TVNZ reports: quote:

A homeless man who died alone on the streets of Auckland is understood to have been kicked out of Australia just months before his death.

The Australian Border Force will not confirm his deportation for privacy reasons and New Zealand immigration authorities said they did not hold any information.

But those who knew Gregory Cameron, 57, said Australian Immigration dumped him at Auckland Airport with nothing. end quote.

Once they have boarded the plane, Australia has no further responsibility for deportees to New Zealand. But, in this government of kindness, why is there no state help for people who have recently been sent back here, many of whom have no family or support base in New Zealand? quote:

Police confirmed they attended a sudden death of a 57-year-old man on Tangihua Street on Monday night.

Other homeless people in the area said Mr Cameron had not been living on the street for long and he died of pneumonia. end quote.

Other homeless people? Why are there any homeless people in New Zealand at all?

If you are wondering why I am asking that question, then you need to cast your mind back to May this year.

An extreme far left newspaper  (article published 4 May 2018) reports: quote:

The New Zealand government has promised to get the country’s homeless population off the streets and into shelter in time for winter.

In a joint announcement on Friday, housing minister Phil Twyford and prime minister Jacinda Ardern announced a NZ$100m emergency housing package to tackle the ballooning problem. An estimated 40,000 people live in cars, tents and garages amid a chronic housing shortage in the nation of 4.7 million people.

“We’re pulling out all the stops to support people in need and urgently increase housing supply this winter,” said housing minister Phil Twyford.

New Zealand has the highest rates of homelessness in the OECD, with more than 40,000 people living on the streets, in emergency housing or in substandard conditions. Per capita New Zealand’s homeless population is almost twice as bad as Australia, which is placed third on the list.

More than half of New Zealand’s homeless population live in Auckland but it is also growing in smaller cities such as Rotorua, Tauranga, Queenstown and Wellington.

“We’ve really made a plea today, any marae, any seasonal housing that might be available, please contact us, we’ll work alongside you,” said Ardern. end quote.

I see that this policy has worked out well for Greg Cameron, hasn’t it?

This government is a total disgrace. They make these noble announcements, the media praises them incessantly, then they walk away from the cameras and forget all about it. Because the media fawns over them all the time and writes nothing but fluff pieces, nobody ever bothers to do any investigations into whether or not they actually bother to keep their promises. Clearly they have failed miserably on this one.

This is the government that is supposed to be bringing kindness back but the project to rehouse the homeless had to be put in hold because Jacinda needed a PR group to follow her around New York at the taxpayers’ expense. Oh, and she needed a private plane to fly her to Nauru because she was breastfeeding. You can see what her priorities are and, in spite of what they say, looking after the homeless is clearly not one of them.

The government that increased petrol prices significantly by imposing fuel levies in July has decided to rush through legislation to look into petrol price margins… you seriously could not make this stuff up.

Stuff reports: quote:

The Government will rush through changes to the Commerce Act to allow the competition watchdog to investigate the margins on fuel, as the pump price hits a record high.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced the move at her post-cabinet press conference, saying consumers were being “fleeced” at the pump. end quote.

Yes. Like the unfortunate sheep that we are, we are being fleeced all right. We are being fleeced by this government – first of all, because of their fuel levies and GST, and secondly by an incompetent government that has caused a fall in business confidence which has flowed on to a dollar that has dropped significantly, causing further hikes in the price of imported fuel.

And don’t forget the decimation of our own oil industry. It may not be directly responsible for this, but it definitely doesn’t help.

They are also a government that hates business, so it must all be the fault of the fuel companies. quote:

The previously-announced legislation will be passed in the first two weeks of sitting in late-October. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern will then nominate that the retail fuel industry is the first to be investigated by the Commerce Commission. end quote.

The thing is, we have been here before, it is nothing more than a cynical move by the princess to take the heat off the government by pretending they are going to do something about it. They won’t. quote:

“The study I anticipate will report back next year and I will prioritise a response to it,” Ardern said. end quote.

Next year? Will that be January? July? November? See what I mean? It is months away. quote:

“I am hugely concerned at the level of price that consumers are currently paying at the pump for fuel.” end quote.

Then roll back the petrol taxes. That will make a big difference and do something about the falling dollar because that will make a big difference too. quote:

“In 2008 we had one of the lowest pre-tax costs for fuel in the OECD. Today we have the highest in the OECD.” end quote.

We also have the highest rate of fuel taxes and levies that we have ever had. Funny how that just gets brushed aside. quote:

Ardern said the importer margin on petrol climbed from 7 per cent of the price of petrol in 2008 to 16 per cent in early 2018.

“That increase represents a transfer of wealth from petrol consumers to producers to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year,” Ardern said. end quote.

2008 was the beginning of the GFC. Everything was in freefall. What about the ‘transfer of wealth’ to a government that is robbing us blind? Nothing to see here. Move along.quote:

“Consumers, in my book, are being fleeced.” end quote.

Oh yes, we are, Princess, and it is not just by the fuel companies. quote:

National leader Simon Bridges described the move as “yet another inquiry” and called on the Government to axe its fuel tax increases.

“She’s saying consumers are being ‘fleeced’ while her Government is driving up fuel prices and taking hundreds of dollars from Kiwi households through higher taxes on fuel.”

Bridges added that “National supports another look at the practices of fuel companies”. end quote.

Don’t forget, that as fuel prices rise, so does the GST take on petrol as it is charged at 15% of the final pump price. This all represents an unexpected windfall to the government.

Jacinda is very good at talking the talk, but that is the only thing she can do. She held a press conference, looked concerned, pretended she cared, and then walked away and the results won’t be known for months on end.

This is the government that is bringing kindness back. The trouble is, those on low incomes will never benefit from it.

Maybe she is looking at nationalising the fuel companies. That worked really well in Venezuela, didn’t it?

Mike Hosking slams Jacinda Ardern’s taxpayer-funded campaign videos: Quote:

How about Jacinda Ardern?

So the trip to New York was a PR exercise, there’s no question about that. And if there was any benefit of her going to the United Nations Leaders Week, it was to fly the flag for the country.

Small nation, we box above our weight, a lot of people are interested, she turns up in American media, that’s all good for the country. There’s no doubt about that.

But what we didn’t realise is she had an ad agency in tow – that you and I are paying for.

A crew of three, from some agency called Augusto, which has a New York office. And basically they just wandered around filming her, and photographing her.

And it’s not unusual for a leader to be photographed, but normally it’s the office staff who do it. You know, get the ol’ phone out and take a few snaps.

She had a whole ad agency with her, and she’s defending it. Because they’re building up library stock and you know what they’re building up library stock for. They’re building it up for the election, and the election campaign.

It will be Ardern and Trudeau. It will be Ardern and Trump. It will be Ardern at the UN. And you and I have paid for all of this. End quote.

And Augusto was a Labour party donor. Remember the fuss over a glass of milk at Oravida? No taxpayer money spent there, but Augusto is a donor and they’ve been paid back handsomely. Quote:

They think, National, this is against the rules. Ardern defends it.

She says it’s paid for out of Labour’s Leader’s Budget. And so you’re supposed to go ‘oh whew, well that’s okay then’.

But who supplies Labour’s Leader’s Budget? We do. It’s all taxpayer money.

You and I have paid for an ad agency of three people, and what do you reckon that costs?

Ardern says it’s not expensive. But she wouldn’t have a clue, because she doesn’t give any numbers.

She says it’s not excessive. But she wouldn’t have a clue.

This is the party that spends $1.6 million on three days to chat about justice.

So three people from an ad agency, wandering around in New York.

And you and I have paid for that. End quote.

And it may well be against the rules. Even if it was then Labour will just do what they did last time and change the rules, retrospectively.

Digital image credit: Luke

Life is getting tough for Meka the Muss as the report into her workplace bullying has been leaked. The details aren’t pretty as leaked to the NZ Herald: Quote:

The incident involving former Government minister Meka Whaitiri and a staff member allegedly left bruising to the upper right arm of the staffer and photos of bruises were produced to the inquiry, a draft report leaked to the Herald shows.

The incident occurred because Whaitiri was unhappy at not having been alerted to a photo opportunity at a media standup with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern during a lunch break at a function in Gisborne. End quote.

Shoved and dragged outside because her boss missed a photo opportunity? One can only imagine what might have happened if she hadn’t cooked Meka some eggs, eh Paula? Quote:

The staffer originally told the inquiry that Whaitiri had pinched her arm but changed that to grabbed.

“It was hard and it scared the living daylights out of me,” she said.

In other parts of her evidence, she said: “She was definitely angry, and was definitely mad that I had screwed up. It scared me a lot and I didn’t want to return to that [work environment].” End quote.

Credit: Stuff

Another minister is having their policies torn apart by government officials.

Typically for Labour ministers they are just plowing on regardless because they know best. Quote:

Housing Minister Phil Twyford’s package of tenancy law reforms would likely drive up rents by causing some landlords to get out of the market, officials have told him.

Officials said while most of the tenancy law overhaul and other changes to the rental market considered by the Government would not have much of an effect on their own, their cumulative weight could lead some landlords to sell their properties to owner-occupiers.

Because owner-occupiers typically have less people in a house than renters, this could lead to a further shortage in rental properties – and higher rents. End quote.

 

The exact opposite of what Labour is trying to achieve.Quote:

The advice came in a late-April paper produced for Twyford by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and obtained by Stuff under the Official Information Act.

The policies discussed include the Healthy Homes Guarantees Act, which sets more strict standards for rental properties, the extension of the Bright Line Test taxation change, and the expected end of “loss ring fencing” for landlords, a setting that allowed landlords to offset losses on one property against another.

“While these effects should be minor, the cumulative effect of changes to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 may lead landlords to perceive the effects as more than minor. As a result, even if legislative changes did not materially affect the financial returns of landlords, some many nevertheless choose to sell their rental properties,” the officials wrote.

“The combined increase of these policies will be to increase sales of rental properties, with fewer landlords purchasing.“

The analysis was focused on areas which already had a shortage in rental housing and an increasing level of demand – most notably Auckland and Wellington. There was no modelling done on how large this increase could be.

The officials believed that the Government’s attempts to increase supply would not materially change things for at least the next two years, with the housing shortage increasing by 14,600, even if 6000 KiwiBuild homes are built. End quote.

They are a long way off even getting close to building 6000 homes. Quote:

Twyford said the advice was “only a scenario” and he “wasn’t assuming that is going to happen.”

“They’ve explored one risk scenario. I think there are too many variables at play. I think we have to be alive to that scenario, but I’m not assuming the numbers [on the housing shortage] they have are going to happen.” End quote.

He only thinks they’ve got it wrong. Never before have I seen a minister so convinced of his own infallibility. His arrogance knows no bounds. Quote:

He accepted the basic assumption that rentals being sold to owner-occupiers would make the shortage worse as rentals had a higher occupancy rate, but said supply was being increased to make up for it.

“The collision between under-supply and excess demand that has been a feature of the market for so long is much less of an issue now,” Twyford said.

“Investor activity in the market hasn’t reduced. In fact investor activity with multiple properties has actually increased over the last couple of months.”

He admitted some landlords could exit the market – but said the market itself would stay strong.

“For some landlords, the idea of having to put in a heat pump, or the idea that you may not be able to get rid of tenants using a 90-day notice, may be the straw breaks the camel’s back – but in general I think markets are very resilent.” End quote.

He might be surprised. But then again he often is. Quote:

National Party housing spokeswoman Judith Collins said the advice proved what the National Party had been saying – that the reforms would drive landlords out of the market.

“We have been saying one change landlords can cope with, a whole lot you have people leaving,” Collins said.

“This is going to put more stress on the rental market, put rents up, and at the same put much more people onto the social housing waitlist.“

Collins wouldn’t commit to reversing any of the policy changes Twyford was making if National came to Government in 2020 but wouldn’t rule it out either.

The way to fix the rental market was to encourage new supply by reforming planning laws, Collins said – something she said Twyford was talking about but not actually doing.

“What are are going to have is fewer landlords and the ones that are there are going to be asking for higher rents.” End quote.

Twyford is dreaming if he thinks increased costs on landlords won’t lead to increased rents. No one ever sees rents go down, and with these reforms, rents will go up to cover the increased risk of dud tenants and capital expenditure on improvements.

Digital image credit: Luke

Amy Adams used parliamentary privilege to make further allegations about Meka the Muss: Quote:

Further allegations of assault have been flung at Labour’s Meka Whaitiri during a parliamentary debate.

National’s Amy Adams said the Government hadn’t been straight with the public about the alleged incident involving her press secretary.

“The public of New Zealand deserves to know if we have a member laying hands on a staff member to the extent that they end up with bruising …you do not go around laying hands on people to the extent that it leaves bruising,” Adams said.

 

Adams used parliamentary privilege – a legal immunity – to level the allegations.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern fired Whaitiri last week, after seeing a Department of Internal Affairs report into an incident in Gisborne in August.

Neither party have confirmed what happened, but allegations of shoving have circulated.

Ardern said a cut-down version of the investigation would be released. End quote.

I think Ardern means whitewash.

But seriously bruises? On a staff member? I suppose phone books are hard to come by these days. Quote:

Speaker Trevor Mallard granted an urgent parliamentary debate into Whaitiri’s removal on Tuesday afternoon, shortly after Whaitiri’s return.

Adams said that would be “sanitised” and the Government hadn’t been upfront about what happened. She also questioned why Whaitiri was fit to remain as an MP.

“We have heard no apology to the staff member … it’s all been about what’s fair to Meka Whaitiri. What about that staff member who we now know has been left bruised?”

The Selwyn MP said it made Labour’s commitments to openness and transparency an “utter joke.” “This is one of the least transparent Government’s New Zealand has ever seen.”

She added: “We are seeing dodging, weaving, ducking.” End quote.

The hits keep on coming, all while the princess is virtue-signalling her way around the UN. She thinks she’s clever but other people around the world just think she is a silly, Kardashian-style little girl.

New Zealanders had two votes at the last election, one for the political party whose policies they most liked, and the other for the electoral candidate of their choice.

As it turns out, our party vote counts for absolutely nothing, zilch, nada and it is all because of the cobbling together of deals between NZ First and Labour, and Labour and the Greens, resulting in the coalition government.

Socialist Cindy.Photoshopped image credit: Luke

The important deal between Labour and NZ First was done behind the scenes, out of the public eye and without transparency.  We all remember the agonising weeks where Winnie drew out the decision due to the supposed dialogue between the parties.

Why does it matter? Because voters want to know the compromises made to party policies in the formation of the coalition government.

It is only after decisions have been made that we see the areas of compromise and uncertainty, so how do ministers figure out their position when party policy is contradictory?

They go with Winnie of course, as happens when Cindy backs down. Cindy is pushing to double the refugee quota but Winnie wants to keep the status quo. Little wants to abolish the three strikes, Winnie says no. Kelvin Davis said he would resign if the two Northland charter schools were closed but despite his threat, all charter schools were given an ultimatum to comply with mainstream education or be closed down.

There is an awful lot missing from the seven page coalition document making bedlam for the ministers as they lurch from one crisis to the next. No wonder we are hearing very little of substance from any of them.

Initially, Peters promised we would see the highly guarded 33-page coalition document, but we never did. Cindy decided it was not in Labour’s political interests to disclose it.

It is under wraps and will not see the light of day after the Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier declared it did not have to be disclosed because it did not form part of the final coalition agreement. Quote.

Mr Boshier also asked the Prime Minister’s Office whether the document had been in use since the formation of the new government, and its contents shared with any Ministers, government departments, or anyone else subject to the OIA.

He was advised that was not the case.

“After carefully considering those comments and the nature and purpose of the document, I accept that the document is still held solely in Ms Ardern’s capacity as Labour Party Leader.” End of quote.

Boshier makes his call based on Cindy’s word.  But is this good enough given she been caught out being economical with the truth about Claire Curran’s position in government? There will be very good political reasons why Cindy doesn’t want us to see the full document, but openness and transparency are not among them.

Openness and transparency give the voting public confidence. Hiding issues away results in the current situation, the very thing Cindy expected to avoid by not making the discussions public, the economy is tanking and business confidence is low.

We were given the seven-page document signed on 24 October 2017. A link to the disclosed document is here and the preamble is below.  Quote.

“Together, we will work to provide New Zealand with a transformational government, committed to resolving the greatest long-term challenges for the country, including sustainable economic development increased exports and decent jobs paying higher wages, a healthy environment, a fair society and good government.

We will reduce inequality and poverty and improve the well-being of all New Zealanders and the environment we live in.” End of quote.

Transformational – not for the better.

Sustainable development – yet to see it.

Address long term challenges. – what are they?

Increased exports – exports were temporarily weak in 2017 and early 2018 according to the OECD

Decent jobs paying higher wages – where and when?

A healthy environment – where and when?

A fair society – fair to who?

A good government – yet to see it.

Reduce inequality and poverty – how and when?

Improve the well-being of all New Zealanders and our environment – how and when?

These are idealistic, meaningless words, seemingly written by a public relations consultant because there is no substance to them. No methodology or strategy to explain how these goals will be met, or even exactly what they are.  In hindsight, the writing on the wall for the modus operandi of this government.

But we now know this government’s strategy is to outsource to working groups the research and decision making, over 150 of them to date. Great. The government does not have the confidence to do its own spade work.

But even more to the point, how many of these lofty goals have been achieved in the last ten months? Exactly none.

What are the long term challenges?  Move people off welfare into employment?  Shift people from sleeping on the streets into accommodation?  Move people out of poverty? How do they expect to do this? More taxes, of course, more money for the government will solve every problem.

There isn’t much this government is doing to address the specific items listed in the document which include re-entering the Pike River mine and supporting NZ First’s racing policy. Both are important to some voters but are hardly worth a mention in the big scheme of things except to note the amount of money being thrown at the Pike River mine re-opening for dubious political reasons that could have been better spent.

There is nothing on major policy in the signed coalition document except that the coalition government supports Labour and NZ First policies. But what happens when they contradict each other?  Public debate, you say?

Where was the debate on closing down oil and gas exploration?  Where in the coalition document does it forewarn us that the government intended to close it down?

There is nothing in the document about adding or removing land currently included under Schedule Four of Crown Minerals Act. 40% of New Zealand falls into this category and some land with no conservation value could and should be removed from Schedule Four and made available for mining. Instead, the Greens are quietly muttering about revisiting Schedule Four, not to remove land that shouldn’t be there, but to add in more land.  Little wonder they want to increase Department of Conservation funding.

Which brings us to the Confidence and Supply Agreement between Labour and the Greens, link to the agreement here. Unsurprisingly, their list is long and predictable with no mention of funding for their expensive schemes because they too think chucking someone else’s hard earned money at a problem will fix it. Their list includes the following gems:

• Aim for a net zero emissions economy by 2050
• All new legislation to be evaluated for climate impact
• Government subsidy for low-income earners using public transport
• 100% renewable electricity by 2035
• Government-backed Green Investment Fund of $100 million
• Reduce congestion by chucking more money at walking and cycling options (the mind boggles over this one)
• Enforce the Resource Management Act (which should be scrapped and rewritten)
• More money for Department of Conservation
• More money for endangered plants and animals
• More money to university students
• More money to low-income earners
• Money to reunite refugee families
• More money for alcohol and drug addiction

More money, more money, more money…spend, spend, spend.  Where are the new developments to fund it?

How can one of our most valuable and undeveloped industries, mining, have any confidence in this government? Now that a death blow has been dealt to oil and gas exploration, is the government considering closing down exploration for coal and mineral resources too?

We will only find out the answers when this non-transparent government is good and ready to do stuff many of us object to.

The undisclosed notes and lack of transparency leading up the final coalition document is just another nail in the coffin of MMP.

A Whaleoil post by Cam Slater quotes Tracey Watkins who is critical of Cindy’s defensiveness about her weak coalition government saying: Quote.

As [Cindy] reminded reporters on the way into Parliamentary Question time on Wednesday, hers is the first “pure” coalition government since the introduction of MMP more than 20 years ago. That might as well be code for “hospital pass”.  End of quote.

This is arguably the worst coalition government we have seen. MMP has been put to the test with the current coalition government and been found wanting, wanting transparency.

Credit Mark Mitchell

I thought it was a little strange when Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern cancelled two scheduled interviews for this weekend citing a diary mix-up.  I would have thought she had plenty of PR people who could keep those things straight for her, but apparently not. I shrugged and carried on with my day.

Then a few hours later, the latest botch-up hit the news and it made sense. She’s avoiding the media in case they want to ask nasty little questions. Questions like why are we having to pay $107,500 to someone for a job that was, and now isn’t?

Newsie reports the story.  Quote:

Govt to pay Derek Handley $100k after CTO offer retracted.

Tech entrepreneur Derek Handley was offered the role of the country’s first Chief Technology Officer, but will now be paid out $100,000 after the offer was retracted by the government.

The government has called a halt to the appointment process for the position.

Megan Woods, the Minister for Government Digital Services, said a full-stop had been put on the process as the government reconsidered its approach to digital transformation.

Mr Handley, a New Zealand entrepreneur, will be paid out $100,000 – three months of the one-year contract for services – and $7500 for any set-up expenses.

In a message posted on LinkedIn, Mr Handley said it had been a distressing time for his family who moved to Auckland from New York for the role.[…]  End of quote.

I can’t say I blame him being disappointed, that’s quite an upheaval bringing the family from New York back to New Zealand for a job that has now, well, vanished.

But this all gets very murky and confusing.

As you will recall, Clare Curran was sacked from her Open Government and Government Digital Services portfolios because she failed to record a meeting she had with Derek Handley back in February this year and failed to disclose the meeting in answer to a written question.

In an article in a Newspaper on 24th August about Ms Curran’s sacking, Ms Ardern was quoted as saying:

The State Services Commission will examine the CTO appointment process to ensure the Handley-Curran meeting had no bearing on process or outcome. The SCC will report back before the appointment is made.

Handley remains a candidate for the CTO position. An appointment is expected to be made shortly.  End of quote.

Yet when we read the statement from Derek Handley posted on LinkedIn today, he says:  quote:

One month ago I was offered and accepted the position as the first Chief Technology Officer for New Zealand.  End of quote.

So if I get my diary out, one month ago from 14th September would mean that Derek was offered and accepted the job on 14th August. 

And yet we have Ms Ardern saying on 24th August that Handley remains a candidate for the CTO position.

This is very confusing, and there are a number of questions that Ms Ardern absolutely needs to address.

Ms Ardern, can you please clarify exactly when Derek Handley was offered the job. If the date given in answer to that question doesn’t match your statement from 24th August that ‘an appointment is expected to be made shortly’, please explain.

What I’m also confused about is why this role is now suddenly not required. It was created back in December 2017 and signed off by the prime minister. Months were spent screening potential candidates, conducting interviews, only for the job to be pulled nine months down the track, after an appointment has finally been made. That just makes no sense.

Let’s go back to the Newsie article.  Quote:

Ms Woods, who took over the ministerial role from the embattled Clare Curran, said she had asked officials to review the CTO position and to make sure there were no overlaps with any other existing roles.

“Today we’ve put a full stop on this process.

“What’s clear is that we need to step back and have a good look at the role and see how it fits in with the other work being done in the digital transformation space.[…]

[…] “However as the new Minister I have asked officials to review the CTO role and provide advice on the best ways to drive a forward-looking digital agenda for New Zealand.  End of quote.

Sure Megan, that all sounds very plausible.  About as plausible as Jacinda having a diary conflict.

Nick Smith sums it up pretty well in the Newsie story:  Quote:

National Party state services spokesperson Nick Smith said the process around appointing a Chief Technology Officer had been “a shambles from the beginning”.

“It involved secret meetings and emails, the resignation of Minister Clare Curran and now we’re paying Derek Handley around $100,000 for a job he never even started.

“The government must now come clean with the hidden emails from Clare Curran and the Prime Minister so we know the full story of how badly this was handled.

“The Government should apologise to taxpayers for wasting their money and Mr Handley for wasting his time. He’s right to have criticised the process for lacking in transparency.”  End of quote.

All this from what was promised to be the most open and transparent government ever.

PHOTO-South Auckland Middle School facebook page

In honour of Maori Language Week, we at Whaleoil have decided to dedicate one post each day to highlight a Maori word that has particular significance to Maoridom.

Today’s Maori Word of the Week is: piki.

Definition: success.

Thanks to the innovation of New Zealand’s Charter schools many Maori and Pasifika children have been experiencing lots of piki.

Sadly the Labour coalition government is forcing the closure of all charter schools and making them conform to an education (one size fits all) system that has been a barrier to piki for so many Maori children.

PHOTO-Supplied to Whaleoil
Dominic Elliot holding a sign: “Jacinda where is your support now?”

Mike Hosking says Jaciinda Ardern lacks a spine: Quote:

I assume no one is missing the irony that poor old Clare Curran could see what needed to be done, but her boss once again couldn’t.

And because of that it raises once again the question as to just what, in Ardern’s mind, you have to do to get sacked.   

She, of course, claims Curran had already been sacked as a Cabinet minister. But we know differently.

Ardern seems to be keen to play with words, Curran was already gone on Friday when she was busy on this radio station giving no indication whatsoever that that was the case.

Oh there was an excuse, some rationale about family members and party officials being told.

But that’s the stuff that looks manipulative and dodgy. It’s the stuff that’s never quite as clean and clear as it needs to be. End quote.

Sneaky and furtive as her ex-minister. Quote:

Now, in her mind Ardern might well still be sitting there this morning having convinced herself she is right, and we are all wrong. And that some sort of touchy-feely approach to discipline is the modern way.

But it doesn’t add up. You can’t, on one hand, stand there talking about the high standards you expect of your ministers, while on the other hand defending a serial offender and refusing to sack them and offering up excuses about having a bad day at the office.

The two don’t gel.

So at least Curran has done the right thing, but in doing so has highlighted how Ardern didn’t.

And that’s before we get to Meka Whaitiri. If it’s true what Stuart Nash told us last Wednesday that she denies it, it’s a “she said, she said” sort of affair. And that is a mess that doesn’t easily get resolved.

And goes further to highlight that, one, it’s the Labour Party that is letting the coalition down. And Ardern’s other excuse that “this is government” and “it’s what happens in government” equally doesn’t wash, given her partners seemingly have nothing like the same trouble Labour has.

And two, both of those in trouble are women in a Cabinet Ardern was desperate to make 50/50 gender-wise and has already fallen short, before she losses potentially two of them.

And three, this increasingly looks like a party that had no expectation of government, has put all hands to the pump, and too many of those hands don’t know what they’re doing. End quote.

They haven’t a clue. They are led by a clueless prime minister. Quote:

And that is before you get to Winston Peters, who increasingly looks like an experienced settled, if not, ever so slightly Machiavellian sort of operator. He’s increasingly offering policy influence and direction for the Government without seemingly keeping the Prime Minister in the loop. End quote.

Winston is actually doing a good job.  Quote:

And all of this was put in to spectacular context on Friday with Curran’s emotional resignation, he talked of her time in Cabinet, the achievements, the areas she worked on.

All of which would have been fine if it encompassed five or six years of service, but in reality it’s not even one.

These guys have just arrived last week, and look how loose the wheels are already. End quote.

Very loose and in danger of falling off. Labour’s problem is two fold. First their leader is an emotional wreck who seems to want to govern on feelz. Just the other day she was saying being criticised for her $80,000 jaunt to Nauru hurt deeply. The second issue they have is their exceedingly shallow talent pool. It is so shallow you could wade through it and not even get close to wetting the hem of your trousers.