education. The Novapay debacle showed that government struggles even to install a centralised payroll system. Why should anyone believe it can develop a centralised system for calculating school performance?
“Schools should be funded based on how many parents choose to send their children there, and they should be able to use the funds as they see fit..
“Under a bulk funding model, schools that attract students from high needs areas can still get a top up for doing so, but the most important drive for them should be attracting more students.
“ACT is the only party that truly believes in parental choice and understands the funding policies required to achieve it."
‘Useful’ in what sense?
In the sense of add to the occasion of the Olympics in a way that Hadyn suggested team sports do not.
Useful Summer Olympic team sports: rowing.
Useful Winter Olympic team sports: bobsled. Also curling.
Well said Russell.
An entire post criticising the opponents of a politician without basically once addressing their arguments? Isn’t this textbook ad hominem?
It’s also meant “delays” for every other party, Mark. And here’s a crazy idea, Mark: Perhaps its NOT the job of the Representation Commission to be of “benefit” to any party or faction? Nor is it their job to determine the internal affairs (including candidate selection) of Labour, National or any other party.
The delay isn't caused by the Representation Commission, but by a decision of the Minister of Statistics and the Duties of Statutory Officers (Census and Other Remedial Provisions) Act, government legislation which set the date for the census as 2013, instead of 2011. Had the census not been delayed by the Government (and, you know, the Canterbury Earthquake), we'd have had the boundaries a couple of years ago.
I assume this is the liberalism / tax dodging conflict manifesting itself, or the sheer repulsiveness of the National candidate).
Or, you know, people like Grant and think he did a good job for Wellington Central over the previous 3 years.
If Gower has floated this claim of a deal and left out an outright denial that’s the case, that’s shabby.
The outright denial is at 2:24 in the video linked to.
Did you float a claim of shabby journalism without even watching the story about which you floated the possibility of being shabby?