Planet Rugby Forum

Seneca of the Night wrote:

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:

Santa wrote:

For now though the Prime Minister is standing by her man, saying Twyford has done an "incredible job".

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics ... gress.html

Well that's true in the sense that the job he's done is not credible.

That aside, I really do wonder if she confuses well-delivered messaging with actual delivery of results.

I personally find it very very difficult to determine what goes on in her head. Has she ever given an interview in which she's talked of her 'hinterland'? Can someone direct me to one, I'd be interested.

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:

Santa wrote:

For now though the Prime Minister is standing by her man, saying Twyford has done an "incredible job".

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics ... gress.html

Well that's true in the sense that the job he's done is not credible.

That aside, I really do wonder if she confuses well-delivered messaging with actual delivery of results.

I personally find it very very difficult to determine what goes on in her head. Has she ever given an interview in which she's talked of her 'hinterland'? Can someone direct me to one, I'd be interested.

If results are some process like the following, just about everything's still at stage 1 or 2, some at 3 including the money thrown at regional development, and nothing's at 4 or 5.

1 - messages and intent
2 - specific policy and delivery plans
3 - funding
4 - successful execution of change
5 - actual delivery of outcomes

What we've got is a target for us to be carbon neutral by 2050 is getting presented as having achieved something; or funding for mental health is a result in itself; or banning exploration for something stops consumption of it. Jones explicitly jumps from 3 to 5. I've given them money therefore I've created sustainable jobs.

Santa wrote:

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:If results are some process like the following, just about everything's still at stage 1 or 2, some at 3 including the money thrown at regional development, and nothing's at 4 or 5.

1 - messages and intent
2 - specific policy and delivery plans
3 - funding
4 - successful execution of change
5 - actual delivery of outcomes

What we've got is a target for us to be carbon neutral by 2050 is getting presented as having achieved something; or funding for mental health is a result in itself; or banning exploration for something stops consumption of it. Jones explicitly jumps from 3 to 5. I've given them money therefore I've created sustainable jobs.

That's a good way to think about it. They haven't actually delivered much. They're just not National. Wow.

Tehui wrote:Losing Amy Adams is a big loss for National. I actually thought she deserved to get the nod as leader during their last caucus vote.

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:

Santa wrote:

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:If results are some process like the following, just about everything's still at stage 1 or 2, some at 3 including the money thrown at regional development, and nothing's at 4 or 5.

1 - messages and intent
2 - specific policy and delivery plans
3 - funding
4 - successful execution of change
5 - actual delivery of outcomes

What we've got is a target for us to be carbon neutral by 2050 is getting presented as having achieved something; or funding for mental health is a result in itself; or banning exploration for something stops consumption of it. Jones explicitly jumps from 3 to 5. I've given them money therefore I've created sustainable jobs.

That's a good way to think about it. They haven't actually delivered much. They're just not National. Wow.

Government is terrible at 4, and worse at 5. Most projects go late and deliver well short of intended scope, and everyone's just pleased at the end to shut the f**king thing down and call it finished. The follow-up to deliver actual sustained benefits is woeful (Whanua Ora, the Social Investment Unit, IR Transformation, ACC transformation, anything with transformation in the title, Landonline replacement, Oranga Tamariki, Courts Modernisation, MSD Simplification, son-of-tomorrow's-schools, etc... forever, like a boot stamping on a taxpayer's face). There are exceptions but they're few and far between.

guy smiley wrote:

deadduck wrote:

Santa wrote:

eugenius wrote:The policy itself was ill thought out and half baked .

They campaigned on it over 2 election cycles. It was a core policy.

Indeed.

Labour were crowing from the parapets that they were the only ones with the solutions to the house price problem. They had years to get their ducks in a row prior to rolling out the policy, and they had ample opportunity to wind in their unrealistic targets prior to presenting them to the electorate in the 2017 election campaign. But no, they persisted with the 100,000 homes in 10 years tag line.
Kiwibuild can only be considered an abject failure and Labour are accountable for 100% of that as they are the ones that mis-sold it to the public. The 'it was pretty hard' excuse doesn't wash, we all knew it was going to be pretty hard. That's why no other party made such promises.

Why would the current opposition have made any such promise when their policy direction was clearly one of turning a blind eye and whistling Dixie for a decade?

guy smiley wrote:

It might be amusing to run a poll for those critical of the delivery so far asking how much extra tax they'd pay to see the job done.

Jay Cee Gee wrote:The brightline rules? Please, that was little more than an info gathering exercise. It had little to no real world impact.

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:There's a pretty straightforward way of addressing the 'problem' of people speculating on house price rises, if you think it's a problem.

If the rental is less than the mortgage interest on the value of the property, plus rates and so on, plus maintenance, then the only purpose you have is capital gain and therefore you should be taxed as such. The last government wouldn't do that, and the current government won't. Something else that they could do (actually this one is very easy to implement) but won't.

deadduck wrote:

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:There's a pretty straightforward way of addressing the 'problem' of people speculating on house price rises, if you think it's a problem.

If the rental is less than the mortgage interest on the value of the property, plus rates and so on, plus maintenance, then the only purpose you have is capital gain and therefore you should be taxed as such. The last government wouldn't do that, and the current government won't. Something else that they could do (actually this one is very easy to implement) but won't.

Won't that just mean landlords game it by increasing rents to a level where they can avoid the tax. That policy is a recipe for inequality

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Santa wrote:

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:

Santa wrote:

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:If results are some process like the following, just about everything's still at stage 1 or 2, some at 3 including the money thrown at regional development, and nothing's at 4 or 5.

1 - messages and intent
2 - specific policy and delivery plans
3 - funding
4 - successful execution of change
5 - actual delivery of outcomes

What we've got is a target for us to be carbon neutral by 2050 is getting presented as having achieved something; or funding for mental health is a result in itself; or banning exploration for something stops consumption of it. Jones explicitly jumps from 3 to 5. I've given them money therefore I've created sustainable jobs.

That's a good way to think about it. They haven't actually delivered much. They're just not National. Wow.

Government is terrible at 4, and worse at 5. Most projects go late and deliver well short of intended scope, and everyone's just pleased at the end to shut the f**king thing down and call it finished. The follow-up to deliver actual sustained benefits is woeful (Whanua Ora, the Social Investment Unit, IR Transformation, ACC transformation, anything with transformation in the title, Landonline replacement, Oranga Tamariki, Courts Modernisation, MSD Simplification, son-of-tomorrow's-schools, etc... forever, like a boot stamping on a taxpayer's face). There are exceptions but they're few and far between.

That's government for you. Things get watered down and neutered by the need to balance so many interests. It's the good bit and the bad bit.

My guess there are consultancies all over Wellington that sell a service to ensure and measure the outcomes of these programmes and they just rinse and repeat.

There is a wider more massive point, and one that bears repeating across the west, because we are forgetting the lesson. All human institutions are bad at change, and only get worse at it. Entrophy and torpor are natural states of the universe and humans are made of crooked timber. But governments are particularly bad at this, as there is poor accountability built into the system due to the shareholder structure and before you know it you're waiting two months for a phone.

This lesson was hard won through the 70s and 80s and it seemed everyone knew their Hayek. In NZ people like Alan Gibbs and Roger Kerr and many others were relentless in banging the drum on this lesson over and over and over. It is an eternal lesson, and requires eternal vigilance. But in this age of Democratic Socialists and young female politicians who show no sign of ever having read a book, it looks like we are soon going to have to learn it all over again.

We have to hope the Adrian Orrs can outlast and outpace the Jacindas.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Dark wrote:

Hareaway wrote:Phil kiwibuild Twyford . Times up champ ... you have done bloody nothing ...you talked and talked and nothing has happened... get up and fudge off ,

Apparently the govt reshuffle is this thursday (after Ardern announcing it happening last August)

20 virtual internet dollars says Twyford keeps the majority of roles, given Ardern's weird reluctance to hold people to account unless backed against a wall.

How can you reshuffle a deck of cards loaded with 2s, 3s, 4s? They're all fcking useless.

I have a theory which is extremely counter-intuitive but we need to increase the size of the house. We need to have more power and intrigue from backbenches and caucus, we need to have more backup options to pressure / replace poorly performing ministers, etc. Cabinet is overmighty in our system. And this cabinet is an overmighty dog. Adern is no doubt holding on to a lot of people because the options are worse.

Enzedder wrote:End of Life Choice bill is going thru it's 2nd reading - some of the speeches here

https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parl ... mId=207585

Live here

https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parliament/

How's it going? Will be fascinating to see how it goes inc. whether it gets torpedoed for the sake of it because it's an ACT thing.

Personally I hope it gets through in some high-quality form - I can't think of many more fundamental rights.

Enzedder wrote:

How's it going? Will be fascinating to see how it goes inc. whether it gets torpedoed for the sake of it because it's an ACT thing.

Personally I hope it gets through in some high-quality form - I can't think of many more fundamental rights.

Lots of arguments both sides but, to me, the anti side are trying to paint a picture of state sanctioned killing as opposed to the pro side talking about humane choices.

Enzedder wrote:The vote was 70 to 51 in favour of the bill going thru

Ghost-Of-Nepia wrote:

Enzedder wrote:The vote was 70 to 51 in favour of the bill going thru

Someone miscounted (looks like Trevor's admitting to the error now). 70-50 - as one MP was double counted! Unsurprisingly, it was Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki - her name went over two lines . . .

Wilderbeast wrote:

Ghost-Of-Nepia wrote:

Enzedder wrote:The vote was 70 to 51 in favour of the bill going thru

Someone miscounted (looks like Trevor's admitting to the error now). 70-50 - as one MP was double counted! Unsurprisingly, it was Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki - her name went over two lines . . .

Crack up

You must have all the contacts

Enzedder wrote:The vote was 70 to 51 in favour of the bill going thru

RuggaBugga wrote:The old Dipak gambit.

mr bungle wrote:

RuggaBugga wrote:The old Dipak gambit.

A great Kiwi politician.

Wrong thread.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

jambanja wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Dark wrote:

Hareaway wrote:Phil kiwibuild Twyford . Times up champ ... you have done bloody nothing ...you talked and talked and nothing has happened... get up and fudge off ,

Apparently the govt reshuffle is this thursday (after Ardern announcing it happening last August)

20 virtual internet dollars says Twyford keeps the majority of roles, given Ardern's weird reluctance to hold people to account unless backed against a wall.

How can you reshuffle a deck of cards loaded with 2s, 3s, 4s? They're all fcking useless.

I have a theory which is extremely counter-intuitive but we need to increase the size of the house. We need to have more power and intrigue from backbenches and caucus, we need to have more backup options to pressure / replace poorly performing ministers, etc. Cabinet is overmighty in our system. And this cabinet is an overmighty dog. Adern is no doubt holding on to a lot of people because the options are worse.

You theorized and so are some others
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politi ... mps-to-150

Wow. Interesting. Great minds thinking alike and all that. I had Jonathan Boston as a lecturer way back in the days. He was pretty good from memory.

It will be hard to argue for an increase in the size of the house, but I reckon it's sorely needed. That report seems to cover it.

koroke hangareka wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: Wow. Interesting. Great minds thinking alike and all that. I had Jonathan Boston as a lecturer way back in the days. He was pretty good from memory.

It will be hard to argue for an increase in the size of the house, but I reckon it's sorely needed. That report seems to cover it.

fudge, I had him as a tutor.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Tehui wrote:

koroke hangareka wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: Wow. Interesting. Great minds thinking alike and all that. I had Jonathan Boston as a lecturer way back in the days. He was pretty good from memory.

It will be hard to argue for an increase in the size of the house, but I reckon it's sorely needed. That report seems to cover it.

fudge, I had him as a tutor.

Sounds like we may all have crossed paths at some point.

More importantly, Boston was a pioneer of the famous 'delayed right wing mind implant'. What that means is that at some stage in the next five years both of you will wake up one morning and be of impeccable clear right wing mind. You will see clearly now the rain has gone.

koroke hangareka wrote:The South African marxist who added a layer to the base of Marxist theory labelled "patriarchy" (maybe on his own initiative, who knows) made more impression on me, and I don't even remember his name.

Mr Mike wrote:Was an interesting chap. He was based at Canterbury and taught the politics of class, gender and race. Read today that he died in 2001 from a brain tumor in Sydney.

I recall he once told me that he found how I handled my masculinity “very attractive”. Who could blame him?

koroke hangareka wrote:

Mr Mike wrote:Was an interesting chap. He was based at Canterbury and taught the politics of class, gender and race. Read today that he died in 2001 from a brain tumor in Sydney.

I recall he once told me that he found how I handled my masculinity “very attractive”. Who could blame him?

That's a shame, he seemed like a decent bloke. I read yesterday that Jacob Bercovitch died in 2011, which shook me a bit. I didn't actually like Jacob, but his class was very very good. Getting to that age when all your teachers go and die on you.

koroke hangareka wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Tehui wrote:

koroke hangareka wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: Wow. Interesting. Great minds thinking alike and all that. I had Jonathan Boston as a lecturer way back in the days. He was pretty good from memory.

It will be hard to argue for an increase in the size of the house, but I reckon it's sorely needed. That report seems to cover it.

fudge, I had him as a tutor.

Sounds like we may all have crossed paths at some point.

More importantly, Boston was a pioneer of the famous 'delayed right wing mind implant'. What that means is that at some stage in the next five years both of you will wake up one morning and be of impeccable clear right wing mind. You will see clearly now the rain has gone.

Sounds highly unlikely, he was just a post-grad student. I remember literally nothing he did or said.

The South African marxist who added a layer to the base of Marxist theory labelled "patriarchy" (maybe on his own initiative, who knows) made more impression on me, and I don't even remember his name.

Mr Mike wrote:

koroke hangareka wrote:

Mr Mike wrote:Was an interesting chap. He was based at Canterbury and taught the politics of class, gender and race. Read today that he died in 2001 from a brain tumor in Sydney.

I recall he once told me that he found how I handled my masculinity “very attractive”. Who could blame him?

That's a shame, he seemed like a decent bloke. I read yesterday that Jacob Bercovitch died in 2011, which shook me a bit. I didn't actually like Jacob, but his class was very very good. Getting to that age when all your teachers go and die on you.

That’s a shock also. Who was the Palestinian advocate in the department he was always in conflict with?

Edit: Ron McIntyre?