Who set-up Clayton Cosgrove?

The Press release was issued by TV3...

'The Nation'
Clayton Cosgrove
Interviewed by RACHEL SMALLEY
Rachel Friday afternoon we got a statement from Mike Dormer at Independent Fisheries who was prepared to give us some answers despite his legal advice. First he pointed out that Independent Fisheries started discussing the issue of land near Christchurch Airport with Clayton Cosgrove in 2008 with a large number of other landowners. Second he said the Christchurch Airport Protection Bill was not initiated by Independent Fisheries, nor did it make any payments to Clayton Cosgrove in connection with that bill. Independent Fisheries also told us it has a long history of funding political parties and doesn’t put any preconditions on funding support, and no preconditions were placed on the support provided to Clayton Cosgrove's campaign. Clayton Cosgrove is with us this morning, thank you for coming in Mr Cosgrove.
Rachel Why did you accept a donation from Independent Fisheries after you drafted that bill, knowing that Independent Fisheries stood to financially benefit from it, if it went through.

Clayton Cosgrove – Labour MP
Well let's cut to the chase. What TV3 has just accused me of is that I accepted donations in return for proposing legislation that Independent Fisheries would have benefited from if that legislation had gone through. So Rachel my question to you is – is that the accusation that TV3 is making?
Rachel We've made no accusations at all. Did you though accept a campaign donation from Independent Fisheries knowing that they would ultimately financially benefit from this bill that you had drafted?
Clayton Yes I accepted campaign donations from Independent Fisheries and I've accepted campaign donations from a variety of people of all sorts of persuasions. My bill though, what your story doesn’t talk about would have benefited literally hundreds of people from Kaiapoi to right down northwest Christchurch, because what it would have done is got their property rights back for them, not just Independent Fisheries. I represented over a 100 people, constituents, as a Member of Parliament, collectively, not individually, to enable them to get their property rights back.
Rachel Did you have any discussions with Mike Dormer or Independent Fisheries about the issues that they were facing at the Airport, before you drafted that?
Clayton Mr Dormer told me that he'd bought some land, the company had bought some land I think in August 2008. He told me that when I held a public meeting in August 2008, which about a 100 landowners mostly from Christchurch, all had the same issue, and that’s why I was aware of it. But again Rachel you seem to be coming back to accusing me of taking a donation for proposing legislation for a company so they'd have a beneficial interest. This legislation would have benefited probably hundreds of land owners, mum and dads, B&Bs, entities and organisations, right through Kaiapoi and right down at the northwest side of Christchurch.
Rachel Mr Dormer said, the CEO of Independent Fisheries, he said – he told the press, and I'm just confirming the date here, on June 24th, that he thought the bill was quote "outstanding". He said that on June 24th 2009. In June you said you were drafting the bill.
Clayton I'll just check my chronology. I announced I'd prepared that bill in June 09, it went into the ballot in July 09, and it was announced publically, and I talked to a lot of landowners right across Christchurch. In fact when I announced that I was doing this I got people from all over Christchurch, even outside my electorate, who were in the same boat, and again I come back to it. Your question seems to be again Rachel accusing me of taking a donation in direct relation in return for legislation that a company would have benefited by. Is that true, because that legislation would have created a win for all those people, and by the way Christchurch International Airport. It was a unique moment in politics where everybody would have won by this.
Rachel The bill you were drafting as you said in June 2009, that’s the same month that Mike Dormer said he thought it was outstanding.
Clayton Well a lot of people said it was outstanding actually.
Rachel Why would he be familiar with it at that stage?
Clayton Because everybody was familiar with the proposal that I had. I talked to mayors of the then Mayor of Makariri, Councillors about it, the idea I had that we could say to landowners if you release your land, if we can release your land and noise is not an issue, the Airport gets total security, and landowners who had had their property rights taken away from them, would have had that land released.
Rachel Did you ask Independent Fisheries for a donation?
Clayton No.
Rachel Did Independent Fisheries in those discussions that you had about the bill, did they ever suggest that they would make a donation?
Clayton No and I've never accepted a donation with any preconditions and I have never been offered a donation with any preconditions. Independent Fisheries by the way, and Mike Dormer who is a hugely respected business person, philanthropist, donate to charities, many political parties, and by the way they donate heavily to the National Party.
Rachel Okay did they ever raise with you the issue that they may consider donating to your campaign?
Clayton No.
Rachel Okay, what contact did you have with Mr Dormer, or any executives for that matter from Independent Fisheries between June 2009 when you drafted the bill, and November of that same year?
Clayton Oh Mr Dormer and I are old friends, we go back about 12 years. He's a friend of my family, I know his family well. He's a respected person, I'm proud to say I'm a mate of his. I had discussion with all landowners. We set up a group of landowners across the board who had legal support, some who didn’t. I was leading negotiations on behalf of over a 100 constituents with the International Airport and others, for years on this.
Rachel So do you meet this man socially?
Clayton Yes. I'm proud to say I do.
Rachel And do you have discussions about the issues that he was facing at the Airport?
Clayton I've had discussions with all the landowners and Mr Dormer of course.
Rachel Because you drafted the bill in 2009.
Clayton I'll just say this Rachel. These questions are interesting because again you seem to be coming back to accusing me of taking a donation from a company to draft legislation. I said that is not true.
Rachel Okay and we take that, and that is on the record. You’ve said that you’ve had contact with them from June 2009 when you drafted the bill, and then November of that same year. On the 3rd of November that year, Independent Fisheries made a donation, how much was that donation on November 3rd.
Clayton On the 3rd of November, if I can check my chronology, 3rd November $2,500.
Rachel $2,500 okay. Were you surprised by receiving a donation?
Clayton No.
Rachel No surprise whatsoever, okay.
Clayton I received donations from all sorts of people throughout the parliamentary term.
Rachel Did you realise there was the potential though for a conflict of interest knowing that Independent Fisheries wanted that area of land, so they could develop it and get over the hurdles they were facing at the Airport? Did you recognise there was a conflict of interest then that somebody stood to financially benefit? Was donating to your campaign, when you were putting forward a bill…
Clayton And by the way, I have declared all those donations. That’s something that’s failed in your story. The reason we're talking about this now actually, and quite rightly you're questioning me and that is appropriate, is that I was transparent and open and declared every donation as the law required appropriately. In fact in my last electoral donation I declared donations I didn’t have to, I even declared the wood for my hoardings. So that is open.
Rachel Okay, let's come back to this scenario here. Did you recognise there was a conflict of interest though by this donation coming through.
Clayton There would have been a conflict of interest from any person, and I have people donate money to me in support from all political persuasions. There would be a conflict of interest if it came with preconditions, and by the way every MP receives donations. There would be a very bad look and a lack of judgement if those donations were hidden and not declared. There is transparency here, and the reason you can question me is because I declared them.
Rachel Sure, in 2011 you received another donation from Independent Fisheries, how much was that?
Clayton Fifteen thousand dollars.
Rachel Okay in total you received $17,500 from Independent Fisheries.
Clayton All declared.
Rachel Yes absolutely. That is the third largest donation from one company to any individual MP. It's a sizeable amount of money. Why do you think Independent Fisheries were so generous?
Clayton Well Independent Fisheries have had a history of donating to charities, and donating to political parties, they heavily fund the National Party. You'd have to ask them.
Rachel Why are they generous now though?
Clayton Well maybe, maybe, they’ve got a history of supporting me, maybe they think that I've worked my guts out for my constituents over 12 years, and maybe they think I'm a good MP, but again I ask you, your question leads me to believe that you are accusing me of taking money from a company in direct return for legislation. That is not true.
Rachel That’s not it at all. I'm trying to establish whether you think that there was a conflict of interest there?
Clayton No I don’t believe so because there was no preconditions. I've never accepted a donation in my life with preconditions, and one has never been offered to me in my life with preconditions, and of course Independent Fisheries as I say have funded the National Party heavily, they’ve already said to you that they don’t put preconditions on any of their donations.
Rachel You have said though it is a large donation as we've mentioned here. When it came in at that size, that last one 2011 of $15,000, so $17,500 did that not flag up to you though that there was a potential conflict of interest, because you came out and pushed ahead with that bill again.
Clayton No, actually that’s not true, that’s not true. The bill last went into the ballot on the 9th of September 2010. The donation as made on as you say in November. I wrote to Mr Brownlee on the 22nd of August on that year, because Mr Brownlee as your show shows, said he wanted land released, and I said here's an opportunity to do it. What this is about, the National Party have got their fingerprints all over this, they’ve been trying to shop this around for weeks. Can I just say this to you. Mr Brownlee a number of coincidences – in the court case he attaches a copy of my bill to his affidavit. Okay it's not about me or the Airport, your reporter just happens to be in the studio and Mr Brownlee just happens to be overseas ….
Rachel Front Page has had no contact with Jerry Brownlee.
Clayton Well the National Party have tried to shop this around and smear me and smear one of the most respected business people in the community, a person who has given money to the Salvation Army, supported youth groups. Mr Dormer does not deserve to be smeared and nor does Independent Fisheries. This is the old story. Mr Brownlee's backed into a corner in a court case where people are fighting for their property rights, and Mr Brownlee has decided he's going to lash out as has the National Party. It's a good old fashioned smear, and all these declarations, all these donations were declared openly, transparently and honestly as the law requires, and that’s why you can question me about them, as you should today.
Rachel And I appreciate you coming in and allowing us to do that. Clayton Cosgrove thank you for your time this morning.

New Political possiblities are growing.



LEN GALE A man of the people. 



A few thoughts from LEN GALE, aged 85, veteran of the 1951 Waterfront Lockout who turned up down at the Ports of Auckland picket line to help out earlier this year

On the Line

"You have to admire the men and women on the picket-line. Rain, hail, scorching sun and wind, they brave it all. A picket line is not just people standing on the curb waving flags and placards.

It is a mobile school room where past struggles are recalled and analyzed, strategy and tactics. Where friendships form across the trades and occupations. Where "outsiders" come to offer support and are welcomed with warm handshakes along the line.

Where overseas delegates come with money and pledges.

No scab loaded vessels at our ports! They offer up their union flags and Tee-shirts, symbols of international solidarity.

All day news comes from radios hooked into car batteries and from delegates returning from meetings and from the courts. One moment of relaxing the unions basic idea of justice and what we know in our culture as fair play and hard won conditions will evaporate.

Justice lies in the heart and soul of people everywhere and that is the port workers strength and trump card. What else motivates workers to hold out for so long?

The constant honking of horns and the occasional thrown kiss helps, it puts motorists on side and it sends a signal to the watchers on the port building balcony with their binoculars.

That we are here, on the line, and in good heart.".[Quote ends]

 

Today we are fighting the same battles, slowly but surely the government is removing the tools by which we can achieve common goals. Goals like Public Television, public ownership of vital services, a fair tax system, An ACC that does what we agreed when we gave away our right to sue. We know that collective action works, the Ports of Auckland is a example, the Talley's union bashing, and larger class sizes is yet another. The going will be tough the present government will pander to its donors, give soft loans {43 million dollars] to its friends along with huge tax reductions to its wealthy mates. More and more we are becoming like the USA where money can buy you anything, like pokie machines to rip money from the poor. Right at this moment the government is using the old fashioned but effective tool of finding scape goats to blame. People like solo mums and dads, the unemployed, the disabled have become their targets. New Zealanders want better, and they are proving by pouring out of the country at over a thousand a week.

 

New and progressive  political forces are assembling to refresh and revive the political landscape, The Mana Party is one of those who is giving representation to those who have lost their voice. The Labour party is slowly but surely repositioning itself closer to those it once stood tall with, its slow but it is happening.

Can Knights be un-knighted?



Can Roger Douglas be un-knighted? 



During the finial edition of the Backbenchers on TV 7 they showed a clip of Roger Douglas defending his mad policies of freeing up the banks and financial nutters of the day, he said, “That Wall Street failed because the US financial scene was too regulated”. I was totally stunned, and ashamed that such dribble could come from a guy who was knighted for service to NZ. And to think that he represented the NZ Labour Party made it doubly alarming but never the less that’s what he said. Today here in NZ those who leave college and attend University are lumbered with student loans that can be as high as sixty thousand dollars. Right at this very minute in time, students owe billions of dollars to the state, thanks to Roger Douglas. Most of our so-called blue chip investments in the deregulated finance market have gone down the drain, the housing bubble has burst and thousands are having great difficulty meeting their mortgage repayments especially if one of the house holders has lost their job and are trying to live on one wage. Why, because people have simply become too greedy, not needy but greedy. And now as was predicted we have needier and less wealthy but who have in fact become wealthier, beat that for stupidity. This government followed the mad Roger Douglas and gave massive tax cuts to millionaires and borrowed the money or taxed the needy to pay for it. That is a fact.

The mad financial dealers that took over Wall Street because of its deregulation are now the leaders of countries, the nutty Republican presidential candidate in the US is but one example of a billionaire who has great control over the media and may well buy his way into power using the money he has ripped off his fellow citizens. Money is power and power is money.

We here in NZ are led by a like model, and he is rich by NZ standards. [60 to 70 million], and what is his answer to our problems…sell off the family silver…exactly what Roger Douglas did. When will we ever learn? One thousand plus a week leaving for Australia or elsewhere says it all and they are not leaving because of what is happening in Greece, they are leaving because of what is happening here in New Zealand…and that is a fact.

The bankster world is much smaller than many realise and the same names keep appearing; names like Robert Rubin who was involved with trying to stop the Enron Bonds being down graded; Merrill Lynch [Key’s Bosses] were involved in an attempt by Enron to lie about the state of their company. A little while back John Key met with Timothy Geithner to discuss free trade, why? It makes me nervous when I see our PM so close to what are arguably the biggest Ponzi schemers of our time. We need to look carefully at the past behaviour of our leaders especially in the financial / banking or money trading area. We must stop repeating the same failed policies over and over again. Rod Oram says

“The developed world, including us, has at least another decade of wrenching adjustment to repair the damage done by the debt-fuelled boom during the 15 years or so to 2007” [Quote ends].

He is correct and we must not forget where John Key resided during those years and who his bosses were. They were his mentors, his guiding lights, they paid his bonuses and they didn’t pay him for nothing…sadly for all of us we are now paying for those massive Ponzi type scheme.

Dotcom Vs the FBI [NZPolice] explodes...

Whatever will this do to the Part-time PM’s dream of ultra close NZ / USA relations ?

Ian.

Is this fact or fiction...you decide.

Kim Dotcom ambled away from the High Court where he had just heard that his , search and seizure were illegal, and therefor his arrest was unjustified....

Behind close doors a very senior police boss known as Bob was chatting to an FBI Agent called agent X. When they heard the news that the outcome from the court was that the raid on Kim Dotcom’s home was totally illegal the tension in the room exploded…eavesdropper picked up on the conversation at this point.

Agent X said “Shit…

Bob [The NZ Cop] replied, “Christ”…

Agent X muttered, “I thought you said we were in the clear?

Bob, “Did I say that”…

Agent X, “Yeah you did, what the hell am I’m going to tell my controller?

Bob, “That’s up to you I’m more concerned with what I’m going to tell the PM”.

Agent X, said, “PM? Who the hell is that?

Bob, “The Prime Minister of New Zealand”

Agent X, You mean like the Governor?

Bob, “No, I mean like the President”.

Agent X, “You have direct contact to your President?

Bob, “Pretty much”

Agent X, The Judge, can you get to her?

Bob, “What do you mean?

Agent X, “You know have you got anything on the judge, when is she due for re-election?

Bob, “We don’t elect our Judges, we appoint them and they are incorruptible”.

Agent X, “Really man, that’s cool”.

Bob, “I reckon you ought to get out of the country or at least head back to your embassy”  

Agent X, “Why should I?

Bob, “I might have to arrest you”,

Agent X, “What the hell for Bob we are friends and you don’t arrest friends”.

Bob, “Sorry Agent X but one has to think of the future, I’ve got my career to think of”…

Unfortunately at this point my hearing aids ran out of battery power…. I’ll bring you more later…watch your back you never know who is watching you these days…

Another lecture on Maori...Yeah right..

Don Esslemont...

Don Esslemont took the opportunity of his Access Radio broadcast to yet again state his entrenched views on Maori, well not Maori actually, because in his view no Maori actually exist, what he means is part Maori.

To do this he took the present review of our constitution as his start point. And his explanation of it was in the best school masterly manner and I have no criticism of that part.

He stated that ‘No person in their right mind could claim that Maori exist because from 1940 [or some such date] all Maori are now part Maori”, or words to that effect.

In effect Don is suggesting that because no Maori now exist, issues like Maori seats in Parliament which are a part of our constitution should be removed from that constitution. Now if I hear Don correctly, he is not suggesting that we should ask those who consider themselves Maori if they wish to continue to do so…for Don has made that decision for them…so let’s now take that strange view one step further.

Just to set the scene; A Scottish settler fleeing persecution back home arrives in NZ back in 1940. He meets and falls in love with a young Maori woman; they marry and have two sons. The two sons in Dons view are now no-longer Maori, automatically and instantly because they are in his view Part Maori.

But on checking with the Father we find that because he married the woman of his dreams he wants to not only see his sons being Maori but he himself would prefer to be called Maori simply because his ill treatment as a part Scottish/English person who was so badly treated that he was driven out of his homeland and he is absolutely ashamed of his heritage. Now any logical and right minded person would see that: The Father could call himself a Scottish New Zealander and the Mother and Sons could call themselves Maori New Zealanders. That choice should be theirs…not Don’s.

Constitutions like the US model: meant little to the masses of human beings that were in the US even after the constitution was signed, because they continued to be enslaved, [authors of the constitution owned slaves], pushed off their land, raped and murdered in their thousands. If Don believes in One Law for all as he claims then he would accept the NZ model constitution that has served us well and has not led us down the track of race riots, slavery and or South African White style [English/Dutch] apartheid.

It was ironic that it was South African white racists who banned Maori from being a part of All Back teams. Didn’t they know that Maori didn’t exist during the 1950’s and 1960’s…they should have contacted Don before banning Maori; he could have explained to them the error of their ways. Have you noticed that Nelson Mandela didn’t ban whites from their national teams? A nice chap is that Nelson Mandela.

Where are these politicans...PART TWO

Where have all politicians gone Part two…well some of them anyway…

Parliament today [Wednesday the 20^th of June 2012] continued the debate on the committee stages of the Mixed Ownership Bill, better known as the selling off of State assets, or the family silver.

Some parties continued to hide and not bother to appear and represent their members the Act Party, United Future Party and the Maori Party, continued to stay away from the debating chamber. I’m not sure where Peter Dunne [UF] John Banks [AP] and Pita Sharples, Tariana Turia and Te Ururoa Flavell [MP] were but they were not in the chamber, that’s for sure.

It was suggested that Peter Dunne was hiding at home with all his doors locked watching the debate on TV. If he was he would have heard just what people were saying about his behaviour. Some MPs thought they should rename the Mixed Ownership Bill, The Peter Dunne Treason Bill, others had even stronger views, most of them were ruled out of order.

John Banks no doubt was hiding under a hedge, or bridge or bed somewhere...

It was suggested that the Maori Party be renamed, 'The Ghost Party' because their seats have remained empty for the entire debate, yet their votes supported the National Party in every closure motion and clause by clause vote. Yet they were not present other than as ghosts from some distant past age.



He was present: Hone Harawira, for Mana. 



Still one Maori stood up in the house and spoke for his electorate and that person was Hone Harawira, in a moving and forceful manner he spoke about water rights, Treaty of Waitangi rights that have been cast aside by the government in its mad desire to please it wealthy friends. He also talked about the future price rises that must come once the power companies have been privatised. And he voted against every clause and part of the bill…so he put his vote where it could do the most good. But most importantly he represented the people of Te Tai Tokerau and the Mana Movement, he was a leader and not a ghost, he was alive not dead.

Whereas: the Maori party ghosts even voted for the clause that diluted the Treaty of Waitangi, which in turn means that the Treaty will only apply to the so-called 51% owned by the government, which means that the Treaty will not apply to our energy companies at all. They sold out your assets, lock-stock and barrel.

There is still hope for the 'Save our Assets' petition sweeping the nation sponsored by the Greens, Mana, Labour, New Zealand First, has they tell me has reached 250.000. So if you have not signed yet do so…together we can stop the rot, stop the crooked future deals that will wreck our asset base…  

Missing politicians...if you know their whereabouts please let me know.

Sharples, Dunne, Banks and Boss Hog Key.

Where have all politicians gone…well some of them anyway…

Parliament today [Tuesday the 19^th of June 2012] started the debate on the committee stages of the Mixed Ownership Bill, better known as the selling off of State assets, or the family silver.

But some parties were missing, for example the Act Party, United Future Party and the Maori Party. Where was; Peter Dunne [UF] John Banks [AP] and Pita Sharples, Tariana Turia and Te Ururoa Flavell [MP].

They were no-where to be seen, were they all down with the flu, stuck in the traffic, snowed in, or were they sitting out back waiting for instructions from John Key and or Bill English because they too kept away from the debate. Have they all gone fishing or on a holiday to Hawaii, or to visit the Queen or are they simply scared of debate.

• One can accept that John Backs wouldn’t appear because he has been hiding ever since his run in with Kim Dotcom months ago.

• One could understand why Peter Dunne stayed hidden because his electorate would strip him bare and even give him a hair cut because his electorate doesn’t want the asset sales to process and his sole vote is allowing asset sales to proceed.

• The Maori Party members profess to be against the bill, but they have used their votes to allow to the government to win closure motions and therefore shut down debate.

They do vote against the bill but only when they know it won’t make a difference. They won’t stand up and argue for what they are against, this is shameful and they should be ashamed of themselves, the issue is more important than their ministerial salaries and BMWs. How can the voters have faith in them when they zip up their mouths and hide? That is not the Maori way especially when almost all their supporters are against the bill and have said so publicly.  

US jails its financial whiz kids...we knight them.

It could only happen in the USA, Allan Stanford a financial whiz-kid was jailed for one hundred and ten years [do people live that long?] for ripping off the system according to a court in the US. He received 40 years less than Bernard Madoff [pictured] who was jailed for 150 years for running a Ponzi scheme that most US financial giants used, and still do from most accounts, outfits like Merrill Lynch have all been fined millions and millions of dollars for offences not unlike that committed by Allan Stanford, who claimed that his bank did not use Ponzi schemes. He said “What was different was that I was not a part of the Wall Street crowd that took bailouts from the government to prop up their Ponzi type schemes”. He has a point; from his point of view it would seem that there is one law for some and another law for others. To my mind it simply proves how corrupt our financial system has become. Spain, Greece and Italy are all victims of a open slather Ponzi based corrupt corporate and international financial market systems that robs the poor to pay the rich, and we here in NZ are half way down the same track.

Stanford’s sentence must please the Sensible Sentencing Trust dream for NZ, but does it, because it’s not tough or outspoken on white collar crime…funny that don’t you think.

The Sunday Star Times letter of the week [June 17^th 2012] was named: “How not to set an economic example” And I quote: “It is interesting to observe the different reactions from world leaders to the current economic problems. France calls for a 30% cut for government members, plus a limit to CE salaries at 20 times that of the lowest paid employees. India decrees a ban on meetings in five star hotels, travel curbs, no new diplomatic posts and bans buying new vehicles.

Here National buys new BMWs, locks in ex-politicians’ and family members world travel perks, refuses to consider a reduction in MP numbers, and gives tax cuts to higher income earners. All this while forcing reductions in the public service; when are we going to get a government that leads by example?

David F Little [Whangarei]

David makes a valid point and one we should all take note of. It is absolutely ironic if not amazing that the regions richest leader should be asking the nation to tighten its belt to save the country while he continues to accept his one thousand plus dollar a week tax cut. After all part of the mess we are in is because of his past behaviour in an industry that has brought the world to its knees.

Pop stars or education.

This from TEU...

TEU tried to flood the Prime Minister’s live Tuesday afternoon chat on Stuff with insightful (or should that be inciteful?) questions about tertiary education policy and employment relations. But none of them made the cut. Instead, the Prime Minister was able to tell us he likes Katy Perry, the Eagles, and Hayley Westenra. We learnt he wears a Cartier watch and likes playing golf. And, luckily he answered a couple of queries about the student allowance scheme.

When Amy asked about the implications of removing access to the student allowance for postgraduate students John Key replied:

“The advice I have received is that on average the switch between student allowances and access to the student loan scheme will still enable students to complete post-graduate studies, albeit it will require them to repay this loan without interest. The research shows these students are likely to earn considerably higher wages over time.”

However, NZUSA president Pete Hodkinson disagrees with the Prime Minister’s relaxed attitude toward allowance changes.

At this stage, as with its recent class size debacle, the government has not provided any evidence showing how many people its new allowances policy will affect, and how.

“The government, in regards to effects on postgraduate students, simply hasn’t identified how many will actually be affected and what the likely implications will be. We believe the changes will limit access to education.”

“Many people have already started post-graduate qualifications with the expectation of support and it is being ripped away from them. Many more New Zealanders have been waiting to turn 24 before doing a post-grad qualification, expecting to receive support as they would no longer be barred due to the parental income threshold – what happens to them now?”

Pete Hodkinson says student teachers, who will now be required to do a new postgraduate qualification, will be among those adversely affected, as will many science and medical students. [Item from TEU]

Do lawyers tell fibs...you decide



Should she resign? that is the question. 



Who is lying? Or to be nice, fibbing or simply being forgetful…ACC Minister Judith Crusher Collins said in Parliament that she didn’t did talk to the ACC Board Chairman [now sacked] before he lodged a complaint to the police. She said that the complaint about Bronwyn Pullar was made in the morning and she was informed in the afternoon. But the police records tell a different story, they say that the ACC contacted them on the morning of the 13^th but that a complaint wasn’t laid until six days later. And Judith Collins was known to have had contact with John Judge within those six days. It really stretches ones imagination to think they didn’t discuss this issue [The complaint]. The issue was so serious that it made headlines in the main stream media. It meant that the Chairman was sacked; the CEO gave up his 500 thousand dollar salary and resigned after only eight months in the job and only giving three days notice. A further two other board members got the chop, one of those was Rob Campbell who once taught at Massey and earlier this year played a key role in the Auckland Port Companies year long attempt to fully contract out the ports operations.

We should be able to trust what our cabinet ministers tell us, Judith Collins, who is a lawyer has swatted off, or failed to answer, or can’t recall, or has forgotten, every time she has been asked a simple question. Any minister with a recall as bad as hers should resign on health grounds. Her behaviour is simply not on and she should go. When John Banks was caught out doing the same thing, he wasn’t replaced all he has done is to stay away from parliament. If you or I stayed away from our job would we expect to get paid…I think not.

ACC Vs Bronwyn Pullar...A SEA OF LIES.



Crusher Collins, is she telling the truth? 



Just like the police investigation of the Banks / Key ‘cup of tea’ tape shut down any honest discussion about its content. We are now all aware that the police takeover of this stupid stuff up led directly to Winston Peters sweeping back into parliament and almost KO’d National. Police found nothing to charge anybody with. So it would appear that police have plenty of time to assist the government shut down political debate.

The ACC use of the same style approach, to the police, in an attempt to shut down the whistle-blower in the ACC privacy fiasco, Bronwyn Pullar. This led directly to the public broadcast of the tape by TV 3 on Sunday June the 10^th 2012. The programme clearly wrecked any creditably that ACC and its Minister Judith [Crusher] Collins [pictured] still had.

This tape was a recording of an interview between Bronwyn Pullar and her support person and two ACC senior managers. It was on the basis of this meeting that ACC bosses ran off to the police pleading blackmail by Bronwyn to get a better deal. The police investigated and found nothing on which to base any charges.

The fact is: That ACC has been ordered to cut costs and to do that they decided to get tough on its claimants and particularly long term claimants, but alas Bronwyn Pullar had the guts and the money and decided to fight back and the then crap hit the fan.



Nick Smith, is he or Key telling the truth? 



The Prime Minister has sided with ACC and has questioned Bronwyn Pullar honesty in relation to her accident back in 2002, this is absolutely disgusting and he should be deeply ashamed of himself. This whole episode proves the stupidity of the governments publicly stated fact that ACC was insolvent…that was just tripe as the books show and ACC accounts prove… and government knows it. The whole concept of selling off parts of ACC seems to have been put on the back burner and John Key is back peddling at a rapid rate, because as he knows full well, as do we all, that the present system is better, fairer and cheaper than anything private enterprise can put forward. So far this debacle has cost one cabinet minister [Nick Smith] his job because of a letter he wrote that directly contradicts Key’s disgusting claim. Who is lying Key or Smith, the tape proves that its unlikely to be Smith, you decide.

The Chairman of the ACC John Judge should be dumped forthwith and the Minister should also be dumped along with him. The question is will they have the guts to take positive action and at least restore some trust to ACC? Time will tell…I didn't have long to wait...



Business Guru: Paula Rebstock first welfare now ACC. 

 BREAKING NEWS: John Judge the ACC chairperson has just resigned...according to Judith Collins he wasn't sacked but resigned, yeah-yeah! and guess who has replaced him before his seat gets cold...yeah you are right...Paula Rebstock the governments favourite and massively over paid consultant.

Steven Joyce stumbles yet again.



PR Failure whiz kid Steven Joyce...fails again.



The government is running scared, it fears that the back-lash of the stupid increase of class sizes will grow like a cancer and damage its possible future. It simply hates an alert and aware population. So-called strategy and PR king Steven Joyce has yet again failed to grasp the reality of the real world. Key is planning to bring forward its Asset sales legislation and take it through the legislative process under urgency. Over eighty percent of New Zealanders are opposed to the sale of State Assets. The Government possible realises that this may be its last term in office, or that pressure will grow to the extent that an early election may be required. With its support parties in disarray and particularly the ACT party that’s awaiting to find if John Banks may be required to step down because of his possible misuse of the donation process.

The sale of [49%] of state-owned power companies Mighty River Power, Meridian, Solid Energy and Genesis, along with Air New Zealand is a key plank in its so-called plans to balance the books. Right at this moment a nation wide referendum campaign is underway to get enough signatures [350.000] to force a referendum, this referendum is being strongly supported by Labour, the Greens, Mana, New Zealand first and the Maori party. Peter Dunne is under huge pressure from his electorate to support the referendum while the John Banks is still hiding behind his lawyers.

So Steven Joyce and his corporate backers have to get the legislation through before the referendum closure date, so introducing the bill under urgency has become urgent if they are to avoid looking stupid as they did over their failed education policy changes that they have now wiped.

So maybe we should get the School Kids and Teachers to assist with the campaign because it would seem that the government is dead scared of any kind of mass movement. This is natural because normal they simply buy off the opposition, for example the Sky City Pokie machine swap for a so-call convention centre. If you have not signed the referendum please do so.

This is a dangerous time for democracy, secret deals with Sky City, Mediaworks, The Hobbits, The taxing of Paper Boys and Girls, the elderly care industry and the politicalisation of our Justice System and the ever growing gap between the rich and the poor are signs for all to see. Using united and collective action we can fight back and stop the rot.

Increasing class sizes gets the chop. Victory to the people.



Boss Key and Deputy English. 



Breaking News: The Government has chopped its plan to increase class sizes and reduce the numbers of teachers. Just hours ago the Minister of Education stated; That there would be no going back...but just after that a conference call took place between, Bill English, Steven Joyce, Jerry Brownlee, Hekia Parata and the PM John Key.

Here is Eavesdroppers version of that call...

The Conference call:

“Can you hear me Bill", Asked John?

“Yes”, whispered Bill English

"Hekia are you with us? Yes she answered meekly.

"Jerry and Steven you’re both connected? Yes said the duo, almost as one.

Right said John, we are in a real pickle over this teacher and class size business”, he added sounding really bossy.

“It’s not my fault”, said Jerry in a high pitched tone.

“Nor mine”, added Steven sounding like an echo of Jerry.

“I’d just like to say at the start, said Hekia…

“Oh shut up Hekia shouted John, “you’re the reason we are in this mess”, he added and as for you Bill you need to learn how to count after all it was all your idea to cut the class sizes and thereby save millions so we could balance the books”…”and as for you Steven your advice ‘Don’t worry, be happy’ was way off the mark, call yourself a PR expert! And Jerry it would seem that your experience teaching wood-work has been of little value in this debacle…I was having such a wonderful time lunching with the Queen and talking it up with the NATO boss and that strange British PM, what’s his name”. John paused for a quick breath.



Hekia Parata. 



“But”, said Hekia…

“Oh shut up said John, Where are you Steven? John asked.

“I’m at Sky City Casino trying to tie up the loose ends on your deal with them over the pokie machines”… whimpered Steven in his best Mediaworks voice.

“Well tell us what to do Jerry you are the so-called expert on school teachers, wood-work and all that stuff”, shouted John from across the sea in his mansion in London.

“I’m not sure about what to do”, whined wee Jerry.



Jerry Brownlee



“What about you Steven you are our expert at spin, what’s your opinion? Said John sounding really pissed off.

I’m thinking about it but I’d like to talk to one of my friendly bloggers about it John” answered Steven.

“Not that dim-wit Whale-Oil”, asked John.

“No not him, someone a bit more intelligent”, muttered Steven.

“Bill, have you got any bright ideas how to get us out of this muddle we’ve got ourselves into”, John said cutting his decimal down a notch or two.

Bill spoke slowly and concisely when he said, “You are the PM, I’m only the Deputy, its your call John that’s why you get the big bucks”.



Steven Joyce



“Right here is what we do…Hekia, you go on national TV and Radio and admit you made a big mistake, you apologize to all the thousands and thousands of Kiwi Moms and Dads and all the School teachers and school children. While doing so you are not to mention this conference call or use our names in any way. You are the Minister of Education and the buck stops with you. Later I may move you to another portfolio like say the Minister in charge of Racing, have you got that?

“If you say so…but”, Hekia said before she was cut off.

“No buts Hekia just do it, they don’t call me the smiling assassin for nothing”, said John in his best school master voice.  

The conference call was now over, John K went back to his red wine, Jerry went out to his shed to work on his latest wood-working project, Bill went inside to find out if any of his kids were involved with the protest at their various private schools, Steven went into the Sky City pokie machine room to try his luck at reducing his overseas debt and lastly Hekia went into the bathroom to practice her apology in front of the mirror ...as she always did...

later

The Labour Party saw a future, the Greens planted a tree and named it Hekia, John Banks had a cup of tea and carried on hiding from the press, Peter Dunne brushed his hair yet again and Hone H just smiled...and thought 'one down' and wondered who will be next... 

Catherine Isaac Job for a mate.



NZ Expert on Charter Schools - Yeah-Yeah. 



John Banks asked John Key “if he could find a job for an old mate”; she was a business woman and ex-president of the Act party. Key asked what was she good at and Banks replied, “Well nothing really but she is a mate”. Right said Key, so he offered her the position of Chairwoman of the Charter Schools Working group. It was a perfect choice, she knows nothing about education, nothing about NZ education standards, nothing about the not for profit sector, not unlike the Minister of Education Hekia Parata, So he gave her the job and the hundreds of thousands of dollars that goes with the job…and that should keep wee John Banks out of my hair, he thought.

Catherine Isaac had a job at last, something to get her teeth into, and something she could build Act party policy into. She pictured the future and imagined some future school titles like; The New Market Coke-a-cola Intermediate Charter school, or The Merrill Lynch Charter school for girls or even the McDonalds Charter school for the overweight or possibly the Act Party school for budding whiz kids. She was simply overjoyed that at last the market could get to grips with getting education where it should be. She pictured the huge number of shares that Kiwi Moms and Dads would line up to buy…schools could even end up on the stock exchange, as they do in the United States.

Of course each attendee at these charter schools will be funded by the state purse and they can also take funding from organisations like wealthy business groups, corporate and finance companies by buying naming rights. Teachers can be paid at what rate the school decides but not less than $13.50 per hour, class sizes can be whatever they wish, and National Standards won’t apply to them.

It is rumored that Catherine’s first task will be to tour, at tax payers expense, the world and especially the United States so she can develop her zero knowledge about Charter Schools. This is rather strange because the US education system is already rated well below New Zealand and especially US Charter Schools.



Catherine Isaac, formerly Catherine Judd ^[1] (born c.1950), is a past president of the New Zealand political party ACT, and managing director of Awaroa Partners. She was formerly director of JM Communications. She married former Business Roundtable director Roger Kerr in 2010.  

Care Workers...humans or slaves, you decide.

Aged Care gone wrong:

Care Givers are amongst the most important groups in our communities…they do a wonderful job helping our ever growing numbers of elderly…they are the unsung heroes of our very profitable private care industry, and we feel for them…yeah, yeah shouts the same mob of national back benchers. I’m not sure if they mean the care givers or the private overseas companies,

• Is there a Care Giver amongst the 2012 Queens Birthday honours? Was one of them knighted?
• When did care givers last get a pay rise and how much was that pay rise?
• The DHBs received the money for wage increases and handed it on to the private providers, why didn’t it get paid to the care givers in full?
• Is this theft?

The French Government has just announced that the top French public officials, for example CEOs and Heads of Departments will now be paid at a rate of 19 times what the person at the bottom gets. This means pay cuts of up to 50% for some of those at the top. Just imagine if we did the same here in NZ. If we did the same we wouldn’t have take two hundred and fifty dollars off paper boys and girls per year. That sort of action would take some courage and this government has over the past couple of years down the exact opposite, so don’t hold your breath.

Bigger Class sizes for some...says Hekia Parata



This tells the true story. 

 


 



Hekia Parata

 Education gone wrong:

When failed electorate national candidate Hekia Parata scraped in on the party list they made her the Minister of Education. They saw her as a rising star, a glamour queen who could at the next election in 2014 take the seat of Mana. Sadly for the Nats that star is on a downward trend. She has failed to grasp the education portfolio and complete a proper learning curve. Instead of learning from the last Minister of Education Anne Tolley who failed completely to sell governments policy to the people because of her one-tract mind. Unfortunately Hekia Parata has followed her down that dictatorial path. She stated that there is nothing wrong with large class sizes…what’s important is the quality of the teachers…teachers with higher qualifications will solve our educational woes…yeah, yeah bleeps sleepy national party back benchers. But:

• They send their kids to private schools and the private schools all make a key selling point. They say smaller classes are best for learning. Parata says this does not apply in state schools.
• All around the world experts say smaller classes are vital to good learning, yet
• Government increased grants to private schools with out demanding changes.



Students in Queen St protest. 

 Any person with an IQ above 10 knows that smaller classes fronted by qualified teachers’ produces better results…statements from all the private schools attests to this. Parents agree as well and teachers and school boards believe this fact. But Hekia Parata says otherwise and simply follows the party line.

While Parata does not look after university education, the Nats PR whiz kid Steven Joyce has that role and he chopped assistance to those seeking Masters or Doctorates, this means that those without family support may have to give up their education. In Auckland it has lead to students taking to the streets. What this means is that if you are rich your kids get university education, if your middle class or poor you don’t. It’s ironic that the person and party changing the law all got their education for free but now days university students leave owing thousands and thousands of dollars that they must pay back. This is doubly ironic when the jobs just aren’t there. Many of these qualified people end up working at food outlets like Burger King and get the minimum wage. Or they head over the ditch.