Archive
Brain fades and balls ups
.
.
On 20 March, Key made this curious remark, regarding Shearer’s stuff-up over his undeclared New York bank account,
“You don’t get cut any slack from the Labour Party when you say (you’ve made) a mistake but when they make one they don’t want anyone to have a look at it.”
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ – IRD knew of Shearer account, but not Parliament
There are two points of interest regarding that remark,
1. “…but when they make one they don’t want anyone to have a look at it.”
Not true.
As Vernon Small wrote in the Dominion Post on 21 March,
He was right to front-foot it by doing the rounds of the press gallery to disclose his blunder and face the music. It would have played must worse if he had left it until the next register of pecuniary interests was published.
Acknowledgement: Fairfax media – Shearer’s bank blunder threatens chances
Yet again this is another prime example of Key willfully mis-representing facts to suit his own purpose. His ability to “bend the truth” is unparalled by any other Prime Minister, whether Labour or National.
Shearer actually fronted to journalists and made a candid admission of his stuff-up.
When is the last time Key or Banks did the same?
2. ” You don’t get cut any slack from the Labour Party when you say (you’ve made) a mistake…”
Why should Labour (or any other Party) “cut any slack” for the National-led government?
Did National “cut any slack” for Labour when Helen Clark was Prime Minister? No, the Nats were relentless in their disparagement of Labour. In fact, they were often quite brutal,
.
Acknowledgement: Scoop – Showers latest target of Labour’s nanny state
.
Acknowledgement: Scoop – National launches its Food in Schools programme
.
(Note: National never proceeded with it’s “Food in Schools” programme, and the policy was quietly dropped soon after they were elected into power in November 2008. see: Govt guarded on free school meals)
And this little ‘beauty’ in abusing Labour, in this January 2008 speech by John Key,
” Under Helen Clark and Labour, our country has become a story of lost opportunities.
Despite inheriting the tail wind of a strong global economy, Helen Clark has failed to use that momentum to make significant improvement in areas of real importance to New Zealanders. She has squandered your economic inheritance by failing to build stronger foundations for the future.
Tomorrow, Helen Clark will tell us what she thinks about the state of our nation. In all likelihood, she’ll remind us how good she thinks we’ve got it, how grateful she thinks we should be to Labour, and why we need her for another three years.
Well, I’ve got a challenge for the Prime Minister. Before she asks for another three years, why doesn’t she answer the questions Kiwis are really asking, like:
- Why, after eight years of Labour, are we paying the second-highest interest rates in the developed world?
- Why, under Labour, is the gap between our wages, and wages in Australia and other parts of the world, getting bigger and bigger?
- Why, under Labour, do we only get a tax cut in election year, when we really needed it years ago?
- Why are grocery and petrol prices going through the roof?
- Why can’t our hardworking kids afford to buy their own house?
- Why is one in five Kiwi kids leaving school with grossly inadequate literacy and numeracy skills?
- Why, when Labour claim they aspire to be carbon-neutral, do our greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at an alarming rate?
- Why hasn’t the health system improved when billions of extra dollars have been poured into it?
- Why is violent crime against innocent New Zealanders continuing to soar and why is Labour unable to do anything about it?
Those are the questions on which this election will be fought.
Helen Clark thinks she can hoodwink Kiwi voters into giving her another three years to answer these questions. Well, I say she’s had nine years, she’s had her chance and she’s wasted it. The truth is that as time has gone on, Labour has concentrated more and more on its own survival and less and less on the issues that matter to the people who put them there.”
Acknowledgement: National Party – 2008: A Fresh Start for New Zealand
So when Key whinges about the Labour Party not cutting him “any slack”, Key might consider that he gave as well as he got when he was in Opposition.
That is the role of Opposition – to criticise, challenge, and question. The alternative would be a quick trip down the road to join the club of authoritarian regimes.
By the way… how is John Key’s list of criticisms that he levelled against the Labour Government on 29 January 2008,
- Why, after eight years of Labour, are we paying the second-highest interest rates in the developed world?
- Why, under Labour, is the gap between our wages, and wages in Australia and other parts of the world, getting bigger and bigger?
- Why, under Labour, do we only get a tax cut in election year, when we really needed it years ago?
- Why are grocery and petrol prices going through the roof?
- Why can’t our hardworking kids afford to buy their own house?
- Why is one in five Kiwi kids leaving school with grossly inadequate literacy and numeracy skills?
- Why, when Labour claim they aspire to be carbon-neutral, do our greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at an alarming rate?
- Why hasn’t the health system improved when billions of extra dollars have been poured into it?
- Why is violent crime against innocent New Zealanders continuing to soar and why is Labour unable to do anything about it?
Except for interest rates (which is not controlled by governments – which Dear Leader should have known), none of John Key’s list above has improved in any measurable manner.
He’s probably forgotten it by now.
.
Disclosure
This blogger is not a member of the Labour Party, nor has any preference in who leads that Party.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 23 March 2013.
.
.
= fs =
John Key on Aaron Gilmore
From today’s Dominion Post…
.
Acknowledgment: Defiant Gilmore digs in
.
John Key’s judgement on Aaron Gilmore,
“In the end, to make a contribution, you have to have integrity, and to have integrity there has to be a directness and fullness in your answers.”
*cough, cough*
Yes, Dear Leader, “you have to have integrity, and to have integrity there has to be a directness and fullness in your answers.“
Indeed.
.
.
= fs =
Breakfasts, Brain-fades, and Bullshit
.
.
Acknowledgement: Dominion Post - Key met spy candidate for breakfast
.
The best response amongst the comments posted was this one, in response to a right winger trying to deflect on to Shearer and Norman,
.
Acknowledgement: Dominion Post - IBID
.
Brilliant reposte.
’nuff said.
.
.
= fs =
Key: “I’ve left NZ in a better shape than I found it”
.
.
Without a doubt, the following story by the NZ Herald on Key’s latest utterances deserves an Award for Outstanding Bullshitting – with a special mention for Self Delusion.
WARNING: do not be drinking anything when you read this – not unless you can stop your gagging-reflex from spraying over your monitor and keyboard,
.
.
If Dear Leader truly believes that,
“Personally, I think if I got hit by a bus this afternoon, I will have left New Zealand in a better shape than I found it.”
… then he is dangerously more out of touch with reality than the rest of us ever imagined.
But because John Key gives no indication of any head trauma or diagnosis for delusional psychosis, the only remaining option is that this was a pathetically weak attempt to shore up his Party’s waning public support.
Almost every poll has National’s voter support dropping. This blogger suspects very strongly that National’s own internal polling reveals a much more dramatic fall in public support – and that John Key’s credibility as an honest politician has taken some serious battering this year.
One poll in July of this year, by Fairfax/Ipsos, had this unflattering picture of Key,
” A new poll has found Prime Minister John Key is increasingly becoming a polarising figure – especially among women.
The first Fairfax Media/Ipsos political poll shows National has enough support for a third term, 44.9 per cent to Labour’s 32.6 per cent, assuming the current mix of support parties. But it also reveals a growing divide, with many still strongly backing Key, but a growing sense of anger and distrust among others.
Interviewers asked 1000 people to describe Key in as few words as possible. The pollsters said many voters rated him a straight-shooter and good or excellent leader, but a significant number thought he was arrogant, smarmy and out of touch.
Key still has the confidence of an overwhelming majority – 63 per cent saying he had a clear vision for the country, and was a strong and effective leader. “
See: ‘Polarising’ PM losing gloss
Since that poll, National’s support has dropped to 45% and Key’s personal support has plummeted to 42%, in a One News/ Colmar Brunton poll released on 4 November.
See: National support holds as Labour slips in poll
National is clearly in trouble with the public and Key’s extraordinary statement that “I will have left New Zealand in a better shape than I found it ” is utterly laughable.
This blogger’s guess is that Key made this statement, off the cuff, and without his tax-payer funded spin doctors crafting a more credible message.
On almost every level, it is a demonstrably false assertion.
Looking at the facts on Planet Earth, rather than on Planet Key, we find the following;
.
Unemployment
.
When Key took office at the end of 2008, the household labour force survey reported unemployment at 4.6% or 105,000 real people.
See: EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT – DECEMBER 2008 QUARTER
The latest household labour force survey released on 8 November this year had unemployment at 7.3% or 175,000 living, breathing people.
See: Household Labour Force Survey: September 2012 quarter
In other words, there are 75,000 more unemployed people now, than there was four years ago.
This blogger accepts that the Global Financial Crisis has been a major factor for rising unemployment, but three questions still remain to be answered,
- Why has National not done anything practical to counter the effects of the GFC, despite having four years to implements job-creation programmes?
- Why did National proceed with tax cuts in 2009 and 2010 when the lost tax-revenue could have been used for upskilling; job creation; building new houses to meet our critical housing shortage; etc?
- Why does National continue to blame the unemployed for being unemployed, when they – the Nats - play the GFC Card when ever it suits them, as an excuse?
Report Card: F – Total Fail
.
Economic growth
.
Retail
Retail Trade dropped from NZ$18.8 buillion in December 2011 to the current NZ$16.8 billion, in September,
.
Sourc: Reserve Bank of New Zealand
This constitutes a $2 billion drop in retail activity.
By comparison, the drop from December 2010 to September 2011 was less - NZ$900 million. (See: Reserve Bank A1 Domestic trade)
Balance of Trade
Our Balance of Trade has definitly worsened since November 2008, when the Global Financial Crisis had begun to impact on our export sector,
.
Source: Trading Economics New Zealand Balance of Trade
.
In part, this may be due to our high dollar, which makes our exports less profitable – but makes imports (consumer goods, fuel, building materials, plant & equipment, etc) cheaper. However, whilst this may benefit one sector of our economy, it means that we are not paying our way with our trading partners.
Economists are expecting the figures to worsen in the coming months and year,
” The annual current account deficit has widened to 4.8 per cent of GDP and economists expect it will keep getting worse, with sharply falling export prices and rising demand for imports.
The current account records the balance of trade between New Zealand and the rest of the world for goods and services, net investment income and net transfers.
ANZ economists said the 4.8 per cent figure was worse than market expectations and given the worsening trade position with lower commodity prices, the deficit was trending closer to the 5 per cent of GDP “danger zone” for international lenders.
The falling value of dairy exports and a drop in spending by tourists after the Rugby World Cup have seen the current account deficit worsen by $600 million to $2.8 billion, seasonally adjusted, for the March quarter.
That takes the annual deficit back up to $9.7 billion for the year to March 31 or 4.8 per cent of GDP according to latest Statistics NZ figures out earlier today. The deficit was equal to 4.2 per cent of GDP in the December year. “
See: Deficit expected to worsen
Wages
Despite JohnKeys perennial promises (see previous blogpost: John Key’s track record on raising wages – preface), wages have not risen to anywhere near Australia’s levels.
In fact, wage rises in the last four years have not matched those under the previous Labour government, despite Dear Leader’s pledges and claims to the contrary,
.
.
As Statistics NZ states in it’s June Quarter report,
” In the year to the June 2012 quarter, there was no significant increase in:
- median weekly income from all sources – up 1.8 percent from $550 to $560
- median weekly income for those receiving income from wages and salaries – up $6 (0.7 percent) to $806
- median hourly earnings – up 48 cents (2.4 percent) to $20.86.”
New Zealanders are generally not fools, and many have taken to voting with their feet to where there are better opportunities for jobs, wages, housing, etc…
See also: John Key’s track record on raising wages – 9. Conclusion
Migration
Migration to Australia was one of John Key’s major election platforms in 2008. He was scathing of Labour and the exodus of New Zealanders to Australia,
“We want to make New Zealand an attractive place for our children and grandchildren to live – including those who are currently living in Australia, the UK, or elsewhere. To stem that flow so we must ensure Kiwis can receive competitive after-tax wages in New Zealand.
[...]
One of National’s key goals, should we lead the next Government, will be to stem the flow of New Zealanders choosing to live and work overseas. We want to make New Zealand an attractive place for our children and grandchildren to live – including those who are currently living in Australia, the UK, or elsewhere. To stem that flow so we must ensure Kiwis can receive competitive after-tax wages in New Zealand. We must cut taxes and grow our economy, and National will have policies to ensure both occur.” – John Key, 6 September 2008
See: Speech: Environment Policy Launch
“I don’t want our talented young people leaving permanently for Australia, the US, Europe, or Asia, because they feel they have to go overseas to better themselves. That’s why this Government is focused squarely on improving New Zealand’s economic performance. And to be frank, New Zealand’s economic performance over a number of years has been disappointing. ” – John Key, 15 July 2009
See: Speech to Business Breakfast hosted by Cullen Law
The result? Wholly predictable by now,
.
.
As the NZ Herald story reported,
“The number of New Zealanders moving across the Tasman hit a record 53,000 in the year to February, but the unemployment rate at home and Australia’s new tax breaks that would make millions better off are tipped to lift that number.”
As Massey University sociologist Paul Spoonley stated on TV1 on 3 September,
“We can’t afford to bleed the numbers of people we see leaving for Australia. We can’t afford to lose the skills. We’ve got to do something.”
Key’s response,
“Maybe we want to think about doing a bit more [mining] to encourage people to stay. It’s been a 40-year problem, and if we want to resolve it, we need to get on top of all of those issues.”
Oh really? “Maybe we want to think about doing a bit more “?! Gosh, Mr Key – you think?
Key’s statement encapsulates one simple reality; that his inept “government” is utterly clueless. Dear Leader does not even know whose responsibility it is to create jobs;
Last year;
“We agree with you, it’s the government’s responsibility to do everything within it’s powers to try to get people jobs.” – John Key, 17 November2011
See: Key and Goff Q&A: Creating jobs
This year;
“Nothing creates jobs and boosts incomes better than business growth. For New Zealand to build a more productive and competitive economy, we need more innovative companies out there selling their products on the world stage.” – John Key, 24 August 2012
See: Key Notes: Honouring our fallen soldiers
Whenever National does become proactive, it tinkers with labour laws which will ultimately have the effect of driving down wages. This, in turn simply accelerates the flow of Kiwis to Australia and elsewhere.
Export Industry
On the other hand, when exporters cry out for relief from a high Kiwi Dollar that is ruining their trade, National either ignores their plight, or derides any possible remedies.
As president of the New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association and Managing Director of two export companies, Brian Willoughby, said in utter desperation,
“I’m concerned that this vitally important discussion is degenerating to the point that it is the guy with the biggest foghorn that is going to get heard the most. The Government had the biggest foghorn.
What is starting to irritate me is, here I am just down the road in Christchurch, representing manufacturers producing $2.6 billion [worth of product]. So why doesn’t someone from the Prime Minister’s department pop along and see me? I am far easier to get in touch with than the guys in Hollywood, and I don’t need any special concessions. The ones I need are the same ones with the dollar that the film industry needs.
But the issue is to develop a more balanced economy.
There are a whole lot of people [in manufacturing] who are hanging on by the skin of their teeth and there are a whole lot of redundancies going on that the public never hears about.
The other thing that is poorly understood is that manufacturing jobs support three jobs outside – the courier guy, the guy that cleans the towels, the cafes near the factory. We have the contractors and suppliers – the guy that supplies the nuts and bolts and screws, the guy that does the laser cutting, the guy that does the painting, the guy that does the polishing, the guy that provides the plating service.”
It’s wrong to sit on our hands and say there is nothing that we can do.
We need a proper debate because it is extremely important to the New Zealand economy as a whole, not just to my members. In the long run, exporters ensure that we have a reasonable standard of living. If we can’t sell off-shore with good added value margins, we’ll go broke.“
See: Soaring NZ dollar has industries in discussion
The Herald story goes on to reveal that Willoughby’s two Christchurch-based companies together employ twenty people. A year and a half ago, it was thirty.
On 25 October, Reserve Bank Governor, was forced to concede,
“Offsetting this, fiscal consolidation is constraining demand growth, and the high New Zealand dollar is undermining export earnings and encouraging substitution toward imported goods and services.”
See: OCR unchanged at 2.5 percent
Our export sector is being damaged by our over-valued dollar (pushed up by speculators); profits are down; and redundancies are occurring.
Meanwhile, John Key smiles and waves and does nothing except make derogatory comments against visiting sports people.
Report Card: E – Verging on Total Fail
.
Crime
.
One of Key’s oft stated “successes” is that “crime has dropped”.
That may well be. But their may be several factors involved here,
“New Zealand’s crime rate has dropped to an all-time low, latest figures reveal.
The annual crime statistics released by the police today showed recorded crime dropped 5.2 per cent on the previous year.
There were 394,522 recorded offences in the 2011-2012 fiscal year, compared with 416,324 the previous year – a decrease of 21,802 offences.
New Zealand’s population increased by 0.7 per cent during the period, resulting in a 5.9 per cent decrease in the number of offences recorded per 10,000 of population.”
And as well,
“The largest decrease was in Canterbury, where recorded crime fell by 11.7 per cent.
Following the earthquakes there was a sudden large decrease in recorded theft and property damage offences.
Less serious offences reduced the most.
Although small by value, these offences are large by volume.
“This decrease appears to be partly due to the public not wanting to bother us with minor matters when they knew we were dealing with the earthquake,” Mr Rickard said.”
See: NZ crime rate at all-time low – Police
Interesting, eh?
The biggest decrease occurred in the Canterbury region in the same year as the February earthquake that killed 185 people.
Surely Dear Leader is not going to take credit for something that a natural disaster caused?! Of course he will.
This is John Key we’re talking about.
Report Card: none (someone nicked it)
.
Conclusion
.
As is usual for John Key, his statements often contain loose “facts”; half-truths; and often outright untruths. His claim that “if I got hit by a bus this afternoon, I will have left New Zealand in a better shape than I found it ” is patently false.
On almost every indicator known to humanity, New Zealand is nowhere near “in a better shape than [Key] found it “. Not unless he is using voodoo socio-economic ‘science’ that the rest of us are not privy to?
Perhaps they originate from Planet Key?
On an end note, I leave the reader with not just the results of my Fact Checking – but this dire warning from economists,
.
.
Roll on 2014.
.
.
= fs =
Charter Schools – John Key’s re-assurances
.
.
1. The Prime Minister’s ‘committments’
Three months ago, Dear Leader gave assurances that National would dump Charter Schools if they failed to “work”. He said,
“If they don’t work then the Government will close them down very quickly – if they do work then it will be great for the children involved.” – source
Key then added,
“If you look at the US where they are the most prevalent – there are about 5,500. Not all of them are successful but many of them are.” – Ibid
Those two statements are unfortunate for two reasons;
2. The Prime Minister’s ‘credibility’
Without beating about the bush and indulging in ‘niceties‘, John Key’s credibility is shot to hell.
As detailed in previous blogposts and elsewhere on other blogs and in the MSM, John Key has not always told the truth, nor fulfilled his committments.
Past pledges and promises have been broken. Promises such as,
- Promised to introduce food-in-schools, when National was in Opposition, and has since retreated from the policy (National launches its Food in Schools programme )
- Promised to cap the state sector and not cut – National has sacked over 2,500 workers (National’s pledge card)
- Promised to stem the migration to Australia – migration has worsened (Kiwis still flocking across Tasman)
- Promised to raise wages – instead National is implementing policies to drive wages down by introducing legislation to remove certain protections such as the repeal of Section 6A from the Employment Relations Act (New industrial relations laws rewrite labour rules)
- that cutting taxes and raising gst were “fiscally neutral” (Government’s 2010 tax cuts costing $2 billion and counting)
- Promised West Coast families to retrieve the bodies of 29 dead miners, and then going back on his word
- Promised not to raise GST – and then raised it anyway (Key ‘no GST rise’ video emerges)
- Promised to include the agricultural sector in the ETS, but instead weakened the ETS, contrary to assurances in 2008 (blogpost: ETS – National continues to fart around)
- Promised to create 170,000 new jobs (Budget 2011: Govt predicts 170,000 new jobs)
- Promised to “build rail” – yet Kiwirail is cutting services and National is cutting subsidies (Public transport faces subsidy cuts)
- Promised not to interfere with Kiwisaver (Key readies voters for changes to KiwiSaver)
- Promised not to interfere with Working for Families (National’s pledge card)
- made a committment at a public meeting, last year, to limit overseas purchases of ten farms per purchaser (blogpost: Another of John Key’s lies – sorry – “Dynamic Situations” )
- Fell short of 4,000 new jobs promised by the national cycleway (Cycleway jobs fall short)
- has stated that more jobs are being created – even as unemployment has risen to 6.8%, and expected to go higher on 4 November (Unemployment rises: 6.8pc)
- There is “no housing crisis in Christchurch” (No Christchurch rental crisis -’Pontius’ Brownlee)
There are also instances where statements made by Key which have stretched our credulity,
- that he received an email claiming that Standard & Poors would have made an even bigger downgrade had a Labour Government been in office, and was subsequently unable to prove it’s veracity (The PM did not attend meeting and email reveals S&P did not snipe at Labour)
- that he had “no knowledge” of John Banks’ lies regarding the Dotcom and Skycity donations
- that he has not been involved in backroom, secret negotiations with Skycity (Key ‘back pedalling’ on Sky City)
- that he has not been involved in backroom, secret negotiations with Mediaworks (Key changes tack over meeting with broadcaster)
- that he had no knowledge of GCSB’s involvement on the raid on Kim Dotcom’s mansion (blogpost: Dear Leader, GCSB, and Kiwis in Wonderland – Part Rua )( John Key briefed on Dotcom spying in February )
- that he had knowledge of the purchase of 36 new BMW limousines (PM signed papers relating to BMWs)
- etc, etc, etc.
More here.
And often indulges in flatout bullshit such as this little gem on the public ownership of natural resources,
“ … So if you accept that viewpoint, then I think you have to accept that elements like water and wind and the sun and air and fire and all these things, and the sea, along with natural resources like oil and gas, are there for the national interest of everyone. They’re there for the benefit of all New Zealanders, not one particular group over another. “
See: TVNZ Q+A Interview with Prime Minister John Key
Politicians have a poor reputation when it comes to telling the truth. In the case of our current Prime Minister, in this blogger’s opinion, he has made bending the truth; with-holding information; and outright lying into a whole new artform.
No wonder there is a joke floating around cyberspace, on Facebook, blogs, and elsewhere,
Q: How can to tell John Key is lying?
A: His lips are moving.
Which probably explains why politicians are viewed with such disdain; League Tables that really count!
3. The Prime Minister’s ‘truthfulness’
Key said,
“If you look at the US where they are the most prevalent – there are about 5,500. Not all of them are successful but many of them are.”
As usual, Dear Leader’s comments can never be taken at face value.
The truth is that a Stanford University CREDO analysis of Charter Schools in the US revealed the disturbing fact that only 17% of American charter schools did better than non-charter schools.
See: Stanford University: Charter School Performance in 16 States (USA)
The rest achieved same, or worse results,
.
.
Source: Wikipedia Charter Schools (based on CREDO study)
So who will trust John Key on this issue?
Who will trust Key’s committment when he says “if they [Charter Schools ] don’t work then the Government will close them down very quickly” – when he doesn’t even give us accurate information about the efficacy of Charter Schools?
Telling us that “not all of them are successful but many of them are” – is disingenuous. It is a deliberate ploy to mislead the public.
And proves yet again – if evidence was needed – that this man is the most untruthful Prime Minister we have had since —?
4. Furthermore…
John Key assures us, hand-on-heart, that “if they [Charter Schools ] don’t work then the Government will close them down very quickly“…
Which is all very nice (if he can be taken at his word, which is doubtful), but how will he know if Charter Schools “don’t work “?
Actually, we won’t know.
National intends to remove Charter Schools from all public scrutiny and will be exempt from Official Information Act requests. All information regarding Charter Schools will be kept secret by National,
.
.
To put it mildly, this is an extraordinary state of affairs. A radical new experiment in education will not be open to public scrutiny. According to John Banks, the architect of this crazy programme,
“DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING A NEW ZEALAND MODEL OF CHARTER SCHOOL
[...]
Ombudsmen Act and Official Information Act (OIA)
These acts would not apply to Partnership Schools/Kura Hourua because they are not Crown Entities. This is the same case for private schools.
This will help to ensure Partnership Schools/Kura Hourua are not susceptible to costly and vexatious requests. The contract will specify the information that must be provided to government, and this will be subject to the OIA.”
It’s interesting that a politician with the lowest reputation for honesty and openess in this country’s history – John Banks – has decided that Charter Schools will be exempt from OIA requests and Ombudsman oversight.
Banks’ attempted to justify this paranoid secrecy by suggesting that Charter Schools would be “susceptible to costly and vexatious requests“.
Laughable…
Extraordinary…
Worrying…
And scandalous.
5. Summing up…
So what do we have here?
- The Prime Minister promises that “if they [charter schools] don’t work then the Government will close them down very quickly “.
- Key assured the public that ” not all of them are successful but many of them are ” – ignoring the truth that only 17% of Charter schools in the US have been deemed “better” by a Stanford University CREDO study.
- There will be no public oversight of Charter schools.
- The Minister in charge of Charter Schools, John Banks, justified the removal of public oversight and secrecy on the flimsiest of excuses.
- The public will have to rely on the National Party for accurate and impartial reporting of Charter Schools progress. (Imagine Key’s reaction had Labour proposed such a thing! Imagine the cries of “nanny state” and “Helengrad”?!))
- Neither John Banks nor John Key are held in high regard in many parts of New Zealand society. Key is known for breaking promises; abandoning committments; and mis-representing the truth. John Banks was engaged in dishonest activities surrounding his mayoral campaign donations; lied about his activities; claimed “forgetfulness”; and was investigated by the police. He was not prosecuted – but only because his actions went beyond a statute of limitations. (Banks still refuses to publicly release a record of his police interview, despite his assertion of “nothing to hide, nothing to fear”.)
This blogger finds nothing reassuring in the utterances of John Key and John Banks.
An incoming Labour-Green-NZ First-Mana government has no option but to close down this dodgy programme, or at the very least, incorporate these schools into the state system.
Otherwise, Charter schools are a ‘time-bomb’ waiting to go off.
Does Shearer really, really want such a legacy from John Banks?
.
*
.
Previous related blogposts
Christchurch, choice, and charter schools
Charter Schools – Another lie from John Banks!
Dear Leader, GCSB, and Kiwis in Wonderland (Part Rua)
Sources
TV3: Key defends charter schools trial
Otago Daily Times: PM vows charter schools out the door if they fail
NZ Herald: Charter schools escape scrutiny
Radio NZ: Charter school group wants to register unqualified teachers
Additional
Many oppose proposed charter school
Charter schools: They’re not better for our kids
Other Blogs
Seemorerocks: One video exposes Key, GCSB’s & Banks’ Dotcom lies
Not PC: John Key lies [updated]
Infonews: National’s growing list of broken promises
.
.
= fs =
“Spin me a conspiracy”, said Dear Leader!
.
.
In politics, there are several ways to discredit your opponant or critic;
- Humour
David Lange was the past-master of the one-liner riposte. His classic, “I can smell the uranium on your breath”, is now firmly ingrained in our culture.
- Attack Reputations
A favourite of Robert Muldoon, who had little reservation in undermining, or even destroying, a person’s reputation if they crossed him.
- Buy them off
Our best and most experienced journalists gave up their professions to join the Dark Side of politics, and become Press Secretaries and spin doctors for politicians, government departments, SOEs, and corporations.
Some of the most well-known media names from the ’80s, ’90s, and ’00s now work for employers who do not want the public truthfully informed on certain matters.
- Deride & Dismiss
If you can successfully paint your critic or political opponant as a “loony”, incompetant, naive, or possessing some other faulty character-trait, then you may persuade the public not to listen to them.
The Right deride the Greens as “tree hugging socialists” – and other epithets – when attacking their policies. Even when said policies are clearly delineated and sheer common sense – the derision and dismissive retorts are by now an automatic kneejerk from the Right. No thought required.
- Off to the Gulag!
Very popular with the old USSR, and still in heavy usage in the last remaining Stalinist regime in North Korea. The Chinese have their own Labour Camps (prisons) for their political prisoners. And even the United States – the Land of the Free – has their own dirty little ‘secret’ at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
Probably not feasible for dear little New Zealand… yet.
.
*
.
National’s tax-payer funded spin doctors have been working overtime this year on new angles for their Ministerial Masters to use to dismiss the growing clamour of criticism against their policies, and more increasingly, criticism of John Key’s style of leadership.
With National dropping in the polls and Key’s popularity not what it once was, it is fairly obvious that critics are starting to hit home – and the Tory hierarchy is worried.
One response has been the Deride & Dismiss tactic.
Increasingly, Dear Leader and his ministers have taken to referring to critics and political opponants as “conspiracy theorists” – a jibe designed to make someone appear to be on the fringe of politics; slightly unstable; not thinking rationally; and espousing ideas unsupported by facts.
It’s like suggesting that your opponant or critics believes in fairy tales. And it’s becoming more and more common,
.
“Mr Key is rejecting all their allegations.
“It went through the normal tendering process, Sky City was the only bidder prepared to look at a deal that didn’t involve government resources. They can run around as much as they like looking for conspiracies but they’re never going to find one”. ” – John Key, MSN News, 19 April, 2012
.
“ But despite the paper, he denied there was any connection between him calling off the business case and SkyCity indicating it was considering extending its centre. “Not despite your wildest conspiracies, no,” he said. ” – Dominion Post, 24 April 2012
.
“But I would say it’s a really positive thing to do. You can make a difference. And it’s like the convention centre. People want to chase their tails in conspiracies. There is no conspiracy. The conspiracy is we haven’t had a convention centre for decades. We will get 160,000 visitor-nights. They will spend roughly twice as much as everybody else. The Government has got no money to pour into it.” – John Key, The Listener, 23 June 2012
.
“There is no conspiracy here. There’s a failure by an individual, there’s a cock-up, but there’s not a conspiracy.” [re, GCSB] – John Key, TV3, 29 September 2012
.
“Yeah the conspiracy theorists won’t like it they’ll be on TV tonight saying ‘yeah you know Dotcom’ and all this sort of carry on but they live in fantasy land.” – John Key, TV3, 1 October 2012
“There’ll always be conspiracy theorists out there but I’m interested in jobs, not people who live in Fantasyland and want to make things up.” – John Key, Fairfax media, 2 October 2012
” Meanwhile Mr Key is writing off the concerns around Dotcom as “conspiracy theories”.
“I’d caution New Zealanders not to buy into conspiracy theories too much,” he says. ” – John Key, TV3, 4 October 2012
Even Fran O’Sullivan, NZ Herald columnist and bearer of the Honorary Captain Key De-Coder Ring, joined in to support National’s spin-dictoring.
“The conspiracy allegations against Key are over-egged.” – Fran O’Sullivan, NZ Herald, 3 October 2011
As these quotes show, Key has been using the “conspiracy” pejorative as often as he can get away with it.
Without indulging in conspiracy theories, one could almost come to the conclusion that “Conspiracy” and “conspiracy theorists” are the magic words in 2012 – as determined by National’s back-room spin doctors. These guys have been racking up serious over-time to create the right things for Key and other National ministers to say.
Anyone criticising Dear Leader is engaging in “conspiracies” and accusations against National are “conspiracy theories”.
Got that?
Good.
Otherwise it’s off to the Gulag for you!
Meanwhile, here is one example of pre-scripted spin being delivered incompetantly, by an incompetant Minister. Listen and weep, for our taxes are paying for this woman’s salary,
.
[click on image to link to TV3 video]
.
.
= fs =
Dear Leader’s Mighty Lie?
.
.
In March of this year, this,
” That’s what we are working our way through at the moment. But the intention is for that retail distribution, that opportunity for mums and dads to buy, to be absolutely front of the queue. They’re my number one priority.”
“We’ve made it absolutely crystal clear what our intentions are..If it comes to mum and dad, and they want to buy 1000 shares or whatever…I want to make sure they get their allocation, they’re not scaled and they’re at the front of the queue. “
See: Key: No referendum on asset sales
And this in June,
” You can’t and wouldn’t want to stop them – but the question you have to ask yourself is why would they go and do that? The question comes down to, why would a foreigner find an investment in Mighty River Power to be far more attractive on the long run than a retail investor sitting in Karori? And there’s no logic that they would. “
See: Can’t stop asset shares being sold overseas – John Key
Had become this, two days ago,
” Mighty River Power shares could be listed on stock exchanges on both sides of the Tasman to boost investment from Australian institutions, making shares more expensive for Kiwi investors…
… The joint lead managers – investment bankers helping Treasury arrange the sales – are understood to be pushing for a dual listing, with Wellington-based NZX as the primary exchange and a secondary listing on Sydney’s ASX.
… However, the Government has repeatedly said it wants to encourage a high level of local ownership, which it expects to be 85 to 90 per cent.
State-Owned Enterprises Minister Tony Ryall would not discuss the issue, saying no decision had been made on an Australian listing. “
See: Dual listing may hit Kiwi investors
Aside from the breath-taking deception that National and John Key are about to foist on this country, there is an irony here that in June, John Key was assiduously trying to reassure the punters that Kiwi “mums and dads” would be first in the queue to purchase shares.
Key even tried to find reasons why those “mum and dad investors” would not on-sell their shares to foreign investors, saying, “the question comes down to, why would a foreigner find an investment in Mighty River Power to be far more attractive on the long run than a retail investor sitting in Karori”?
Now we learn that the shares may be listed in Australia?
Perhaps Key is targetting “mozzies” and their “aunties” on “The GC”?!
Key is well known for saying one thing to one audience, and something completely different to another. This time, he will have been well and truly caught out if shares are listed on the Australian stock-exchange, for Australian investors.
What are the odds?
My money is on another Mighty Lie from Dear Leader.
.
*
.
.
.
= fs =
Another of John Key’s lies – sorry – “Dynamic Situations”
.
.
An email sent to Dear Leader, last year,
.
from: [email]
to: john.key@parliament.govt.nz
date: Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:32 AM
subject:Purchase of farmlandSir,
At a recent public meeting in the Hutt Valley, in answer to a question from
the audience, you responded that purchases of farmland, by overseas buyers,
would be restricted to ten farms per purchaser.Can you confirm that this restriction is in place, and when the regulation was
enacted?Regards,
- Frank Macskasy
.
No response (or even acknowledgement) was ever received from the Prime Ministers office.
The issue arose during a public meeting in Lower Hutt, organised by Hutt Grey Power, on 24 May last year. People were concerned about the sale of 16 Crafar farms to overseas investors. The audience were most clearly unhappy at the prospect that foreign investiors were buying up vast tracts of our productive land.
Key made reassuring noises and said that his Party were “looking” at putting a limit at the number of farms a foreign investor could buy. He proposed a cap of ten farms. (Though even that was not well received by the audience.)
In media reports though, he was somewhat less specific,
“Prime Minister John Key says the Government would look at changing the law to limit foreign ownership of productive land if there is growing public concern.
However, he says such a change in response to the sale of the Crafar farms would a knee-jerk reaction.”
See: Law change possible over foreign land buyers – Key
See: PM: Change to foreign ownership law possible
Nothing ever happened, of course.
This was yet another example of John Key uttering vague reassurances with no intention of following through. And on 20 April, this year, Ministers Williamson and Coleman consented to foreign investor, Shanghai Pengxin, buying all 16 Crafar farms.
See: Govt’s Crafar China sale decision slammed
No wonder that John Key’s reputation is becoming more tattered with each passing day. After a while, people start remembering these things.
.
.
= fs =
Money in the Banks (Part #Rua)
.
.
John Banks has dug himself further into a hole by stating yesterday,
“If I had have quite specifically and quite easily answered all of those questions upfront, contrary to the legal advice, then I wouldn’t find myself in this situation where people think I’m obfuscating. I shouldn’t have taken that legal advice, I should have answered questions much more straightly.”
See: Banks’ Dotcom call: ‘I’d do it again‘ (1 May 2012)
Banks is using the excuse that he received “legal advice” which advised him not to say anything to the media (1 May),
“I could have quite easily answered all of those questions up front, contrary to the legal advice. I have never had any problem answering questions in a very straight manner…that is why the public will be surprised I took the legal advice literally, not to jeopardise any inquiry.”
See: Banks ‘regrets’ legal advice to stay silent (1 May 2012)
To understand why that excuse is about as flimsy as wet toilet paper in a sewarage pond, one has to look back at the timelime of this scandal.
TV3 broke the story of Banks failing to declare the source of Sky City’s donation on 5 April.
See: Banks accused of failing to declare donation (5 April 2012)
At that point there was no knowledge or mention of any other dodgy donations.
Twentytwo days later, TV3 again broke the story that Banks had received donations from web entrepreneur, Kim Dotcom, and had listed them as “anonymous”,
“Kim Dotcom is the latest person to have been found to have allegedly donated money anonymously to John Banks.
It is already known that in the race to be super city mayor, Sky City donated $15,000 each to the two front runners.
Len Brown listed Sky City as a donor but Mr Banks did not.
Campbell Live was interested in that because we had heard Kim Dotcom had made a donation three times that size to the John Banks mayoralty campaign.
Campbell Live has even been told Mr Banks was so grateful that he called Dotcom to thank him for it.
An investigation found that like the Sky City donation, the Dotcom donation appears to be listed as anonymous.
The question is why?”
See: Banks knew about ‘anonymous’ Dotcom donation – reports (27 April 2012)
That TV3 report is time-stamped on the TV3 news website at 7pm. In a phone call, the following exchange takes place,
Campbell: Did you ever helicopter out there?
Banks: I… don’t remember that. I mean, I had my own helicopter or course – I was flying, myself.
Campbell: Did you ever land it at his house or go out there in a helicopter?
Banks: I don’t recall…
Campbell: You’d remember that – you’d remember that surely if you helicoptered into the Coatsville mansion. You would surely remember that?
Banks: I can’t recall whether I did or not…
Campbell: What, you can’t recall if you flew a helicopter into the Coastville Mansion of Kim Dotcom?
Banks: No, no.
See: Ibid
Now the interesting thing here is that given that phone call, which was aired after 7pm on Friday 27 April – how could John Banks have had time to consult a lawyer for legal advice?
There was no mention of any police investigation until the following day, on Saturday 28 April, when told RadioLIVE,
“If and when the police want to come and see me and talk to me, I’m very happy to do so.”
And if, as he claims, he had somehow managed to consult a lawyer prior to John Campbell speaking to him on the phone on Friday 27 April, why did Banks continually state “he could not remember” instead of “the matter is currently under Police invesigation and I have been advised by legal counsel not to make any public statements at this point”. Or even a simple “no comment”?
Because the reference to so-called “legal advice not to talk publicly” doesn’t surface until Tuesday 1 May – some four days later. In those four days, Banks keeps insisting that “he can’t remember”, “he can’t recall”. He makes no reference to this mysterious “legal advice” until four days later.
It is the opinion of this blogger that Banks’ did not have any legal advice when John Campbell first phoned Banks on 27 April.
It is the opinion of this blogger that Banks’ continuing claim that he “could not remember” was a weak attempt at obfuscation and not based on any manner of “legal advice”.
Furthermore, one has to question that if John Banks is being truthful and Kim Dotcom is lying – what would be the point of requiring “legal advice”? Legal advice for what?
It should be noted that thus far, not one claim made by Kim Dotcom has been proven to be incorrect or lie.
On the other hand, despite Banks first claiming that he did not phone Dotcom to thank him for the $50,000 donation – he now admits to phoning the entrepreneur to thank him for sponsoring a fireworks display in 2010, estimated to cost about $500,000.
See: John Banks dined at mansion, gave advice on Dotcom residency
Interestingly, at first Banks couldn’t recall phoning Dotcom. Now he not only recalls that he did – but remembers the substance of that phone conversation?!
How does that work?
Banks himself admits to lying – on legal advice,
“If I had have quite specifically and quite easily answered all of those questions upfront, contrary to the legal advice, then I wouldn’t find myself in this situation where people think I’m obfuscating.”
See: Banks’ Dotcom call: ‘I’d do it again‘
This blogger has never heard of “legal advice” that advises a client to deliberately lie. Legal counsel usually advise a firm “no comment”, and say nothing further.
Furthermore, Banks at first said “his contact with Dotcom was limited to 20 minutes conversation and he had been to Dotcom’s mansion in Coatesville only once for dinner“.
See: Banks sought split donation: Dotcom
Since then, Banks has admitted several visits to Dotcom’s Coatsville mansion; possibly two phone calls; and advocating on behalf of the entrepreneur by phoning Minister Maurice Williamson,
“One, because he had been particularly generous to New Zealand; two, he was an entrepreneur who came to New Zealand to live in this home and do great things for New Zealand; three, he was a New Zealand resident; and four, I could see no reason a New Zealand resident … shouldn’t be able to buy property here.”
See: Banks: I didn’t lie, I simply forgot
Again, Dotcom’s claims are confirmed – whilst Banks’ story changes almost daily.
I leave the final comment, to the Prime Minister,
“If he’s complied with the law, some people might not like it but he’s complied with the law, and you wouldn’t sack a minister for complying with the law of New Zealand.”
See: previous Blogpost on Pansy Wong, Richard Worth, and Phil Heatley
.
*
.
References
Banks knew about ‘anonymous’ Dotcom donation – reports (27 April 2012)
Police expected to investigate Banks’ campaign donations (28 April 2012)
Banks regrets not being up-front over donations (1 May 2012)
Banks’ Dotcom call: ‘I’d do it again‘ (1 May 2012)
Banks ‘regrets’ legal advice to stay silent (1 May 2012)
John Banks: I briefed Dotcom (2 May 2012)
Banks: I didn’t lie, I simply forgot (2 May 2012)
Previous Blogposts
John Banks – Demented or Slippery as an eel?!
Key on Banks; Staunch, stupid, or stuck?
.Banks: I didn’t lie, I simply forgot
.
= fs =
Isn’t it a crying shame…? (Part #Rua)
… that politicians continue to lie and misrepresent issues, just to push their own perverse agendas,
.
.
Banks is telling outright lies when he says,
“Too often politicians spend up large in the good times, leaving nothing in reserve for when things get tough. We saw this type of spend up occur under the previous Labour Government.” – Ibid
Every time this blogger reads comments like that, reinforces the view that the Right Wing are desperate to re-write history, to paint Labour as as fiscally incompetant.
The truth, though, is completely the opposite: Labour posted surpluses year after year, during it’s administration from 2000 to 2008. This IMF graph is fairly clear how debt dropped from 2000 to 2008 – and rose once National took power in November, 2008,
.
The Government Debt in New Zealand was last reported at 31.6 percent of the country´s GDP. From 1985 until 2010, New Zealand's average Government Debt to GDP was 41.50 percent reaching an historical high of 71.60 percent in December of 1986 and a record low of 17.40 percent in December of 2007
.
See more here: Labour: the Economic Record 2000 – 2008
Under Labour (red), debt dropped.
Under National (blue), debt went up (not helped by two tax cuts in April 2009 and October 2010 we could ill afford).
This is reinforced by another chart, with data sourced from NZ Treasury, that shows government budgets under National (in blue) and Labour (in red),
.
New Zealand reported a government budget deficit equivalent to 3.3 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2010. Government Budget is an itemized accounting of the payments received by government (taxes and other fees) and the payments made by government (purchases and transfer payments). A budget deficit occurs when an government spends more money than it takes in. The opposite of a budget deficit is a budget surplus.
.
In fact, if any government is guilty of massive deficits and borrowing, look no further than this one,
.
.
.
And just to prove how incompetant National truly is,
.
.
So much for the ’09 and ’10 tax-cuts being “fiscally neutral”. Rubbish. Those tax cuts were made at a time we could not afford them; were funded by massive borrowings from overseas; and are a dead weight on this country’s finances.
What makes all this even worse is that our Dear Leader, John Key, was warned about the unsustainability of National’s tax cuts programme,
.
When right wingers try to re-write history, it gives the rest of us the opportunity to set the record straight. It serves as a valuable opportunity to remind New Zealanders that centre-left governments tend to be fiscally prudent, whilst right wing governments give away money (through tax cuts) that we do not have.
Eventually, the message percolates through to the Great Unwashed. And people like John Banks are caught standing in a rather cold wind, with their trousers down around their ankles.
.
.
= fs =
Another day in a lie of the National Party
|
|
= That Was Then =
|
"National’s rebalancing of the tax system is self-funding and requires no cuts to public services or additional borrowing." - http://www.national.org.nz/files/2008/ECONOMY/Tax_Policy_Paper.pdf
|
"This makes it absolutely clear that to fund National’s tax package there is no requirement for additional borrowing and there is no requirement to cut public services." - http://www.national.org.nz/files/2008/ECONOMY/Tax_Policy_Paper.pdf
|
"If National is elected to lead the next government, I personally guarantee that we will...
...Ensure government spending is focused on frontline services such as health and education by capping the number of bureacrats and putting real discipline around government spending." - http://img.scoop.co.nz/stories/images/0810/9610985fe02ddcb32279.jpeg
|
= This Was Before=
|
Of course, the “cap” soon turned into cuts. Two thousand five hundred cuts.
It’s not very fashionable to say it these days – but these were 2,500 hard working, dedicated, state sector workers who made sure that the wheels of government moved efficiently. They made sure police got their cars, radios, and tasers. They made sure doctors got their hi-tech machines-that-went-*ping* and medicines. They made sure schools were resourced (as much as penny-pinching politicians might permit).
And all the other jobs that are quietly done, out of sight, and which make our society function. John Key said pretty much the same thing in a speech, in March 2008.
Key was also adamant that National would not cut front-line staff, and instead would re-direct resources to where it was needed,
|
"We are not going to reduce the number of front-line staff. Let me make this absolutely clear – under National the numbers of doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, police and other front-line staff will grow.
In addition, we are not going to radically reorganise the structure of the state sector. Our focus will be on delivering services. Just as Labour has done, we will take opportunities to make changes to some agencies as part of the usual business of government. However, there will be no wholesale reorganisation or restructuring across the state sector." - http://www.johnkey.co.nz/index.php?/archives/335-SPEECH-Focusing-on-the-Front-Line.html
|
Both Key and English repeated the mantra; “no cuts to frontline staff, no cuts to frontline staff, no cuts to frontline staff, no cuts to frontline staff...”
The public came to believe Dear Leader and Little Leader.
Until the day of reckoning, and the lie was exposed…
|
= This Was Before=
|
The first lie was that there would be a cap on the state sector.
The second lie was that there would be not cuts.
The third lie was that cuts would be made on the “backroom bureacracy” (whatever that is), and not on the front line.
All lies.
|
|
Does anyone know if, or when John Key, Bill English, aren’t telling lies?
This blogger has been politically involved since his late teens. I have lived through the Muldoon regime; the Lange/Douglas “reforms”; the cock-ups of the Bolger/Richardson/Birch/Shipley circus; and the safer, more steady stewardship of Clark and Cullen.
I can tell the reader one thing: of all the governments we have had since the 1970s, the two most mendacious; dishonest; deceptive and manipulative ones have been;
*drumrolllllll*
|
|
|
|
|
|
May we have the envelope please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And the winners are…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1. Key & English
#2. Lange & Douglas
No need to clap.
|
Even Bolger – to his credit – kept to his word on most of his policies and pledges.
To my fellow New Zealanders – even to you folk who naively voted for National last November – I offer you this prediction; by the time the next election rolls around, you will be climbing over each other to cast your ballots, and to vote to throw out this shabby, dishonest, visionless ratbag regime.
You will have had a gutsful of Key’s empty promises and National’s shady dealings with casinos and other corporate interests.
You will have had enough of the relentless bad news; the growing inequality; the lack of jobs and spreading poverty; and losing more of your friends and family to Australia.
You may not even be here in New Zealand by the next election.
But I hope you still vote. We will need it.
|
|
= fs =
The Lie Clock…
|
|
A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.
He asked, “What are all those clocks?”
St. Peter answered, “Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move.”
“Oh,” said the man, “whose clock is that?”
“That’s Mother Teresa’s. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never told a lie.”
“Incredible,” said the man. “And whose clock is that one?” St. Peter responded, “That’s Abraham Lincoln’s clock.
The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life.”
“Where’s John Keys clock?” asked the man.
” John’s clock is in Jesus’ office. He’s using it as a ceiling fan.”
|
|
= fs =
It’s becoming fairly apparent that…
… whatever John Key says, the opposite will occur.
Just sayin’.
|
|
= fs =
John Key: another day, another broken pledge…
.
.
National’s hatchet-job on our state service continues – and appears to be getting worse.
Fresh from news that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade about to sack 305 people; and 295 uniformed personnel are to be fired from the Defence Force, we learn that Key’s government is about to fire at least 70 staff from Housing NZ,
.
.
This is on top of Housing NZ recently announcing that it will no longer assist low-income families with social needs,
.
.
Worse still, on top of the redundancies, is the planned closure of offices; and replacing front-line staff with an 0800 number Call Centre.
The sackings are a direct breach of Key’s promise to New Zealanders that the cutting of the state sector would not impact on front-line staff – and indeed he has stated that front-line numbers would be strengthened,
“It’s time to focus public spending on front-line services that make a real difference in people’s lives, rather than paper-shuffling and report-writing that does not…
We are not going to reduce the number of front-line staff. Let me make this absolutely clear – under National the numbers of doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, police and other front-line staff will grow…
In addition, we are not going to radically reorganise the structure of the state sector. Our focus will be on delivering services. Just as Labour has done, we will take opportunities to make changes to some agencies as part of the usual business of government. However, there will be no wholesale reorganisation or restructuring across the state sector… ” – John Key, 12 March 2008
John Key has broken every aspect of his own committments that he made to the nation, nearly four years ago, and which he has been repeating ad nauseum ever since.
Not only is his government sacking front line staff – but they are radically reorganising the state sector. Key’s most bizarre recent proposal was contracting out government services to Google. I kid you not: Rise of the Terminator Keybot!
A proposal to replace 1,000 full time soldiers in the Defence Force with “reservists”, who are “on call”, is a depletion of front-line personnel. This leaves NZ ill-equipped and ill-prepared to meet our international committments for U.N. peacekeeping duties, or local disaster relief operations.
Soldiers are front-line personnel. In fact, the term “front line” is a military term.
For those of us with fairly decent memories, we may recall the 1990s; when a Bolger and Shipley-led National governments cut the state sector until health, housing, social services, etc, were failing to meet the needs of ordinary New Zealanders.
At one stage Prime Minister Jenny Shipley was mooting moving or demolishing the Beehive Building so that an extension to the main Parliamentary Building could be undertaken. The cost to taxpayers was estimated to be in the region of $94 million (1997 dollars).
All whilst rentals for State houses were set at market prices; ex-psychiatric patients were living in public toilets; and on 3 April 1998, Southland dairy farmer Colin Morrison (42) died on a waiting list, awaiting a triple heart bypass surgery. His condition was listed as “life threatening” – but was still on a waiting list when he died.
And all during the 1990s, the wealth/income gap between the top 10% and the rest of New Zealand widened further and further.
Sound familiar?
By 27 November, 1999, New Zealanders had had a gutsful and threw out the National government.
History is repeating. The question is, how bad will it get this time? Perhaps as bad as families living in caravans?
.
Additional
‘Broken promise’ claim as frontline Defence jobs slashed
Review suggests more part-time soldiers
Families in caravans, cars as Housing NZ gets tough
Housing NZ proposal poses dangers for staff
HNZ: Housing New Zealand proposes changing how it delivers its services
2500 jobs cut, but only $20m saved
On Colin Morrison 1998)
Widow says little improvement seem
.
.
“I dunno. I wasn’t told. I wasn’t there.”
.
.
Last October, Dear Leader got in serious hot water over a supposed “email” he had received from “a friend”, claiming that Standard & Poors would have down-graded New Zealand’s credit-rating had Labour been in office.
This is the supposed email,
.
.
Key referred to the email in the Debating Chamber – and Labour called him on it.
To make matters worse (for Dear Leader), Standard & Poors called him on it.
The matter came to a head with this extraordinary, incredibly embarressing media conference,
.
.
Now we have another email which Key has “no knowledge of”,
.
.
Little wonder that the public do not trust Key, and that his popularity has taken a dive.
There is an old saying,
“Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me!”
.
.
John Key’s foot-in-mouth syndrome
.
.
In Parliament last week (4 October), John Key quoted a mysterious, anonymous, “email” which he daid “inferred” that, “when Standard and Poor’s was giving a meeting in New Zealand about a month ago, what it did say was that there was about a 30 percent chance that we would be downgraded. That is what happens when one is on a negative outlook. It did go on to say, though, that if there was a change of Government, that downgrade would be much more likely.”
However, a quick glance at the official government website, the NZ Debt Management Office not only doesn’t support that claim – but actually shows the reverse: Labour actually RATES BETTER than National/Rogernomics governments.
.
[Click on image for full size version]
.
Note that three credit downgrades happened duting three National governments; 1991, 1998, and this year. And if you include the Rogernomics period – that makes FOUR neo-liberal governments that were downgraded.
Do credit ratings agencies seem “risk averse” to new right governments? Do they prefer centre-left governments?
First, look at 10 September 1998 (National government) – AA+ (negative outlook)
But when Labour came to power – 7 March 2001 – AA+ (stable outlook)
Stable outlook?!
Nah, must be a mistake. Let’s have another look at a following period…
6 August 2008 (Labour Government) – AA+ (stable outlook) re-affirmed
“Reaffirmed”?!
Well, bugger me! It rather does seem that credit agencies look favourably upon centre-left government policies rather than centre-right administrations.
Whoda thunk?!
John Key – wrong again. It’s rather getting to be a habit with the ‘infallible’ Dear Leader.
.
.
Reference Sources
Hansards – 1. Credit Rating Downgrade—Effect on New Zealand Economy
NZDMO – New Zealand Sovereign Credit Ratings
.
.
Politicians never tell fibs…
… do they?
It was revealed today that John Key was caught out telling a “porky” in Parliamement. (In political-speak, “porky” = lie.) And quite a setrious one at that,
.
.
The Prime Minister stated in the House,
“Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I cannot confirm that. It may well be; it sounds logical. But let me quote this from Fitch Ratings: “New Zealand remains well placed amongst the world’s highly-rated sovereign credits, with its creditworthiness supported by moderate public indebtedness, fiscal prudence, and strong public institutions.” But I will say this: when Standard and Poor’s was giving a meeting in New Zealand about a month ago, what it did say was that there was about a 30 percent chance that we would be downgraded. That is what happens when one is on a negative outlook. It did go on to say, though, that if there was a change of Government, that downgrade would be much more likely.” - Hansards
So according to the Prime Minister, Standard & Poors – one of the three main credit agencies – stated that if there was “a change of Government” (ie; Labour was elected), that our sovereign credit-rating would be “much more likely”.
Unfortunately for our happy-go-lucky Prime Minister – Standard & Poors denies saying any such thing,
.
.
Specifically, S& P stated categorically,
“We don’t rate political parties. We rate Governments’.“
Caught out, it seems, the Prime Minister then went on to say,
.
Got it in an email
At his post-Cabinet press conference in Wellington on Monday, Key told media he was not at the meeting with Standard & Poor’s in September, but that he had received an email on September 6 from a trusted source who was at the meeting.
That source told Key Standard & Poor’s said there was a one-in-three chance that New Zealand would get downgraded and a two-in-three chance it would not, “and the inference was clear that it would be the other way round if Labour were in power,” Key quoted his source as saying in the email (see the full email below).
“The person is known to me, they’re known to be very trustworthy. I rang the person, had a conversation with them and it was relayed exactly as I relayed it in the House,” Key told media on Monday.
Key said he had not spoken to Standard & Poor’s to confirm whether S&P had made the comment.
“The person was at the meeting. I simply got the email, thought it was rather interesting, rang the person up. I’ve dealt with them before. They’ve given me information before which has been correct,” Key said.
The person was obviously confident that what he was telling Key was correct, he said.
“I wasn’t at the meeting, but all I’m telling you is it’s not a random comment I made up. I received the email, I verified it with the person. That’s it.” Source
.
So in effect, Key got his “information” via “an email on September 6 from a trusted source who was at the meeting”?!
Riiiiight…
Kinda like, I heard this story which is true, ‘cos it came from a mate’s friend who is the brother of this guy’s hairdresser, and she heard it from her cousin who is the wife of the Prime Minister’s secretary’s gardener that…
The text of the email follows,
.
.
Note that all identifying details have been removed. In fact, that “email” could have come from anywhere, including the Prime Minister’s secretary’s gardener.
Interesting.
In the Prime Minister’s statement to Parliament, he refers to “…when Standard and Poor’s was giving a meeting in New Zealand…”.
But the “email” refers to “…a session with a range of economists yesterday morning – every year they do this session – with economists from Aus plus all the main NZ banks, and this year two from Standard and Poors…”.
In John Key’s statement, the meeting was organised by Standard & Poors.
In the email, the meeting was held by “a range of economists… with economists from Aus plus all the main NZ banks”.
So who organised this meeting?
Where was it held?
Who attended?
We don’t know. All we have is an anonymous “email” – unsourced and unverified - statements from the Prime Minister that contradict the email; and a firm denial by Standard & Poors’ analyst Kyran Curry that they would ever make such comments.
The greatest irony here is not that John Key may have lied and mis-led Parliament and the people – but that Martyn “Bomber” Bradbury is banned from Radio NZ for “defaming” the Prime Minister.
If ever you get a chance to watch the movie, “Wag the Dog” – do. It is a chilling insight as to how politicians and their staffers can manipulate the media to serve their own ends.
As for the Prime Minister – perhaps he will get away with it, again. But the “clock is ticking”, and these stories of deceit are becoming more prevalent.
The media is finally catching on,
.
.
Curiouser and curiouser,
.
ANZ chief economist Cameron Bagrie was not at the breakfast meeting in Auckland and a spokeswoman said another colleague of his who was there was not the author. The BNZ's Stephen Toplis said it had not been him nor anyone at the BNZ. Westpac chief economist Dominick Stephens said he had not sent the email but wouldn't comment when asked if he knew who had. ASB Bank economist Nick Tuffley said he was at the function but didn't send the email.
.
So the question remains;
Who wrote the email?
.
.
