"We on this side of the House, make no apology..."
If you are a watcher of Parliamentary TV, you'll have heard this arrogant refrain many, many times.
This must be 'phrase one' to be learned by all National Party MPs on the day they pull on their "Air of Superiority" blue underclothes, before going in to debate for the first time.
It's indicative.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
41 comments:
It sounds a lot like "let them eat cake" to me.
We on this side of the House make no apology for crushing this car. In fact, it's our proudest moment!
Nicely taken out of context RG.
If the refrain was - "We make no apology for [select as appropriate: doing/not doing] something the left [don't want/want] in the best interests of the country" then surely that deserves a medal.
Suggest you may want to have a close look at that air of superiority if I were you. ;-)
Paranormal
Do you think the Greens will apoligise for using taxpayers money to pay people to collect signatures for a public referendum.
It quite funny really, the so called 'Earth Party' could not even get volunteers to stand on the street for what they believe in, that had to pay them. I guess that means they agree with the USA style of politics where you use money to buy the decesions you want. Yep, honest, yep, integrity, sure, yep
Remind me who owns the council? You might be local government but doesnt Central Government own you?
'Air of superiority', paranormal?
I won't bother myself with considering such an 'air' - I've more important matters to attend to.
Oh, Towack, how mistaken you are. The Greens are apportioned taxpayer money to do what they choose in order to fulfil the mandate they got from the New Zealanders who voted for them. You know perfectly well that they have not been adminished by the Speaker for their use of those funds to circulate the petition. Your annoyance is misplaced.They have not 'used money to buy decisions' as you suggest, but have used money to enable the NZ public to record their choice on a matter. Enabling the public voice, Towack. Why do you fear that so?
Anonymous - who 'owns' the council? Good question. We are representative of our constituency, surely? As a Councillor, I'm beholden to those who ticked my name on the ballot paper; thoughtful people who want to reverse the environmental degradation that our region has suffered over time. At least, that what I imagine they were thinking when they voted for me. From discussions I've had with people who did vote for me, I think I've got it right. Central Government does have influence and requirements and is clearly seeking to have much more.
admonished
If the council sold up and moved away who would get the preceedings?
ie. Does the rate payer own the council or central Government?
Oh I dont fear it at all, the NZ public had their say as you well know, we agreed to partial asset sales at a wee thing called an election.
But keep the spin going, they need the help :)
Maybe you could help further, and save us poor taxpayers some money, by getting out and volunteering to get signatures on the street since the Greens obviously have no one else putting their hands up - maybe they are too busy planning their next under cover warfare in the North Island, or making petrol bombs, or getting their gardens ready for the next green crop.....
Proceedings, Anonymous? The 'council' is plant as well as people - which do you propose might be sold?
A reasonable Central Government would leave the proceeds in the community that invested in that plant and those people, I'd have thought. (ps - we are not planning to sell up, or sell out :-)
Not suggesting you would. I am just trying to understand who owns the Council.
Is it safe to assume that based on your comment that Central Government owns the Council? It is a genuine question I don't know the answer to.
Towack - your dislike for the Greens is palpable. The NZ public may have had their say, though you'd have to believe that every one who voted 'National' understood and supported every single policy, which of course, isn't the case, but that aside, they're/we're going to have another 'say' on one particular issue, asset sales, and then we'll know far more accurately whether New Zealndfers want to sell even a tiny fraction of them, or not. I'm guessing you fear to hear that 'we' do not. It'll sink National's, and with it,, the right-wing's, chances at the next election. Good on the Greens for taking the initiative to give a voice to the public that has been boxed into a position they don't want to be in.
It is not safe at all, to assume 'from my comment' that Central Government 'owns' the Council. Your deductive processes are somewhat opaque, Anonymous. Perhaps you should give the Councuil a ring and ask. The lovely woman at reception will probably have your answer.
You don't know?
As I was trying to say, Anonymous, your question is unclear. Do you mean, 'who owns the buildings, cars etc, or do you mean the Council's intellectual property, it's investments (land etc) , it's shares in SouthPort...I don't think it's a clear-cut as you seem to think. "Who owns the council" is a nebulous question that doesn't have a simple answer, so in answer to your question I'd say, no.
So does the Government have any ownership right?
Ownership of what? Can you be a bit more specific? I'm part of the Council and they don't own me.
Why not give the afore-mentioned "lovely woman" a call, Anon?
0800 732 732
or fax: 0800 732 329
You're welcome.
Robert,
I can't specify because I dont know the answer. If I suggest an item and you say "no" I am none the wiser. I am asking if Government has any ownership rights. Surely, if the Government does, you can say "yes" or "no" and what they are. If you don't know is there embarrassment in saying so?
I can imagine the fun in the council chambers if simple answers are so hard to find.
Suz,
Thanks for your help, but if the man at the top (and teetering) can't help I would imagine the answer is buried below.
PS. There is no hidden reference to a certain Leunig cartoon and pedestal there.
We do have fun in the boardroom, Anonymous, and often it's because the answers aren't simple or immediately apparent. I did say earlier that i don't know the answer to your question, in fact I'm still not sure what you mean. Maybe I could ask you, what aspects of 'The Council' do you believe are owned by Central Government?
Ok If you dont know that is fine. It was and still is a genuine question so I would not venture to speculate inappropriately.
I rang that number Suz and made my usual Friday night order but apparently they don't do pizzas,
Towack - they do, if you say the right code word.
Anonymous - so you've no thoughts as to what aspects of the council might be government owned?
Sorry Towack, my bad.
I must've used the wrong code word too, which would explain the muscly man at my door, wearing not much more than lei, when I ordered a Hawaiian with extra beef.
How embarrassing!
Robert,
I speak in areas of expertise. I asked the question because I didn't know and still don't.
Anonymous, I know that you don't know, but asked whether you had 'thoughts as to what aspects of the council might be government owned'.
You began this line of discussion by asking if central government 'owns' the council. I'm keen to know what made you think it might. You don't have to be an expert to look inside yourself to discover why you hold a view. Sheesh!
Suz - did you tip?
Yes - right over! needed smelling salts to bring me out of my swoon.
You're quite the delicate flower.
Robert, paranoia is obviously your strong suit. Are questions not allowed here?
Questions? You don't see me asking questions, anonymous, do you? Why should you be allowed to ask questions, when I am not?
I am a rate payer. It is my right to question those that I voted for. Or have I got the wrong? Do you prefer to rule from the top without being questioned?
Anonymous said...
I am a rate payer.
Me too, Anon. Me too.
It is my right to question those that I voted for.
Mine too, Anon. I exercise that right often, for my own satisfaction and on behalf of other ratepayers.Some Councillors resent my questions at times.
Or have I got the wrong? Do you prefer to rule from the top without being questioned?
That might be your daftest question yet, Anonymous. Here I am, engaging in a public forum, asking and answering more questions than any other Councillor and you ask if I 'want to rule from the top without being questioned'. Did you think before you typed that one out?
Questions by a councillor in the form of a campaign against rate payers are clearly inappropriate.
Being a rate payer and a councillor you should be questioning yourself very hard.
I can see your upset and I can understand it. A campaign is never as affective when it is questioned by those with the right. But trying to belittle me will have no impact. If you don't want me here just ask.
PS by suggesting disfunction of the council are you breaching you code of conduct?
Anonymous/Identity-hidden commenter:
Questions by a councillor in the form of a campaign against rate payers are clearly inappropriate.
Perhaps they might be, but I am not campaigning against rate payers. Repeatedly stating it doesn't make it true.
Being a rate payer and a councillor you should be questioning yourself very hard.
I do, thank you.
I can see your upset and I can understand it.
You are mistaken. I am not upset at all, therefore your 'understanding' is misplaced. A campaign is never as affective when it is questioned by those with the right.
That makes no sense at all, on any level that I can see.
But trying to belittle me will have no impact. If you don't want me here just ask.
Prompting me to 'ask you to leave' is a constant theme with you, and a boring one. I've addressed it many times and yet you persist with your claim. It's not a strategy I admire,
PS by suggesting disfunction of the council are you breaching you code of conduct?
I'm not and if I was, no, not a breach. You certainly are fixated on breaches of codes of conduct. No ordinary person is so fixated as you. It's, as I said before, boring. It also makes you look obsessive and petty (just sayin').
Repeatedly stating it doesn't make it true.
Repeatedly posting blogs that paint farmers in a negative light does.
Suggestion I look petty is a breach of your code of conduct:
Relationship with the public
F behave in a courteous and sensitive manner and not discriminate against any
person;
Just saying...
"Repeatedly stating it doesn't make it true.
Repeatedly posting blogs that paint farmers in a negative light does."
Did you think before posting this comment?
Suggesting that you look petty is a breach of nothing, RRAD, if it's true and in my opinion, it is true.
Post a Comment