0 Tu Maori Mai

The Maori Party is at a crossroads. It has just celebrated its tenth anniversary, but faces a fight for survival at the General Election on 20 September. But as Michael Fox reports on Stuff, the party isn't going down without a fight:

When the soldiers of 28th Maori Battalion returned from World War II, their commanding officer told them to go back to their mountains and marae but to remember to "stand as Maori".
In 2014, the Maori Party has adopted that theme, Tu Maori Mai (Stand as Maori), as its rallying cry for the election as it seeks to win back favour and claim all seven Maori seats.
As the party prepared to launch its election campaign in Rotorua today, co-leader Te Ururoa Flavell said he believed it had proven the value of an independent Maori voice over the past six years and winning the seven seats would give it influence over any incoming government in what is shaping as a tight election race.
"We think that . . . an appropriate call for our people now is to stand as Maori at this important vote and that's the call. That's us."
This election shapes as a major test for the party, which won four seats in 2005, five in 2008 and three in 2011, and is losing co-founders Tariana Turia and Pita Sharples to retirement in September.
The party is polling poorly and some are writing it off, but Waiariki MP Flavell said the election was a "golden opportunity" to consolidate Maori influence in Parliament.

The retirements of Dr Sharples and Mrs Turia will present the Maori Party with enormous challenges; they have been the faces of the party since its inception. It is imperative that Te Ururoa Flavell hold onto Waiariki ahead of Annette Sykes.

And it's interesting to see criticism of the Maori Party for having been too close to National; read on:

Opposition parties have painted the party as too close to National, but Flavell said it would be asking voters to compare its achievements with those of Labour's Maori MPs and Mana's Hone Harawira.
"If you actually want to achieve something, you've got to be there and that's what we're determined to do, but you've got to get the numbers in order to have real influence and we remain focused on that - on winning all of seven seats."
The party cites Whanau Ora, the insulation of 235,000 homes under the Warm Up New Zealand scheme, and pushing up the excise on cigarettes as some of its successes.
It says it has influenced the Government's thinking on poverty and Maori issues and helped prevent the the passing of legislation it did not agree with, such as the Employment Relations Bill.
Maori affairs commentator Jon Stokes praised the impact of the party, saying its greatest achievement was ensuring the Government remained mindful of the need to "bring Maori along".
It had helped protect Maori from the worst effects of global financial crisis, as it usually bore the brunt of such economic downturns.
"The involvement of the Maori Party helped mitigate and minimise the hurt that Maori would've normally experienced, which is not to say that they didn't experience it, it's just that . . . no one ever considers how hard it could've been."

On balance, we reckon the Maori Party has achieved more for Maori by being in the tent with John Key and National than it would have on the outside looking in. Whanau Ora was the party's biggest policy win, and whilst its still too early to assess the success of the initiative, there are some promising signs.

They've certainly achieved more for Maori than Hone Harawira has, unless you count hardening opinion as an achievement (which we don't). Whilst we believe that at some point in the not-to-distant future there needs to be a debate over the future of the Maori seats, in the meantime we believe that the Maori Party gives those who choose the Maori electoral option stronger representation than they get from opposition parties.

We echo Te Ururoa Flavell's call to Maori voters; Tu Maori Mai. Voters can continue to give Maori a strong voice inside government, not on the sidelines.

0 Hey Hone; there's no "if" in sorry

Hone Harawira has apologised (in a manner of speaking) for trivialising the alleged sex assault by a Malaysian military attache on a Wellington woman. The Dom-Post reports:

Mana Party leader Hone Harawira has apologised for calling the row over a sexual assault charge against a diplomat "bugger all."
The Te Tai Tokerau MP made the remarks on political panel show Backbenches last week.
Asked on the show about the political storm around alleged attacker Muhammad Rizalman bin Ismail, Harawira said: "I think all of the media, their heads should roll for making a big fuss about bugger all."
The country was facing more pressing matters such as "kids starving", he said.
Harawira added: "Let's just keep it there, it's allegedly, and so until such time that this sorts its self out, let's get on with running the country in the best interests of all off the citizens."
Now Harawira says he made a "big mistake" and praised Tania Billingsley, the 22-year-old victim of the alleged attack, for speaking out about mishandling of the case. 

There's just one problem; Harawira's apology is far from unconditional; read on:

Billingsley spoke on TV3's Third Degree programme last night about the events surrounding the granting of diplomatic immunity to the diplomat.
In a Facebook post this morning, Harawira said: "I want to sincerely apologise if my comments on Backbenches may seem to have minimised the gravity of the situation regarding the young woman who asked police to investigate the complaint of sexual assault against the Malaysian diplomat.
"I have reviewed the tape and I accept that my comments were not helpful at all.
"Sexual assault IS a big deal, and I applaud Tania Rose Billingsley for her brave and courageous appearance on television last night."
Internet Party leader Laila Harre, who has formed a political alliance with Harawira, said the apology was "very sincere."
In a tweet, she added: "Kia haha [sic] to Ms Billingsley." 

Sorry Hone, but prefacing an "apology" with "I want to sincerely apologise if..." is not an apology at all in our books. Real apologies are unconditional, and leave no wiggle-room.

What Mr Harawira should have said was something like this:

"I made a comment last week that was wrong. I apologise unreservedly. Sexual assaults are never a trivial matter"

Apologies have been in the news a bit in the last week. We're far from perfect, and have made plenty of apologies of our own over the years. If any politicians need help in the language of apologies, we'd be only too happy to help! 

0 Quote of the Day - 28 June 2014

OK; it's a fair cop. This is yesterday's post. But we were so wrapped up in the Hurricanes' gutsy win over the Crusaders last night that we clean forgot to post it.

But Steven Joyce takes the coveted Quote of the Day for this effort:

Campaign chairman Steven Joyce warned delegates that the campaign was "still a little puppy" and that anything at all could happen in the next 84 days before the election - the wackiest thing imaginable, he said.
"A retired Maori activist who has become an MP working with a hard left unionist and let's just throw in a wealthy German millionaire right-winger, they could form a political party," said.

"That's the sort of wacky thing that could happen between now and September 20.
"If Laila Harre, Hone Harawira, Pam Corkery, Kim Dotcom, Russel Norman, Metiria Turei, David Cunliffe, Matt McCarten, and John Minto are the answer, can we please have another look at the question?"

It's an oldie, but in 2014, it's a goodie, and a very relevant goodie at that. 

0 Protecting our most vulnerable (Part 2)

We blogged earlier yesterday about the passage of the Vulnerable Children Bill. The Bill had its third and final reading in Parliament yesterday, and passed by 105 votes to ten.

Only the Greens and Hone Harawira voted against the Bill. For some reason, the Greens only recorded nine votes; we guess their other five MP's (more than a third of the party's caucus) must have been otherwise engaged outside Parliament. Either that, or there was a schism within the Greens, and five Green MP's wanted to support the legislation, but were not allowed to break ranks. To the best of our knowledge Hone Harawira did not even attend the Third Reading debate. He certainly did not speak in the debate, and his vote was cast as a proxy by Green MP Kevin Hague.

We were terribly disappointed that the Greens and Harawira could not see past their political noses to support this piece of legislation. The intent of the Vulnerable Children Bill was such that it ought to have enjoyed the unanimous support of the Parliament. After all, what issue, if not protecting our most vulnerable children, could one reasonably expect the Parliament to unite on?

Jan Logie and Kevin Hague spoke on behalf of the Greens. Check out this extract from Ms Logie's speech:

The Green Party wants to ensure all of our children have their basic needs met. We want to address the causes of vulnerability so that all of our children can thrive. That is why we put child poverty on the political agenda last term and we have been continuing that through this term. That is also why we have been working so hard to put domestic and sexual violence back on the political agenda. 

Poverty is created and can be eliminated by Government policy. Child poverty and deprivation escalated in the 1990s due to Government policy. It is not out of our control. We continue to unashamedly call for action every single chance we get on this issue, because it is at the heart of the welfare of our children. Although violence is not quite so easily amenable to Government intervention, and no one thing is going to solve it, we can still significantly reduce it. This bill is not going to do that.

Kevin Hague's speech (and Mr Hague is one Green MP for whom we have considerable respect) was more like an election campaign speech:

KEVIN HAGUE (Green): I guess I agree with a lot of what my colleague Andrew Little has just said, but we disagree on one point. He said that something is better than nothing, and I do not think that is always true. In this case, we do not agree and we are opposing the bills divided from the Vulnerable Children Bill.
My colleague Jan Logie has explained our reasoning behind that. I want to talk a little bit about what the Green Party would do about this situation. If the country gives us a chance later this year we will be looking to address the basic needs of children in New Zealand—those unmet needs that are currently causing the environments that are driving this vulnerability and the problem that we are seeking to address.

Sadly, Kevin Hague's speech was little more than a series of feel-good sound-bites for the child poverty industry. Simply throwing money at societal problems is not going to solve them. Complex problems require changes in mindset and attitude, not a bottomless bucket of money.

National MP Alfred Ngaro nailed that argument in his speech. He quoted Flaxmere resident Henare O'Keefe; the man who could have replaced Ikaroa-Rawhiti MP Parekura Horomia. We have previously blogged about Mr O'Keefe here.

So here's what Alfred Ngaro had to say:

This legislation is about protecting and providing that which is needed. There has been talk about poverty. We know that there are a number of children and families who are in hardship. We do not disagree with that. But can I remind members of this. Henare O’Keefe, who was one of the candidates for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, following the death of the late Hon Parekura Horomia, tells the story at the Whānau Ora conference that when growing up in Ruatōria there were dirt floors, they had very little. They had to boil their water, they had to go outside, they had to hunt for things—they had very little and a large family. But here is the powerful thing that he said at that Whanau Ora conference: poverty is no excuse for abuse, poverty is no excuse for failure. What he was saying is this: you may have hard times, you may have difficulty, but you do have an opportunity to be able to do the best for your family and for the people who are around you.  

Henare O'Keefe (and Alfred Ngaro, quoting his words) are both dead right; poverty (however one defines it) is not an excuse for abuse, be it physical, psychological or sexual. There is no excuse whatsoever for child abuse.

Rather than trying to politicise the issue of child poverty, we reckon the Greens and Hone Harawira ought to have thrown their weight behind a Bill which already enjoyed broad support across the Parliament from both Government and Opposition MP's.

To say that we are disappointed with the stance adopted by the Greens and Harawira is an understatement. We have waited almost 24 hours to commit these words to a blog-post because to have done it in anger last night would probably have been counter-productive.

DPF mirrors our thoughts in a post he put up this morning:

The Herald reports:

A law change aimed at improving the protection of children at risk of abuse or neglect, including stronger vetting of adults who work with children, has passed into law with broad support in Parliament.
The Vulnerable Children Bill passed its final stage by 105 – 10 votes in Parliament on Wednesday afternoon after only the Green Party and Mana Party’s Hone Harawira voted against it.

They voted against???

The bill is the centrepiece of the Government’s ‘Children’s Action Plan’ – developed after Social Development Minister Paula Bennett’s White Paper on Vulnerable Children.
Its measures include changes to the law so that abusive or neglectful parents will have to prove they are safe if they wish to keep any further children they have. In the past, social agencies have had to to prove they were not fit parents to take a child from them.
It also introduces greater screening of those who work with children for government and community agencies, and ban those with serious convictions from working closely with children.

They voted against this? Against screening of those who work with children, against banning convicted offenders working with children?

Green Party MP Jan Logie said Ms Bennett had failed to deal to the main problem of child poverty.

Some on the left think that the solution to every single issue is to tax hard working New Zealanders more, to give to those on welfare. That is their solution to everything. So sad.

The proposals put forward by Paula Bennett and supported by National, Labour, NZ First, the Maori Party, United Future and Brendan Horan were practical in nature, rather than financial. Throwing money at problems simply doesn't work if there is not a change in underlying behaviours and attitudes.

Sometimes you have to step outside your party's ideological bubble in order to make meaningful, lasting change. It is unfortunate and regrettable that the Greens and Mr Harawira were unable to do that yesterday. 

But Hansard will forever record that yesterday, it was more important for them to make a political statement than to support legislation to improve the safety of the children they purport to represent. That alone speaks volumes. 


Footnote: Speech extracts are from the uncorrected Hansard for 19 June 2014.

0 Protecting our most vulnerable (Part One)

Parliament yesterday passed the Third Reading of the Vulnerable Children Bill. Sadly (and inexplicably), Parliament was not in unison on this legislation; the final vote was 105-10, with the Greens and Hone Harawira voting against; more on that later.

Paula Bennett has hailed the passage of this legislation:

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett has welcomed the passing of the Vulnerable Children Bill into law ensuring that New Zealand’s most at risk children get priority in accessing services and support.
“With more than 30 specific initiatives contained within the Children’s Action Plan, this new legislation provides a solid platform of accountability and monitoring never before seen in child protection to underpin the plan,” says Mrs Bennett.
The Vulnerable Children Act confers responsibility on the heads of five government departments, holding them directly accountable for improving the lives of vulnerable children.
The Ministries of Health, Education, Social Development, Justice and Police frontline staff must now ensure that children identified as vulnerable get the services and support they need to thrive.
“Every child in this country deserves good health, education and welfare.  Most parents provide that but for those who can’t or won’t, government agencies must step in and be advocates for those children.  I expect these children to now go to the front of the queue,” says Mrs Bennett. 
The 10 new Children’s Teams, two of which are up and running now, will provide a coordinated group of professionals to plan and wrap services around at risk children early to keep them safe from harm so they can thrive, achieve and belong.
The new law introduces new vetting and screening checks for government and community agency staff working with children including banning people with serious convictions from working in core children workforce roles.
The legislation switches the onus on parents who have killed or severely abused or neglected a child.  They will now have to prove they are safe to parent subsequent children.
Other changes include greater clarity in Family Group Conference plans that specify exactly what parents will need to do to meet their children’s needs.  Children in care will also be enrolled in the Kiwisaver scheme, allowing better planning for their future.
“While no law can stop children being abused, neglected or killed, this new legislation transforms our child protection system.  It means there will more eyes on vulnerable children, services and support will be prioritised and there will be greater vigilance on known abusers,” says Mrs Bennett.

The Vulnerable Children Bill is not perfect, and there is no guarantee that it will protect every child in New Zealand. But it is definitely a step in the right direction, and we especially applaud the added responsibility given to heads of government departments instructing them to work closely with other departments, and holding them accountable for that.

In her Third Reading speech yesterday Paula Bennett had this to say:

This Bill is a critical step in giving effect to changes in the Children’s Action Plan.
These include ensuring joint accountability across Justice, Health, Education, Police and Social Development, for the wellbeing of vulnerable children.
They also include the new requirements for the screening and vetting of Government workers and contractors who work with children.
All up these new requirements will cover around 182,000 New Zealanders.
There are also new workforce restrictions to prevent those with serious convictions, who pose a danger to children, from coming into contact with them. 
The legislation will also switch the onus on parents who have killed, or severely abused or neglected a child, and they will now have to prove they are safe to parent subsequent children.   
But let me be very clear, the legislation contained in this Bill is a small part of work already underway.
We can pass laws to improve screening and vetting.
We can pass laws that place restrictions on dangerous people where there currently are none.
But we cannot pass laws that stop children being beaten, neglected, or sexually and emotionally abused.
We cannot pass laws that stop children being killed, by those who should love and protect them.
We cannot expect that throwing more money at this problem - without changing how we work - will actually fix anything.
Accepting that this is as good as it gets will not cut it.

This is a pretty emphatic statement from the Minister of Social Development. She and her Ministry have been working on these proposals for several years. Mrs Bennett launched the White Paper on Vulnerable Children in 2012, which received more that 10,000 submissions. She told Parliament that the legislation passed yesterday "would be nothing" without those submissions.

Labour supported the passage of the Bill. Sue Moroney began her Third Reading speech with these words:

It is a pleasure to rise to speak at the third reading of the legislation formerly part of the Vulnerable Children Bill. I congratulate the Minister for Social Development on bringing the legislation forward and bringing it all the way through to its third reading in a timely fashion. I also want to commend the work that was done at the Social Services Committee on the Vulnerable Children Bill, because I think that it did improve the bill, and we were able to ensure, I guess, that some of the more problematic parts of that bill were taken out, actually. That was what happened; quite a significant part of that bill was taken out. I also want to acknowledge Anthea Simcock from the Child Matters organisation in Hamilton, because I understand that quite a lot of what has ended up in this legislation has been as result of her advocacy around the issues for children who are vulnerable, and vulnerable to child abuse. I think we should just call it what it is, quite frankly. So I congratulate Anthea on her involvement in this.

Parliament is by its very nature an adversarial place. But the two main parties were able to find common ground yesterday. 

New Zealand First too found general agreement with the Bill; here's what Asenati Lole-Taylor had to say in her introductory remarks:

Talofa lava, kia ora, and thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to talk about this legislation, arising from the Vulnerable Children Bill, in its third and final reading. The legislation sets out to achieve some goals. It proposes solutions that are much needed for problems, given the epidemic that has been in existence for quite a while in New Zealand. We are all aware that problems associated with vulnerable children are complex, and so the solutions identified in this legislation may only go so far. The member who has just spoken, Alfred Ngaro, is absolutely right: it is not perfect legislation; not yet. Obviously, we need to look at this legislation carefully because there are underlying issues that must be clarified.

There will undoubtably still be challenges ahead, and the Government freely concedes that the legislation is not yet perfect. But it has passed into law, despite the Greens and Hone Harawira not being able to bring themselves to support it, for wholly political reasons.

We will examine those reasons in Part Two later today.

0 Harawira - "an inside job"

Whilst David Cunliffe is crying foul, Hone Harawira reckons the Donghua Liu revelations are an inside job from within Labour; Stuff reports:

HARAWIRA: IT'S AN INSIDE JOB
Mana leader Hone Harawira believed someone within the Labour Party, rather than the Government, was running a smear campaign against Cunliffe.
He admitted he was concerned about the impact of Labour's latest troubles on the chances of Left-wing parties attracting enough votes to form a coalition government at the next election.
"I'm in the game of trying to change the government. To do that requires Mana and the Internet Party to get stronger without adversely affecting the Greens and Labour and for the Greens and Labour to also get strong with their own constituencies. Any threat to that is a threat to us overall." 

It's not often that Harawira and Cameron Slater would be singing from the same song-sheet, but we read this earlier today on Whaleoil:

Sources inside Labour having been consistently saying that Grant Robertson knew all about Donghua Liu and his donations to Labour.
I know he was specifically warned over attacks based over Donghua Liu.
When he was attacking National over this he was setting his leader up for a fall. 
This was known for a couple of months, as Robertson was able to deny any involvement in fundraising as he wasn’t an MP until after the 2008 election.
What will be more troubling for David Cunliffe supporters is the same sources are saying that Robertson couldn’t believe his luck when Cunliffe made statements saying he hadn’t advocated on behalf of Donghua Liu. 

Then here comes the clincher:

Apparently Robertson knew all about the letter and didn’t warn Cunliffe. This kind of low political bastardry has to be admired.
Grant Robertson has shown he has the mongrel to be leader of the Labour Party, and the finesse as well.
His set up of his leader was absolutely brilliant, and he has effectively sandbagged the Labour campaign so he can have a shot at being leader. 

Let's not forget that Grant Robertson served his political apprenticeship in the office of Helen Elizabeth Clark, with her formidable chief of staff Heather Simpson. So close was Robertson to H1 and H2 that the urban legend reports his nickname at the time as being H3. To have received the Whaleoil Seal of Approval for Political Bastardry suggests that Robertson was a very good student of the Dark Arts.

So if this is indeed a set-up and an "inside job" as Harawira describes it, Grant Robertson would unsurprisingly be high on the list of suspects. But then again, so would the co-chairs of ABC, Trevor Mallard and Clayton Cosgrove, neither of whom is beyond getting down and dirty.

The Labour Party doesn't look especially happy or united at the moment. Labour registering at 28% on the Roy Morgan poll that has just come out this afternoon won't do much for the mood either as the caucus disperses for the weekend. How will they be when they reconvene after a weekend of BBQ's?

0 Eat your Greens Kim!

Rod Emmerson's been reading the Herald. In particular, he's read the bit in the Herald-DigiPoll about MegaMana eating into the Green Party vote:

This is great stuff from our favourite cartoonist. But before eating too many Greens, Dotcom ought to make sure that there's no organic "residue" on the leaves.

0 Jones on Dotcom's "pretend party"

Bob Jones is in fine form this morning in his weekly NZ Herald column. Under the headline Dotcom, your no-hopers won't save you Jones opines:

My urging John Minto to shut up and acquire a hobby induced his response claiming he once thrashed me in a Victoria University debate (I've never debated him or indeed anyone at Vic) and challenging me to debate with him publicly on any of a wide range of subjects.
As I, like everyone else, want him to shut up, I'd hardly provide him more oxygen by doing that. Minto repeated this in a letter to me. I replied by helpfully suggesting he could satisfy his pathetic craving for attention by putting on a one-man black and white minstrel show and suggested he start practising singing Swanee River.
And given his life-long socialist belief in spending others' money, I offered to buy him his banjo and face-paint. He would have gone down a treat in old folk's homes, but acting altruistically in a meaningful way is alien to him, aside from which there's the awkward need to smile, so instead he's shamelessly joined Dotcom's pretend party.

Dangle money before hardened lefties and they'll sit up and purr every time.

Bob Jones hits the nail on the head here (sorry Rex). The political Left loves money, especially when it belongs to the long-suffering Someone Else. That is the only reason why the Mana Party has agreed to the MegaMana rort deal; Dotcom's money.

Of course, it matters not to Hone, Laila, Annette and John where the money came from; Jones continues:

Kim Dotcom was granted residency in November 2010 under the "investor plus" category, despite his past offending in Germany, his persona-non-grata status in Thailand and his minor securities conviction in Hong Kong, the Immigration Service making a marginal judgment call given his expressed investing commitment.
This decision was thereafter supported by his generosity to a range of causes, and he quickly became a larger-than-life, jolly-jumbo figure who brightened our lives. But today, three years later, his world has collapsed and, flailing in desperation, he's become politically involved, something I'm sure he never anticipated given his background of frivolous excess. He's now best described as the Milan Brych of New Zealand politics.
So what went wrong? That's simple: specifically the revelation of his wealth source, namely the large-scale copyright theft of Hollywood movies, which has led to the extradition order by the FBI. Due to preposterously idiotic behaviour of the police, who, instead of knocking on his door and handing Dotcom a summons, mounted a scandalously infantile raid by 76 armed police and two helicopters, then wrongly threw him into prison, the public reaction became hugely sympathetic, more so when it was revealed he had been illegally spied on by the GCSB clowns.
Dotcom's loveable maverick reputation collapsed, despite his vigorous legal efforts to prevent it, once details of the FBI's claim became public. Hitherto he had presented his business as that of an innocent bystander, akin to a taxi driver delivering a passenger to a bank, then subsequently being charged with aiding and abetting a crime after it was found his fare had robbed the bank.
But the FBI claims he had the means to control his Megaupload site's content, but far from doing so, actively incentivised the placement of movies on his site.
In rebuttal, Dotcom points to the terms service users were obliged to agree to, which included an undertaking not to post copyrighted material. He further argues that the sheer volume of material was such as to prevent practical policing.
The user copyright undertaking won't wash in any court and he knows it. It was his primary income source, arising from many tens of thousands of downloading users exploiting his site's stolen movies, but Dotcom, the site owner, implausibly claims this was all unknown to him.
Anyone wrongly charged with a serious crime should be ultra-eager to get into a court and argue their innocence. Instead, Dotcom has wasted millions trying to avoid doing so.
So he has resorted to a final desperation measure, namely to spend millions attempting to buy a change of government, which he hopes will override a court-backed extradition order, an inevitable outcome once he's used up all of his legal ploys.

Dotcom's money is not "clean" money, despite one of the serious criminal charges he is facing in the USA being Conspiracy to commit money laundering. But that won't stop Hone Harawira and his whanau. Their loathing of "rich prick" John Key means that the end justifies the means in getting rid of him, in their eyes. 

Of course that ignores the obvious hypocrisy of taking money from another rich prick, but Dotcom gets a free pass because he despises John Key too. Principles disappear out the window when the cheque book comes out.

Jones closes, with final digs at Dotcom, Harre and Minto:

He's wasting his money as no government will do that, regardless of any undertakings from the soul-selling abysmal no-hopers he has garnered together to fund as a political party. If anything, his efforts will hugely harm the Opposition cause in Balkanising and confusing its message, thus presenting an electoral option with, on one side, a rabble of dissimilar, mutually antagonistic parties, all with unpopular leaders and wildly different messages, set against a stable governing party with the most popular leader in our history.
This is the fifth party Dotcom's new leader, Laila Harre, has belonged to, which speaks volumes. Laila will always be remembered for the funniest political gaffe in our history when she explained her 2002 defeat by lamenting on television that voters had voted with their heads rather than their hearts.
If she wants hearts, then far better she assists Minto with a one-man black and white minstrel act which will pull the punters in droves, but when it comes to heads, like Dotcom, she's history.

Jones is once again quite right. The Herald-DiigiPoll released this morning shows a small rise in support for MegaMana at the Green Party's expense. A congested hard-Left is hardly going to filch votes from the centre, or the centre-right. All that will happen is that the same volume of votes on the Left will be distributed among more parties.

Of course, we're not going to complain about that outcome. It'll be a nice farewell gift to New Zealand from Dotcom as he is jetted off the the USA to face the trial he has tried so hard to avoid. 

0 Hide on MegaMana

Our favourite commenter Rex made this observation earlier this morning:

Next job, cut and paste Rodney Hide's rant!

At that point, we hadn't made it as far as the Herald on Sunday's website yet; we were still working through e-mails sent to us overnight bringing things to our attention. And the frequency of that has increased in recent weeks.

But naturally, we went straight off in search of Hide's latest opinion-piece. And we found that he does indeed rip in to all those involved in MegaMana; under the headline Hilarious Dotcom drama is riveting Hide opines:

I used to think politics was all about achieving good government. That proved invariably disappointing. These days, politics is no longer my responsibility. I'm happy if it just proves interesting.
That's why I am for the Internet-Mana Party. They're the best entertainment in years. If they were a parody they would be too improbable to be believed.
Maori nationalist Hone Harawira calls Pakeha the rudest of names and the wrong colour to date his daughter. But he's jumped into bed with whiter-than-white Kim Dotcom.
Harawira trumpets Mana and His People but that's not stopping him using his electorate to coat-tail Dotcom's party into Parliament. His price? $3 million.
It's easy to accuse Harawira of hypocrisy but he has a ready reply: it's a lot of money. At $3m his double standard is good and high.
Laila Harre wasn't elected leader of the Internet Party. She was hired. She's been selected and paid for by Dotcom. The former coffee picker for the Sandinistas is New Zealand's first corporate-hire political leader.
A mate rang after Harre's appointment splitting his sides, "All they need now is Pam Corkery". Corkery was appointed press secretary that day.
Willie Jackson considered standing but wanted $250,000. That's his price for standing up for his principles.

We're grateful to Judge Holden, Edward the Confessor, Rex or whatever else he calls himself for pointing us in the direction of Hide's column, although we would have found it at some point in any event. And we make no apologies for copying and pasting a story that tells the truth of the MegaMana rort in the manner that Hide does.

That's because the rort would be funny, almost beyond belief in fact, if it wasn't such an affront to democracy. 

Hide continues, making a mockery of the notion that MegaMana is going to be some kind of new, visionary force:

The recycled 1990s Alliance Party is promising a digital future. But they're technophobes and Luddites. Harre declares herself well-qualified because her children are the internet generation and her husband uses a computer at work.
She also believes Dotcom is funding her to help the poor and downtrodden with 1970s socialism. It's nothing to do with his extradition to face criminal charges. The left don't talk about truth. Rather, it's the narrative. Harre is the only person buying her narrative.
Next up, Annette Sykes. Her driving force? The Treaty and economic equality. Nothing about Dotcom's over-the-top lifestyle and opulence suggests Treaty concerns or a share-the-wealth mentality.
Someone isn't being upfront about their political aims and aspirations. The gulf between Dotcom and his politicians is altogether too yawning.
Then we have veteran campaigner John Minto. His promise? That Mana is coming after the rich. Capital gains taxes, financial transaction taxes, inheritance taxes and a more progressive tax system are all part of his campaign.
He's targeting the "parasites" and their "unearned income". In the meantime, he's more than happy taking the fat cat's money. That's the money the FBI are accusing Dotcom of not earning.

The Occupy movement in 2011 protested about the "1%"; the parasites and fat cats referred to by Hide. If his repeated boasts about his personal wealth are to be believed, Dotcom is not only part of the 1%, but quite likely in the top 0.25%. 

He is the very kind of person that the likes of Laila Harre, Annette Sykes, Hone Harawira and John Minto have spent their lives condemning, yet when the cheque book comes out, they gladly take his money, and climb into bed with him. Their hypocrisy is breathtaking.

Rodney Hide isn't done yet; he has one final go at Dotcom:

 

Dotcom set out to destroy Banks for not rushing to rescue him from Mt Eden Prison. He expected a minister to jump for a $50,000 political donation. That's his character. Imagine what he expects for $3m.
And imagine how he will perform when he doesn't get it. Pure entertainment.

The day is fast approaching when the REAL Kim Dotcom is going to be unmasked. When that happens, watch for those who have taken his filthy lucre to be unmasked with him for selling their principles for the promise of big bucks.

Hide's final two words are right on the money; it will indeed be "pure entertainment". There are going to be some extremely red faces on the left-hand side of the political divide and we can't wait to see the squirming!

0 What the 2014 General Election is all about...

Mike Treen is the national director of the Unite union. In 2011, he was one of the organisers of a group of unionists supporting the Mana Party. It's safe to say that he is one the far Left of New Zealand politics.

Mr Treen also blogs at Martyn Bradbury's union-funded Daily Blog. And our attention has been drawn by a reader to this paragraph in a lengthy blog-post written by Mike Treen and published yesterday. In one paragraph, he tells readers what the 2014 General Election is all about:

That's right Dear Readers. This election isn't about the economy, about health, education, crime or poverty. It's not even about the trade unions' hoary chestnut of a living wage. Mike Treen has declared that this year's General Election is about Kim Dotcom getting his revenge on the Government.

So forget all the bullshit and rhetoric about the digital economy, and about better access to the internet for everyone; that's just a front. MegaMana is all about a rich convicted criminal, wanted in the USA trying to escape justice, and trying to get his pound of flesh from the Government who allowed US authorities to try and extradite Dotcom.

We suppose we should be grateful to Mike Treen; at least he has called it as it actually is, rather than feeding us sugar-coated bullshit as Dotcom, Hone Harawira and Laila Harre have done. But as the countdown to the election continues, let's not lose sight of the fact that Dotcom is trying to subvert New Zealand's electoral system for his own ends. 

There's a word for that.

Kim Dotcom wants to take his revenge on this government. This is perfectly understandable. He has every reason to do so. In fact, given his treatment, he has more reasons than most. The most effective way for that to happen is for this government to be defeated in the coming election. The Mana-Internet party alliance is the best way to make that happen. He was smart enough to see that. - See more at: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/06/12/why-the-mana-internet-alliance-is-a-potential-game-breaker/#sthash.hjSfLLzz.dpuf

Kim Dotcom wants to take his revenge on this government. This is perfectly understandable. He has every reason to do so. In fact, given his treatment, he has more reasons than most. The most effective way for that to happen is for this government to be defeated in the coming election. The Mana-Internet party alliance is the best way to make that happen. He was smart enough to see that. - See more at: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/06/12/why-the-mana-internet-alliance-is-a-potential-game-breaker/#sthash.hjSfLLzz.dpuf

Kim Dotcom wants to take his revenge on this government. This is perfectly understandable. He has every reason to do so. In fact, given his treatment, he has more reasons than most. The most effective way for that to happen is for this government to be defeated in the coming election. The Mana-Internet party alliance is the best way to make that happen. He was smart enough to see that. - See more at: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/06/12/why-the-mana-internet-alliance-is-a-potential-game-breaker/#sthash.hjSfLLzz.dpuf

Kim Dotcom wants to take his revenge on this government. This is perfectly understandable. He has every reason to do so. In fact, given his treatment, he has more reasons than most. The most effective way for that to happen is for this government to be defeated in the coming election. The Mana-Internet party alliance is the best way to make that happen. He was smart enough to see that. - See more at: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/06/12/why-the-mana-internet-alliance-is-a-potential-game-breaker/#sthash.hjSfLLzz.dpuf

0 100 days to go

UPDATE: There seems to be a glitch in the system, so we've taken the poll down for a wee while. Like the Labour Party with all its promises, the system doesn't seem to be counting at the moment...

*************************

The Herald notes that there are just 100 days to go before New Zealand goes to the polls on 20 September 2014.

To mark the occasion, we've kicked off our June political poll a day early. We've also combined the Internet and Mana Party, given Kim Dotcom's recent purchase of Hone Harawira's party.

As usual, the poll will close on the 20th of the month at 7pm. It will then be three months to the minute to when the polls close for the 2014 General Election.

We realise that this poll is completely unscientific; we don't need to be told that! But it's our blog, and we decide what gets published here, so polling it is!!

Thanks in advance for taking part. We'll report back when the polls close.

0 Rudman on coat-tailing

Brian Rudman doesn't hide his contempt for coat-tailing in his latest Herald column. But under the headline Cut off the coat-tails and end MMP rorts he's not exactly kind to the Labour Party and David Cunliffe either; he opines:

Labour is promising to abolish within 100 days of taking office the MMP coat-tail rule that enables a minor party electorate MP to bring party list mates into Parliament regardless of the 5 per cent entry threshold.
The joke is that, barring a miracle, there seems little chance of Labour leader David Cunliffe and his Green allies forming a government without the aid of the Mana-Internet "party", whose existence depends on gaming the coat-tail provisions.
And having exploited the system for all it is worth - and spent more than $3 million of internet millionaire Kim Dotcom's cash - to get back into Parliament, it seems unlikely that Hone Harawira and Laila Harre will turn around and vote to end the fun.
The stitch-up between embattled Mana Party leader Mr Harawira and Mr Dotcom, the millionaire refugee from American law enforcement agencies, is not the first attempt to game the MMP rules. It's just the most egregious.

Rudman is dead right. The deal between Dotcom and Harawira is the rort to end all rorts, and everyone knows it. John Key may invite minor party leaders for a cup of tea, but on the rort scale, the MegaMana one is a five course dinner with wine matches, and port and cigars to follow.

Of course, that won't stop David Cunliffe, if that is what it takes. Faced with a choice of governing and reaching some sort of deal with MegaMana, and facing another three years in opposition, we all know what David Cunliffe will do.

And we all know that Labour has form; read on:

In 1999, in the second MMP election, Labour leader Helen Clark encouraged Labour supporters in Coromandel to support Green candidate Jeanette Fitzsimons to ensure the defeat of the National incumbent and bring in several Green list candidates on her coat-tails.
Ms Fitzsimons narrowly won - but in the end the Greens' party vote just sneaked over the 5 per cent threshhold, entitling them to six seats anyway.

Of course, that's not Labour's only coat-tail rort. From the first MMP election in 1996 to his retirement at the 2011 General Election, Labour stood a series of Neville Nobodies against former Labour Party president and MP Jim Anderton in Wigram. By the time he retired, Anderton was back to being a Labour MP in every way except his self-named political party.

So Labour knows all about coat-tail rorts. But make no mistake; David Cunliffe, for all his pontificating now will reach out to Dotcom and Harawira if that's what it takes after 20 September. Then he will ask the MegaMana MP's to close their eyes, block their noses, and like turkeys, vote for an early Christmas. Labour's hypocrisy is galling. 

0 Photo of the Day - 11 June 2014

This arrived unsolicited in our inbox a short while ago:

They say that many a true word is spoken in jest. This is living proof of that saying, even if Hone Harawira hasn't yet cottoned on to the fact that he is now Dotcom's puppet.

0 White-anting in Labour? Surely not...

Is David Cunliffe being white-anted again? You'd have to wonder after reading Andrea Vance's story on Stuff:

Senior Labour Party MPs have used social media to attack the alliance struck between Mana and the Internet Party.
Former leaders Phil Goff and David Shearer, and Rimutaka MP Chris Hipkins, are among those who have objected to the deal. It could see MPs from Kim Dotcom’s fledging political vehicle enter Parliament on the ‘‘coat-tails’’ of a victory for Hone Harawira in Te Tai Tokerau.
The strong opposition from within Labour could make post-election coalition talks tricky.
Goff says he feel strongly about Dotcom’s ‘‘pure political opportunism’’, citing his previous donations to ACT MP John Banks, now the subject of a court case. ‘‘He wants to be able to influence and control politicians.’’
Goff says he was previously ‘‘very critical’’ of National for exploiting MMP and failing to implement recommendations from the Electoral Commission to abolish the provision.
‘‘I’m scarcely likely to endorse another rort ...I’m being entirely consistent,’’ he said.
Goff says he made his feelings clear to the Labour caucus. ‘‘It will be the decision of the party leadership...but I see problems in creating a coalition where the philosophies and principle of people that you are trying to enter into a coalition with is unclear because they seem to be coming from diametrically opposed positions.’’
Those  views were also reflected in a passionate Facebook post at the weekend. Shearer also used the social media site to write that although he wished the Internet-Mana ‘‘marriage’’ well, he knew ‘‘it’s going to end badly.’’
And on Twitter last week, Hipkins posted: ‘‘The good old days, when political parties formed from movements. Now all it takes is a couple of million and some unprincipled sellouts.’’ 

Now getting all high-and-mighty and having an attack of principles is one thing, but it's not something you'd usually associate with the Labour Party. But Ms Vance makes a very interesting point:

All three MPs were linked to the Anyone But Cunliffe [ABC] faction - who were opposed to David Cunliffe assuming leadership of the party. However, a Labour source played down talk of more division, saying all three were close to Te Tai Tokerau candidate Kelvin Davis.
Davis himself posted on Twitter: ‘‘Bro, I think of the people of Te Tai Tokerau, not Sergeant Shultz.’’  He was referring to Dotcom’s German origins.
A spokesman for Labour said Cunliffe was ‘‘off the grid’’ and not available for comment. 

Kelvin Davis is rapidly emerging as a lightning rod for the ABC faction, which as well as the three chaps named above includes the likes of Annette King, Trevor Mallard and Clayton Cosgrove. 

There's a test coming for David Cunliffe's leadership of the Labour Party. Will he support Kelvin Davis wholeheartedly in an attempt to wrench Te Tai Tokerau from Hone Harawira's grip? Or will he take the path of least resistance, and give MegaMana an armchair ride into Parliament by campaigning softly in the far North? 

Mr Cunliffe is on a hiding to nothing here. He is already deeply unpopular with a large portion of his caucus. But he will also need every possible coalition option if he is to have any chance of forming a government after the General Election.

No one said it would be easy...

0 Pay your own fine Hone

Hone Harawira is in trouble over trouble he was in last year. If that sounds confusing, hopefully the Herald will explain:

Current and former MPs and "ordinary people" banded together to pay the $632 fine Hone Harawira received last year for defying police at a 2012 Auckland housing protest.
But while one of his Mana Party contenders claims Winston Peters was among the donors, Mr Harawira will not name them, even though it appears he is required to do so under parliamentary rules.
The Mana Party leader was arrested when he joined protesters fighting the removal of state houses in the East Auckland suburb of Glen Innes. He was alleged to have locked himself in his car and turned his music up, blocking a Housing New Zealand-contracted truck from leaving with one of the homes.
Several months later he was found guilty of failing to comply with a police instruction, fined $500 and ordered to pay $132 court costs.
But last week at a public meeting of Housing NZ tenants in Grey Lynn, the sole nominee for Mana Party candidate for Tamaki Makaurau, Kereama Pene, said: "Our Mana leader was dragged out of his car in GI.

He got done for it. Do you know who paid his $500 fine?"
Someone called out "Kim Dotcom!".
But Mr Pene said: "No, it was worse than that, much worse than that, it was Winston Peters."
Mr Harawira last week confirmed he received assistance to pay the fine but would not say who from.
"I don't want to go naming names. Some of them were ex-MPs, some of them were current MPs, some of them were just ordinary people from GI and from other walks of life."
The money was paid "in the same way that people helped fundraise to help myself and my wife go to South Africa last year [for Nelson Mandela's funeral]. I think they just genuinely supported what I was trying to achieve."

Hone Harawira has dug a hole for himself. Instead of just shelling out the $632 himself, he fell back on socialism's favourite approach, and paid it with Other People's Money.

It's not like Hone is poor or anything. He's on a salary of $147,800, plus the added allowance for being a minor party leader. He's certainly in the top bracket of income earners in New Zealand, and probably closer to the 1% which he so frequently condemns that he would like to be.

Winston Peters, of course, denies shelling out, and Hone's saying nowt:

Meanwhile, Mr Peters said Mr Pene was wrong about him paying the fine.
He recalled it wasn't a big fine and on being told it was $500, asked: "Why didn't he pay it himself?"
However, the fine, including costs, is large enough to require disclosure under the rules for Parliament's Register of Pecuniary Interests because it was paid by someone other than Mr Harawira.
The rules also require the identity of those paying off MPs' debts to be declared.
Mr Harawira last night refused to comment on what he said was a "petty" matter.

We've got news for Mr Harawira; this is NOT a petty manner. He was convicted of a criminal offence whilst acting publicly in his capacity as an MP, then he accepted donations to pay the fine, having been found guilty by the Court. He is required by law to declare the donations, and if he refuses to do so he could find himself in front of Parliament's privileges committee.

The law applies to every New Zealander. Hone Harawira cannot simply opt out of his legal obligations because of the political implications of them. He's made his bed, and now he has to lie in it; not from it.

0 Espiner (C) on MegaMana

There has been a lot written in the last week about MegaMana, Kim Dotcom, Hone Harawira, Laila Harre et al. 

MegaMana Fatigue Syndrome is fast approaching, and a Dotcom-free day beckons, but it's not here just yet; not whilst people like Colin Espiner are making their voices heard. Under the headline What's behind Dotcom's civil union? Espiner (C) opines:

Say what you like about the sacrifice of conscience for cash - a great big German spanner has just been flung into the machinery of this year's election campaign.
I wasn't going to write about Kim Dotcom's vanity party again this week. It has had far more publicity in its short life than it deserves.
Plus, it seems that everywhere you look Dotcom is there. Giving evidence in the John Banks trial. Breaking up with his wife, Mona (on Twitter, of course). Fighting Hollywood over access to his millions. Calling on Prime Minister John Key to resign (again).
Shortly, it will be Dotcom in the dock as he fights extradition to the United States on fraud and racketeering charges. Forget Banks and buckets of mud - that hearing is going to be the trial of the year. So a bit of Dot-gone seemed like no bad thing.
And then suddenly, there he was in a civil union with the beneficent ghost from socialist Christmases past: Laila Harre.
The media was expecting Dotcom's Internet Party would announce a flake as its new leader. Or a complete moron. Either would have done just fine. We could have ridiculed them, and moved on to more important matters.
But Harre isn't a flake. And she's certainly no moron. She's one of the most driven, persuasive and intelligent politicians I've met. I don't know how Dotcom managed to put a ring on the darling of the Left but on the face of it, it's a major coup.
The question, though, is for who?
Harre is an old-school socialist. She's from a trades union background. She's a former member of the Labour Party, of New Labour, and of the Alliance Party. She's most recently worked for the Green Party.
She's mates with most of New Zealand's remaining old hard Lefties, including Matt McCarten (now Labour leader David Cunliffe's chief of staff), rent-a-protester John Minto (also in the Internet Party tent), ex Green MP and now ex Mana candidate Sue Bradford, broadcaster and former Alliance MP Willie Jackson (who's flying a kite about standing for the Internet Party himself) and radical Maori separatist Annette Sykes (president of Mana and number two on its list).
Harre was one of Jim Anderton's stars when the Alliance Party won 10 per cent of the vote and entered government with Labour in 1999. She quickly rose to Cabinet rank, and was a capable minister.
But when the Alliance imploded three years later, Anderton and Harre fell out. He went on to form the Progressive Party, returning to Parliament on the back of his safe Wigram seat. Harre took over as leader of the Alliance, and lost, badly, in the 2002 election.
On the face of it, then, Harre is likely to appeal to older Lefties who admire her feminist principles and strong trade union credentials. 

And therein lies the problem for Dotcom's "Internet" party; older Lefties are already voting for the parties of the Left, so all that is likely to happen is that the votes of the parties of the Left will get further diluted. MegaMana may get a bigger share of the vote, but it will be at Labour and the Greens' expense, and a few conspiracy theorists may be lured away from Winston First. Will that change the Government? Probably not.

Espiner (C) continues:

It's hard to see her appeal to young, internet-savvy geeks though. Last time Harre was in Parliament the internet was barely out of short pants. And the people she's trying to persuade to vote for her weren't born and certainly wouldn't know her from a 33K dial-up modem.
But does it matter? Probably not. As long as Harre gets votes, neither the Internet Party nor Mana will care where they come from. And she's got $3 million of Dotcom's money to spend - that's more than any other party contesting the election, including Colin Craig's Conservatives. 

It's going to be fun over the next few weeks going through speeches made during the Electoral Finance Bill debate. We've already made reference to Hone Harawira's remarkable transformation from one who hated the influence of money in elections to one who has $500,000 to spend this time around. 

And the Hansard extracts we've saved so far have some really doozies in them that we'll share a little closer to the election as the political landscape takes shape.

Here's the remainder of Espiner's piece, where he gets right to the heart of the issue, and what this obscene display of money-flashing is all about:

On the face of it, the Left has engineered a spectacular reverse takeover of Dotcom's party. It's like a reunion of every failed candidate from every disappeared political party of the past 20 years, funded by an avowed capitalist whose fundamental philosophy - the freedom of movement of capital and people - runs counter to everything his candidates stand for.
But remember, Dotcom doesn't really care. His political aims are pragmatic, not philosophical.
In my opinion, there are two reasons why Dotcom is manipulating the political process. First, he wants rid of Prime Minister John Key. Second, he doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in a United States penitentiary. If the Internet-Mana party is elected with more than a couple of MPs, then Dotcom is likely to achieve the first objective.
There is no possibility the party could side with National. So a vote for Internet-Mana is a vote for a Labour-Green-Internet-Mana-and-possibly-New Zealand First-Government.
On the second objective, it's possible Dotcom could delay any extradition ruling against him long enough for a change of government to take place. The new multi-tentacled administration could overturn a court ruling. It would be foolish and contrary to the rule of law, but it could.
The Internet-Mana party may also either confuse or scare the bejesus out voters and strengthen National's hand. Blue-collar, socially conservative, Labour-leaning voters - who'd only just got their heads around the idea of dealing with the Greens - may not countenance their vote ushering in a potential coalition led by far-Left feminist and Maori radicals.
In her acceptance speech of the Internet Party leadership last week, Harre admitted her party was gaming the MMP system in a bid to get into Parliament. But she said it was "time for New Zealanders to take back MMP".
It was a nice line, with a ring of socialist rhetoric to it. But nothing could be farther from the truth. The Internet-Mana party may be successful or it may fall flat on its face.
But it is Dotcom who is attempting to take over MMP. And it is for no-one but himself. 

Kudos to Colin Espiner for calling the MegaMana marriage for what it is; a cynical piece of manipulation by Dotcom, to his own benefit. And shame on all the supposedly principled Left-wing politicians like Harawira. Laila Harre and John Minto who are standing by and letting it happen.

In this case, the end does NOT justify the means. The largest attempted rort of our political democracy in this country's history is underway, and it needs to be strongly condemned. Roll on July 7th.

 

0 Quote of the Day - 2 June 2014

Karl du Fresne is one of a dwindling band of old-school journalists; the kind who don't simply recycle the many press releases that cross their desks each day. And his comments on MegaMana are interesting; under the headline Mana ties knot with eye on cash du Fresne opines:

Whatever else you might think of Sue Bradford, she sticks to her principles. You have to respect her for walking away in disgust from the Internet-Mana pantomime.
Who, other than the most gullible, is going to believe these two parties have genuine shared concerns? They are united only by rank opportunism.
Hone Harawira needs access to Kim Dotcom's bank account, while Dotcom seems driven by a personal grudge against Prime Minister John Key and a need for political friends who might help him avoid extradition. These are hardly a sound basis for a credible political party.
In his desperation to make the merger look honourable, Harawira argues that internet access is a pressing issue for young Maori.
This is a convenient but very recent conversion. When I last looked, digital access wasn't even mentioned on the Mana website.
The $200,000 that Dotcom reportedly put into the Internet Party is a far more likely explanation for Harawira's enthusiasm. But at least he had the decency to grin cheekily when he admitting coveting his new ally's resources. Like Winston Peters, he often gives the game away by grinning when he knows no-one is fooled.
Unfortunately, a mischievous grin can't disguise the notion that this alliance is a cynical exploitation of a flawed electoral system. Theoretically at least, there is a possibility that Internet-Mana will end up in a position of power that bears no relationship to its voter support.
What's more, the two parties have undertaken to review their relationship six weeks after the election. So if they get into Parliament, all bets will be off. Take that, suckers.
The best we can hope for is some entertainment as the inherent tensions boil to the surface and Internet-Mana blows up like Krakatoa. How long, for example, before Mana office-holder John Minto – a conviction politician in the Bradford mould – spits the dummy? He can only fool himself for so long that the merger is in the best interests of the proletariat.
Even on their own, Far-Left parties such as Mana have a glorious history of disembowelling themselves. Who knows what bloody mayhem could result when the hard-core Left hitches itself to a wholly incompatible ally like the Dotcom party? 

Of course, since du Fresne penned his column we have discovered that Herr Dotcom has put a lot more than $200k into the Internet Party. The generally accepted figure now is $4 million, with $500,000 of that being paid to Hone Harawira's cult party as a dowry.

Karl du Fresne is dead right (sorry Rex/Edward/Judge); this is indeed a "cynical exploitation" of MMP. And if Labour overtly or covertly instructs Kelvin Davis to not try too hard in Te Tai Tokerau, it too will be a party to this dirtiest of dirty deals.

 The Left has lost the right now to criticise electorate deals done by any other parties. Having so staunchly defended MMP when New Zealand last voted on its system of democracy, who would have ever expected it would have been the parties of the political Left who exposed just how flawed MMP is, and gave us convincing reasons to demand change?

In the meantime, let's just stand back and wait for the ritual disembowelling to begin!

0 Bromhead on the MegaMana Marriage

Herald cartoonist Peter Bromhead calls the MegaMana marriage for what it is:

This is a marriage which already has an end date set; so much for "'til death do us part". We still reckon though that it will end in tears.