Posts by simon g
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Key's media trainer Janet Wilson was also the producer of the Sky / Prime interview programmes featuring the party leaders in the election campaign, presented by, er, Bill Ralston.
-
Any bets on how long before the Maori Party divorces the National /Act government?
I don't know about the whole party, but I'd guess individual MPs will be wondering why they got dragged down the aisle. Here's
the maiden speech from their newest recruit. It's a roll call of radical heritage.The real problem was the way the deal was done in the first place. In politics, you want to get your aroha in writing. They need at least one big, big reason to stick with the deal, through all the inevitable conflicts ahead. So the more they endure on National's behalf, the more the vague "reviews" will assume a greater importance, becoming a Holy Grail, to make it all worthwhile.
-
Paul W
Don't worry. It happened on a Friday afternoon. Sky safe.
(still, at least Winston waited over two years before inventing the elastic portfolio, whereas poor old Pita couldn't get through the first week).
-
MMP flexibility ... here's the latest twist.
The Bail Amendment Bill has passed its first reading. The Labour opposition voted in favour (not that unusual), but - here's the thing - the Maori Party voted against.
The Associate Minister of Corrections is co-leader of the Maori Party. So Dr Pita Sharples is responsible for - and must publicly support - government policy on prisons, but is opposed to the government's policy on who has to be in them.
It's Winston's China FTA contortions, all over again.
-
But what if the inquiry had actually been launched in order to satisfy a gold standard zealot, and he was sitting on the committee?
-
Also we weren't supposed to warn people that the companies might collapse, because that would have caused a loss of confidence, and then they could have collapsed.
-
I hope this Climate Change select committee doesn't get asked if they want tea or coffee. They'll take up the whole day arguing about the question, never mind the answer.
Latest (NZPA, today):
Leader of the House Gerry Brownlee today officially added to the committee's terms of reference: "Identify the central/benchmark projections which are being used as the motivation for international agreements to combat climate change; and consider the uncertainties and risks surrounding those projections."
Draft terms, released when National signed up ACT as a support partner in post-election negotiations, included an examination of the scientific claims underpinning climate change theory, but were then dropped in the version tabled in Parliament.
Select committees are officially masters of their own destiny, but Peter Dunne, who will chair the inquiry, said MPs were not going to start digging into the basic science.
Today Mr Brownlee indicated National MPs would be taking the same stance.
"There are those...who say we should start questioning the science. I want to make it abundantly clear that these terms of reference does not allow questioning of the science," Mr Brownlee.
National wanted an inquiry to look at New Zealand's unique position as developed nation heavily reliant on agriculture.
Mr Hide, who will sit on the committee, has said as far as he was concerned the committee will get to look at the issue of the science theory behind climate change.
Climate change sceptic Mr Hide said the reference to central projections, risks and uncertainties could allow examination of the science.
(emphasis added)
Don't bother trying to work out what it all means, just wait for the next clarification - now issued daily.
-
On the ETS committee, "Steve Pierson" on the Standard claims:
At the last moment, National has flip-flopped and inserted at the last minute an additional clause to the committee’s terms of reference that questions the science of climate change.
If true (a big "if", admittedly) that would be the fourth version of their policy on climate change in as many weeks.
-
Hey, Giovanni, be grateful you live in Wellington.
I have no opinion on Auckland's noisy, winking Santa. There, I've said it now.
-
Yeah, it's page one from the "Yes Minister" playbook, really. The modern equivalent of expelling the Soviet diplomats, buying the front page at a bargain price.
In the last term, Labour were hopeless at not seeing the easy and empty stories coming (light bulbs, showers, etc.). National are as glib as a televangelist dripping in cheese, and will doubtless be providing plenty more of this kind of thing. Steven Joyce is there for a reason. He knows you can never underestimate the media's love of an effortless headline.
It's just the actual governing that the Nats will struggle with. As we've already seen.