Election Eleven – Monday
.
Election Eleven – Monday
.
.
The last four days, and the election campaign is into the ‘last stretch’. Expect things to get interesting… dramatic… and desperate…
.
.
.
John Key and the growing “Cult of Personality”? So we really should start addressing him as “Dear Leader”?
.
.
Hmmmm, I didn’t realise that John Key won the Rugby World Cup? I’ve been mis-led – someone said it was the All Blacks!
.
.
Radio NZ invited both Phil Goff and John Key to debate on Morning Report. As per his M.O., Key refused. So much for his criticism of the media last week for focusing on the “Teapot Tapes” saga, rather than addressing the “ishoos”.
Phil Goff fronted on RNZ to be interviewed,
.
.
Listen to debate with Phil Goff on Morning Report
.
So while Phil Goff was addressing issues on Radio NZ – where was John Key? Missing in Action? Kidnapped by Grey aliens? Nope, here he is,
.
.
Oh dear.
Is this what Key calls “discussing issues”?
.
.
Some people just don’t seem to “get it”…
.
.
I’m not sure if “Daniela” is a low-information voter who has totally mis-understand the aim of Labour’s letter – or is a National/ACT supporter deliberately ‘stirring the pot’.
By what stretch of imagination does “Daniela” think that the letter is “threatening”? Does she really think that Labour activists, aliens, or Moonies are going to break into her home; kidnap her; and transport her to a secret underground volcano lair???
But this bit really “takes the cake” and suggests to me that “Daniela” is happily fomenting mischief with this,
“Daniela also forwarded the flyer to the blogger Whale Oil, saying she was upset because she felt like the letter made it sound criminal to head back to work after having a baby.” Source
So let me get this straight; “Daniela” thinks that Labour is trying to “criminalise” her for heading back to work after having a baby?!
Does “Daniela” not realise that National actually does have a policy which attempts to force mothers of 1 year old children back to work? As the article states,
“National’s welfare policy would see sole parents asked to seek full-time work when their child turned 14, part-time when they turn five, and the work-testing of all sickness and invalid beneficiaries. If women have a subsequent child while already claiming a benefit they will have to look for work when that child is one year old. “
“Daniela” seems hopelessly confused by all this. She doesn’t seem to undersytand that Labour’s mail-out is actually making a factual statement. This excerpt is from TVNZ’s Q+A,
“GUYON Because this will, in some cases, mean that mum has to work full-time when the first child hits one, won’t they? Because it’s about returning to work obligations. So if you’ve got a 14-year-old, say, and you have another child when you’re on the DPB, you’ll have to work full-time when that child is one year old.
PAULA So your other children are 14. So you’ve got other children that are 14 years and older, you’re on welfare, and then you have another baby, so there’s not many. So last year, there were about 70 of them, and yes, they will have to look for full-time work.
GUYON So who’s gonna care for the kid?
PAULA Well, it’s within respect, as well, that it does need to fit in, so we’re not gonna make them work all night, for example, and then look after children all day. The job kind of needs to fit with them. But there is going to be childcare options. And, actually, people do it now.
GUYON Let me take you back to when you first came into parliament. You made a speech in 2005. I’ll quote from it. You say, ‘As we are pushed to increase women’s participation in the workforce, we need to ask the question of who will be raising the next generation, and a lot of women are saying that they would like to – that staying at home and raising their children is an option they would like not only to have, but one they would like to be actively encouraged to do.’
PAULA Yeah.” Source
So it is National’s policy to make mothers of 1 year olds to seek work outside the home.
And it would be likely that, given such a new “Nanny Statish” law forcing new mothers to practically abandon their baby, they may well end up missing their child’s first birthday.
I hope someone brings all this to “Daniela’s” attention. Because so far, she either doesn’t get it – or she’s playing to someone elses agenda.
Which is it, “Daniela”?
.
.
.
Is “Daniela” the Whaleoil bloke in drag, the underhanded whinger, formal complainer, and attack dog for seriously conservative/demented (which are the same thing)?
And what is it with National completely dissing RNZ? Fairfax is always prepared to give a story about his lovely trousers (WTF?) but does Radio NZ ask like, really hard questions or something? And why were National so arrogant to not answer any questions that RNZ asked of it? If the national radio broadcaster asks some questions on behalf of its listeners you answer the bloody questions unless you really do have something to hide. National is hiding something. I reckon it is their true self. So we need to see what they’re really like. Release the tape.
And “low-information voter” is an oh so accurate description for a lot of people out there. Remember 50% are below average just by definition.
All excellent questions, Mathew.
As another example of the media treating Goff and Key differently, it’s interesting to note that whilst Goff is grilled for Labour’s spending promises – the same is hardly done to Key and National’s $18.4 billion spending thus far – and more to come.
Q+A on Sunday (20 Nov) had two interviews with Goff and Key (he turned up!). The interviews were totally different in tenor – with Key getting it reasonably soft, whilst Goff got a “hard” interview.
As for “Daniela” – I’ll believe it when I see it. Something about that story feels fake.
Again, well sussed, Mathew.