Today's quote comes from John Roughan's piece in the NZ Herald, where he neatly sums up the apparent disconnect between opposition to asset sales, and National's continued high levels of support:
John Key's achievement this week deserves more recognition than it might ever receive. In a year or two, when the power companies are all on the sharemarket and it seems entirely normal that they would be, it will be hard to credit how much opposition there has been.Key was heavily criticised, by me as much as anyone, for excessive caution in his first term. When eventually he committed himself to some partial asset sales and said he would go to the country with the programme first, it was brave.But I didn't realise how brave.One of the four power companies had been privatised long ago. A float of minority stakes in the other three, plus the coal mining operation and Air Zealand, didn't seem drastic.It was incremental, logical. It hardly compared with the courage of the fourth Labour Government or National in the 1990s, though neither of them had dared to put privatisation to a public vote.Key's courage last year was trumped in my book by Labour's decision to go to the election with a capital gains tax, though he chose not to make an issue of that.Labour, however, staked its whole campaign on opposition to asset sales.The Opposition did far more than Key to ensure the election was a referendum on them.Mercifully, I wasn't here to see what happened but it seems to be agreed National was returned despite its programme, not because the nation was reconciled to it.
34 comments:
Yes, and Labour are blind to this, as is obvious by their continuing to bank their future on the issue.
Some of their anger and frustration at failing (again) to stop National's asset policy has been directed at Peter Dunne.
Like National, United Future and Dunne campaigned on a position on National's flagship policy, and now Labour are screaming at Dunne, sometimes hysterically, for not going back on his word. But they'd be screaming at him if he changed hos position too. Such is a very negative opposition.
Dunne is a asset wipe
I should delete your comment Anon, but I won't. It's far better to leave it there just to show how nasty the Left can be.
You know the right is far worse IV2. You just think it's all right, or even funny, when they do it.
And you missed the actual money quote:
"National was returned despite its programme, not because the nation was reconciled to it."
The public don't like what the Nats are doing, and their arrogance, cronyism and incompetence will catch up with them on what will be a sad day for the shill.
Look again Judge; that line you mention is right there, and it's true. Which just goes to show that asset sales aren't an issue worth dying in a ditch over. By 2014, once those former Lab/Green voters are receiving their regular dividen cheques, everyone will be wondering what all the fuss was about.
Yes, I know the line's there. You ignored it to focus on the puffery.
We'll see if the public is so sanguine after the proceeds have been distributed to the cronies and the profits have been taken, won't we?
The Left? I've voted National every election since I was allowed into the polling booth. It's just that I loathe Dunne because he is a bag of dung, with a tail.
On the topic of Left wing and right wing comments I've just been looking at Kwiblog where I see the right wingers there are really showing their class by insulting Phillip Ure's wife, calling her ugly. If this is what you mean by nasty Keeping Stock then the right wingers are winning easily. I noticed that you are commenting there as well. Picking on Phillip again are you? I've read comments of yours before where you attack him, even bringing up his past criminal record to torment him with even though that is something that happened in long ago and that he has paid the price for. I guess you are one of those nasty right wingers, going by that and a shameless one at that.
And IV2's a frequent visitor, commenter and fawner at Slater's, where some of the most vicious and nasty individuals you're likely to come across outside of Crusader Rabbit lurk. Yet it's the "left" who's "nasty".
Really its John Banks being in Parliament that should make New Zealanders very angry. Dunne is horrible and totally untrustworthy but Banks was only put there to get this asset sale stuff passed. Banks has been exposed to us all as a cheat and a liar but we shouldn't forget that the asset sale legislation wouldn't have passed if Key had held Banks to any kind of standards instead of pretending that Bank's hadn't been cheating. We all know he was and now this asset sales stuff has passed and all because of the clever tricks of Key. It is pretty dirty politics from the National party.
It's Cam Slater and David Farrar who are feeding the 'nasty' story into the media stream. They are hoping to seed the public ear with the lable so that the National party politicians can use it when the election gets closer. This blogger Keeping Stock has joined in and is doing his little job helping to build the lable of 'nasty' and trying to get it to stick. Judge Holden is right to say that there are really nasty comments on Kiwiblog and WhaleOil/Gotcha and here on Keeping Stock as well and he is also right to say that the host of this blog can't or pretends he can't see them. From my neutral point of view, I voted Colin,it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Mind your language Keeping Stock both here and on other blogs. That stuff doesn't go unnoticed you know and it never disappears.
@ Sophia; for goodness' sake; you can't hold me responsible for things that other people say on someone else's blog. But I do not resile from critising Phillip Ure, who has chosen not to work for a living, claiming that his now 17-yo child cannot be left with a caregiver. Despite that he manages to spend hours every day attacking people on Kiwiblog, and last weekend boasted at going to some Pot Awards, to which he either took his son, or left him at home or being cared for. That kind of defeats his reasons for not working, don't you think?
But in saying that, I try to restrict my criticism to the actions and not the person. I certainly try to avoid the "colourful" language that Phil uses, and I would hope that my spelling and grammar are better.
But Keeping Stock I can't see why you feel you have to attack a man for his past on another persons blog. Phillip doesn't even come to your blog and doesn't attack you so why do you feel the need to go over to Kiwiblog and attack another man by exposing his previous record. What is Christian about that? I just don't understand your reasoning. Phillip has nothing to do with you and you with him. I think you are being both nasty and un-Christian and I'd like to hear your explanation for this. My own Christian beliefs do not allow me to be nasty to anybody else and I don't mean to put you on the spot but something is wrong here. I don't like Judge Holden's comment sometimes but I think he has got something to say here.
So let's see John; you caution me to mind my language of this blog (which I do, btw). But when an anonymous commenter calls Peter Dunne an "ass wipe" and I criticise that, I'm somehow being nasty? Hmmm...
Check this link out Sophia. It will tell you how often Phil has featured at Keeping Stock (hint: it's less than once):
http://keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz/search?q=Phillip+Ure
I have had some robust debates with Phil at Kiwiblog, and yes, there are times when I have baited him (and vice versa). I've never claimed to be perfect, and my faith is a work in progress. I certainly try to avoid using obscene language of the kind that he regularly does, but I still am angered that a man of some intellect (he claims to have an MA degree) can point-blank refuse to work because he does not want his child going into childcare. He lauds over those who visit Kiwiblog, glamorises his cannabis-centred lifestyle, and uses as many ad-hominems towards others as are used against him. It was Phil who first introduced his criminal past into the debate when he revealed that he had done time for armed robbery.
If I am being unchristian, I'm sure that God will hold me to account. I am regularly attacked her on the basis of my faith, and I seldom respond. I try as best as possible to be respectful of others' views even when I disagree with them, and I react to provocative comments far less than I may have done in the past.
In the meantime, let's get back to the topic...
Keeping Stock if Phil is being un-Christian then God will hold him to account not you.
Phil might be doing things that you don't agree with but you are not his judge. God is. You brush this off and give examples of how bad the other man is but try to excuse your own behaviour with your explanations. I'm going to leave it here Keeping Stock but I want you to think about it. It is not nice to be nasty to anyone especially if you are going to accuse others of being nasty.
That's right KS. Your comment earlier about 'how nasty the Left can be' is an good example. That wasn't the 'Left' making that comment. It was a person who makes the effort to come to your blog, read it and join the debate. You are too free with your 'nasty' accusations.
Sophia North - if I had seen that 'ugly' comment on Kiwiblog I'd have spoken up against it, as others would - in fact someone probably did, because the comment has resulted in demerits which have added up to a ban.
Blogs, especially very active ones like Kiwiblog, rely on a degree of self-policing by the blog community.
18 comments, 4 relevant to post
Victory to trolls.
Point taken Anon (10.35am); I will try to be more vigilant!
You trolled your own post with your first comment, so yes, you should be more careful.
One of the main problems for both the Labour and Qween (sic) parties is that they no longer have a leader who is strong enough or is capable to gather a team around him/her to set an agenda to take them to the voters with the message that vote for us and we will protect NZ from the sharp edges of the recession (where have I heard that before) and then go forward in a way that the private sector generate jobs and tax revenue to make this a country that can pay its way in the world without making us the Greece of the Sth Pacific.
There is NO way a coalition made up of Labour/Gween (sic)/Winny 1st /Mana could possible sell itself to the electorate .. The drudge (sic) and his/her mate bOb (sic) Guyton are portraying themselves as intellectual heavyweights so can’t understand why so many people ignore them apart from take the piss out of their inane comments.
I see the drudge(sic) visits the Whale .. not too many posts there drudge (sic), why not?
No risk of anyone ever mistaking you for an intellectual heavyweight though is there, jubjub? I mean have your mother read back to you what you just wrote. It's almost painfully embarrassing. Aside from the appalling sentence structure and lack of any evidence of rational thought, you don't even know when or why (sic) is used.
It's sad that the education system somehow failed you completely. You should have tried harder. As it is you resemble a monkey trying to put on a tie. You'd stop if you had any concern for your dignity, but you don't, so please proceed.
jabba is the phil ure of Keeping stock only without the humour,panache and flair.
Oh, and writing skills.
Jibbo. Why would ANYONE wish to be a contributor to Mr Slaters fantasy world? KS for all his delusions is not an out and out c...........
"No risk of anyone ever mistaking you for an intellectual heavyweight though is there, jubjub? I mean have your mother read back to you what you just wrote. It's almost painfully embarrassing" .. No chance drudge because, unlike you, I don't pretend to be an intellectual heavyweight and my mother died 5 years ago so I dodged a bullet there aye dipshit. The (sic) thing is for you as it seems you have a burning need to correct peoples (is that a sic?) errors (you are what some call anal retentive so I will be gentle on you).
Anon at 5:53 brilliant, is that your best shot and jolly, stats show him as the No1 blogger in NZ so join the drudge in the minority
Anonymous said...
jabba is the phil ure of Keeping stock only without the humour,panache and flair.
Oh, and writing skills.
July 1, 2012 5:53 PM
Being a dumb arse, I need help here.. Should there be a space after the coma between humour and panache .. Just asking
Yes, there should, jabba.
There should also be 3 ellipses, not the two you have used. Remember too, that the word following the ellipses does not start with a capital letter, unless it is a pronoun.
Gold I opine!!!
Poor jubjub. He doesn't know when to give up.
"stats show him as the No1 blogger in NZ so join the drudge in the minority..."
Completely wrong again, but why change the habit of a lifetime? Basic mathematics and logic can join simple literacy on the long list of skills you don't possess. Just as well you don't pretend to be an intellectual heavyweight old guy. You'd have a very hard time maintaining the deception.
This thread is gold, Inv! I suspect this was the straw that broke the comment-rules camel's back? The catalyst for the rule change?
Anyway, a small number of observations. First, the country has no choice but to sell, sell, sell. The NZX is moribund at best, and kiwisaver funds (let alone private investors) have a distinct lack of (relatively) safe companies in which to invest.
Secondly, government ownership of the electricity supply-chain has driven up the price, throttled both competition and innovation and choked supply. Private ownership, even pretend private ownership, with hopefully some genuine free-market drivers, will provide a better continuity of supply and lower consumer prices. If in the future NZ loses its obsessive infatuation with the nonsense of the green religion.
Thirdly, mney is stolen from you, and every other taxpayer in the country, to fund Ure's chosen lifestyle. It's not that he doesn't work because he can't. He doesn't work because he refuses to work. In the situation, any taxpayer has a right to pass judgement on hs lifestyle, even to the point of ridicule. We have the right to judge his lifestyle because we fund it. And I for me object to my hard-earned being stolen from me to pay for his (obviously over-)supply of dope.
It's remarkable that the small number of observations the guntt makes are almost entirely false. I note he provides no evidence to support anything he says. There's a reason for that. This is why he thinks Obama was born in Kenya.
Riiiiight, so in Sludge-land, the NZX is alive and throbbing with excellent, (relatively) safe investment opportunities, the review of the Bradford "reforms" didn't find massive rorting and deliberately keeping supply throttled, and mney is not stolen from productive people and given to oxygen thieves like Ure.
Sludge-land must be one of those mirror image places, where black is white, up is down and New Zealand is not in a socialism-induced death spiral.
Comments on this post are now closed.
Post a Comment