Posts by stephen walker
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
When I used to work for the port years ago I did wonder quite how Aucklanders, or their media representatives, rationalised that the 1% or so of the Waitemata Harbour shoreline that the port occupies was specially "theirs"; must be part of some sort of public domain and thus able to be taken away from any port use or control. However, I guess that's all a bit passe now.
amen.
the way people have been trivialising the function of the port has certainly been an eye opener. "Just shove it somewhere out of sight so we can rightfully enjoy OUR waterfront!" I hear them chant.
well, i've got news, lads and lasses: the port is the reason auckland is here in the first place. doh. and no, between 1840 and 1985 there were no used Japanese imports to worry about. so it goes a bit deeper than that.
and apart from that, when and if the port is "opened up" to "public access" (like princess wharf?), are we gonna have several km of viaduct-style booze barns and apartments? or will it be swimming, sunbathing and snorkling in deisel slicks and ferry effluent? sure, a public park somewhere on the water's edge and even a square for events would be really nice. but we aren't talking about kaiteriteri beach here. it's a fcuking reclaimed port ffs.
phew, end of rant. as you were...
-
a direct quotation doesn't have a "that" before it.
so these phrases wouldn't be transcribed in the way you suggest. or am i confusing basic grammatical rules here? -
what i find interesting is how national have gone for another political novice. not as extreme as brash, of course. that was so stupid i couldn't believe that even the national caucus was so intellectually shallow.
but, once again, we have someone with just four years in parliament and no cabinet experience. even the upstart lange had six years in the house before becoming leader.
so, in his short parliamentary tenure, what has key achieved? how do his recent finance policies stack up? what is his record in the debating chamber and in the select committees?
mr. slack has been kind enough to elucidate key's voting record, but what about his other activities?
-
Danyl,
an excellent effort. certainly better than Ray Miller's in the SST. i would just take issue with one of your assumptions. you say:
_"Brash has a reputation as an 'honest gentleman' of New Zealand politics, or at least he did until last week."_
This "honest don" thing seems to me to be one of those urban legends spawned simply by people repeating it often enough so that it becomes "accepted wisdom". to me, it's simply PR/manufactured image/spin, with no basis in reality. how has this one-tool, reserve bank fixit man, with his finger on the interest-rate trigger, become "honest don"?
the clear evidence i see to the contrary is from Brash's own 1998 speech in london:
"But, when I feel like criticising the reformers for not explaining their intentions in advance of making dramatic changes, I recall a conversation which I had with a group of elderly gentlemen in late 1984 shortly after the then-Labour Government introduced a tax surcharge on the taxpayer-funded retirement income scheme – which effectively means-tested that scheme, despite the Labour Party’s strong commitment not to means-test the scheme prior to the 1984 election. My friends were indignant at the Government’s deceit. I asked them whether they were confident that the original retirement scheme, without some form of means test, was economically sustainable in the long term. No, they thought it was probably not sustainable without some form of means test, and indeed its continuation without a means test would almost certainly, in their opinion, create major strains on the economy. I then asked whether they thought a political party could become Government if, before the election, they pledged to introduce a means test for the scheme. Not a chance, they agreed with alacrity.
"Then I asked them whether they were suggesting that the Labour Party had had a moral obligation to lie. They did not like that conclusion, and neither did I, but I am reminded of the conversation whenever it is suggested that Governments should not undertake reforms until a majority of the population support those reforms."
seems pretty clear to me that he is not worried about being very expedient with the truth. in other words, honesty is not up there on the priority list, so the "honest don" tag is just a cooked up image he never earned or deserved. and in light of Hager's revelations, the whole thing makes the media hacks who repeated it so long look silly and biased. imho!
cheers!
-
nah, just use the money to build robbie's rapid transit, 40 years late is better than never
-
Simon,
do you have a web site, or are you going to do a guest post on PA?
i'm intrigued to learn what you are doing in Bali... -
span & che,
no, this is not just you. it's the reason i don't watch tv anymore.
as for the quality of herald journalism...lets just say that the ones with half a clue stand out like a sore thumb. -
DC is gonna be on Nat Rad this afternoon (snigger) defending her "article"'...pwhpwpwhpwph
-
and we can all rest assured that these "Canadian passport holders" have NZ residence. yeah, right.
as an aside, i wonder who all these crystal meth users are? and why does nz have the highest meth use per capita in the world?
-
i don't think Coddington is the main issue here. a quick perusal of her past "journalism" efforts will preclude most people from taking seriously anything she writes.
no, i think this "piece" just throws into sharp relief the true agenda of the North & South editor:
trashy "Shock! Horror! Probe!" cover stories, if that's what it takes to sell some magazines. And if hilarious ineptness in manipulating stats to prove your case, along with some juicy Asian-bashing thrown in, are what it takes, so be it!
and maybe nat-rad in the afternoons could make some effort to have their "panel" sound less like newsdork-zb? intelligent, articulate wingers are one thing, but...