Wednesday, 31 October 2012

Police will interview John Key, yeah right.

Will police interview John Key?

First this PR from the police via Green Party:

Police appoint senior team to look into illegal GCSB spying
Monday, 29 October 2012, 2:21 pm
Press Release: Green Party 
29 October 2012

Police have appointed a team of senior investigators to look into a Green Party complaint about the Government Communications Security Bureau’s illegal interception of Kim Dotcom’s communications, Green Party Co-leader Russel Norman said today.
Head of the ‘Operation Grey’ inquiry Peter Read, Detective Superintendent Southern, wrote to Dr Norman who laid the complaint under the Crimes Act.

DS Read expected an initial report on the findings mid-November.
“I am very pleased that senior police investigators have started inquiries and expect to make an initial report by November 15,” Dr Norman said.

“It is reassuring to know that police intend to interview key witnesses to get to the bottom of how a New Zealand resident was illegally spied upon.
“I hope they will interview senior police and Government ministers including Prime Minister John Key and his deputy Bill English, about their involvement,” Dr Norman said.

“Spies must be held to the same standards as other New Zealanders. They are subject to the laws of this land and must be held accountable by the police and the courts when they violate those laws.”

A QC has been appointed to provide independent oversight of the inquiry”. Ends

Sometime in the near future:

Our Eavesdropper in the PM’s office taped the following this morning and I thought that in the name of ‘openness and transparency’ I should share it with you as quickly as possible:

Two very, very senior police officers entered the PM’s office, they each wore name tags but their names had been covered over. Therefore I will name them as Cop 1 and Cop 2. After showing both into the PM’s office I switched on the hidden microphone and this is what I heard:

“Thank you for seeing us so quickly Prime Minister”, said Cop 1.
“Sure no bother, I’ve got a few minutes before I take off on my monthly holiday”, uttered the PM.
“You are not going overseas are you PM”, asked Cop 2.
“Well actually I am”, the PM replied.
‘Where”, said Cop 1.
Hawaii” said the PM.
“Himmm”, said Cop 2.
“We would like to ask you some questions relating to the behaviour of your GCSB, is that OK, asked Cop 1.
“I’m sorry old-chap, but I’m not allowed to answer any questions about the GCSB but if there is anything else I can help you with I’d be glad to assist”, said the PM.
“Oh I think in this case you can answer because we have been ordered from the highest level to seek answers to key questions about the GCSB and its operation regarding Kim Dotcom and we as we understand it you are the boss of the GCSB”, muttered Cop 2.
“I’m sorry but my job description doesn’t allow me to discuss the inner workings of the GCSB”, it’s a very secret organisation, said the PM.
“And who the hell wrote your job description”, said Cop 1 sounding like he was playing the bad cop role.
“I did”, so I can’t use the excuse, I can’t remember now can I”, said the PM.
“No I suppose not, so not much point then in conducting this interrogation, we might as well bugger off and let you get away on your no doubt well deserved monthly R and R break”, said Cop 2 playing the good cop role.

“No hang on a minute, I think I can help you out, what say I write some questions to myself, then answer them myself, and then leave the answers on the table, then I’ll go and get a coffee and while I’m out you can quickly read my questions and answers, how does that sound”, said the PM, adding it’s the way we used to do it on Wall Street when the regulators called, so if its good enough for Wall Street it should be good enough for little old Noo Zealand.

“You sound American”, said Cop 1.
“Well I’m not, I was born in Christchurch, lived in a State House and all that stuff, but I could end up living in the US a couple of years from now…well I’ll write my Q and A then I’ll duck out to the smoko room for a coffee. OK.

After a short period the PM left his office.

“Are you sure this is legal”, said Cop 2.
“I don’t really know, but I suppose we could call him a police secret undercover agent who is passing us information, that way we would have conducted this interrogation without having to reveal his actual identity”, said Cop 1.
“I think we ort to ring our boss and find out if that’s OK, we don’t want another Red Devils stuff up, who needs DI Wormald and Greg O’Connor on our backs”, said Cop 2.
“Lets read what the PM wrote, we’ll do it together”, said cop 1.

After a few minutes of total silence the two policemen burst out of the PM’s office and rushed out the main door…As the PM still hadn’t returned our Eavesdropper ducked into the PM’s office and saw the paper on the table, he had a quick read and photo-copied the page all before the PM returned. This is what he read…

To Whom It May Concern:


1. Does the PM know Kim Dotcom: Answer: Not until the raid, when I heard his name on TV3. Anyone who says anything else is a liar and a traitor and doesn’t love Noo Zealand.

2. Did the PM know that the GCSB was illegally spying on Dotcom: Answer: No way! the PM never knows about anything illegal. I’ve since learned that the GCSB was the Government Communications Security Bureau and they work closely with our good friends in the USA. And since I’ll need a US work permit in a couple of years I never asked any questions of the GCSB, the SIS or the police, but I did ask Hillary Clinton what she thought…and she thought I should continue knowing nothing.

3. Has the PM ever held any discussions with the head of the GCSB: Answer: Not really, I know he is short and chubby but I can barely remember his name. I may have seen the odd report from him but to the best of my ability I can’t remember any

5. What action will you take if our findings are negative: Answer: Lower the salaries of all police staff above the rank of Detective Inspector by at least 20%. And make…Crusher Collins Minister of Justice and John Banks Minister of Police. And if your findings are strongly negative I may make the Police a part of the Social Welfare Ministry under Paula Bennett and without a doubt she’ll make police take weekly drug tests.

But if you produce a favourable report clearing me of any blame for the bloody stupid [but welcomed] behaviour of the GCSB I’ll get you free passes to Sky City Casino and the next All Blacks test.

Signed: XX Your dear friend and employer…I have already forgotten what I wrote, and God bless America and Noo Zealand…PM’s Q and A note ends.

PS: I have removed all the bad language to protect the elderly and those who believe in God of what ever version or greed.

I have also sent a copy of this to the Police Complaints Authority but I’m not expecting a reply or acknowledgment for about two years and after the 2014 election.


Sunday, 28 October 2012

One law for all...

Detective Inspector Grant Wormald

One Law for All…yeah right

What is happening to our police force? Have they been watching too many American movies, too many pulp television programmes?
Sometime back they raided a peaceful village and arrested heaps, but it was found that they broke the law and had to drop the rigged up charges against all but four now known as ‘The UREWERA 4’.

Then they had yet another brain failure and mounted a helicopter military style assault on a NZ resident who had just paid ten millions dollars to the government and who lived in the Prime Ministers electorate and was a good buddy to John Banks an ex police minister who asked for and received fifty thousand dollars from the very same chubby German settler. In the best US Hollywood style the police, with FBI assistance smashed their way in, and armed to the teeth dragged his pregnant wife outdoors…all in the name of Justice peace and good will…and of course US goodwill…

The legal outcome was yet another round of idiotic law breaking by the police, the FBI, the GCSB and the National Party lost its memory.

The GCSB put their secret agent out to work in his garden after the Prime Minister called him a ding-a-ling… but the police had bigger stuff ups yet to be unfolded by their dapper sleuth par excellence DI. Wormald.  

And the man who led the police in this stuffed up operation; Detective Inspector Grant Wormald a name to remember wasn’t long in hitting the headlines yet again..

Detective Inspector Grant Wormald was also accused by Dotcom's lawyers of giving misleading evidence. But wait there is more for this very same DI Grant Wormald organised what I believe will be the biggest police stuff up since the Allan Arthur Thomas jack up. Below is a press release [in italics] from the NZP HQ. My comments in bold:

Statement on Red Devils investigation
Thursday, 25 October 2012, 6:33 pm
Press Release: New Zealand Police 
Statement on Red Devils investigation

Statement from Assistant Commissioner (Investigations) Malcolm Burgess:

Police will reassess aspects of undercover operations following the judgment in the High Court in Nelson yesterday involving the Red Devils gang.

This means the police will decide if they have broken the law, is that legal?

At the time police arrested an undercover officer involved in the investigation into the Red Devils we understood we were acting on the authority and approval the Chief District Court judge.
The High Court has since reviewed this aspect of the operation and found that the actions of police were a breach of the court process.

Breaching court process…according to the police is not breaking the law…yeah right.
We are reviewing our processes to ensure this does not happen again.
However we are discussing our legal options for an appeal against the stay of proceedings given the serious allegations of offending by the Red Devils.
Now for the public relations spin:

Our staff works tirelessly every day, at times involving personal risk, to keep communities safe from serious criminal offending. The undercover programme is an integral part of those efforts to investigate serious organised crime and those who operate outside the law. It is difficult and often dangerous work.
Police are absolutely committed to ensuring the programme operates in a way which puts offenders before the courts while operating within the law.

How come you charged a police undercover agent, found him a lawyer, put him in front of a judge and had him lie during the process…and you still claim to respect the law?

Our review of processes will ensure we do not put police or the courts in this position again. Police appreciate that there is a high level of public and media interest in the details surrounding this case. However, given that Police are considering options for an appeal, we will not comment further at this time.

But wait there is more…from the Police Association President Greg O’Connor, he is the police’s chief union representative…his main role is to defend the indefensible. Sometime back the police association had the tough job of defending a bunch of organised rapists [Brad Shipton and Bob Schollum] who terrorized a victim…thank god he failed, had he succeeded rape could have become a police weapon in the fight against violent crime. Here is a part of his press release [italics]: It is a superb piece of public relations spin: My comments are in bold.  

Throwing out charges punishes public, not Police
Wednesday, 24 October 2012, 4:49 pm
Press Release: Police Association 
For Immediate Release
24 October 2012

Throwing out charges punishes public, not Police
The High Court’s decision to stay prosecution of 21 alleged serious organised criminals is disproportionate and unjustified, and the public will be the real losers from the decision, Police Association President Greg O’Connor said today.

So breaking the law is now OK is it Greg?

The High Court made its ruling because Police had arrested and charged in Court one of its own undercover operatives, in a ruse to strengthen his background cover story amongst the gang members.

So Greg was this undercover agent going to go to prison and carry on his undercover duties?

“Police acted in good faith when taking these measures to protect the agent’s life, and acted with the knowledge and agreement of the then-Chief District Court Judge, Russell Johnson, in doing so. This included following his advice not to inform the local Nelson District Court of the ruse. To have the Court now effectively change its mind is a slap in the face for the agent who put his life on the line for over a year,” Mr O’Connor said.

As it is understood now the Chief District Court Judge did no such thing, which is correct you or the judge…

“Organised crime is serious business. It is a business which its perpetrators may kill to protect. The subterfuge in building a criminal record for the undercover operative was necessary to reduce the very real risk to his life.”
The decision to stay proceedings against the 21 members and associates of the Hells Angels feeder gang, the Red Devils, was also disproportionate and unjustified, Mr O’Connor said.

Is not police crime a serious business, should the police be allowed to break the laws they are sworn to uphold?

“The fact the agent had an artificially constructed back-story did not cause, encourage or enable anyone to offend. They were allegedly doing that anyway. All it did was allow the undercover agent to move in their circles more safely in order to gather evidence. It is unjustified and disproportionate to throw out the charges against alleged serious organised criminals solely because the High Court now takes offence at the subterfuge involved in constructing a credible cover story for the undercover agent.

Are you saying that your undercover agent didn’t commit crimes while he was embedded within the gang…what did he do sit around and read a book!
“In the High Court’s rush to punish Police, they are really punishing the public, who will now see 21 individuals escape trial for alleged serious organised criminal offending, and be left free to carry on their activities. The Red Devils gang will be empowered by this decision and the good people of Nelson will now have to put up with the consequences,” Mr O’Connor said.

I’ll leave the last word on this issue to others…its hard not to agree with them. Police are meant to uphold the law…not ignore it or break it.

Senior police who committed a "fraud" on the court system by faking the prosecution of an undercover officer were bordering on committing criminal acts themselves, legal experts say.
Head of the Canterbury University Law School, Chris Gallavin, said the police actions were "bloody ridiculous".
"It's absolutely abhorrent police would go to such lengths. I can't understand where the police were coming from – it shows naivety in the extreme. I think the court's been quite generous to say there's been no bad faith."

Throwing the charges out was entirely proper, with such a massive abuse of process. "I'd go so far as to say the officers were on the precipice of committing criminal acts."

Auckland University law professor Warren Brookbanks said police had acted "very, very inappropriately. The clear message is it went beyond their brief." 

Police have been left embarrassed by two judges in separate cases throwing out charges against up to 28 Red Devil bikie gang members.

A judge yesterday halted drugs and firearms charges against 21 people because the police staged a fake arrest of an undercover cop. Justice Simon France ruled that the police's actions were "a fundamental and serious abuse of the court's processes".

The decision puts the Organised and Financial Crime Agency of New Zealand in the firing line again after the controversial raid on the home of internet tycoon Kim Dotcom.

In a second case involving the Red Devils another judge was so concerned about a raid on club premises that he threw out charges against 28 people. Many are among the accused whose charges were dismissed yesterday.

The swoop on a barbecue at the Red Devils Motorcycle Club in Nelson was part of a two-year bid to snare gang members. About 50 people were at the August 2010 function and police suspected liquor laws were being broken.

However, in July this year Judge Chris Tuohy ruled out evidence because it was "improperly obtained" through "a series of breaches of the defendants' rights, some of which were significant infringements".

Officers had obtained search warrants to search the property but not individuals. After finding a small amount of drugs, they searched the party guests. Judge Tuohy said entry was "unlawful and unreasonable" as police chain sawed through fences despite being let through the front gate.

All 28 faced a charge of being on an unlicensed premise.

In the damning judgment issued yesterday, Justice France ordered a stay of proceedings in the prosecutions of 21 people arrested as part of Operation Explorer.

Undercover cop Michael Wiremu Wilson had infiltrated the Red Devils. Police faked a search warrant for a lockup he was renting in May 2010 and "found" stolen property and cannabis paraphernalia. Wilson was arrested and prosecuted - his true identity unknown to the judge, lawyers and court staff.

Earlier this year two officers told the High Court at Nelson they followed protocol by approaching then chief district court judge Russell Johnson, now dead.

Justice France later found the protocol was written after the fake prosecution, and guidelines at the time actually stated: "The police must not allow an arrested agent to appear under a fictitious name without the permission of the court. Deceiving the court is not permitted."

So much for Greg O’Connor and his spinning press release and the rumour that Garth McVicar of the Sensible Sentencing Trust is to become the head of the police compliance team…  

Saturday, 27 October 2012

Some Patsy Questions

Ian McKelvie leading drone...

These individuals each receive around a hundred and fifty thousand dollars per year as members of parliament [with small capitals]…

They are the gun fodder of the National Party. Ministers write their questions, their task is to ask them, to the very same people who wrote them, beat that for honesty.

It’s a heartless task but a well rewarded one. Their first role is to make Minister’s look intelligent, bold and decisive. In most cases that is impossible because very few are intelligent, bold or decisive. They could be called ‘Drones’.

It is the nature of drones to act like drones and they do. Take a look at a typical question time input from National Party drones, these were asked on the 24th and 25th of October 2012:

DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) to the Minister of Finance: What measures has the Government taken to support families through the global financial crisis? [Does Bennett not know the answer to this inane question?]

David Bennett: How much will the Government invest this year in programmes that support New Zealand families?

KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister for Economic Development: What is the Government doing to encourage businesses to invest, and grow jobs? [Does Singh Bakshi not know this, surely he must be joking]

Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) to the Minister for Social
Development: What changes will the White Paper for Vulnerable Children make to better support professionals working with children? [Good God haven’t you read the bill before it hit the floor of parliament]

Nikki Kaye: How much is the Government spending on improving community facilities in greater Christchurch? [It was in the ministers press release Nikki, don’t you read your local paper]

Dr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister for ACC: How will the Government improve accidental injury outcomes for under-six-year-olds? [What a stupid question, do you think they will provide playpens?]

On this day the government knew that the opposition parties were in attack mode over the behaviour of the Prime Minister about his sudden memory losses about the GCSB, Kim Dotcom, voting over the drinking age and general matters of performance. This being the case they used question time to get out some good news.

Even a quick glance over the questions listed above shows a pattern, the first was ethnic use.

It’s well known that Maori don’t vote National and with past leaders like Don Brash and supporters like John Banks and Act you can’t blame Maori for ignoring National Candidates.

So National fills this vacuum with other Ethnic groups via their list seats. On this particular day they called on their ethic drones to ask questions, written by ministers to those very same ministers. The Indian, Chinese and Pacifica groups all got their turn on Wednesday and like drones they asked their patsy questions along with a few supplementary questions.

I don’t doubt that Dr Jian Yang, Sam Lotu-liga and Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi are capable of writing their own questions but they are simply not allowed for if they did then some honesty might be required in answers to those questions.

The next day saw other drones take a turn

LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō) to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government’s infrastructure programme contributing to building a more competitive economy?
[Surely that question would be best suited to the Minister of everything Steven Joyce…well it was because Bill English was away as is normal on a Thursday…so Steven Joyce answered for him and no doubt wrote the question…shame on you Louise]

IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made to review Child Youth and Family’s complaints process?
[That’s a silly question Ian, everyone knows she will simply release the info via the internet and hope for the best…you should stick to asking patsy questions about sheep, cows and other various other farm animals human questions are out of your range]

I think that is enough examples of the National Drone team in action to make my point.

No doubt these drones will continue to buzz at question time. Like worker bees they will automatically ask their patsy questions and get patted to the head by the Queen bee. With a bit of luck they may get rewarded, regardless we should keep a close eye on them because we are paying for these insect style behaviours…and it is not cheap

Thursday, 25 October 2012

People power wins in Palmerston North

People power wins in Palmerston North.

The PNCC voted to keep Wards so the spirit of Dr Brian Booth who passed away some months ago was still present as various submitters argued for the retention of the Ward System and their argument was persuasive and the councillors voted eight to four in favour of wards. This was a complete reversal of earlier votes.

Of those making verbal submissions [19] only one argued clearly for across the city voting, that submitter [Chettleburgh] suggested that there was little cost difference for candidates and that a hundred word bio in the candidate booklet was all that was needed to get individual candidates message across. This submitters argument was strange, because he was elected to the Regional Council via their Ward system, because the PN City is treated as a Ward [one of five] under the Manawatu District Council voting system.

One other submitter [John Whitelock] wasn’t sure what he wanted other than that he wanted the rural based locations to be represented, but he did point out how successful his ward committee had been when it was in existence.

One submitter [Ian Ritchie] has written to all councillors stating:

“I was asked a question last night as to the difference between the spirit in Ashhurst and Fitzherbert.
After the submissions, John Whitelock, who had chaired the Fitzherbert Ward Committee, said that when the Ward Committee functioned there were some great discussions with attendance at meetings up to 90 – far more than Council meetings.
I think that says it all.
Wards and especially Ward Committees are very important on the ground, even for supposedly a collection of small, disparate communities as there were in Fitzherbert. Please reinstate them.
They are the life blood of good local government”,

For the record this is how the councillors and mayor voted on the issue:

  • For City wide voting [4]: Naylor [Mayor], Jefferies [Deputy Mayor] Nicky Guy and Bruce Wilson:

  • For Ward voting [9] : Barnett, Baty, Broad, Kelly, McCann, Meehan, Nixon and Utikere. Teo-Sherrell didn’t vote because of a conflict of interest [he had put in a submission] but he supports Wards.

  • Abstained: Linklater.

  • Absent at time of vote: Findlay

  • Failed to turn up for any of the submission hearings. Dennison

Total 16,

You can decide what each person’s reasons for voting the way they did, but in regard to:

Cr. Linklater abstaining this was odd; when one considers that he was pushing City wide voting through out the submission hearings.

Cr. Findlay being absent for the vote was most likely because he was in support of Wards but could not bring himself to vote against the Mayor.

Cr. Dennison’s absence from the total submission debate simply proves once again the wide gap between councillors regarding performance. Never the less, he most likely would have voted the same way as the mayor.

A key point to arise was the clear view that Councillors should live in the Ward in which they stand at the time of the election. This immediately means that local representation means just that. If once elected councillor’s change their location they can remain representing the ward they were elected in until the next election, then if they wish to stand they must do so in their new ward. That ensures true local representation and stops all the councillors from ending up in one Ward.

There are already strong moves to kick start the reformation of unofficial Ward Committees if you are interested in joining such a group, please contact me at or phone 359-2030.

Thursday, 18 October 2012

Is the National party broke


This from Bombers blog site:

In a sign of how desperate the National Party fundraising situation has become, National Party HQ has asked each of its MPs to cough up $30 000 each as a personal contribution to the National Party election war chest.

Any Journalist who doubts this should simply ask Judith Collins if the donation request is true because she apparently is the MP who is most angry about having to pay it.

As Manufacturers and Exporters leave National in droves towards any opposition Party who will change the free market economic environment they are trading in, Joyce's private crony capitalism model has locked out many businesses and pushed them into the arms of National's political enemies.

Hitting up their own MPs to the tune of $30k each shows how damaging National's status quo positioning has caused their ability to raise funds. I can also imagine many National MPs grumbling about contributing $30k when John Key has over $50million.

It will be interesting to see Judith Collins response to this.
National asks each of its MP’s to donate $30.000 to the party:

Blog ends:

After reading the above I immediately pulled together a team of eager young reporters to make contact with various National MP’s and support MP’s to seek comment on this issue.

We told them that: It has been revealed that the National Party is seeking or demanding that each individual national party MP, electorate and list member part with thirty thousand dollars to boost the party’s coffers. Here are their responses:

There is a strong rumour that both John Banks and Peter Dunne have been approached with a like request. John Banks is thought, but he can’t remember, to have approached Mr. Kim Dotcom suggesting that he might like to assist. Peter Dunne said he would approach the Labour Party and see if they would help him out, if he supported them after the 2014 election. The Maori party said they would do what ever John K their real leader told them to do.

Mr. Dotcom was not available for comment…nor was John Banks but a staff member out of his office thought that Mr. Banks most likely couldn’t remember. Peter Dunne was unavailable because he was at his hairdressers having his weekly perm.

Justice Minister Crusher Collins said she was most upset by the demand and would be speaking to her team of lawyers about the matter. This is simply blackmail and I won’t have a bar of it, she said when she received her invoice for $30.000 of her hard earned dollars. “This kind of behaviour was OK for the ACC but my own party…it’s just not on”, she said before slamming down the phone.

John Key, who is holidaying in Hawaii firstly said he hadn’t been informed about the fund raising effort, but then suggested that if any MP couldn’t afford the thirty thousand dollars he gladly give them a loan at 7.8% interest, repayable before the 2014 election.

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett said she would duck into her local WINZ office and pick up a few food grants so she could afford to pay her thirty thousand dollar bill in monthly installments.

Bill English said he was OK with the donation, because he’d claw it back during the next Treaty of Waitangi settlement.

The Speaker of the House Lockwood Smith informed this reporter that he was not asked to pay, but he would gladly pay if the PM approved his appointment as High Commissioner to London.

The MP for Rangitikei Ian McKelvie said that he’d have to sell a couple of bulls and put up his tenets rent but other than that he no real concerns, and he was far too busy practicing for his next patsy question in parliament to worry about such minor matters.

The Minister of Health Tony Ryall said he would borrow the money from Murray Georgel CEO of MCH rather that pay the PM’s 7.8%.

Steven Joyce Minister of everything said it was just not true; the thirty thousand was really just a donation toward the setting up of a National Party Charter School at the end of the highway to nowhere in 2015…that will lead to a brighter future for all…and it simply proves how much our MP’s love their country…they deserve a medal.


Friday, 12 October 2012

Spies Lies and Alibis

So it would appear that Prime Minister at his briefing on the illegal use of the GCSB in the Dotcom affair, saga, shambles, FBI operation was recorded on audio or video…and that he actually asked questions about Dotcom months before he said that he first heard about the chubby German multi-millionaire. It certainly appears that this shambles is starting to affect Nationals poll ratings.

In the world of counselling there is a code word used to describe the stages that people go through to handle problems. DABDA it represents denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. John Key is moving through those stages right now. Firstly he denied any knowledge; he showed his clear anger in parliament during question time. Then he went into bargaining mode when he pleaded that maybe he had forgotten, his anger has now turned to depression he avoids media questions like those posed by John Campbell on TV’s 3 Campbell Live. Acceptance of his failure firstly to get on top of job and secondly to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth is next.

The question now is did spies catch Key on tape talking about Dotcom? The New Zealand Labour Party and David Shearer appear to have information that he did. Key has reverted for the moment into denial mode yet again.

The Labour Leader on 11 October 2012 issued this Media Statement:

“Labour is calling on the Prime Minister and the Government Communications Security Bureau to confirm whether an audio-visual recording exists of John Key addressing staff at the agency during a visit on February 29th.

“Labour understands such a recording may exist and that it may show John Key referring to Kim Dotcom when speaking to staff.

“There is one way to clear this up. The Prime Minister should give the green light to the agency to release any and all unclassified material about the visit and John Key’s comments to staff.

“It was during the visit on February 29 that the Prime Minister was briefed by GCSB about their surveillance of Kim Dotcom. He claims to have no memory of that. Previously though, he had told New Zealanders that he did not know about the surveillance till September 17.

“The agency’s review of its handling of the Dotcom case says that ‘no written record was kept of the meeting’. But it is silent on whether any audio-visual record exists of the Prime Minister’s visit.

“What New Zealanders need to know is what happened on that day when he visited GCSB, whether the Prime Minister’s comments were caught on tape and whether he mentioned Kim Dotcom to staff.

“It’s time for the full facts to be put on the table. This goes to the heart of John Key’s credibility and whether he’s telling the truth to New Zealanders.

“I’m calling on GCSB to confirm whether that audio-visual material still exists. If it simply shows John Key addressing staff then it should be publicly released because it is unlikely to contain classified information.

“At the very least, the material must be handed over to the relevant authorities who are looking into the case. I have also today made a request to the GCSB under the Official Information Act for any such material.

“There is now no alternative but to have a full, independent inquiry. A series of in-house investigations won’t cut it. There are too many unanswered questions. That is damaging our reputation for open and honest government and New Zealanders’ confidence in our intelligence agencies,” said David Shearer.

Winston Peters has also made comment about the issue of Dotcom:

On the 9th October 2012 the New Zealand First Party Leader issued this;

PM’s Office Was Aware of Dotcom in July Last Year
The Prime Minister’s office knew about Kim Dotcom’s application to buy his Helensville-mansion in July 2011 according to evidence unearthed by New Zealand First.

The Prime Minister confirmed in reply to a written question from New Zealand First that his office knew about Dotcom in July last year.

“In July 2011 one of my staff was advised by Hon Simon Power's office by phone that Hon Simon Power was declining an OIO [Overseas Investment Office] application from Kim Dotcom.
“This information was not conveyed to me as it was routine,” Mr Key said in his written reply.

Rt Hon Winston Peters says the continual emergence of new evidence suggests the Prime Minister knew of Dotcom much earlier than January 19, 2012 – the date Mr Key claims he first became aware of his existence.

“How long can the Prime Minister continue to deny that he knew of Kim Dotcom before January 19 this year?

“His senior ministers knew of Dotcom, his Helensville electorate office knew of Dotcom, and now it emerges that the Prime Minister’s office also knew of Dotcom.”

Mr Peters says it is hard to fathom how Mr Key can claim that he didn’t need to know about Dotcom’s application to buy a mansion in his own Helensville electorate because it was “routine”.

“Routine is about the last word you’d use when it comes to describing anything to do with Dotcom. Love him or hate him, he is a larger than life figure.

“And why would Mr Power relay the information to the Prime Minister’s office if it wasn’t for the consumption of the Prime Minister?

“Mr Key’s involvement in the whole fiasco stinks like a sweaty Hobbit’s armpit in summer,” says Mr Peters

 Is this affecting Nationals standing in the polls…it would appear so


This latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll on voting intention was conducted by telephone with a NZ wide cross-section of 827 electors from September 24 – October 7, 2012. Of all electors surveyed 4% (down 0.5%) didn’t name a party.: October 10, 2012

Today’s New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows a fall in support for Prime Minister John Key’s National Party to 41.5% (down 2% since September 10-23, 2012) — this is the lowest support for National since John Key won Government at the 2008 New Zealand Election. Support for Key’s Coalition partners has changed with the Maori Party 1.5% (down 1%), ACT NZ 0.5% (unchanged) and United Future 0.5% (up 0.5%).
Support for Labour is 33.5% (up 0.5%); Greens are 13.5% (up 2%), New Zealand First 6.5% (up 1.5%),

If a National Election were held today this New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll says a combined opposition of Labour/ Greens & New Zealand First would be favoured to form a new Government.
The latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Government Confidence Rating is down 4pts to 106 with 44% (down 3.5%) of New Zealanders saying New Zealand is ‘heading in the right direction’ compared to 38% (up 0.5%) that say New Zealand is ‘heading in the wrong direction’.

“Today’s New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows Prime Minister John Key’s National (41.5%, down 2%) falling further behind a combined Opposition of Labour (33.5%, up 0.5%); Greens (13.5%, up 2%) and New Zealand First (6.5%, up 1.5%); A total of 53.5% (up 4%).

“This is the highest share of the vote held by these three Opposition parties for six years since October 2-15, 2006 (53.5%) when Labour was in Government in coalition with NZ First.

“Also concerning for Key will be second straight fall in the Roy Morgan Government Confidence Rating — now at 106 (down 4pts) — and at its lowest since Key’s election in November 2008 with only 44% (down 3.5%) of New Zealanders saying New Zealand is ‘heading in the right direction’.”

Electors were asked: “If a New Zealand Election were held today which party would receive your party vote?”
This latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll on voting intention was conducted by telephone with a NZ wide cross-section of 827 electors from September 24 — October 7, 2012. Of all electors surveyed 4% (down 0.5%) didn’t name a party.

Wednesday, 10 October 2012



National has found the answer to all our economic woes…it will put us in surplus by 2014…It will lead the way to a brighter future…it will feed our kids…its called tough love National Style for youth aged 16 to 19. Production will boom and thousands will find employment under this new and progressive policy. The policy title is ‘cut wages’.

They introduced the first step in this outstanding development at budget time, by taxing paper boys and girls now they have taken the next step in their master plan lowering the wages for teenagers. There is one common linking point in this master plan…most of these selected people don’t or can’t vote.

Kate Wilkinson the Minister of Labour who can’t accept that the rape of a woman is unsocial behaviour and that Mike Tyson [a convicted rapist] should be allowed into the country as a real life model for our youth… has done it again! She has shot herself in the foot.

Ms Wilkinson said the new starting-out wage [$10.80 per hour] was the latest in a series of steps to help get more New Zealanders into jobs in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis.

In a press release of over 560 words she never once actually stated what the hourly rate was…I don’t think she actually knows. Or cares…She sounds like a good ACT member from way back in the nineteen eighties or even the eighteenth century, from whence she came.
John Banks and his ten member party must be rolling in their gold sleeping bags. John Banks and his weird dream of ripping off the bennie brigade must surely have now reinvigorated his memory cells. No doubt he feels he needs to have yet another cup of tea with his old buddy John [forget-me-not] Key.  

According to Kate Wilkinson three groups will be eligible unless they are training or supervising others:

· 16- and 17-year-olds in their first six months of work with a new employer
· 18- and 19-year-olds entering the workforce after more than six months on benefit
· 16- to 19-year-old workers in a recognised industry training course involving at least 40 credits a year.

Would you or I want to be eligible for a pay cut! From $13.50 down to $10.80 and you know who decides if you are eligible or not…the employer…who has the most to gain, beat that for stupidity. And that strange crowd ACT on CAMPUS supports this rip-off; of course it won’t affect them because mommy or daddy will pay…Wilkinson ended her PR dribble by saying:

The starting-out wage is another initiative to help more young people into jobs,” Ms Wilkinson says.
The starting-out wage is due to come into force from 1 April 2013.

ACT as is normal put out a press release via a blog site, John Banks now releases no press releases unless he has permission from ACT on campus two members: National writes his press releases. Here is a small part of it:

ACT has campaigned for the re-establishment of a youth minimum wage since Labour and the Greens abolished it. In 2010, we introduced the Minimum Wage (Mitigating Youth Unemployment) Amendment Bill which would have reintroduced the capacity to establish differential minimum wages for those aged 16-17. Not one party in Parliament, aside from ACT…voted for this.

Naturally the employers and Business NZ front men spoke in favour of the wage cuts, and dribbled on about helping unemployed youth…they said nothing about older workers who would be tossed out to make way for what could be called ‘Youth slave labour’…

MANA Leader and MP for Te Tai Tokerau Hone Harawira released the following”

More Youth to Pack for Australia
Tuesday 9th October 2012
“Today’s announcement by the government to lower the pay rate for 16-19 year olds will result in only one thing – more of our youth packing their bags for Australia in search of higher wages” says MANA Leader and MP for Te Tai Tokerau Hone Harawira.
“People can’t even live on the minimum wage of $13.50 an hour. How the hell can the government expect anybody to live on just over $10 an hour? No wonder this country is experiencing new levels of poverty”.
“This policy is nothing but slave labour. I bet money-hungry businesses will lay off older staff and take on new, younger employees. Those businesses will give Key a slap on the back with a fat donation for the next election for increasing their bank balances through lower wages”.
“A society that doesn’t care for its young has no future. That will be the legacy of this government”.

Now you may disagree with Hone Harawira’s comments but as someone who is very close to those on very low incomes he understands the lot of the very low paid. Everyone must ask the question, can you live on $13.50 per hour and if your answer is only with great hardship, then the situation must become worse if you are on $10.80.  

Labour Leader David Shearer and Darien Fenton released the following statement on this issue: 09 October 2012 Low wage future no future at all

“National's plan to pay young Kiwis low wages will just see them saving up their $10 an hour for a plane ticket to Australia, says Labour Leader David Shearer.
"Under National's watch, 65,158 young Kiwis aged between18-30 have headed to Australia looking for better jobs and opportunities – 21,733 this year alone. Paying lower wages will just drive more of them offshore”.

The Labour Leader had more to say on employment in general and lifted the debate to include the bigger picture. And for once moved pass the conception stage, but still was soft on what he intends, or the party intends to do in the short term:

“Labour has real ideas that will make a difference. We will pay employers the equivalent of the dole to take on apprentices, raise the minimum wage, create a world-class education system, foster innovation through research and development tax breaks, and tackle the high dollar by changing monetary policy and encouraging investment in the productive sector through a capital gains tax”.

Darien Fenton, Labour's spokesperson on Labour issues, said the following:

“The reintroduction of youth rates just confirms that John Key's focus is on cutting wages rather than job creation.
"Paying young workers less just shows how bankrupt of ideas the Government is when it comes to tackling unemployment and creating secure, decent jobs.
"Cutting young people's pay is just the tip of the iceberg. Changes to labour laws are also going to hit Kiwi workers hard and make it harder to get fair wages.
"Kiwis are worried about job security and stagnating wages. They want smart new ideas not failed policies from the past,"

The Green Party through its Co-leader Metiria Turei expressed its view on the reduction of wages for our young people. Once again it is difficult to disagree with their balanced view. Here is what Metiria said:
The National Government thinks the way forward for New Zealand is to give young workers a pay cut, Green Party Co-leader Metiria Turei said today.
The National Government today announced it would return youth rates. Youth rates will allow employers to pay less than the minimum wage to many young workers, including those starting new jobs or going to work after being on a benefit.
"National's proposal to reintroduce pay rates for young workers is simply another mechanism to deliver cheaper labour to employers and is discriminatory," said Mrs. Turei.
Rather than offering young people a bright future, through skills and training, youth rates are about undercutting all workers’ wages by ripping off young workers.
"Rather than offering young people a bright future, through skills and training, youth rates are about undercutting all workers' wages by ripping off young workers.
"The most disgraceful part of National's attack on young workers is that they are effectively increasing the age limit for what constitutes a 'youth'.
"The previous discriminatory policy of youth rates at least stopped at 18," said Mrs. Turei.
"Now, under the John Key Government, those under 20 who have been on a benefit for more than six months will find that any job they may get could pay significantly less than the minimum wage.
"This policy is an incentive for bad employers to hire and fire young workers and is likely to see real wages for young workers drop significantly," Mrs. Turei said.

So there it is…the parties I could find no comment from were the government support parties, the Maori Party and United Future. I failed to find anything from NZ First: