Posts by Steve Withers
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The Herald last week cited Tizard's situation as a negative for MMP. I was struggling to see why anyone would care about a situation that arises occasionally, has no affect on outcomes or policy and merely relects the outcome of the last election.
Meanwhile, despite being in a rush to bag MMP, the Herald *STILL* hasn't acknowledged or reported on the democratic disaster inflicted on Auckland last year by First Past the Post in the election for Auckland's Council: 62.5% of all votes cast didn't elect anyone to the Council. 13 of 20 Councilors got less than 30% of the vote in their wards. In Albany Ward, over 80% of votes cast elected no one. In North Shore and Whau Wards - both - over 69% of votes cast elected no one.
That's a lot of votes - the VAST majority - electing no one at all to the Council.
We didn't hear a peep out of the Herald about that disaster.
They must look at democratic matters with the telescope around the wrong when.....so trivial things look large and REALLY IMPORTANT stuff.....isn't seen at all.
Why else would a minor list issue rate daily coverage while almost 2/3's of Aucklanders electing no one at all to "our" Council....didn't rate a mention anywhere in the Herald?
-
Hard News: Limping Onwards, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
Graeme: I tend to agree. Goff's 'gaff' aside, anyone who wants public broadcasting; doesn't want asset sales - overt or by stealth; does want public transport, *can't* vote for the National Party. No matter what.
-
I tend to focus on policy as that is the only thing that really affects my life when all is said and done. Politics is full of theatre and related human foibles, failures and follies. More often than not these prove to be irrelevant side shows on the way to better (or worse) outcomes as a consequence of policy implemented by whomever is the government.
Darren Hughes? Ultimately irrelevant. Goff's handling of the affair? More relevant, as it provides insight into the cross-currents of his own decision-making processes and consequent execution of them. He may not have handled it well, but I can't help but feel Goff's heart was and remains in the right place. That "heart" flows on into policy formulation and implementation (IMHO) more than media timing or "optics".
I'm not your "normal" voter, I guess. I tend to know what parties offer in the way of policy and allocate my vote accordingly. Political Theatre may be fun, farce or tragedy....but signifies little.
-
BTW....I also have a UPS for my PC...and can charge that up from the car with an inverter. If you have a car, you have SOME power....and can at least keep batteries charged on critical items and a small CFL light or two to light up the night.
-
I have an Android phone. It does all that....and more. If you ever found yourself in a disaster, you don't want an iPhone. You'd want a phone you could swap a spare battery into and keep going...and maybe charge the flat battery up from some AA's and some bits of wire while you have the spare in the phone. That's how crims keep their phones charged in the prisons. It's good enough in a disaster....but with an iPhone, you can't even put a spare battery into the thing.
-
The problem is most Kiwis have no idea what any of this means....and their eyes glaze over when you try to explain it even if they ask.
-
Hard News: The digital switch-off, in reply to Sacha,
Urlich of First New Zealand Capital says Sky is under-leveraged with an inefficient balance sheet. Profits had boosted Sky's asset levels but there were no apparent acquisition targets and little prospect of a boost in dividends or a share buy-back.
In other words...they just provide a service with no quick fixes for market speculators.
We need more businesses like that....and especially ones that don't involve Rupert Murdoch in any way.
-
Hard News: The digital switch-off, in reply to DexterX,
I don't knowingly give Rupert Murdoch one cent. If he owns a single SKY share (and I think he owns a lot more then that), then I refuse to have it. It doesn't hurt that their content is crap....and I have too much going on in my life to sit around watching OTHER people play games of any kind.
-
Hard News: The digital switch-off, in reply to Russell Brown,
The Blair government was in the thrall of Rupert Murdoch and Conrad Black. They did a lot to dilute and diminish global access to the quality programming of the BBC....because it blew the inferior commercial product out of the water, as often as not. To allow that to continue would see VERY bad press from the media barons.....so Tony Blair and his government folded. Plus, the BBC was causing trouble over their lies about Iraq...and they needed to weaken it and make behave.
Now the UK has a Tory government that is even MORE hostile to media not owned by a billionaire they can cozy up to.....
The same is happening here in NZ. The National Party of today is actively hostile to the ONLY significant media (TVNZ and RNZ) not owned by foreign corporates. In this sense, they are demonstrating - once again - they cannot be trusted without collective assets.
I need no more proof. Thirty year of watching these stupid people do this to *our* assets is more than enough.
-
If you want public broadcasting in New Zealand then you don't vote for the National Party. Easy enough to do.
If you think the corporate media campaign (Fairfax and APN) supporting tax cuts and the National Party from 2005 to the present was evidence of WHY we need a public broadcaster, then you don't vote for the National Party.
If you think the tax cuts themselves were imprudent - at the very least - then you don't want to be voting for the National party.....
I clearly remember Michael Cullen saying tax cuts were a very bad idea because one day a rainy day would come and we would need the money. Well....it rained...and National is oblivious to their own role in ENSURING the resources aren't there to meet the need....due to their tax cuts.
If you want a sane transport policy NOT geared to pouring taxpayer cash into infrastructure and bus/truck-owning corporates....then don't vote for the National party.
If you think climate change is something every person on this planet should be competing with each other to show leadership on....(instead of lolly-gagging at the back of the Reluctant Bus)....then don't vote for the National Party.
If you understand that Peak Oil actually occurred in 2006....and you want a sane public transport policy for the oil-poor future that is as certain as sunrises....then you don't want to vote for the National Party.
I could go on......but the list is already long enough to make it screamingly obvious that only people ignorant of all these things could vote for the National Party.