Hard News: Locking in the Future
117 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
they’re a “do nothing” government – except for what they’re doing.
<Pendant> That is not a contradiction if "They" include their business mates.
It is just another example of "Us and Them"
The Government has become that two headed monster they like to call a PPP
Fuckn' Li'l P heads. -
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
they’re a “do nothing” government – except for what they’re doing.
And the not-at-all-secret secret agenda. Really, folks, this is sounding like the script for Saw, Part 69 -- it's all awfully familiar, but still doesn't make any sense.
-
Sacha, in reply to
-
Sacha, in reply to
if "They" include their business mates
isn't that the point?
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
if “They” include their business mates
isn’t that the point
Actually, if you look at who Tuanz represents, it’s some of the biggest companies in the land. And they’re really unhappy with Joyce.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Actually, if you look at who Tuanz represents, it’s some of the biggest companies in the land. And they’re really unhappy with Joyce.
You will notice, of course, that that list does not include Telecom. Other lists of companies that may lose out somewhere are the likes of Fulton Hogan and Feltcher Building, there are a few more but they are few, those mates. Every other supporter is just a deluded fool.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Every other supporter
It's not that black or white. Sensible business people are also unimpressed by the way this government are behaving, as Russell notes.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
I do wonder if Joyce’s dictatorial style is going to come back and bite him at some point.
Dictators overrate their ability to bargain. Businesses see them as a soft touch - you only need to convince one person, so you just do a full-court-press on them. Not many people can withstand sustained pressure.
Telecom is playing a game for all the marbles right now. It's telling that they've never seen a better time to make such an outrageously obvious play.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
It’s not that black or white. Sensible business people are also unimpressed by the way this government are behaving, as Russell notes
Last time, it got to the point where NBR ran an editorial endorsing Labour policy on local loop unbundling.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Sensible business people are also unimpressed by the way this government are behaving
Yet they are still supporters?
Deluded fools. -
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Other lists of companies that may lose out somewhere are the likes of Fulton Hogan
Doh!!!
What I meant to say was "Other lists of companies that may lose out somewhere would not include the likes of Fulton Hogan..."
I don't know how I slipped up that badly.
:-$ -
That list should also not include Petrobras
John Key sends in the Hired Goons.An Air Force Orion has been observing a protest flotilla in the sea off East Cape at the request of police.
The surveillance plane was sent after the Government asked police to monitor the protest.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Actually, if you look at who Tuanz represents, it’s some of the biggest companies in the land. And they’re really unhappy with Joyce.
Do I see a divide between the 'old economy' and the 'new economy' here?
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Do I see a divide between the ‘old economy’ and the ‘new economy’ here?
Very good point. This government certainly operates on an old ideology that looks at failed policies to achieve outdated results.
Who knows, will the new economy have a more realistic attitude to the, so called, War on Drugs? -
Sacha, in reply to
Yet they are still supporters?
no, they are not
-
I think we should be clear that having an evil-enrich-your-mates-who-donate-to-your-party-and-screw-the-poor agenda is not mutually exclusive of being incompetent-and-not-very-bright.
-
Sacha, in reply to
quite
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
I think we should be clear that having an evil-enrich-your-mates-who-donate-to-your-party-and-screw-the-poor agenda is not mutually exclusive of being incompetent-and-not-very-bright.
But it is in terms of caring for yourself and your cohorts and not giving a shit about others, a survivalist mode. Very un-evolved, which was the point of the article.
Stick up for the reptilian ones if you wish but don't deny the process.
We are just better as opposed to bitter. -
Sacha, in reply to
Stick up for the reptilian ones if you wish
How is saying they are incompetent 'sticking up for' them?
-
They are not merely incompetent, they are sub-Prime.
-
Umm, yeah, Steve, I wasn't responding to any particular article. It was more of a general observation. If anything, it was following on from nzlemming's post, earlier.
-
Rex Widerstrom, in reply to
Joyce took a paper to Cabinet arguing that unless they got a deal, they would default on their payments and go into liquidation.
And possibly Joyce was motivated by a desire to do a favour for his old business. But what of the rest of Cabinet? Why should they care?
Let's assume the report was right, and Mediaworks ended up in liquidation. First they'd try to sell the whole thing as a going concern. It's not impossible that another player would have bought it. Or they'd have tried selling it piece-by-piece as going concerns because that'd produce the greatest return to creditors. Only as a last resort would they auction off assets and spectrum (subject, I assume, to regulatory approval of the transfer) and even then I suspect communities and smaller operators may have kept their local station going.
So what would the end result of this Chicken Little scenario have been? Different ownership and, possibly, more diverse ownership. So again - why would Cabinet care?
Unless there's a quid pro quo in place, even if (and probably) unspoken, so it won't come out in the OIA documents...
-
Dear Russell,
I haven't been a reader since the Hobbit debate. I have to be honest in that I didn't really understand what was going on with it and nothing I read gave me a clearer understanding. Everyone was very emotive and involved.
I've since spoken to people I know and am still not sure about exactly what went on.
I do feel there is a major shift to reduce basic employment rights, and that the Hobbit with its marching and Sir Peter Jackson's backing was part of the PR for that. Now the government has come out and said business should take advantage of our comparatively poor pay it merely seems to confirm their agenda all along.
I was wondering if you were going to make a comment on Helen Kelly's in depth account (which I am still reading through). Also perhaps it would be good to know how you feel about the current changes to the employment law, and the abuses of the contractor/employee divide in our workplaces.
As Helen Kelly says
"Contract labour is also used by many employers to avoid obligations they would otherwise have to employees such as sick leave, paid holidays and employment security. Many workers in NZ are employed in this way for no personal benefit but with little choice"
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1104/S00081/helen-kelly-the-hobbit-dispute.htm
This can be the case where the contractor should be an employee but is uninformed or disempowered or both.
I feel this is important for my view of what New Zealand is, where we don't attack our weakest, we support them.
This is what I wrote at the time on another blog where you were putting your case:
martinb said...
I am at my core someone who wants things to reach an accord.I've long been an admirer, listener and reader of Russell Brown's. And I've never been a great fan of Chris Trotter. So it pains me greatly to find I may come down omre on Trotters side than Russels.
What upsets people like myself Russell, is that by attacking the union without equal balance, you add to the antiworker vitriol of the moment, much of which is unjustified.
I would expect from someone of, what I had considered to be, stature to post more like Tim Watkin at Pundit/TVNZ.
But instead there has been a lot of vitriol at an admittedly bizarre union campaign.
Feeling uneasy is not a sufficient response to this continual abuse of the democratic process by National.
I work in a work place where a lady with excellent performance of 3 years has just been let go. Despite excellent reviews from her clients (some of whom were in tears), peers and immediate manager she has been dismissed (she had been on 6 month contracts through that 3 year period) with poor performance cited).
This is not an isolated case below decks at the moment. By attacking the union without providing balance, irrespective of the merits of the case, it is easy to feel you are not supporting the people who this is happening to and that you don't care.
-
Apologies if this is the wrong forum.
As for the case above was settled and the lady has been snapped up by a larger company but I've heard of other abuses too.
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
Only as a last resort would they auction off assets and spectrum
A lot of commercial contracts have a clause that voids them if one party enters liquidation/bankruptcy. I wonder whether spectrum licenses do (or whether, in keeping with the mug-punter approach of the NZ government generally, they forgot).
Post your response…
This topic is closed.