Meka the Muss scandal rolls on with leaked report

by Cameron Slater on September 28, 2018 at 8:00am

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.

That is unacceptable for anyone but much worse for the party of the workers, the Labour party. Bosses are supposed to treat staff with respect, not leave them bruised and shaken. Maybe the employee should meet with her union delegate.
What is more interesting is that the report leaked. So much for being the most open and transparent government in history. It sounds very much like someone thought this would be white-washed by the prime minister, who seems to have bought a job lot of white-wash.
One week on the job and she gets bruises and wants to quit. That is some pretty bad workplace bullying going on there from a member of the party that touts itself as the party of the workers.
If a National MP, or indeed a bloke MP had assaulted a staffer, Labour would be demanding their immediate resignation from Parliament. The unions would be issuing stroppy press releases demanding the same. Labour’s hypocrisy is astonishing and the silence of their online cheerleaders appalling.

Why are we even considering compensation?

by Christie on September 27, 2018 at 9:30am

Mike Yardley at Stuff is asking the very pertinent question of why we are even considering paying compensation to people who were evicted from houses that were contaminated with methamphetamine. We shouldn’t be. quote.

How many news scribes bothered to read Housing New Zealand’s (HNZ) methamphetamine contamination report last week, before rushing to join the feeding frenzy of condemnation?

Did any of them peruse the full report before being played like a fiddle by the master of choreography, Housing Minister, Phil Twyford? end quote.

Unlikely. The preaching had already started and had been used as an opportunity to beat the previous government with a big stick over trying to keep tenants safe from contamination. quote:


Much of the commentary in HNZ’s 188-page report has been pasteurised to please the ideological persuasions of their political masters. But buried beneath the spin and fluff, some searing facts provide some sobering context about the scourge of meth in state housing and how the agency arguably acted in good faith.

Since July 2013, 4958 of HNZ’s properties have been contamination-tested, triggered by reasonable grounds for suspicion, with 2483 properties testing above the Ministry of Health and Standards New Zealand’s prevailing thresholds at the time.

Of those, 1214 properties were tenanted when testing was carried out. In the case of 264 properties, HNZ was satisfied that the present tenants weren’t responsible for the contamination and they were promptly rehoused. HNZ also paid for their moving costs and shelled out grocery vouchers or cash grants to atone for placing them in contaminated rentals. end quote.

So those that were blameless were rehoused and compensated at least to a point. If it was me, I would simply be grateful to be moved out of a house that could seriously damage my family’s health. quote:

In a further 159 properties, the tenants were allowed to stay put, while it was remedied. But for 791 properties, the occupants were found responsible for the contamination, they were not rehoused, and were served with a seven-day notice, a 90-day notice, or a Tenancy Tribunal order to vacate.

The HNZ report also reveals that of their rentals that tested positive for meth, 565 of them actually clocked up a reading of 15μg/100cm2 or higher. (The new contamination threshold as decreed by Sir Peter Gluckman.) end quote.

Not a case of passing contamination then. These houses would still breach the limits, even if tested today. quote:

Remember the 87-year-old pensioner who was forced out of her rental of 60 years? The TV news channels paraded her last week as a prime victim of HNZ’s “bogus testing”. Not only did HNZ rehouse her and pay the moving costs, but her rental recorded an off-the-charts meth reading of 22.5ug/100cm2. And that followed the tenant’s son arranging for the property to be commercially cleaned before testing. There had also been a firearms incident at the place. end quote.

Obviously a dear, sweet, little old lady. quote.

Yes, in the great majority of cases, the positive meth readings fell well short of the new Gluckman threshold that HNZ has now embraced. However, why are we frittering away big bucks compensating the occupants of those 791 properties, who had been cooking or smoking meth in their state rentals?

Why should hundreds of bad eggs be financially rewarded for criminal behaviour or breaching their tenancy agreement, just because of overcautious meth contamination readings? end quote.

Don’t we call this government criminal huggers? Is that what this is? quote.

Furthermore, the Government is forcing HNZ to lurch from one perceived extreme to another. The era of “zero tolerance” for illegal drug activity has been turned on its head, with a “zero-eviction policy” for illegal drug use now in force.

Meth use in state houses no longer carries any sanctions. end quote.

Is this for real? It is now okay to use meth in a state house? quote.

If you’re a meth user, you’ll be offered access to fully-funded addiction treatment services. That’s a worthy, welcome initiative.

But if you spurn every offer of help, preferring to pursue your recalcitrant lifestyle, there’ll be no repercussions, unless you’re unlucky enough to be collared by the cops for burglary or the like, to support your habit.

And if you contaminate your rental beyond the new Gluckman threshold, HNZ will now happily transfer you to another property. No problem. end quote.

Which will simply be contaminated again. Then on to the next one and the next one and so on.

This government is completely crazy. The waiting lists for state houses are getting longer by the day and all that they can do is to continue to reward people for criminal behaviour. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Contrast that with a landlord who, if they have not insulated their rental property by July 2019, can be fined $4000, with the money going to the tenant. How about compensating landlords who have to decontaminate their properties because of these criminals? That’s never going to happen. Because landlords are fat cats, so we can’t have that.

Twyford’s arrogance shown up by officials

by Cameron Slater on September 25, 2018 at 9:00am

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.

More info emerges about Meka the Muss

by Cameron Slater on September 26, 2018 at 8:00am

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.

Let’s do what exactly, Cindy?

by Suze on September 15, 2018 at 12:30pm

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.

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.

$100k for the job that wasn’t

by Deb on September 15, 2018 at 9:30am

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.

Who’s the daddy lion?

by Cameron Slater on September 15, 2018 at 9:00am

Cindy on Winston’s knee.
Photoshopped image credit: Luke

On The AM Show Kris Faafoi was trying out some new lines to try and describe the NZ First-led government: Quote:

A Labour MP says political commentators are yet to figure out what much of the public already has – that this Government is the first “pure” MMP Government.

This Government is not the same as the previous Government,” new Minister of Broadcasting Kris Faafoi told The AM Show on Friday.

“The previous Government had a lion and a lamb, and when the lion said ‘jump’, the lamb said, ‘How high?’ In this Government we’ve got more than one lion, and we have agreed… to a whole lot of stuff. And if we want to do other things, instead of answering ‘how high’… we say, ‘Why should we jump? Let’s have a discussion about those kinds of things.’” End quote.


I think we all know who the lion is, and boy is he roaring.Quote:

Critics of the Government have latched onto disagreements between Labour and NZ First, the two parties which make up the formal coalition, over issues such as the refugee quota and justice reform.

National MP Judith Collins, perhaps unsurprisingly, is one of those critics.

The party needs to actually work out who’s in charge,” she told The AM Show. “As Kris says, there’s three lions there – which one of them’s the big daddy lion?

She said it’s clearly NZ First leader Winston Peters. End quote.


Puppet master Winston.
Photoshopped image credit: Luke

But here is the sledge of the day, from Judith Collins:Quote:

“It’s really great that Jacinda’s going to dump all her TV bookings for this weekend so she can do a speech on Sunday to tell us all what’s happening… We’ve got Winston Peters off the reservation on various issues, the Greens off on the other side and we’ve got Jacinda in the middle, saying: ‘What the hell is going on here?’” End quote.

Can anyone imagine Simon Bridges being able to say that?Quote:

Ms Ardern was due to appear on Three’s Newshub Nation and TVNZ’s Q+A this weekend, but pulled out of both, her press secretary claiming it was a “simple diary issue”. National leader Simon Bridges will appear on Newshub Nation in her place.

Mr Faafoi said instead Ms Ardern will deliver a speech to outline what the Government has achieved in its first year, and “what we intend to do for the next 24 months and hopefully beyond”. End quote.

It will be a short speech then. Quote:

Clare Curran’s resignation last week saw Mr Faafoi pick up the broadcasting portfolio. While Ms Curran was a member of Cabinet, Mr Faafoi has been left outside, with Cabinet shrinking to 19 with Ms Curran’s demotion.

Ms Collins said if Mr Faafoi wants to take Ms Curran’s spot in Cabinet, he knows what he has to do.

“Kris just has to become a woman and he’ll get into Cabinet – that’s the problem, you see? I’ve told him what he has to do. I don’t know if he’s prepared to do it.”

Mr Faafoi didn’t respond to Ms Collins’ suggestion. End quote.

Two great sledges in one 15 minute slot.

Faafoi could always identify as a woman. That seems to be a thing these days.

Maori language week: word for the day

by SB on September 13, 2018 at 6:15pm

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?”

Maori language week: Word for the day

by Christie on September 12, 2018 at 6:15pm

Andrew Little with a fist full of dollars.
Photoshopped image credit: Boondecker

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: Apo

Definition :  Apo, verb, to grasp greedily, grab, appropriate, acquire greedily.

Usage: very common, particularly in Treaty negotiations or renegotiations.

The above photo was taken during negotiations with Ngapuhi in August (with some assistance from Boondecker). Clearly, the talks were going well.

Once a Treaty settlement has been agreed and signed, however, this does not necessarily mean that the agreement is final and no more money will be paid by the Crown. quote:

Ngai Tahu and Tainui received huge top-ups, totalling $370 million, to their supposed “full and final” Treaty of Waitangi settlements.

Waikato-Tainui received $190m and the South Island’s Ngāi Tahu $180m – more than they originally settled for in 1995 and 1998, respectively.

The Government made the payments on December 15 [2017] without any public announcement, but they were discovered by Stuff and confirmed by the Office of Treaty Settlements this week. e

Tell me lies tell me sweet little lies

by SB on September 11, 2018 at 1:00pm

A reader wrote to me and pointed out that he had noticed that often what New Zealand Muslims say to the media does not match Islamic texts.

His first example was what he called a “puff piece” article from the Otago Daily Timesthat was written not long after one of the many Islamic terror attacks in the Western world. Quote.

Muslim imam Mustenser Qamar said the Quran strongly condemned terrorism, but not everybody realised that.

“There’s no form of terrorism allowed in Islamic teachings,” he said

“These people, I like to call them ‘so-called muslims’, because they’re not acting on Islamic teachings. End quote.

Typically after every such attack, Muslims are interviewed by the media and tell us that “Islam doesn’t support terrorism”.

These two verses from two of Islamic texts, however, contradict the above claim. quote.

Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror, and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures.

–  (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220)

“Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the Fire: And evil is the home of the wrong-doers!”

–  Quran  (3:151)end quote.


The Islamic Women’s Council  of New Zealand responded to comments made by disgraced Imam Dr Mohammad Anwar Sahib  by saying…

While we may disagree with aspects of Jewish theology, and may have political disagreements, we see the Jewish people as closely connected to us through the Abrahamic tradition. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) had good relationships with his Jewish neighbours and encouraged Muslims to do the same. We are permitted to eat their kosher food, and we offer them our respect.

These quotes from Islamic texts contradict the Islamic Women’s Council of New Zealand.

O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.”
–  Quran  5:51

“And well ye knew those amongst you [Children of Israel] who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: “Be ye apes, despised and rejected.”

–  Quran 2:65

“The Jews were made to come down, and Allah’s Messenger imprisoned them. Then the Prophet went out into the marketplace of Medina (it is still its marketplace today), and he had trenches dug in it. He sent for the Jewish men and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in batches. They numbered 800 to 900 boys and men. As they were being taken in small groups to the Prophet, they said to one another, ‘What do you think will be done to us?’ Someone said, ‘Do you not understand. On each occasion do you not see that the summoner never stops? He does not discharge anyone. And that those who are taken away do not come back. By God, it is death!’ The affair continued until the Messenger of Allah had finished with them all.”

–  Al-Tabari, Vol. 8, p. 35, See Also Ishaq:464

In fact, Muhammad’s dying words included a curse on Jews for building their place of worship at their prophets’ graves.

When the last moment of the life of Allah’s Apostle came he started putting his ‘Khamisa’ on his face and when he felt hot and short of breath he took it off his face and said, “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets.” The Prophet was warning (Muslims) of what those had done.”

– Sahih Bukhari 1:8:427

“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you and when you meet any one of them on the roads force him to go to the narrowest part of it.”

–  Sahih Muslim 26:5389

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.”

– Sahih Muslim 41:6985,

See also Sahih Muslim 41:6981Sahih Muslim 41:6982Sahih Muslim 41:6983Sahih Muslim 41:6984, and Sahih Bukhari 4:56:791

Finally, a completely different reader contacted me this week to point out how the words reported by the MSM from FIANZ do not match their actions. He wrote…

Taqwa Mosque is still listed on FIANZ. The imam at the mosque is the same who believes he is due an apology for being exposed saying that women should not leave the house without permission and that Jews are the enemies of Muslims. FIANZ spoke against him and stood him down from their board but still endorse his mosque.WTF?

It is hard to escape the feeling that just like in other Western countries Islam is the religion of sweet little lies to prevent non-Muslims from being spooked by the truth. They actually have a special word for it.

deception; the islamic word for concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies.