About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

February 27, 2012 8:00am by Kokila Patel

General Debate 27 February 2012

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment147

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (147)

Login to comment or vote

F E Smith

Nasska,

I think the fascism one is wrong. In that case, the state lets you sell your own milk, but tells you who you must sell it to and for how much.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:03pm
nasska

F E Smith

Ever since I had to let my sub editor go grammar & fact checking has gone to the dogs.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:10pm
F E Smith

nasska,

you have my sympathies. Times are hard, but they will improve!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:13pm
bc

Ok I’ve come into this late in the game, but I’ve just read the first post from Chuck.
Chuck sir – you are an idiot!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:28pm
labours a joke

“Morons. Absolute morons”

Of course you are entitled to that opinion..which is wrong, but so be it. You must be a lawyer.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:28pm
Yvette

Penny Bright – In our attempts to fight the corporate greed of the 1%, were Occupy Auckland becoming effective and causing concern to some people in high places?

No. Penny, you weren’t causing concern to any people in any high places.

You obfuscated any OCCUPY impetus with all your own personal obsession Get_John-Banks-and-Brash krap – OCCUPY AUCKLAND (General Assembly 1/2/2012) SUPPORTS THE PRINCIPLE OF A DRAFT ACTION PLAN TO PREVENT CORRUPTION – ‘WHITE COLLAR’ CRIME & ‘CORPORATE WELFARE’ IN NEW ZEALAND [DRAFT DISCUSSION DOCUMENT ONLY] – and ruined some grass.

Otherwise, over a couple of months, you did fucking nothing but bore people stupid.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:30pm
mikenmild

I should have thought that the Sensible Sentencing Trust being morons was a truth universally acknowledged.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:37pm
Put it away

Water loon, the Mana party stood on a “99 percenter” platform, using all the same rhetoric, and their share of the votes was…drum roll please…. one per cent. You “occupy” nutbars ARE the 1 percent. The 99% wasn’t interested.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:50pm
reid

Morons. Absolute morons.

FES, those case studies they have where it went wrong don’t sound unreasonable, to me: e.g. someone given bail for murder because he’s young then commits another murder.

If it’s violence and if the perp has priors, why shouldn’t bail be real hard to get?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 8:52pm
Put it away

reid – they don’t sound unreasonable to you, but you don’t make money from crime like our learned friend. Turkeys… christmas.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:01pm
F E Smith

reid,

and of the well over 100,000 plus charges each year, and the 50,000 plus bail decisions, how many have actually go wrong? Nowhere near as many as you might think.

But the SST isn’t talking about needing any priors. A potential sentence of two years or more would see an automatic remand in custody. That takes you into the ‘he said/she said’ area of family issues, and also parents who are charged with smacking their children.

All locked up, no chance of bail!

The SST are taking a very rare occurrence and pretending that it is routine. It isn’t, and they are morons.

EDIT: of course I am a lawyer, that is what gives me the knowledge necessary to understand that the SST are just plain dumb.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:12pm
kowtow

FES
Morons absolute morons.
I don’t think so.They are taking a position,perhaps aiming high and allowing for a drop.

There is no doubt that bail has swung to the accused and against society’s safety. It is a travesty that serious crime is being commited by people who are accused of very serious crimes.

The morons are the politicians ,lawyers and judges that have allowed this to happen.

The anti capital punishment wankers often cite the case of the innocent man being executed as an argument against capital punishment.
What of the innocent murder victims killed by people that the “justice” system has put on the street?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:13pm
F E Smith

kowtow,

bail is always weighted towards the accused. That is because they are presumed to be innocent, not the other way around.

The Bail Act sets out criteria that must be applied. The lawyers represent their clients (police/crown and defendant) and make submissions based on the position of their client. I fail to see how they can be blamed for anything in this issue. It is not for the lawyer to decide whether his/her client applies for bail or gets it. Judges consider the facts they are presented with, consider the law, and make a decision. 99.9% of the time there is no problem.

And most murder victims are not dead because their killer has been released on bail or parole.

You can abuse the politicians all you want, they write the laws that we have to apply. But to take one case and pretend it applies to many/most is fraudulent.

And the suggestions they are making are, for the most part, just plain stupid. As is allowing for a drop- what happens if there isn’t a drop, and we get ultra-harsh bail laws instead? Are you willing to have bail denied if you are wrongly charged with hitting a woman when the same act against a male would see you released on bail?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:21pm
Weihana

# Put it away (2,405) Says:
February 27th, 2012 at 6:20 pm

Weihana that doesn’t make much sense. If a child is abused, the first suspect is always the family.

Only if it is suspected. As I said, they have authority over the child and the child generally loves their parent so it is not suspected in the first place.

The chance of a heterosexual who abused their own family member being caught is great.

I disagree. Such offending is, I believe, one of the most under-reported crimes and I presume precisely for the reasons I stated earlier: authority over the child and the emotional attachment the child has to their parent.

A homosexual abusing other people’s kids is going to have a much less obvious connection to the victim, and therefore less chance of being caught.

I disagree. Offending by strangers is more likely to be reported, regardless of whether the offender is caught. The reality is that whether it is reported is generally up to the child (or since grown adult). If they are attacked by a stranger the chances are much greater that the child will report it. On the other hand it may be difficult to dob in your priest, but I believe it is significantly more difficult if it is your parent.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:26pm
Pete George

There is no doubt that bail has swung to the accused and against society’s safety.

How are you sure of that? How many on bail are involved in violent crime? Compared to ten years ago? Twenty years ago? How much violence occurs to people on remand?

If we folloed what SST wants how many more people would be on remand?

We have to try and get it as good as possible but no system will be perfect.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:26pm
Viking2

Britain has run out of money, chancellor warns

From: NewsCore
February 27, 2012 1:49PM

BRITISH Chancellor George Osborne has delivered a stark pre-budget assessment of the nation’s finances, saying the country is “out of money.”

Osborne admitted his Coalition government could do little to stimulate the economy and told The (London) Daily Telegraph, “The British Government has run out of money because all the money was spent in the good years. The money and the investment and the jobs need to come from the private sector.”

The blunt message echoes a note left for the Tory-led government after it took power from Labour in 2010. The outgoing treasury secretary told his successor, “Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid to tell you there’s no money left.”
http://www.couriermail.com.au/business/britain-has-run-out-of-money-chancellor-warns/story-fn7kjcme-1226282895066
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:26pm
labours a joke

Dont blow ya horn too hard son..lawyers , car salesmen , real estate agents , politicians, insurance salesmen…you aint in that greater company.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:28pm
Put it away

FES, how do you relate your statement that “99.9% of the time there is no problem.” with the fact that 5 % of the people they let out on bail for violent offences commit further violent offences while on bail?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:28pm
kowtow

FES
You’re a lawyer,that’s great.
‘Bail always weighted towards the accused’, yep I know,innocent till proven guilty and all that.
I’ve been involved with courts too and am interested in these things and once upon a time judges had the general good in mind too and it was very hard for people accused of serious crimes to get bail.
Judges were part of the “establishment”. All that has changed in the last 30 years,what with human rights etc
Say what you like people accused of serious crimes (murder,rape,kidnap) should not get bail and in the bad old days would have had a job getting it.

I’m not talking “ultra harsh”, just plain old common sense ,perhaps like it was not that so long ago.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:30pm
reid

bail is always weighted towards the accused. That is because they are presumed to be innocent, not the other way around.

FES fair points about the stats and yes I know the media mentions only fractions of the reality and then picks and chooses and sensationalises the cases when it chooses to, but even if SST isn’t talking about priors, I would like to see those applied as a weighting factor more than it seems to be. In my hallucination, most people don’t have a record and those who do, either have a bad one or a single offence from a single mistake. Is that a fair comment?

If so then if it’s the former case where someone has a long list of priors, why is it then unreasonable to deny them bail? It’s those cases which aren’t being properly addressed, as I say, in my hallucination.

In my hallucination journalists should also be held accountable as well when they make shit up and don’t do their job properly as well, BTW, and they shouldn’t ever get bail, since they’re guilty as charged by the mere fact they published.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:40pm
bereal

@9.12
FE Smith

edit
“of course I am a lawyer that is what gives me the knowledge necessary to understand………….blah, blah.’

Now is that a pompous prick with his head up his arse, or what?

Right up his arse. i think this drongo actually takes himself seriously FFS

Guess what FE Smith, the bloke who mows my lawns has more sense than you do.
and he’s a fukin idiot.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 9:40pm
reid

Just an observation, but I don’t quite get why some of you here get so irritated by FES. I mean why?

If it was a debate over a medical question, would you get irritated if he joined in if he were a doctor?

Surely someone who works in the field under discussion has insights the rest of us don’t. That doesn’t mean he’s necessarily correct (there is nothing so vigorously defended vested interested disguised as intellectual convictions always applies in these cases) but equally that canard is simply a warning which may or may not be the case. It could be the case he IS right and even if he does have a vested interest (and I’m not saying he does necessarily) this doesn’t by definition invalidate that logical possibility, that he IS right.

I’m not quite sure why some are so disparaging of the possibility of such. After all, odds are, perhaps he is. And, he doesn’t strike me as (a) a fool or (b) disingenuous or (c) malicious, quite the opposite of all of those in fact. So I’m quite puzzled really, as to why several here seem to have such a jaundiced view of his expertise, and it is expertise, whether or not one agrees with it.

Can’t quite work it out.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:01pm
Griff

Those that are incorrigible recidivist offenders are a small minority of the population their harm out-ways their rights to a degree.
The previous offending record should play more of a part in the decision to allow or denied bail.
It is not the death of the total rights structure.Iit is merely a more firm line in the sand against repeat offending.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:03pm
Put it away

reid – because if a doctor was presented with what was obviously a malignant tumour, they would think that removing it would be a good thing. They would not devote weeks of their time to generating paperwork to give them a reason to let it grow, and think they had done us all a favour with the cleverness of their paperwork.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:08pm
reid

Just to put it on record, I’ve heard from a couple of sources lately the US could be subjected to a massive EMP attack which the NWO people will blame on Iran and use it to attack.

An EMP will disable the US electricity grid as well as almost every single vehicle in the US and cause millions perhaps tens of millions of casualties due to the rampant crime when law enforcement is unable to respond.

Naturally the military will be called in and the US population will find itself at the mercy of all that legislation kindly put in place to “protect” them since the 911 false flag, administered of course by all the gentle caring people like those nice TSA gropers but this time, it’s going to be all the Mexican street thugs they’ve recruited into the military.

Imagine that.

Just wanted to put it on record, since if it happens, we won’t have the interweb I don’t think, since the index servers are mostly based in the states and they’ll be wiped out as well.

Of course it’s a complete fantasy, isn’t it. But just in case it isn’t, don’t forget when you read about it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:14pm
kowtow

reid

Irritated?Come on, he let’s everyone know he’s an expert, you know a lawyer,Mr Trained Professional and all that, and look at the language he uses against the SSt,hardly Mr Reasonable. Morons etc FFS.

People are sick of being told by fucken “experts” about what why etc In a democracy it’s the people who are meant to decice not the elites. These guys come across as that, out of touch wankers.

A bit like “scientists” and global warming. And then the taxes and preaching from the pollies follow.

NZ has given it’s opinion on crime and been ignored ,remember that referendum?Back in the late ’90’s.

IMHO.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:14pm
Put it away

you aiming to corner the tinfoil market, reid?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:15pm
F E Smith

pia,

so 95% of people bailed while accused of violence offences don’t commit further offences of violence, eh? Sounds pretty good to me. But, tell me, what percentage of people on bail are on bail for violence offences? I think it won’t be as high as you think, and the 5% you raise will be a tiny percentage.

Ok, so maybe 99.9% is wrong, but I am happy with 98% even. You will never get it perfect unless you lock every person charged with an offence up whilst they await determination of their case.

and your 10.08pm comment is just stupid. Defence lawyers are reactive and most cases end quickly in a guilty plea.

reid,

actually, there is a huge difference in the numbers that people have on their criminal histories. You get everything from cleanskins with nothing, to grizzled old crims with heaps, and everything in between. It would not be correct to assume it is mostly either one end or the other, in fact there is no real pattern to it. It is way to varied to generalise in any way at all.

But a serious history will make it much tougher for someone to get bail, even if their offence is relatively minor. Of course, the older the offending, the less weight a bad list will have, but it still counts. This idea of people with bad lists wandering around on bail is mostly false. We do have to release them sometime, which is usually when they get into trouble again.

Most offending whilst on bail involves minor breaches of conditions. Late back whilst on curfew (that is usually a young persons offence) is a good example.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:17pm
F E Smith

kowtow,

of course someone who works in the area shouldn’t claim to have any idea of what goes on in the area. It is completely understandable that a person who has minimal or no contact with the criminal justice sector would know a hell of a lot more than we lawyers.

And when you get ill and people tell you to go to a doctor, I am sure that you will ask someone at the supermarket for a diagnosis, as asking a doctor would just involve an expert, wouldn’t it?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:23pm
Griff

FES STILL ADDS TO THE DEBATE
Is it not the value of ones input that counts
If there is a legal issue at hand mr F E Smith always gives us his considered opinion you should all rejoice

A lawyer is giving you advise for free. 😯
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:26pm
reid

PIA, a criminal lawyer deals with these people every single day. After decades of doing that, one would imagine they’d have learned a thing or two about what makes said people tick and who said people really are on the inside, which is a hell of a lot more of an insight that the one we have, from reading about the one or two sensational cases per day or week which the media cherry pick simply in order to increase their circulation.

Anyone whose worked in any industry which the media occasionally reports on knows the media are shallow fools and idiots when it comes to coverage of what really goes on in their industry. I’ve worked in banking, telecoms, aviation, manufacturing, ICT, govt and general consulting and in none of those areas has the media ever done anything except provided the public with the general depth and insight one normally gets from watching Home and Away. The only exceptions ever are the occasional columns from those few journos who specialise in the field but most of the public don’t generally read them very often, preferring for some reason to read and absorb only the sensational headlines the sub-editors have kindly provided us under the guise of “all the news that’s fit to print.”

Sad, but true. Therefore, when we do get a professional in the field, a real one, I don’t understand why their views aren’t worth closely listening to. This doesn’t mean they’re necessarily correct in everything they say, but some people seem to react as if they don’t even have any insight at all, which I’m afraid I can’t agree with.

you aiming to corner the tinfoil market, reid?

My predictions pan out in the real world PIA. It does come in handy. For example I knew in 2005 the GFC was coming and prepared accordingly. I realised some time ago the situation is becoming more serious, so I thought fuck it, just say it, and damn the cognitive dissonance.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:27pm
F E Smith

see, I don’t get this. If any of you expressed an opinion on something that was within their area of work, most of you would think it simply adding to the debate.

but if a lawyer says anything about criminal justice policy we get abused left, right and centre.

I don’t understand that.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:29pm
Griff

Can some one actually link to the true figures on recidivist offending
http://www.stats.govt.nz/tools_and_services/tools/tablebuilder/recorded-crime-statistics.aspx
Its probably in here I do not have the band width to tease it out
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:37pm
kowtow

FES

“Morons absolute morons” is hardly adding to debate.

Language like “suggestions you are making are just plain stupid” is hardly adding to debate. It’s fucken rude and patronising. And folk don’t like being patronised.

And no one has yet addressed the issue of how hard or easy it was for serious crims to get bail in the not so distant past.

You don’t get it? No, alot of people who move in legal circles don’t, that’s the point!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:37pm
F E Smith

well, they are morons and the suggestions they are making are plain stupid.

Perhaps I should say that they just don’t understand what they are saying?

And with regards how strong/easy it was to get bail in the not so distant past? It was easier, and the changes of this decade haven’t made any real difference.

I suppose that those of us who work in the criminal justice area should just shut up and accept whatever the people who don’t work in the area think should happen, regardless of facts or realities, eh? Fair enough.

Of course, what we are actually doing is just ceasing to work in the area, but that is also what everyone wants, isn’t it!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:45pm
reid

It’s fucken rude and patronising. And folk don’t like being patronised.

Yes but we’re not like precious lefties here, are we. Lefties have a habit of going all girly the instant something like that happens. Toad still doesn’t speak to me due to something I said (I have no idea what) years ago. (It’s quite good, BTW, I’m not complaining.)

Well, man up, FFS. I don’t know about anyone else here, but I don’t care what people say in a debate, language-wise. It’s the logic and force of the argument that makes the difference for me, that’s the only thing which makes a diff, and as I’ve said above, like FES, it’s a bit puzzling how come his experience in the field, which is more than I have, doesn’t seem to have an impact on that equation for some people, since to me, it’s quite obvious. Not, as I said, that makes FES automatically right, but to me, it does give his comments a weight which I take under due consideration and why wouldn’t it?

Perhaps I should say that they just don’t understand what they are saying?

Yes I’m sure that would go down extra well.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:47pm
F E Smith

reid,

thanks. I have no problem with anybody disagreeing with me. There is ample room for it and a number of different approaches. Mine is simply one among many.

But my views are pretty common among defence lawyers, so I am not a maverick in that sense. And I, too, would have thought it would give what I say, at least on process and procedure, some weight. If anyone wants to come to a different conclusion to me then I have no issue with that, I just hope it is backed up by something more than ‘they deserve it’.

But I really don’t care what they say about me, I was just a making a point. Anyone with a thin skin doesn’t last as a defence lawyer!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 10:58pm
Griff

Reid
I was considering building myself an escape capsule
A structure using reo bar and many layers of chicken mesh 12 to be precise I would then sink this Faraday cage into sea water this being an ideal medium with the chloride irons and all that to provide a robust earth I would need a impervious hard layer over this matrix
And then propel it with a simple diesel motor you could run it using pot ash and water as a clarifying medium and coconuts or fruit even pot seeds as fuel and of course wind power to drive it to escape the terror that is coming
Two forty foot robust antenna grounded by heavy stainless cable to earth the chargeThen I realized I already have one And I am not channeling Scott Watson
FFS don’t say Scott or Ellis this week
Do you know any lusty broads that would like to be saved?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 11:04pm
reid

Yes it wasn’t really a defence on your behalf FES since I know you don’t need it, it was more to raise the general question of why, since this isn’t the first time I’ve noticed it and it just seems peculiar, on this blog, to have that going on.

But no doubt tomorrow the same thing will happen again. Or maybe it won’t…

Edit: Griff, excellent. All I can suggest is don’t forget one of those toilets Jeannette Fitzsimmons has, so you can fertilise your garden with your own excrement.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 11:07pm
F E Smith

Yeah, I don’t get it either, but I generally just ignore it because people like yourself are actually interested in conducting informed debate.

Anyway, must be off. Night all.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 27, 2012 11:19pm
publicwatchdog

Oh well Kiwibloggers – you’ll be THRILLED to know that the petition forms have been passed on to Labour MP Phil Twyford to present to the House – Tuesday 28 February 2012 – the petition that hopefully will help to force the resignation of John Banks ACT MP for Epsom?

The petition which requests:

“That the House conduct an urgent inquiry into the decisions regarding prosecutions relating to the Huljich Kiwisaver Scheme registered prospectuses dated 22 August 2008 and 18 September 2009”.

ie: How come ACT’s ‘one law for all’ (conveniently) didn’t apply to fellow former Directors of Huljich Wealth Management (NZ) Ltd to current ACT Party Leader – MP for Epsom (and Minister of Regulatory Reform) John Banks, and former ACT Party Leader Don Brash, when they both signed the above-mentioned Huljich Kiwisaver Scheme registered prospectuses dated 22 August 2008 and 18 September 2009, which contained untrue statements?

Arguably not a good look for New Zealand – ‘perceived’ to be ‘the least corrupt country in the world’ (according to the 2011 Transparency International ‘Corruption Perception Index’ to effectively have the balance of power held by a yet-to-be- charged ‘white collar’ criminal?

For more background information – please feel free to check out http://www.pennybright4epsom.org.nz

Kind regards,

Penny Bright
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 28, 2012 12:36am
Pete George

Like everyone I don’t always agree with FES – he’s got some weird political ideas 🙂 – but he’s one of a few commenters here who I usually always make a point of reading because he’s good at adding a useful insight into topics, especially of a legal kind.

There are plenty of boorish and petty nitpickers and generalisers but they are easy to skim past. Anyone who lasts the distance has to have a thick skin. Maybe the stayers here should train up to be defence lawyers.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 28, 2012 7:21am
Manolo

The hopelessly politically correct NZ Police would be prosecuting the shopkeeper for possessing a weapon and attacking an innocent man: http://news.msn.co.nz/worldnews/8426169/serial-thief-sprayed-with-bear-mace
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 28, 2012 7:33am
graham

And still Penny talks about one law for all – as long as it isn’t her …

This is the woman who advocates STEALING power from the Auckland Citly Council.

This is the woman who has advocated STEALING water which she has not paid for, and has demonstrated to others how to do it.

So Penny, could you please do the decent thing and add the following to the petition forms that you have passed on to Labour MP Phil Twyford?

“How come ACT’s ‘one law for all’ (conveniently) didn’t apply to Penny Bright, who has publicly advocated STEALING power from the Auckland City Council, STEALING water from various suppliers, and has actively encouraged others to do the same?

How about YOU Penny?

Do YOU support ‘ONE LAW FOR ALL’?

Or not?

If not – why not?

ONE LAW FOR ALL – EVEN YOU, PENNY BRIGHT!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 28, 2012 7:47am
graham

And although I’m certainly not a lawyer, or trained in the law, my reading of the Crimes Act is that advocating other people to steal anything is illegal.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM328506.html

Section 66: Parties to offences(1) Every one is a party to and guilty of an offence who—

(a) actually commits the offence; or

(b) does or omits an act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence; or

(c) abets any person in the commission of the offence; or

(d) incites, counsels, or procures any person to commit the offence.

Not a good look for a self-proclaimed ‘public watchdog’ bravely fighting corruption … is it, Penny?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 28, 2012 7:58am
Manolo

Quote from Penny Dim: “Those of us who make a living of “fighting” corruption, tend to be a lot corrupt ourselves.“
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 28, 2012 8:05am
Elaycee

“For more background information – please feel free to check out… …pennybright4epsom.org.nz” Blah blah…. [splat].

Haha, penny4epsom was another really successful campaign, wasn’t it? It ranks right alongside your attempt to win the Mayoralty of Auckland / to win the electorate seat of Botany / to win a seat on the Howick Ward etc etc – all delivered a ‘level of support’ around that of the margin of error.

And this latest WOFTAM will have the same result. The kiss of death is that it bears your name.

Have a nice day! 😀
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 28, 2012 8:30am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« The Maritime Union at work

Poor diddums »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.3K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

National's privatised child-abuse camps
No Right Turn
ACT MP Wrong (for once)
No Minister
Here We Go: No Pennsylvania Results For Several Days!
Utopia
Daily review 05/11/2024
The Standard
A SUBMISSION ON LONG TERM TAX AND OTHER POLICIES
NZCPR
Govt to spend $2m on a maths teaching pilot (and pupils might learn that 2 + 2 is not as culturally obvious as it seems)
Point of Order
Word of the day
Hompaddock
8pm Live Tonight: The Working Group with Simon Wilson, Ani O’Brien and Damien Grant
The Daily Blog
THE BIG DAY
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
What would Sumner say about Trump and Vance’s pro-tariff rhetoric?
Not PC
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
NZ media’s “propagandisation” of the US Election
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
US military-industrial-sports complex.
Kiwipolitico
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Where are the food carts?
Offsetting Behaviour
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d