I'm hoping everything Key says forever, some cheeky journalist is going to earnestly ask: "When you say you're off to Palmy in the morning- is that you you or the PM's office off to Palmy? Just to be sure I've got this straight."
every panelist I’ve talked to has said they could fund twice as many grants with no loss of quality and all the grants could easily be doubled in size with no loss of quality.
Yep. It’s woeful how many great projects don’t make it- or get a grant, do great science which raises more questions and exciting new avenues- which then don’t make it.
I don't like the model. But before trying to construct something else, doubling it would be worthwhile.
Many and probably most people just see all parties and politicians generally as dirty players and liars. The degree of dirt and the number of lies matters little to them.
And that doesn't worry you? Fine. That makes you part of the problem.
From what I see, it’s the way the game is played, by all sides, and I am not confident there’ll ever be anything different now that it’s deteriorated this far 2) I’d have no idea who to believe, all 3 parties, the politician, the blogger and the author, had controversial reputations.
This really bugs me.
If you have dirt on all politicians, or on Nicky Hager, please divulge. Otherwise, you're engaged in smearing- saying nasty things about people without any evidence to back them up.
I sounds like you still haven't read the book. You should.
I used to do the panel regularly (goodness knows they could do with a few more women regardless) but after having a couple of swipes at Key, I ended up way down the list
Wow. Thanks Josie. The rot runs deep.
Our eldest came home from school one afternoon terribly worried her parents were going to hell. It might have been funny if her emotions weren’t so seriously manipulated.
The ‘christian teachers’ were ignorant and mildly deranged fanatics. The ‘lessons’ involved low-grade colouring in and weapons-grade fear-mongering. We ‘opted out’ which, at Chch East in 1997, was also the only option for the Somalian kids.
Bloody oath it was out-of-line brainwashing.
Wasn't it Woodhouse who had his own little OIA moment with the Donghau Liu letter Cunliffe signed? Maybe he learnt a lesson.
The entirely predictable Listener editorial: “Hager, of course, is no less guilty than Slater of trying to exert influence on the political process.”
I can't even.
Definitely the Waikato Times shouldn’t have run that story.
It’s hardly a front-pager, because an unnamed source and a facebook page aren’t much to go on, unless the unnamed source happens to be highly credible. Someone is lying.
His claims have been backed by a Waikato University student who saw the books in Letcher’s possession.
The source understood that Letcher had been given money from someone within the National Party to buy the books.
Letcher said: “I have one copy of the book and I haven’t finished it yet. I’m not involved in this."
More than likely the paper got played. Hopefully they’ll look into it thoroughly. But if it turns out to be true, it’s not such a stupid story.
Oh yeah, it’s super lazy from the media to run a story on Curwen’s say-so alone – I’m quite surprised it made it that far.
He himself said “So, apparently…”! To treat him like a primary source is simply insane.
To be fair on the paper, they also quote another UoW source, albeit unnamed. Hard for the reader to asses the credibility of the claim without knowing who that source is, or what evidence they have, but two sources is a pretty common policy.