Letter to the Editor: Simon Bridges is a very naughty little boy!

.

.

 

FROM:    "f.macskasy" 
SUBJECT:  Letters to the editor
DATE:     Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:54:16 +1300
TO:      "Sunday News" <editor@sunday-news.co.nz>

.

The Editor
The Sunday News
.

National's Energy Minister, Simon Bridges, continues to rant
that the  Green Party is somehow planning to print  "magic
money" with their recently announced policy to install solar
panels on 30,000 New Zealand homes.

He said,

"I have news for the Greens - if it's a lower interest rate
than normal, it must involve a government subsidy."

Really?

Is this the same kind of subsidy that National gave away to
home owners to install $1 billion worth of insulation in
cold and damp houses?

Or is it the same kind of subsidy that National handed out
to Rio Tinto, Warner Bros, and other private companies? Was
the $30 million of our taxes that John Key kindly gifted to
the Tiwai Aluminium smelter not a subsidy? Or the cheaper
power which National re-negotiated last year?

Ironically, the Green Party is not suggesting subsidies at
all, but allowing access to cheap loans that the government
already has access to. All loans would be paid back by home
owners - not tax payers.

The same cannot be said for the $30 million gifted to Rio
Tinto or the $160 million-plus to Warner Bros for the "Lord
of the Rings" and another $60 million for "The Hobbit". 

We won't be seeing that money back again any time soon.

-Frank Macskasy
(address and phone number supplied)

.

*

.

References

TV3: How The Hobbit came to stay in NZ

Beehive.govt.nz: $100m for investing in warmer, healthier homes

Fairfax media: $1b Budget warmup

TV3: Labour backs Greens’ solar panel policy

Youtube: Solar Homes policy launch

Dominion Post: Greens’ solar pledge would ‘push up prices’ – Key

.

*

.

Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen

.

.

= fs =

Advertisements

Letter to the Editor: John Key dazzles them with bullsh*t

.

.

The Editor
Sunday Star Times
.

FROM: 	"f.macskasy" 
SUBJECT: Letters to the Editor	
DATE: 	 Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:17:26 +1300
TO: 	 "Sunday Star Times" <letters@star-times.co.nz> 

.


Almost in a knee-jerk reaction, John Key is derisory of the
recently announced Green Party policy to offer low-interest
loans to home owners to install solar panels on their
properties.

Key said,

 "If you look at the big emissions at the moment in New
Zealand, it's Genesis through Huntly where they have coal
fired power plants, and the plan that [the Greens] have got
is going to reduce all competition and in my view, put up
power costs to consumers, not reduce it, actually locks that
in."

How the use of solar energy is going to "reduce competition"
and "put up power costs to consumers" is not only unclear -
but bizarre in the extreme.

Key appears to be floundering to create the flimsiest
possible excuse to dismiss the Green's policy initiative.

That is despite;

(a) solar panels reducing our reliance on hydro-dams, which
in drought conditions can interrupt power supply and push up
prices, 

(b) National having invested - in concert with the Green
Party - $1 billion dollars to insulate thousands of homes
around New Zealand.

The later home insulation plan involved non-recoverable
grants of up to $1,500 per household.  By contrast, the
Green's plan involves loans, not grants.

National seems wedded to giving our money away. This was
evidenced by Key's keenness to giving away $30 million to
Rio Tinto, and over $90 million to Warner Bros for 'The
Hobbit'. Those were our taxes given to private companies and
both  subsequently made billions in profits.

Perhaps Mr Key can answer a simple question; why does he
think the Green Party solar panel initiative will "push up
power prices", but National's home insulation programme
would not?

-Frank Macskasy
(address and phone number supplied)

.

*

.

References

TV3: How The Hobbit came to stay in NZ

Beehive.govt.nz: $100m for investing in warmer, healthier homes

Fairfax media: $1b Budget warmup

TV3: Labour backs Greens’ solar panel policy

Youtube: Solar Homes policy launch

Dominion Post: Greens’ solar pledge would ‘push up prices’ – Key

.

*

.

Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen

.

.

= fs =

Letter to the editor: Shane Taurima and Maggie Barry

.

.

FROM:   "f.macskasy" 
SUBJECT: Letters to the editor
DATE:    Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:24:12 +1300
TO:     "Dominion Post" letters@dompost.co.nz 

.

The Editor
Dominion Post
.

The witch-hunt against former TVNZ presenter, Shane Taurima,
can best be described as hypocrisy on a National scale.

It is a bit rich for the likes of National MPs, Tau Henare,
Judith Collins, and Paula Bennett to be crying into their
beersies and alleging bias in Taurima's interviews when
amongst them sits their colleague, former radio presenter,
MP Maggie Barry.

On 5 March 2011 she stood as an unsuccessful  National
Party candidate in the Botany Bay by-election. That was only
three months after leaving her position as radio host at
Radio Live.

For six years prior to that,  Barry worked as a host and
interviewer at Radio NZ, interviewing many left-wing
politicians, political figures, activists, etc.

In 2011, she became a National Party member of Parliament.

There are other examples of journalists, television and
radio hosts, and other media personalities entering politics
- many working for the National Party.

Did anyone complain of undue bias from Maggie Barry or
indeed Richard Griffin - one time Radio NZ political editor,
and subsequent Chief Press Officer and Media Adviser to
Prime Minister and National Party leader, Jim Bolger?

Not a squeak.

The stench of hypocrisy is over-powering.

-Frank Macskasy
(address & phone number supplied)

 

.

*

.

References

Dominion Post: Labour links at TVNZ revealed

Wikipedia: Maggie Barry

Radio NZ: Richard Griffin

NZ Herald: TVNZ manager resigns after Labour Party revelations

.

*

.

Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen

.

.

= fs =

Kiwiblog – still happily fomenting mischief…

.

.

Sometimes, being a mischief-maker can have it’s pit-falls…

Case in point – Kiwiblog administrator, David Farrar, who at the end of January, posted a story on a “leaked” Green Party draft Party List for this year’s election. David wrote,

“I’ve been leaked a copy of the draft an unoffical Green Party List. This is the version done by the hierarchy and leadership. The initial draft list is done by the hierarchy and then members then get to vote on this, and tweak it. They often do make some changes, but the bulk of the rankings don’t change much.” [sic]

David Farrar  then published the List rankings, complete with promotions and demotions. (Though his blogpost wasn’t entitled “Two Greens MPs facing demotion with Green Party List”. The more sensationalist, oily heading of “Two Greens MPs facing sacking with Green Party List” was used instead.)

Only trouble is – none of it was true. Someone was either playing silly-buggers or David Farrar was telling porkies.

My ten cents plus 15% GST is on the former; this was someone playing  David Farrar for their unknown agenda. Why do I believe that the Kiwiblog editor  wasn’t deliberately spreading lies (despite the mis-leading headline to the original blogpost)?

Because David Farrar is no Cameron Slater.

When a right wing blogger publishes a damning piece demolishing another right wing activist’s (Luigi Wewege) reputation for telling outright  lies;

.

.

– then that speaks well for  his credibility. (That’s not to say David won’t present  a story biased according to his  own experiences, beliefs, and worldview – but then, what right or left wing blogger doesn’t? And yes, that includes me.)

On 10 February, David Farrar published an updated blogpost on this story, stating,

“I published last week a draft Green Party list. The Greens said it was an entirely unofficial list, and was not the list that the hierarchy and electorate delegates put together for members to vote on. That is correct, as that list is yet to be drawn up. But in political parties it is not unusual for different factions to start circulating what they see as their desired list.”

This bit is pretty much on the nail. I recall my own participation in Alliance List Ranking meetings. Various factions would draw up their own lists; discuss them; pass them around; lobby for support… Until the day of Regional List Ranking selection and it came down to delegates voting according to their electorate wishes. Some of the “pre-determined” list rankings were successful – but most were not. (After all, only one person can sit in each ranked slot.)

David Farrar should have known this because the Green Party selection  is even more direct, transparent,  and democratic than the Alliance. Or the new Labour Party voting process for leadership contests.

In fact, the Green Party is probably the most open and democratic of this country’s political parties. At the other end of the spectrum is ACT, where Leaders and candidates are selected by the Party’s Board of Directors. ACT members have zero say in the selection process.

So it was hardly surprising that David Farrar  offered up this explanation,

“A manager with the parliamentary party has said on the record that the parliamentary leadership and senior staff have not had any involvement with the unofficial list that was sent to me. They can’t rule out that someone at Parliament hasn’t compiled their own wish list, and been pushing it – but they are unaware of any activity like that and do not sanction it. I believe those assurances.”

Indeed.

The Green Party confirmed to me, in writing that “pre-selected lists” do not exist,

"Our party is proud of our committment to our internal democracy. Appropriate
decision-making is one of the pillars our our party's charter. We take this
committment seriously as Co-Convenors and elected representatives of the party.

Recently a blog site, and reports by the mainstream media, claimed to have a copy of
our draft list - the ranked list of MP's that the party devises that informs which
candidates are elected into parliament once the party vote is counted after the
election. The draft list is a fiction - the party list formation has not yet begun.
Our party uses a participatory approach to develop our party list.

[...]

We can expect an unprecedented level of scrutiny, interest, and, from some, attack on
our internal democracy and the party in general this year. The media, commentators,
bloggers, and other political parties are all interested in our party list. Given
this interest, we can expect some misreporting of our party processes and
list-ranking processes..."

One part of that statement leaps out at me;  “We can expect an unprecedented level of scrutiny, interest, and, from some, attack on our internal democracy and the party in general this year…”

What an odd world we live in when the political Party with the most democratic and transparent candidate selection process is heavily scrutinised (and often criticised) – whilst other Parties – where a culture of transparency and democratic involvement by rank-and-file members is not so well developed – do not suffer the same level of scrutiny and criticism.

In fact, this blogger has not read one single MSM story or commentatory criticising ACT’s closed candidate selection process. It seems almost an accepted feature of our political system that this kind of secretiveness is “the norm” and the Green’s willingness to be open is “unnatural“.

If such be the case, and I have to choose between “the norm” and “unnatural” – I’ll take “unnatural“, any day.

David Farrar concluded by stating,

“I have no reason however to doubt the source [of the leaked “draft Party List] has said anything untrue, and that they did not receive the list from someone in Parliament. I won’t print anything I believe to be untrue. The source has been reliable in the past. Also I do apply my own judgement to a degree and the rankings in the unofficial list do meld with general consensus around the beltway around individual MPs.”

David Farrar may insist that he will not  “print anything I believe to be untrue”.

But he certainly didn’t bother checking the facts first and foremost with the Green Party prior to committing to publication.

If anyone should understand the Green’s almost fetish-like observance for democratic and transparent participation, it should be David Farrar. God knows he’s been around “the beltway” long enough.

Perhaps Mr Farrar  should start questioning “ the source” of the leaked “draft”. Because it looks like he’s been ‘played’ by someone with their own agenda.

Yup, it must be election year…

[Disclosure: this blogger supported the Green Party at the 2011 Election]

.

*

.

References

Radio NZ: ACT Party elects new leader

Kiwiblog: Not in a relationship! (5 Nov 2013)

Kiwiblog: Two Greens MPs facing sacking with Green Party List (31 Jan 2014)

Kiwiblog: More on the Greens list (10 Feb 2014)

Previous related blogpost

2013 – The Year that Was (Scroll down to: Honest Blogging by a Rightwing Blogger Award)

Act proclaims new leader!?

.

*

.

Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen

This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 11 February 2014.

.

.

= fs =