Can I come round and harvest some? There’s a reason feijoa rhymes with “freeloader”, after all :-)
Feijoa related products are the first things I buy on every visit back to NZ. They're very rare here, Sydney-siders generally don't know what they are.
What's the story to there being so many Malaysian restaurants in central Wellington?
A so few in Sydney! However, Mamak in Chinatown is fantastic, the clue is the persistent queue (for visitors to Sydney).
But he’s got such a nice smile.
Less and less on show however...
Key’s response to Gower – um yes, it was a National Party fundraiser, but he couldn’t be “sure” whether he was “right or wrong” when he had previously said it was a charity event – is remarkable.
Surely, finally, Key's faulty memory line will not be believed? Claiming it was a charity event is plainly false. Well done Gower for his smart reporting.
I don't know how, precisely, you measure effectiveness in the health space. I concede, not being on the front page is a proxy or sorts. However, are there more heart surgeries, shorter waiting lists for elective surgery, fewer avoidable somethingorrathers?
I bet Bridges believes he’ll be there one day.
Bridges displays all of the ambition but little of the necessary judgment or experience to be PM. He's in desperate need of a few years in Opposition (I also suspect he's an error away from being an also-ran).
So why would this Minister be gleaning anything on those responsibilities in China?
I wondered that, there may be an obvious reason but I've not looked for it. Perhaps others have?
Australians have a staggering amount stashed away (over 1.6 trillion dollars), and it’s only a little over 20 years that it’s been compulsory. It’s been so popular that the minimum contributions are now way higher than they used to be.
Going up to 12 per cent, from the current 9, by the end of this decade. I don't think I'd describe the increase as being due to it's the 'popularity' per se, just a clear recognition that 9 per cent isn't sufficient for most. It's certainly not unpopular though.
And at the risk of recalling an earlier distraction, the Tasmanian Labor/Green government just got turfed out, after 16 years, for the Libs.
Can we go back to first principles here: just why should we believe that the known history of the Australian Labor and Green Parties should have much relevance for the future of the NZ Labour and Green Parties?
I'd not want to overstate it - electoral systems and parliaments are different - but they appear to campaign on similar issues, target similar voting cohorts and have some common campaign themes. On that basis, it's not surprising to me that they clash from time to time on both sides of the ditch.
Perhaps the Labour party is, just possibly, an organisation that doesn’t like being patronised by high and mighty middle class tofu eaters impatient with their antediluvian “smokestack industrial-age concepts and thinking”.
I used to get a bit of this but not so much now. The last campaign I was involved in, for Labour in Wellington Central in 2008, the Greens and Labour had a good relationship and both had excellent candidates.
I do think Labour must and can campaign on environmental issues as it has a strong claim of actually doing things through 5 governments (and Hebe, I've read your comments and understand what you were and weren't saying).
Indeed, whereas NZ has had significant numbers of them for over a decade. We do actually have our own experiences to go on.
Ben, yup, it’s also useful to recognise that the NZ experience is a variation on a theme that can be observed internationally and across different electoral systems.
I also have to say, as a less active but equally long serving member of this remarkable community, you could consider the way you respond to new and alternative voices (to be really clear, I don't mean your responses to me).