New Blog Name!

My blog name is NX-Files. Basically it's a play on my username (NX) and the TV series The X-Files (which coincidentally is one of my favourite shows).

As before, I'll be simul-blogging on Windows Live Spaces & Blogger, but this time with the same blog name.

http://nx-files.blogspot.com
http://nx-files.spaces.live.com

I decided that the blog names 'Brashtalk' and 'NinthFloor' were a little too obsecure and I wanted to include my username in the URL.

It's very painful chosing a blog name. This will be the last time I'm going to change my blog URL, ever ;) . NX-Files is a fairly generic and inoffensive blogname, so it's perfect.

Even though I've settled on a blog name, I haven't settled on a platform. There are things I like about in both Windows Live Spaces and Blogger. However, in terms of user friendly-ness and customisation - Blogger is streets ahead. WL Spaces can't seem to handle even basic HTML. However I do like the uniqueness factor that comes with WL Spaces because everyone seems to have a blogger account.

Check 'em out. I'd appreciate any feed back on design and layout of the two platforms.

Winston Still Minister of Foreign Affairs....

...... according to both Helen & Peter's websites.  Helen suppose to be acting Foreign Affair's minister, a subject she 'loves', yet it's not listed as one of her responsibilities. 

The Labour website should be kept up-to-date because they're the governing party (for now) and the site is paid for by the taxpayer.

                        

        

 

Technorati Tags: Helen Clark,Winston Peters,Foreign affairs,websites

Corruption

The Owen Glenn, Winston Peter, and Mike Williams saga is just one piece of a puzzle for which the picture has been quite clear for sometime now; Helen Clark owes her third term to acts of corruption. 

You don't have to be partial to conspiracy theories to realise this.  Lets see.....

- Labour stole $820,000 from the tax payer to fund a key component of their '05 election campaign.

- Labour broke the electoral spending cap - an act defined as a corrupt practice in the law.

- The Maori Party was offered $250,000 to side with Labour post '05 election.

- Labour's biggest donor gave $100,000  to Winston Peters early after the 2005 election to pay for his legal battles with National's Bob Clarkson and possibly even Rodney Hide.

- Labour and Winston Peters obtained copies of 100s of Don Brash's and National's email correspondence and released some of them at critical times during the '05 election campaign.  How they got them they won't say.

- Owen Glenn gave Labour a $100,000 interest free loan to help pay for Labour's '05 election overspend, a loan which Mike William initially denied.

- Labour arranged buses to take Mangere voters to the polls.  This in itself isn't corrupt (though taking advantage of the politically naive Pacific Islanders is hardly ethical), Labour's '05 Mangere candidate Philip Field is up for charges of corruption.  There has also been recent speculation that Labour bribed Mangere people KFC for votes!

- Well before the '05 election Helen Clark and Phil Goff broke an important convention and released MFAT notes take during a meeting between National and American senators.  They then used the 'gone by lunchtime' quote as an attack theme during the '05 election.

- Post '05 election Labour passed a law to make their illegal overspending legal. 

- Post '05 election Labour passed the radial Electoral Finance Act without even consulting opposition parties; a break in parliamentary convention of the worst kind.

- Post '05 election Labour has stacked the public service with their cronies; another serious break in parliamentary convention.

The above points are all fact and have been reported in the media.  They either show an abuse of power or outright corruption on Labour's part.   New Zealand is a small democracy with only one house of parliament and no constitution.  Conventions are what hold the place together, so to deliberately break them is very serious.

The facts are pretty damming, but I reckon there's more going on behind the scenes but can not be proven (yet).  For example. 

- Helen Clark won't fire Winston Peters because she not only knew about Glenn's donation to Winston Peters, but approved it.  In fact the donation may have been a condition of Winston's coalition deal with Helen.

It all adds up to the 2005 election being stolen from National and Don Brash.  And this is why I can't stand Helen Clark and why she has to lose the election on November 08/08.

Technorati Tags: Helen Clark,corruption,Winston Peters,Owen Glenn,2005 election,Don Brash,National,Labour,convention,serious breach,Mike Williams

Misdirection: Environmental issues

Amazon idea

As I stood next to one huge forest fire, I thought of all the times I have been urged to unplug my phone charger, turn my TV off standby or turn the thermostat down by a couple of degrees.

Yet I cannot remember ever being told that the fires burning down the rainforest are responsible for 20% of worldwide carbon emissions, the same amount as all the transport in the world combined.

The leftist blog 'The Standard' bangs on about political misdirection so much that I decided to steal the term to highlight the substantial issue of environmental misdirection.

With attention focused on carbon emissions, other environmental issues like deforestation of the rain forest and reduced species biodiversity are left by the wayside. 

While celebrities lecture us about reducing our carbon footprint to achieve a non-specific goal, species are becoming extinct and forests are being destroyed.   

It's very easy to measure success with saving a species e.g. increase the kiwi population by 10,000 birds.  But you can never fail if you're advocating climate change because how do you know if you succeed?

Climate change, rain forest, misdirection, biodiversity.

 

 

Should John Key have delivered his messaged to beneficiaries?

 

Fran O'Sullivan: Key could send powerful message to DPB women

 

It's a pity National leader John Key did not reach out directly to domestic purposes beneficiaries to persuade them why it was in their best interests to seek work once their youngest reaches six. 
 

Fran does have a point.   John Key would've received a lot of mana if he delivered his message to an audience full of beneficiaries. He also would've also received more media coverage.   

 

Sure there would've been the odd heckle and Key would've had to moderate his language, but the pay-off in the eyes of the voters could be worth it. 

 

However, given his message was well received by the voters - it may have not been worth the risk. 

 

Fran O'Sullivan , Beneficiaries , John Key ,

 

 

Winston Peter's and the privileges committee

 

Fighting talk from Winston Peters before privileges hearing

 

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters says he is happy for the public to hear what he has to say to the privileges committee next Monday and wishes the hearing was earlier in the day so more people could attend.

Yes of course is he. 

 

Mr "5.6%" Peters is both irrelevant and important at the same time -  which is exactly why MMP is flawed. 

Then again, any Labour minister brought in front of the privileges committee would get similar amounts of attention.  The difference being the attention would be unwanted in the Labour minister's case.

 

All Winston needs is 5% of the vote, so any publicity is good publicity. 

 

Sure what Winston has done is hypocritical and reflects badly on himself, but the irony is that the heavy news coverage may actually help him. 

 

In my opinion - Winston doomed himself and his party as soon as he signed up with Labour which is the main reason why they're low in the opinion polls.  NZ 1st voters are naturally conservative.  So all the scandals surrounding Winston only cements his supporters because 95% of New Zealanders wouldn't vote for him anyway. 

 

I haven't blogged specially on Peters up till now because frankly he's just a sideshow.... a has been.  He had promise in 1996 & 2002, but he continually disappoints.  Many National voters who defected to him in 2002 did so on the proviso he would be a formidable voice in opposition to Labour - because at the time National sure wasn't.  But instead he spent the entire time attacking National and even more so when Dr Brash became leader.  His attacks haven't really subsided since John Key became leader. 

 

Winston has past up one opportunity after another.

 

 

Winston Peters , New Zealand First ,Privileges committee 

 

Touchstone Quiz

After reading that the left-wing activities who infiltrated the Nats conference and quizzed MPs on left-touchstone issues, I decided to quiz myself on the issues.

I'm defining a touchstone issue as something that divides opinion. Other bloggers are welcome to take the quiz and post results on their blogs. The best way to determine your political allegiances is when you consider the issues rather than party personalities. So am I right or left - libertarian or authoritarian?


1. Civil unions: for or against?

For. If people want their relationship to be reconginised in the eyes of the law... why not. Though from a libertarian perspective I personally don't see why the state needs to validate relationships.

2. Prostitution Reform Act reform: for or against?

Leaning toward against. I hate to think this has become a genuine career choice for young woman....

3. Legalised Cannabis for or against?

Leaning toward for. Ultimately I'm for freedom of choice. But scientific evidence shows cannabis can cause genetic damage. Then again.. I drink diet coke.


4. Nuclear weapons: for or against?

For unfortunately. A necessary evil. In any other time an army numbering in the millions (China and Iran) would be out conquering countries. The only thing keeping them at bay are nuclear weapons.

5. US naval ship visits: for or against?

For - for the reason above.

6. Republic or Monarchy.

Monarchy. Because I consider British traditions part of our culture too!

7. Anti-smacking: for or against?

Leaning toward for.

8. Global warming: Skeptic or believer.?

Leaning toward skeptic. I can accept the world is warming, but the political measures to combat GW are rubbish. The elephant in the room GW activists ignore is population growth. One person = how many energy efficient bulbs...? I support reducing carbon for clean air benefits. However the ETS is rubbish.

9. Nuclear power for New Zealand: for or against?

For. Should be at least on the table - especially if the hydrogen economy comes about and to reduce carbon emissions. A royal commission of enquirer would determine if it's right for NZ

10. Genetic engineering: for or against?

For. How else are we going to feed the worlds ever going population?

11. Kiwibank: Sell or keep?

Leaning toward sell. Don't Kiwibank and Westpac et al. borrow money from the same off shore location? So interest paid on Kiwibank mortgages goes to the same off shore lender. The main argument for keeping it in my eyes is they have branches in rural locations.

12. Broadband or trains?

Broadband. Trains are so last century.

13. Electoral finance act: for or against?

Against - let the Exclusive Brethren and the unions campaign - the electorate is smart enough to sort out crap from crap.

14. State funding: for or against?

Against. But could be convinced otherwise.

15. MMP: for or against?

Against. Another proportional system please - perhaps like what the Aussies have.

16. Obama or McCain?

Obama - because I'm sick of anti-Americanism. Though I wish he was pro-free trade.

17. Minimum wage increases: for or against?

For - as long as the increases are pegged to some sort of wage growth index. Currently the minimum wage equals $26000 a year before tax (based on a 40 week). That's enough to get by, but is pretty rubbish really. But to be honest I haven't considered the economic implications.

Touchstone , Quiz , Philosophy

English back in the good books

English hits back at talk of Key coup

 

EMBATTLED NATIONAL deputy leader Bill English says he will "never" challenge John Key for the party leadership.

English, who was National leader from 2001 to 2003, said he no longer wanted the post "because John Key is doing an excellent job and, having worked with a number of leaders and been one, I'm probably in a better position than most to judge that".

Sometimes you just need to be reassured.  There's nothing more damaging than a perception of fractured leadership team. 

 

 

coup , John Key , Bill English ,

 

Helen's Olympic no-show = early election?

It's curious why Helen Clark didn't attend the Olympic games opening ceremony. I saw Kevin Rudd,  Sarkozy, Bush and a number of other country leaders on the big screen.  There is an immense amount of pride when you see your Olympic team enter the stadium and it's surprising Helen Clark didn't take the opportunity to be associated with that.

 

One possible reason is that she's planning for an early election.

 

Helen Clark , Olympics 

 

 

On English and Key

Fran O'Sullivan: Loose words sparking talk of hidden agenda

 

It is Key's loose-lipped talk, coupled with the rather too frank comments that English sometimes makes about him, that would have persuaded his opponents that the deputy would be a rich candidate for entrapment. Who can forget his priceless "I'm a stayer, he's a sprinter. I grind away, John just bounces from one cloud to another"?

I blogged this week that English's 'loose' comments about John Key were more a reflection of his style rather any split between the two.  Fran's column above throws doubt on my theory.  She speculates there is an 'ideological rift' between Key and English and that English will eventually roll Key for the prime ministership. 

 

Having leadership ambitions and differences in opinion are fine - even healthy - just as long as English doesn't under mind his leader.  So in light of Fran's column I've a couple of concerns about Bill English:

- English rates himself too highly evident by his comment that Brash and Key don't fully understand WfF

- Even though English said he'd never be leader again when he first became deputy, he still harbours leadership ambitions

- Combining the two above equals an un-contented deputy leader

 

I wonder whether Key made the right choice when he made English his deputy/finance minister.  So given my concerns I reckon Don Brash would've been the better choice for deputy/finance minister and keep Bill English as education spokesperson where he was doing an excellent job.  Brash would've been ideal for the job because after his failed bid for PM and his age - he'd have no desire to be leader again.

 

 

Don Brash , John Key , Bill English , Fran O'Sullivan

 

Trouble at mill for Gordon Brown

Testing the waters

 

However he will do so against the background in which for the first time since he faced Tony Blair, a genuine rival has emerged.

 

Gordon Brown spent the good part of decade hounding Tony Blair for the Premiership and destabilizing his government as a consequence.  So now the boot is finally on somebody else's foot - the Blairite David Miliband. 

 

'Poetic justice' some may say. 

 

Brown is now so obviously the underdog that I'm starting to think better of him.  Funny how that is.

 

 

Gordon Brown , David Miliband , UK Politics ,

 

Key hits the nail on the head

Recordings may have been doctored: Key

Mr. Key said Miss Clark could "go for it" but National would be running a positive campaign.

"If she's going to do everything from rort the electoral law, to get (journalist and author) Nicky Hager to listen into our emails, to go out there and get young Labour affiliates to be bugging our personal conversations, well that's her style of politics."

 

Here Here!  To recap Labour dirty deeds (in chronological order IIRC);

 

- the release confidential MFAT meeting notes

- rort of the electoral law (defined as a corrupt practice in the law)

- exploiting hundreds of National's stolen emails

- Labour affiliated John Key attack blog "The Standard"

- Labour affiliated National attack blog "08wire"gb

- secret recordings

 

There are likely to be many more instances such as the fact John Key's rubbish has been searched on multiple occasions.  Now much of the above can't be inextricability linked to Labour but it's all rather covenant 

 

There are a couple of possibilities for all of this; 

 

- Labour activists are even more psychotic and 'on to to it' than anyone thought and don't need guidance from their idols on the 9th floor - who are oblivious to what is going on.

- Labour are only casually aware.....

- Labour orchestrates and drives the whole operation from the 9th floor. 

 

I suspect it's a mixture of the latter two.  Some of the authors for the attack blogs work for Labour in the beehive!

 

You can learn much about a person by how they treat their enemies.  I can't even remotely consider voting for Labour until they ditch these dirty practices or at least condemn them for what they are. 

 

A change in style is exactly why I'm voting for John Key - regardless of how many dead rats/fishs he swallows.

 

 

Dirty deeds , Labour , John Key 

 

 

'The Standard' gone by lunchtime.....

.... well maybe not by lunchtime, but maybe after the election.

 

The Standard - Clown princes

 

In 2005, National gifted Labour the 'gone by lunchtime' comment.

 

It's rather pointless correcting information on 'The Standard' - there are none so blind as those who will not see (plus the authors work for Helen).  Anyway, the quote above is wrong. 

Helen and Phil Goff broke a very important convention by using the notes taken by a junior MFAT (ministry of foreign affairs and trade) official during the meeting between Dr Brash, Lockwood Smith and visiting US senators.  Even if Lockwood or Brash said the comment, the context is unknown - it may have been a joke or on another topic all together.  That is why you don't release what is meant to be confidential meeting notes (Goff only release a partial account).

 

As a consequence political parties no longer trust MFAT officials - another Labour legacy - which is a real shame.

 

Labour's willingness to use confidential notes, stolen emails, and secret recordings point to how dubious and dirty that party is under H1 and H2 - which is my 'hot button' issue for why I'm not voting Labour.

 

 

Helen Clark , Dr Brash , The Standard , Gone By Lunchtime , Dirty Politics

 

Paul Holmes on Bill English

Paul Holmes on English

 

The secret recordings of Bill English and Dr Lockwood Smith reveal nothing new but perhaps the realities of being in opposition.  However, as Paul Holmes said, Mr English's comments show a lack of respect toward John Key.  This is concerning but you've got to put it into context with English's style.  His tone can often be interpreted as disparaging but is unlikely to reflect what he really thinks. 

The evidence for this is the fact he is held in high regard within the National caucus.  What this highlights is that English isn't a very good communicator - which is a major reason why he didn't do too well in the 2002 election. 

This does not change the fact he's a highly competent MP and finance spokesperson.  He has an excellent grasp of the detail.  He made an excellent education spokesperson under Dr Brash. 

 

One positive from all of this is that John Key is really shining at crisis management - getting on top of the situation really quickly with his message sorted.

 

On a general note - it's pretty sad someone snuck in a microphone and recorded private chats.  A similar thing happened at Labour's conference during a more 'public' Q & A'  with Mike Williams.  Wonder if Labour's fingerprints are on this...?

 

Bill English , John Key , Secret recordings ,Paul Holmes 

Editoral: Debt now key election issue

Debt now key election issue

^ fair enough.   The main argument against borrowing is the cost of the interest, while the argument for borrowing is the potential for the new asset to generate income.  For example; A business may go into debt to pay for an extension to their shop with the idea the extra floor space will generate more profits which will ultimately benefit the business.

Each argument is just as valid so there is no right or wrong.  National is for borrowing while Labour claims to be against borrowing. 

If Labour want to make this an election issue, they're going to have to be far more convincing.  To make their case they should declare an aim to reduce debt to 15% of GDP, necessitating the need to keep taxes high.  Their key messages would be the savings resulting from the reduction in interest payments and the fact more money stays in NZ.

 As Labour stands at the moment with a plan to cut taxes by $10.5 billion and keep debt at around 20% of GDP - they don't have the platform to mount such a campaign without being called hypocrites. 

 

Debt , Election , National , Labour 

Aussie Labor keep troops in Iraq....

One of Kevin Rudd's major election planks has just gone by the wayside:

THE 1000 Australian soldiers, sailors and air force personnel in and around Iraq will be there "for a long time to come", Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon has warned.... That completes a comprehensive adjustment of the ALP's policy on Iraq and a significant shift from the impression created by Labor in opposition that Australia's role in Iraq was all but over.

Obama is currently campaigning to withdraw troop from Iraq.  All bets are off on this one.

Iraq , Kevin Rudd , Obama  

 

 

Republicanism by Stealth..... QCs no more

Senior counsel replaces queen's counsel under law change

 

The title Senior Counsel replaces Queen's Counsel under a law that came into force today and Attorney-General Michael Cullen has convened a selection panel for the first appointments. 
 

Labour's continual harping on about National's a secret agenda is really just a cover for their own secret agendas; one of them being republicanism by stealth.   

Labour has made a number of subtle changes over the years, removing crowns from logos, ditching the Privy Council, Knighthoods, and the word 'royal' where ever possible.  Now it appears Labour are ditching Queens Counsel, the designation for top lawyers, for Senior Counsel.

 

These terms and traditions are just as much part of our culture as they are part of British culture.  So when Labour changes these traditions to meaningless, bland, PC alternatives without consultation, they are taking away part of who we are.  Even if NZ became a republic there would be in harm in keeping the historic terminology. 

 

The surreptitious way this Labour government operates, practically those on the 9^th floor, is a major reason why they're getting the boot come 2008!

 

Republicanism , Labour , Secret Agenda , Queen's Counsel , culture  

 

My take on the Republican movement

Republican movement nominates potential Kiwi presidents

 

TheRepublican Movement has announced its top 10 nominees for the first President of New Zealand.

 

It's hard to articulate why I favour our current status quo i.e. Queen as head of state.  My opinion is evolving over time.

 

The advantages of kinship and  friendship have been debunked.  Just ask anyone who have tired to get a UK visa. 

 

Economically there doesn't appear to be any advantage for being a sovereign nation.  Great Britain's trade agreement with the European Economic Community put an end to that. 

 

Traditionally the UK is the first port of call for any New Zealanders heading overseas, but since the EU enlargement many of the jobs we use to get have been taken by the Polish.

 

So what reasons does that leave for why NZ should stay a sovereign nation? 

 

1.  Everyone knows the Queen and the British royals.  This gives a small country like NZ prominence of the world stage when they visit.

2.  Uniqueness.  Republics are a dime a dozen.  Only 16 nations can claim to be a realm of the commonwealth; it adds to our character.

3.  Politics.  Having a head of state above political influence is refreshing.  Even though the Government General is appointed by the government (with the Queen's approval).  Governments come and go, having a fixed family as head of state is like a constitutional anchor.

4.  History. 

5.  The New Zealand's fascination with the royals; better inside than out. 

 

The reasons above are not as good as the used to be i.e. economic and immigration wise.  But they are good enough to justify remaining a sovereign nation.  I don't accept David Farrar's reasoning that we should become a republic in order to enhance our constitution (due to Labour's disregard for convention) because we can do this anyway through entrenching certain laws. 

 

 

Republican Movement , Great Britain , David Farrar , Sovereign Nation , Commonwealth

 

Michael Cullen on John Key adopting Working for Families

Michael Cullen on John Key adopting Working for Families

 

"What I liken this to is imagine Santa Clause sitting down and hacking into your kids bank account, transferring money out of your kids bank accounts in to his, then buying you a present with them.  And you suppose to fill grateful for that".

 

The statement above was typed out word for word from Dr Cullen's piece on One News.  It a breathtaking display of hypocrisy given that Interest Free Student loans, Working for Families, and 20 hours free child care are essentially taken out of your bank account and given back to you in Labour gift wrapping.  These policies that Cullen has introduced are going to be very hard for any government to drop and will only increase in cost as time goes on.  They were introduced to win votes in the short term.

Tax cuts on the other hand stimulate the economy by offering a reward for the hour's you've worked.  

 

On the surface John Key's decision to adopt the full WfF is disappointing.  However, as David Farrar pointed out, to develop an alternative policy without the aid of government departments is difficult.  WfF would've been developed over a period of years by experts in the public service at a considerable cost to the taxpayer.  So with that in mind it makes sense to keep the policy until you have the government departments at your disposal to develop something better (and least intrusive). 

 

Michael Cullen , Working for Families , John Key , David Farrar

 

Three news Journalism or lack of it

Orewa'sRotary Club has once again proved to be a controversial venue for National's leader to hold a speech.

Known for Don Brash's race relations rant four years ago, tonight it was John Key's turn. However this time it was not for any policy announcement, but rather the fact that he apparently did not want the media there to cover it.

TV three's political coverage is often schizophrenic but this story was particularly annoying. 

1.  What was the point of the story?

2.  Where do they get off calling Don Brash's race relations speech a 'rant' - an emotive word which conveys an opinion.  They should just stick to the news and let the viewer form an opinion. 

Siding with Winston Peter's is like making a pack with the devil, but he does have a point about political journalism in this country.  And TV one isn't any better - remember their shocking story that someone in the National Party wasn't a fully signed up climate change believer. 

Don Brash , TV 3 , Journalism