Yes, 1600 a week is not a lot.
SkyTv has 865,000 subscribers, their churn rate ( from annual report) is 13.2%, which would be 2195 per week.
They knew what his day job was/is but didn’t bother to inform the audience.
Farrar is PAID by the National party for a whole lot of things. Polls sounds innocent until you know he is polling specific National policies or reactions to Labour policies.
Then on top of that Farrars is Nationals go to guy for election boundaries and the whole census results for political purposes.
communities (which might be local councils, but could be iwi or affinity groups) decide on the details of drug legalisation/regulation/prohibition for their people?
We used to have this for alcohol. When I first was eligible to vote we had a prohibition question on the ballot paper. Eventually Big Alcohol undermined it. Large parts of Auckland were 'dry' right up to the late 70s.
Ironically if cannabis was decriminalised then the market for selling an illegal drug would diminish.
Really? You over estimate the ability for lots of people to wait patiently for' their plant' to grow. Ever notice all the fast food places around in spite of it being completely legal to 'cook your own'
head of the FMA says he quit, in part because of the attacks on him and his office.
Thats not quite the ( instant) narrative we heard from the SSC and Collins after her resignation/sacking
Isnt the ferro-cement still used for those floating marina pontoons. The local rowing club has one to launch their hulls into an estuary with a large tidal range. Floats just a few cm above the changing water level. Never to sail upon wine dark seas unfortunately !
Slater attempting to pin down Brian Edwards and Judy Callingham on their relationship to Hotchin and his wife. You have to delve down through the comments:
If you had delved down through the comments on Brian Edwards blog like you said, you would have seen classic Slater trying to misrepresent what Edwards said and then Brian doing a ritual halal on him.
there's more good stuff in there too. Read it
I did, and this stands out:
I consider that there is a real and appreciable risk that your transition into adulthood, given your current prospects and educational ambitions.
"Current prospects" seems to translate into 'golden boy with rugby career'.
I had a person who worked for me some time back, because of his family background he hardly went to school from 12 years onwards, so his prospects wernt good, but he changed that and now in his middle twenties has a good trade and good future ahead of him.
M seems to have been very lucky that the court could only 'see' a minor assault but was dealt with by the Chief High Court judge. Im surprised this case wasnt sent back to the District Court where the judges are more used to this type of offending. But of course the Magic Carpet doesnt work this way for people from the right background.
Poor brown kids never get this sort of magic carpet ride out of the criminal justice system that these two brothers got. I wonder if the main factor that the judge has taken into account are sport related. They seem to be dazzled by the aura of those gifted at sport every time they appear in court. Are these two brothers the offspring of some former 'great' who are headed for a great career as rugby professionals now that the pesky problem of any sort of conviction has been removed.
As far as Odgers situation, does anyone know what the Law Society process is?
She doesnt appear to be a member of the Law Society but is on the Roll of Lawyers where you can use the complaint process