New Zealand Order of What?

Well done to unusual arty farty simplistic Maori Painter Ralph Hotere at age 80 and in ailing health, for joining such a prestigious list of New Zealanders including not one, not two but five ex-politicians (Jonathan Hunt of all people...) and a trade Union leader.

If this is our best people, then I don't want to see the reserve bench any time soon.

The only thing that can make this group worse would be the addition of Phil Goff.

I mean it could happen, Mike Moore was only PM for two months and Don McKinnon never made it that far and there are two vacancies.

{Shudder}.

Any self respecting New Zealander should refuse the award until the list is cleaned up.

Curious Forewoman

Just finished reading a very curious interview with Diane Foreman who wins a Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit.

The fact that her personal relationships have been the subject of much media speculation is another example of the struggle women in business face, she said.

"A male in my position would have never had the same attention, that's why it's hard for women. I've had some wonderful people in my life ... but if I was a man no one [in the media] would be very interested."

Nonsense. Being in the paper for relationships (friendships or otherwise) with Don Brash or Paul Henry doesn't make it "hard for women" in business. Other than the obvious, everyone questioning your judgment and good taste.

If a businessman was in a relationship with a similarly high profile New Zealand woman they too would receive exactly the same level of interest. They would and do feature in the very same section of the gossip pages. That they are usually blagging a secretary and not a high profile woman with a Type A personality, means they get less coverage, however it is still the same issues faced by them.

"In New Zealand it's a very small society so people tend to want to appoint who they know. So it's people they went to school with, people they play golf with, and as a woman often you don't fall into that group so you've got to do it from the outside."

More nonsense. New Zealand isn't alone in this. In any case Foreman didn't do it from the outside, her start in business was given to her by her former husband in a family business. So I have no idea what grounds she is talking from when she brings this up.

I enjoy reading about Diane Foreman's success since she was brought into Trigon and when she makes positive comments about what she has achieved. I was also surprised to see she is 51 years old as she definitely never looks it. I enjoy far less reading such utter dribble about how hard she perceives she has it, which only serves to paint her as something I am sure she is not.

Foreman is someone who is never going to come across well talking about women's issues in business. She would be best served to stick to what she's good at - cutting deals, and leaving the PR and media management of her personal and professional life to a team of professionals.

In any case she deserves the recognition of her achievement in the NY Honours List.

Man of the Year 2011 - John Key

In six elections that I have been eligible to, I am yet to vote for National but I came the closest this year.

What started off as a bland career by a bland suited Banker, has turned into the creation of a necessary populist political phenom.

The term "populist" is a derisory highly insulting one in politics. However as the centre right struggles in an increasingly tepid environment where MMP odds are firmly stacked against it with the potential in buy-a-vote welfare politics by the growing class of net beneficiaries, Key is a stand out.

Union stalwart and Labour insider Mike Williams stated this week the "what if" we (Labour) scored just a couple of percent more list vote.

"What if's" in politics are an hilarious waste of time spoken only of by losers.

Populism isn't a dirty word when you are winning. And every day a Labour MP sits in the House opposite John Key they are reminded of that. They lost because they aren't as popular.

John Key wins my Man of the Year this year as almost singlehandedly he has stopped;

- Capital Gains Tax and with it all Gareth Morgan and Bernard Hickey's bat shit silly ideas

- increasing PAYE rates

- ridiculous GST exemptions

- expansion of Welfare for Families and the welfare state

- most importantly massive blowouts in government expenditure a Labour led coalition would have demanded

- excessive Treaty white guilt payments accompanying a Labour led coalition

- "buy-a-vote" policy from the left

At least for another three years.

Richie McCaw only led consistently the best team in the world to win the RWC on one foot with his fourth choice playmaker. Key's achievements are larger as the stakes are much higher and task more difficult.

National didn't need more of an election strategy than "politics is a team game, everyone shut up so John Key can speak". And he did.

The first time I saw Key's political ability up close was at the surprise party thrown after the botched ACT coup for the outgoing Leader. He did everything more than right that night. Key was magnificent, humble, funny and eloquent. And in all honesty probably had at least half the room list voting National by the end of the night.

Thank God John Key is a populist. The alternative was Don Brash.

He stands solely on principles. He stood this time for 1% of the vote as they weren't principles anyone seemed to connect with.

Principles without political power is a luxury only the richest man can afford. On the right we expect our politicians to have principles and somehow maintain the popularity to have power. We like to think we act purely on principles and criticize each other when we don't act purely. The Libertarianz are the grandest example of this behaviour and 1,405 people voted for them. Power and keeping the left from power are the only important matters.

John Key understands politics, he understands polls, coalitions and MMP. He also understands strategy and knows winning is everything. Thank God for that because very few on the centre-right have worked it out.

Key was already thinking how to cut Don Brash's throat well before the tea tapes. He knew that ACT with Hide was a different partner than ACT with the man he'd already knifed in his career, Don Brash. A wounded man looking now for revenge on Key who started his reign as ACT leader criticizing him. Key had seen Brash's callous disregard for strategy, political nous and cunning as a player in his axing of Hide without bringing the Party with him, or even some outside help to run it. A coup without an army. He'd seen Brash lose an election for National, he'd seen his lack of ability to play the public and incompetence and sloppiness dealing with media and staff. His lack of ability to take advice and play on the team.

If Key was still a banker and he took on a team of employees with Brash in it, the first for the pink slip would be Brash as despite his measurable intellect he was otherwise a liability.

Key knew Brash would cut off his nose to spite his face and attempt to destroy not only Key but the centre-right with it.

I am sure being stuck with co-coup plotter John Banks wasn't Plan A, B or C for Key but it is rumoured that together with Banks he plotted rolling Brash even before the tea tapes. The only matter was the timing.

In the last fortnight of the campaign Key looked almost physically out for the count. Like a banker working 20 hours a day on an international deal for weeks on end. But somehow he hung on and was still doing the business at the National Party function election night at 1am, photos, talking, thanking those who had assisted the Party.

Key's only mistake was his very late endorsement of changing MMP to SM. Even then I have confidence that Key, the politician, will rectify Simon Power's ineptness and come up with something to give him and the National Party a chance at a third term.

So he's in Hawaii? Good job. Having a nice holiday with his family away from New Zealand voters haranguing him. They had long enough to do that on the election campaign.

Key damn well deserves a holiday for saving New Zealand for at least three more years from a Labour let government. His job now is to come back and scheme up a way to keep it all this way past 2014 and with it ensure National and the centre-right do not suffer the same fate Helen Clark and Labour have.

Christmas in Hong Kong

Many people ask me what Hong Kong does at Christmas time.

We have the least stressful Christmas Day imaginable. Everything remains open and we all go out to restaurants to Christmas Day Lunch and/or Dinner. Same for Boxing Day. It is important to book such places around a month in advance as competition for the best venues is fierce.

Someone else cooks.
Someone else cleans.

Bliss.

I have had some bizarre Christmas Days overseas. None more so than being the guest of a certain gentleman at his house only to have his ex-wife turn up and aggressively take over the kitchen. The other guests expected a floor show to commence in a battle between old and new. I couldn't look a gift horse in the mouth and simply exited the kitchen with everyone else and let her spend the entire day sweating over the oven. Cooking and cleaning on Christmas Day looks far too hard to contemplate.

Merry Christmas to everyone in New Zealand planning to cook and clean tomorrow as you wonder how next year you can delegate such functions to someone else.

The Pricks for 2011 - Blog Awards

I think I missed these last year due to lack of interest (mine), but there has been so much going on this year we will relaunch with the awarding of my (sometimes) annual Prick(le)s awarded for excellence in the below fields.


The Unfortunate Prick Award for Being So Close - The Labour Party

Everyone forgets in the mull-up that Labour were just two seats away from having a clear centre-left coalition stopping asset sales, bring in CGT and tinkering while Rome burns on fruit and veges. Despite hemorrhaging vote to the Greens this would not have made a difference to Phil Goff's chance of being PM thanks to the stupidity of MMP. I was at the Nats election night parties in 2008 and 2011 and they were very different. The 2011 party was not one of joy, it was one of relief. If you had wanted to punish Labour you couldn't do so more than having them come this close.

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Prick Award for Staff Management - Adam "Five Fingers" Feeley

Not only did Five Fingers pinch the Gosset with all the drama going with that, the incident brought out one of the most curious cases of 2011, that of Anita Killeen. Whom we are meant to believe fucked up her highly promising and high-flying professional life to get back professionally at Five Fingers. In the middle of all this Five Fingers had time to not advance much in the Hanover case, oversaw the death of Allan Hubbard and lead to Whaleoil's tipline being busier than ever with allegations of his curious behaviour.

The Limp Panty Waisting Prick Award for Being a Limp Panty Waisting Editor - David Kemeys

Not content with running a shit as dull paper the SST (aka slowly sinking tabloid) into the ground, Kemes was the idiot who showed mercurial Steve Braunias the door and made life impossible for Jonathan Marshall after he had the temerity to strongly investigate Kings College drunkards at After Ball Parties and Darren Hughes after his sleep-over at Annette's.

The Busiest Prick Award for Political Repeating - Garner and Gower tied

The terrible two-some burst their loads at each other in the final weeks of the campaign with Teagate competing to see who could test the law first by baiting Winston Peters. Like some cheap double act at a strip club as a pairing they are too much. One needs to go. With Gower's terrible whinging at ACT/United and National deals he never balanced it with the horror show of Green candidates such as Denise Roche actively backing her Labour opponent in the seat. Garner is credited by many as the reason Winston is back. Thanks Dunc.

The Impotent Prick Award for Worst Performance In An Election Campaign - National's Creative Team

Shocking. Labour had the best creative team and didn't win as they had the least charismatic Leader but National's creative work was appalling. They need to be outed and disciplined within the advertising industry.

The Smallest Prick Award for Political Silliness - Don Brash

Not content with sticking to rooting unsuitable women, Don switched to do so to an entire political party with 15 years of history and multi-millions invested in it. Good luck getting back with the Missus after that clusterfuck.

The Elephant Prick Award for Common Sense - Barry Colman

Colman had the balls to stand up and poo poo the myth of inequality back in July. The exploitation of this myth was then compounded by the Labour Party and left politicians all year. The voters spoke, National was returned as they still outweighed buy-a-vote policy favourites from the welfarists. How long net beneficiaries can stay the voting minority however is anyone's guess.

The Loudest Prick Award for Blatant Continual Shit Stirring - Whaleoil

There is too much material to list here. No one on the internet in New Zealand politics is louder, ruder or often more tongue in cheek hypocritical than the Whale. Only Whaleoil can hurl abuse at the Labour Party then call them "nasty" when they hurl shit and abuse back. Between breaking many stories this year and being the cause of Union strikes, Whale has exceeded expectations from even his friends and allies for being completely and utterly outrageous in the wooden spooning of shit.

The Disappearing Prick Award for blogging underachievement - David Farrar

David? Where art thou David? If your face was full up in a pile of muff we may have forgiven you but you have been largely absent this year with other stuff on your mind. We end the year with pictures from Safari in Africa. By far David's best series of posts of the year after some short spurts post election. A much larger effort is required in 2012 from our Jedi Grand Master Yoga.

"The Supreme Prick" Blog and Bloggers of the Year - Red Alert(ers)

They won this one off me back in 2009 and not much has changed since then. In terms of New Zealand political blogs it provides the best commentary because it is coming straight from the horse's mouth (oops did I really say that?).

Red Alert has become so successful that it has collected many critics. Often the harshest from those within Labour who do not think MP's should interact in the fashion they do on the site and through social media. Grasping at straws some grumpy old commentators believe Red Alert puts voters off Labour and their MP's shouldn't be on twitter.

Nonsense. Having a hapless goober of a communicator as a Leader and a policy platform that the heaving pathetic underclass usually voting Labour or did not understand put them off in 2011. And it will continue to put them off in 2012 because that hasn't changed either.

Red Alert has developed into a must read as the ultimate opposition blog. Labour people read it in their community in a different way than the VRWC view it. I read it as some would a daily affirmation. A motivational tool as to why I need to work even harder to oppose everything they stand for.

However it remains New Zealand's best political blog which should evolve further in 2012 down whatever path its team chooses it.

The Desperate Tactics of the FMA

Hughes still making it up as he goes along

Fran O'Sullivan has pushed the buttons of FMA Head Sean Hughes to get some answers on the Hanover Finance investigation in a classic pre-Christmas PR dump from the Authority similar to last years freeze order.

O'Sullivan's column today raises more questions than it answered. A brief fact summary follows from her material:

- The FMA has cancelled Xmas leave so Hanover charges can be laid in the first two months of 2012.
- Prior to even laying charges, the FMA has come out pre-Xmas and said it would against directors and promoters.
- O'Sullivan concludes (and we can only assume because she has been told by Hughes) that the FMA now wishes to cut a settlement deal with the Hanover directors and promoters.
- Hughes has stated the Hanover scenario is NOT "talking about wanton reckless misconduct".
- Greg Muir speaking for Hanover suggests the FMA has all the material it requires to show directors acted within the law. Hughes responds by saying the FMA is NOT "alleging intentional or reckless misconduct". Just that the "prospectus and advertising portrayed a rosier picture than the true scenario".
- The FMA are making these representations to keep the freeze order on over Xmas.
- The SFO is yet to conclude its investigation into Hanover involving related party transactions.

Here are my thoughts on the piece by O'Sullivan. And I number them for simplicity's sake. I also note that O'Sullivan's piece is the first by a journalist on this stage of developments. I am not suggesting she is doing anything other than what is her job, that is she is well within her rights to publish the piece, which was a good one.

But looking at Sean Hughes' conduct:

1. What the hell is the head of the FMA doing speaking to a journalist while a formal and serious, and very public investigation is still in progress?

2. Do the Hanover parties even know the possible charges they possible could be charged with? I assume not if the charges have not been laid yet. How consistent is this with natural justice?

3. What kind of outfit threatens to charge persons after more than a one year investigation without detailing precisely what they are being charged with? And does so through probably the most senior and respected business journalist in New Zealand?

4. If the conduct is not intentional, reckless or wanton then what was it? It is starting to all look a bit limp dick when it comes down to the effect of advertising and a prospectus that very few Ma and Pa investors even read cover to cover.

5. What relationship has the purposive placement of this information in the public domain by the FMA got to do with Winkelmann J's demands that the FMA show that they are nearing the end of their investigation?

6. If Richard Long is to be charged for apparently inducing person's into investing in Hanover, will the NZ Herald also be charged for running the $2 million of advertisements in their paper saying same? Just asking given the FMA picked the Herald to run this story through. If Long goes down then surely so does APN. Long probably convinced more people to sign up to Hanover than Hotchin, Watson or any Hanover official.

7. Again despite O'Sullivan publishing the standard 16,000 investors of $500 million of losses, the FMA investigation to begin with did not relate to anything like this figure, it is for a specific time period based on a prospectus in December 2007. That is what the freeze order on Hotchin was for. Apparently now Hughes is looking at a wider time frame but details are vague.

The FMA has fed this information to the media on purpose in a far more blatant manner than their usual under-handed fashion of a "leak" (wink wink).

It all leads to the conclusion that the FMA are after a settlement with Hanover before this even makes a court room much to the teary eyes over at NBR in Jock Anderson who wants to sex this baby up.

Such a tactic in law is not one of a confident party with a bullet proof case. The FMA need Hotchin's scalp and those involved in Hanover in a far uglier fashion than a cash settlement. The FMA have sunk to such depths that they are willing to use the media to put information into the public about more than just the bare bones of progress of an investigation while it is still occurring.

That the FMA has now dragged all the other directors and even possibly those down to Richard Long into the debacle, tells me that the emphasis is not so much on Hotchin anymore but the entire outfit including auditors because they cannot nail Hotchin's backside hard enough to any wall. The asset freeze remember was restricted solely to his assets as though he was carrying the baby for the entire loss allegedly due to technical prospectus violations. You know, prospectuses that every Ma and Pa investor read from cover to cover and base their decisions on. Yeah right.

If you were advising Hotchin and Hanover in a legal capacity right now you would be taking that eventual meeting with the FMA with a large grain of salt from the "get fucked" shaker and taking your chances in court. If there was any behaviour that was so very bad the head of the FMA would not be eliminating intentional or reckless conduct from the charges before they have even been laid. At present anything looks very technical and with it shakier than Christchurch.

Playing Politics

David Shearer gave an awfully boring and poorly delivered speech in Parliament today. He showed that he didn't just need Brian Edwards but he also needed a crack committee assisting of Judy Callingham, Bill Ralston, Janet Wilson, Michelle Boag, Matthew Hooton, Sean Plunket, Greg Ward, Mark Unsworth, Barrie Saunders, Roger Sowry and Deborah Pead.

John Key then slowly got up and destroyed him.

In a performance that showed confidence, style, humour and wit, Key was showing that not only he was the Master of Ceremonies, he was Langesque in delivery, timing and draw.

Straight away the Labour Party spin machine was on high.

They had no choice than to forget Key had already outlined his government's direction, ideas and mandate. They focused on the tagline that Key was being mean to Shearer and this was unfair. Words of the pathetic playing for the sympathy vote. Key, a politician, was apparently politicking instead of discussing the important issues of the day. Forgetting he already had in his lengthy speech humiliated David Shearer and Labour's campaign in the process.

And how did Labour MP's communicate in unison their disgust in John Key demoralising David Shearer with this alleged "abuse"?

Their boo boys and girls all jumped on twitter and started abusing John Key.

Pot Kettle Red?

David Shearer is just tits in the House. The House is now dominated by John Key, Steven Joyce, Winston Peters and Trevor Mallard with cameo's from John Banks, Gerry Brownlee with David Cunliffe to follow when he is allowed off the leash.

Continue with today's form and it will be three loooooong years for the Shearer.

Even a Backbench MP in Alfred Ngaro outshone Shearer today.

McCully & New Zealand's Most Expensive Rental

What do you get for $NZ500,000 a year in rent?

Westpac's George Frazis was living in allegedly Auckland's most expensive rental property at NZ$3,400 per week (NZ$176,800 per annum) for a whopping 1,417 square meters.

However I've found New Zealand's most expensive rental at 3 times the price of that and a fraction of the size and worse still you are all paying for it.

I was at Intermediate School when Murray McCully was elected to Parliament. He's as cunning as they come. If someone was to write a guide to OIA's, McCully and his Charlie Wilson's War Room would be at the top of the list of obstinate fools who use every trick in the book not to hand out information.

I never ask a question of an MP I do not already know the answer to. Because it is in their DNA to lie or at the very kindest block the truth.

So when I OIA'ed McCully's office regarding the rent of the house of the NZ Consulate-General in Hong Kong I had a reasonable idea what the answer should be. Hong Kong rents are as readily available on the google search as stocks on the exchange. Landlords in this town are proud to show off what their properties can be rented out for.

The NZ Consulate-General to Hong Kong lives at this address
House 2, Duplex 1A, Mountain Court, No 11 Plantation Road, The Peak

Here is the building profile with some absolutely beautiful shots.

All NZ expats know this as we are invited up there for piss ups, usually at times where it is impossible to make it and/or the invite includes children. Google and you can find some of these invitations.

The Peak has some of the most expensive real estate in the world. To even rent a shoebox up there you need to have a seriously large housing allowance from your employer and I know of few executive level contracts left with such a luxury. And even then the issue with its beauty is practicality. Try getting up or down at "peak" hours through the windy road and you will see why anyone needing to work normal office hours probably shouldn't and can't afford to live there.

So bless little ole New Zealand, we've had a "flat" up there since 2005 according to Muzza. My early days in Hong Kong when rents I guess were comparably "reasonable". It has a dual purpose of hosting a few parties and guests. But really I ask in the scheme of things in this day and age, is it really appropriate? Could the Consulate-General, a diplomatic posting where we have had very average people hold the position, not live in more modest and appropriate lodging and whenever there is a function, premises not rented in an office or plush hotel?

The NZ Consulate-General and Trade & Enterprise already have an office in Hong Kong in the Wan Chai office commercial area. The NZ Chamber of Commerce already have an office in Hong Kong also located in Kowloon.

How much is this all costing for heaven's sake and are these office not performing most of the same function but dipping out of different troughs? There is some discussion about having 40 staff involved. What on earth are they doing? Or are they just having a good old time over here? The Brits left here in 1997 so all this diplomatic excess is meant to be well over.

Here is the bio of the newbie Consulate-General Robert Kaiwai:

Mr Kaiwai is currently serving as High Commissioner in Tarawa and Ambassador to Palau, Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia. Previously, he has held various senior roles including Deputy Director in the Middle East and Africa Division, and has been seconded to the Ministry for the Environment leading a senior policy team developing New Zealand’s climate change policy.

Has the "flat" resulted in New Zealand business doing more business because of its opulence? I could understand if it was a critical business networking tool but the previous and past Consulate-General's haven't exactly been known as gateways to China. For a start they've been a European woman and Maori man. Surely MFAT has a New Zealand born or educated Chinese person by now to fill the role? A fluent Mandarin or Cantonese speaker?

I could understand the expenditure if we were trying to recruit a business networker of real quality. But instead we get a man who up until a few months ago was posted to a set of bongo bongo Islands with the population of less than a few apartment buildings in Hong Kong? Come on. I'm sure he's a lovely bloke as all diplomats have to be but China and Hong Kong deserve a bit better in terms of status. At present the Consulate-General's reputation doesn't match the opulence of the lodgings at all.

I found examples of the rent in the building here (divide by 6 for the NZ$ amount):

3,760 sq ft for HK$280,000 per month
2,171 sq ft for HK$155,000 per month
4,183 sq ft for HK$275,000 per month
(exclusive of massive management fees and rates that tenants pay in HK directly)

Anyway, you get the picture . The NZ Consulate-General has a duplex in the larger size range I imagine is more represented by the 3,000+ sq ft range (as opposed to 1,417 square metres for Auckland's most expensive rental).

According to McCully the house has been rented since 2005. This being the case a standard lease would see it renewed every two years so it was up for renewal this year.

SL6.1-copie11121409361

McCully claims commercial sensitivity for not releasing how much this rent costs. But as you can see on google it doesn't matter. The answer is a shit load and it would make most New Zealanders, even those in the 1% blush.

I don't know anyone in Hong Kong, even wealthy clients who pay this much rent.

The brilliance of McCully lies in the last paragraph. He knows the answer looks ugly if he gave you the number, he's taunted you by not giving it to you as he hides behind the skirt of a strict interpretation of the law and possible scenario. But then for those charmable bimbos or men in awe of the McCully, he makes it sound like he's actually listened to you and is concerned about the answer that he cannot give you.

Masterful.

The problem for McCully is that by now not giving me the answer I can tell the story based on the numbers I have dug up and call it New Zealand's most expensive rental from probably one of the best diplomatic troughs around these days Hong Kong and China.

If I was actually a journalist and not a blogger, I would have the time to now follow up precisely the value of renting a "flat" that even the richest New Zealanders would not be able to afford (we are talking ball park Hong Kong current market value of NZ$40,000 per month here so NZ$480,000 p.a) and whether New Zealand through its former nice but average and new Consulate-General are using the expenditure to provide the sort of return it would need to justify investment in a city such as Hong Kong which is increasingly becoming critical along with China to the success of the New Zealand economy.

I could also call the real estate firm renting out the above apartments in the same building and find out from them what House 2, Duplex 1A is renting for. It would not take much to get the estimate from the agent based on the big mouths in the industry.

It is time McCully asked his charges just what New Zealand taxpayers are paying for and the return on this astronomical expenditure. How are the KPI's going and how deep has the diplomatic trough here become?

Phil Goff may also like to ask the question, problem is in 2005 he was the Minister in charge and probably started the rorting himself and if made Ambassador to China basing himself in Hong Kong and taking over this relative palace may be part of the grand plan.

David Shearer And His Women Problems

The biggest story this week in the run up to Christmas will be David Shearer's first defining moment - naming his front bench.

Shearer looks like the kind of guy who has never considered himself to have women problems. I doubt he's looked twice at any woman other than his wife. This week though he has to look closely at many. He has the impossible mission of keeping the women of the Labour Party happy in his front bench selections. There will be tears, there will be tantrums. He will be a lucky man if he comes out of it alive given the parameters of my analysis.

Leading political commentator and blogging machine David Farrar has had a go picking the Labour front bench in his popular Stuff column.

The automatic first four picks seem to be Shearer, Robertson, Parker and Cunliffe. Farrar then picks Little, Twyford, Sepuloni (RIP), O'Connor and then a toss up for a Maori/Hapless place between Jones, Chauvel and Mahuta. I agreed more with Farrar's picks than any as they were the most merit based with little regard for quotas. When Sepuloni was actually an MP last week I rate her venom as first-rate if she could have increased her accuracy having 6+ foot of intimidating Carmel on that front bench would have made an impact.

Vernon Small has had a go as well in his less popular Stuff column.

He picks Shearer, Robertson, Parker, Ardern, Jones, Twyford, Sio and Cunliffe if he wanted in.

Other Stuff picks are Shearer, Robertson, Ardern, Parker, Jones, Cosgrove and a choice for the last spots from Cunliffe, Mahuta, Dyson or Maryan Street.

You see the issue though? A dearth of women.

For the first time in memory, National has a far more awesome line-up of heavily promoted and portfolioed women than Labour does. At 5,7 and 9. Try these three versus any Labour women. Then add in Amy Adams as well who is capable of holding her own.




If you want to renew your front bench as Shearer promised you cannot go back to the Helen Clark years where the likes of Dyson, Dalziel, Street and King were Minister either. This whole renewal and fresh faces that has been sold on his leadership bid has seen Shearer capable of only picking women from the "new era". The list is quite laughable when you see their National counterparts.

You have to look at Moroney, Mackey, Ardern, Mahuta, Fenton, Curran, Wall and Woods.

Fenton was made whip and Curran Secretary so that leaves just the others for a fresh look

Moroney, Mahuta, Mackey, Ardern, Wall and Woods.

All of whom wouldn't hold their own vs newly promoted Amy Adams let alone Crusher, Parata and even Bennett.

We all know what will happen, despite The Standard commenters now even admitting she hasn't actually won anything yet, Kim Kardashian Ardern will be selected because she looks good on a billboard and she will probably get King's role of opposing Bennett where her sole idea will revolve around giving beneficiaries more and more taxpayer money. Only she will fail to be half as good as King even still is now so King will end up babysitting her.

But that leaves really the need for one more female spot if we look at the Farrar school of gender balance even. Mahuta was Cunliffe's running mate after having made but a ripple in the massive 15 years she's been an MP with just one term as a Minister, Shearer would rather extract his own front tooth than choose Moroney in the front bench, Mackey was rumoured to be doing Cunliffe's numbers with Chauvel so already backs losers, Woods is fresh off the boat and Wall hasn't been around long enough. Interestingly I think Wall has the brightest future amongst the lot. She hates losing and, is extremely competitive and once she gains institutional knowledge of Parliament will be useful.

Being named on Labour's front bench however is kind of like climbing your way to the top of the class but in the bottom stream of Auckland Grammar. Made worse now because all the older kids have been ruled ineligible to compete. I doubt any female will be given a grunty portfolio either requiring any real application. As was discussed on Red Alert this week, many Cabinet positions aren't really of any use and I bet if the author applied his ideas further he would name the female dominated positions as being central in his attack.

Labour in just one electoral cycle has gone from a Party dominated by women under the H1 and H2 regime, to a Party now destined to be run by men where women simply make up the numbers, and most likely now the tea.

Shearer will be racking his brain right now trying to get the balance right, knowing full well that King, Dyson, Street and Dalziel are light years more capable in any portfolio he gives them than any of the "talent" emerging under the Labour renewal process. Leaving them in the Backbenches may very well be his downfall.

National have a caucus of 59, a huge Backbench of their own and many MP's bored enough to deem heckling the hapless newbies a competitive sport.

It is going to be very embarrassing for Labour when the likes of King, Dyson, Street, Dalziel, Mallard, Goff and maybe even Cunliffe have to step up and save those who replaced them from making tits of themselves in the House and in their portfolios knowing they are all still better than the newbies. A few of those named will serve their final years in long careers hand holding inferior replacements knowing they were actually only one seat away from victory and a place opposite where they are now, sitting in a Cabinet reliving their glory days under Clark.

Seeing how Mr Peacekeeper deals with keeping the oldies happy enough to babysit their replacements for three years, spinning recycled hacks above them as "renewal" and handles the classic pinko gender and race balance issues in his rankings will be the best show in town this week.

Bring out the popcorn.

David Parker is C***Struck

Fran O'Sullivan turns the tables on David Parker today in a beauty of a column outlining the preamble to David Shearer's leadership charge.

Usually male commentators accuse women of behaving like silly little girls over men. The politically experienced O'Sullivan has obviously seen something we haven't in eliminating David Parker as suitable from all adult-like activity because he has the hots for a chick (or as Whale colloquially terms "cunt struck"). I mean he was spoken of as a leadership contender and favourite in ABC (Anyone But Cunliffe) and then rolled over, had his tummy tickled and let his flatmate David Shearer have a shot at being the next PM easily enough. The fire may very well be gone. O'Sullivan calls being in love "a condition". Maybe it is and she is right.

Today Shearer, Robertson and other allies will be determining the final caucus lineup. They face a problem in that Parker does not have Cunliffe's killer instincts. He is not as respected in the business community. Parker is also in love with a new partner; a condition which does not easily lend itself to "putting on a hard hat" and venomously taking it to National on a daily basis.

Parker needs to snap out of this condition immediately. A good dose of cold-water over Christmas and New Year. And we don't mean the kind of playful fun above.

Asking his missus to marry him and the let down that "peak love" brings, would probably be cold-water enough to turn him back to the reality of a hard hat as O'Sullivan describes above. His current hat appears to be hard for all the wrong reasons.

New Zealand Lawyers Suffer Most In Low Wage Economy

During many discussions I have with New Zealanders there is a general theme of hating on lawyers. I find this interesting as usually it comes down to just two things - the moaner has had a bad experience with being over-billed or a lawyer appearing to have stuffed up something crucial in their life, whether it be a divorce proceeding, employment settlement or litigation.

There is a perception that lawyers over-charge and are all earning squillions of dollars.

May I introduce to you a survey that should change your perception immediately about how minted lawyers actually are and how perhaps the bank owns more of his house or car than your lawyer does.

I will try and explain in more details the length of study and hours that a New Zealand lawyer works. Most students these days do five years at High School at a high enough level to get an A Bursary to qualify for the LLB course, five years at University hitting grades high enough to get into Law School 1 and complete conjoint degrees. That is ten years of top-achieving study right there.

They then have a bar admission course. Lawyers are then measured in worth on billable hours. It is not uncommon to work 1,700+ billable hours in a year at a junior level and keep that going through to Partner. I did it a couple of years and it close to killed me shocking me into thinking there must be an easier way to earn a living than working in New Zealand for slave wages ruining my eyes staring at paper.

Using crude maths, that means 36 hours per week for 47 weeks so around 7 hours a day. Administration work (filing, billing, photocopying, some background work, staff training, conferences, professional development hours, reading) is not billable therefore to reach the 7 hours a day you are looking at maybe working on average 9 hours a day working also a Saturday. This doesn't include readings and all the crap you have to take home at the weekend to keep up with the changes in the law. That 9+ hours of work a day isn't easy sitting at your desk stuff. It is concentrated reading, analyzing, interpretation and often precision writing. It is being interrupted and having to start again, over and over again. It is signing out documents with liability attached knowing that one mistake and it is all over. Law also is quite hard. It can be in areas like tax and commercial, very complex and academically challenging.

Momentum carried out a survey with around 1,100 responses or around 10% of the profession between years 1-9. If I was eligible to participate in this survey working in New Zealand I would be a year 10 so only just outside the bounds of those surveyed. According to the experts after years 10 salaries are a lot more stable in terms of pay rises, from what I have seen as well in New Zealand this is true. Another note of despair in the labour market.

Let us start at the bottom. Lawyers with 1-9 years experience working at large firms and then small firms

If you can't score a job at a "large firm" you are looking at a graduate at teachers wages aren't you? Hell even an unqualified stevedore earns $91,480 with five weeks annual leave, free medical insurance for their whole family and limited hours to sometimes just 26 hours for the 40 hours paid.

Lets say you enter private practice here is what you can expect to earn with 10+ years experience.

And here is the "money" end of the profession - Partners and Directors. Ignore the $700k as that will be a Partner at a Bell Gully/Russell McVeagh outfit and look at the median and average earnings of a Partner. The average is $NZ186,800 and the median just $NZ158,000. Salaried Partners (which many are these days as the oldies are the ones with the equity deals) are on a whole lot less.

The full survey is here. The summary is here. These figures are absolute motivational gold for expat professional workers as with a 33% tax rate and these sorts of wages there is no reason whatsoever financially to return to New Zealand and for young lawyers there should be motivational reason enough why after 3 or 4 years at a New Zealand firm you should get the hell out and don't go back until the situation improves. Have a look at what the role models in the industry receive - the Partners.

And before I get a rash of comments surrounding how "high" these wages are, lawyers were the smartest kids in your class next to the ones that ended up at medical school. The teachers told the smartest kids in the class they should be lawyers. Lawyers are by definition more responsible than other members of society not having bar admission and rules and regulations thrust upon them. Yes, in other words, we should be paid more than most of you in salaried jobs but I bet if these figures are to go by that in terms of professions, law is mid-range in income.

The low pay rates I hazard a guess are attributable to law schools flooding themselves with graduates creating what Whaleoil calls unaffectionately "flea lawyers". While I don't often agree with whom he is giving the tag to, (among them QC's and poor old blogger MickeySavage), flea lawyers are sub-lawyers in the profession who might as well refer their clients on to howtolaw.co.nz such is the quality of their advice or more importantly, their advocacy skills and mongrel to actually win for their clients.

Demand and supply has pushed the prices down to affordable levels. However even Partners seem to not be making the cream on the top if the average equity partner (as in has their own money and risk in the firm's success) doesn't even get near $200k per annum.

I mean even a backbench MP with no qualifications, life experience or straight out of University with just a BA having never read a statute in their life earns $141,800+a tax free allowance of $16,100+$25k in after tax pension contributions +$1k phone allowance which puts them ahead of the majority of equity partners, all those in the private practice with 10+ years experience and all lawyers who responded with 1-9 years experience.

Little wonder so many lawyers want to become MP's - the MP's earn more money.

Something is amiss as to why lawyers aren't getting paid or earning the sort of money they deserve or indeed require to live reasonable debt-free lifestyles.

I suggest New Zealand lawyers are just tits at negotiating their pay rates or their clients are New Zealand firms too small to pay decent charge-out rates in the first place. Or is it something else?

Face of The Day

Better than the ones on Whaleoil because I want one of these one day.

Spotted this Chow Chow dog in the street and had to get a shot. The correct translation is "puffy lion dog" but the Chinese kiddies all seem to scream out bear when they see it as in teddy bear I guess.

What I like about the Chow Chow is that they are aggressive in nature and I have seen some even take to kiddies who charge at them to try and touch them.

This fella was chained inside the car so he was as close to me as he could be.

Play It Again David - Labour and ACT

Back in the dark days of ACT I made several observations about excuses for failure and mood at the time of the failure:

- constant talk of re-inventing our image and never actually doing so
- grasping at straws by saying we didn't suck so much in Auckland as the rest of the country
- blaming the media for not giving us good coverage
- constant policy over personality discussions
- a divisive primary style election of the Leader
- members allowed to have a say but a higher power over-ruling them
- tantrums by MPs when they are forced to leave
- TLDR (too long didn't read) advertisements and brochures
- a call for more women to be promoted despite there being precious few available
- infighting between factions at senior levels about things other than policy direction
- a hatred of all things National Party rather than worrying about our own game
- references back to our own David (Lange) and Douglas all the time and glory years
- 1980's key figures running the party in an old style FPP way rather than MMP
- the deepest darkest influence in Roger Douglas still hanging around like a warlord in wait

Well low and behold one looks at The Standard (currently the best show in town in the comments section), Red Alert and the outbursts from various MP's post election and I can see the same thing has happened to Labour. Only Roger is Helen. Her influence shown with all this fresh young talent merely being puppet staffers from her regime. They aren't fresh at all.

They are Helengnomes. Indoctrinated prototypes who think working for an MP gives you enough experience to be a well- rounded one. Whaleoil profiled them here.

There's no excuse for failure in politics. You lose when more people like the other guy than like you. You have to get over that and try again next time.

Labour have a growing electorate of welfare dependent clowns who not only want welfare for themselves but their children and their grandchildren. Labour have to outbid Mana and Greens to get these clowns to vote for them but they know where they are and have to go sign them up. Cunners knew this when he was pitching to this audience off the back of the truck in Avondale.

How Labour can miss out on leading the next government in 2014 is beyond me. Even though John Key and National were at their most popular in history, Labour only missed by one seat this time on forming a government despite crashing and burning their own Party, the vote went to their junior coalition partner. National did very little to promote the anti-MMP campaign. And are now stuck with the system that is inherently bias against those paying for all the welfare promises.

Yet Labour threw out their Leader, ran a Primary for a new one and aren't finished yet chucking the baby out with the bath water by biffing out all the oldies and simply replacing them with less talented and remarkable new Helengnomes. I mean really who can say Ardern (dropped 9.4% party vote and lost seat despite Greens helping her) Hipkins (least he won his seat) and Robertson (complete focus on winning seat and came 3rd in party vote) are the new Goff, King and Mallard? And this is somehow evolution for the Party? At least King, Goff and Mallard had jobs and some life experience outside Parliament before super gluing their backsides to the institution.

The Helengnomes are humorless, talentless generalists, privileged and lacking in life experience party hacks to the outside world. And that's before they even got selected in safe seats or in on the favored positions on the list.

In the meantime those who should be there as Labour's future to appeal to middle progressive working New Zealand like Davis and Nash, are sitting at home on their backsides contemplating what they did wrong.

Not signing up to be a Helengnome pretty much sums it up.

Keep up the entertainment is all I can say.

#Open Labour Tells Us Cunliffe Members Favourite

The Standard has done #Open Labour a huge favour. Forget Red Alert, the best commentary on the leadership race is in the comments on their blog post today titled "Sunday Afternoon Poetry". Poetry it is:

Jacinda "Kim Kardashian" Ardern going against the wishes of her Auckland Central electorate

The new MP's (Hipkins, Robertson, Ardern) are not embracing change in the Party and appear to be with the old guard (Goff, King etc) in supporting Shearer

David Shearer has snubbed The Standard and hasn't even sent in his pitch as the other candidates have done

The members can't see why Cunliffe is allegedly so unpopular with the caucus.

It's going to end in tears. Get out the popcorn.

The Standard Call It For Cunliffe

The Standard are about to have a meltdown this week.

I predict David Shearer is about to win the Labour leadership battle based on caucus support. But for once I agree with The Standard, it should be Cunliffe and it sounds like he is very much the members' choice as well. The Standard won't be enjoying the result when Shearer is named leader. They may pretend to be happy but all have with due respect to them, gone out on a limb and actually taken sides in the debate.

The latest post invited comments from those just in from the Auckland Leader travelling circus.

It sounded like Cunliffe and Mahuta owned yet another meeting and were clearly the more impressive of the options against Robertson and Shearer. This is an excellent quality comment that attempted to summarize the situation:

I have enjoyed watching the Labour party debate this contest in public. No way on earth has it been healthy for them so it has warmed the right quite nicely heading into summer. In one corner Cunliffe, the man who was chosen to front the cornerstone CGT policy and he did a pretty brilliant job. Shame for them the voters thought the policy was tits, but his performance in explaining the policy in the video campaign was flawless. He is a man who I guess thinks he has done everything he has to in order to be named Leader.

Shearer on the other hand is a poor red man's Smile and Wave. And there is nothing wrong with that but the man lacks substance for sure and simply parrots out he's the good guy solely because he worked for a good whack of US tax free dollars for the UN. He clearly lacks political judgment, no easier example being on the Sunday after the election turning up to Matthew Hooton's now infamous corporate BBQ.

Just like Goff, Shearer can't answer the hard economic questions. Neither can Robertson. Both have a far too generalized skill set for the job of the next three years which is to undermine National's performance with respect to economic issues. Labour need to choose Cunliffe to fight this battle because he is the only one in the front bench with the economic mongrel to do it. Parker is a woose and chickened out of the Leadership race, he doesn't have the metal to attack National.

Every day in the House Labour have to get up and in the face of Key, Joyce and English and torment them. They have to hit them intelligently and on hard facts. The global environment will no doubt be deteriorating and Labour need to capitalize on this and chip away at National's timid approach to dealing with the issues. Having show-pony, party careerist, economic lightweights hogging the majority of the action up front will not help them.

They need to develop a front bench of economic brain power and hard hitting capability regardless of who is Leader. They don't have room for pretty girls and boy flakes or children. Labour's newbies are without business experience or suitably impressive academic credentials to compensate, most are simply party hacks coming through the ranks of Young Labour and student/unions. Cunliffe is smart enough to know this and despite his call for renewal he will also know he needs his heavy hitting sledge team of oldies with him.

Sadly for both him and Shearer there isn't much left to choose from. The best heavy hitting sledge machines are Mallard, Cunliffe, Jones and King. In that order. There is then a huge void. Shearer in battling Cunliffe as he has will surely not have the full support of Cunliffe in doing this if he wins as Cunners will have a tanty at the dirty tricks involved in the merging of the Parker/Shearer ticket. He will have to turn to Parker in the Finance portfolio. Parker is a poor substitute for Cunliffe in my view for that role.

Labour's trouble is what to do with Cunliffe when Shearer wins. He wants the job as Leader. He has patiently waited to go for the role. He is rumored to be disliked within the caucus and if he loses to a man who just smiles, waves and hasn't even served a full term in Parliament yet, yes, that is proof his colleagues dislike him. With his experience and skills he deserves a turn but as we all know in life you don't always get what you deserve.

You get what you are good enough to take. Lets see if Cunliffe is. In the meantime when Shearer gets the nod. Watch Robertson.

The Remuera Rooter

Parnell had a Panther, it seems Remuera has tried to outdo its less expensive neighbour yet again and has invented a much friendlier consensual rooter in the Remuera Rooter.

Tennis in the 80's was a hip sport. The roll call of a tennis club in Auckland looked more like that of the Rich List. My family partook in the recreational sport and selected members of it were pretty good. I recall many trips to Auckland to the various clubs and thought on leaving how nice the places were compared to our facilities. Even some astroturf envy developed. My writings on tennis are numerous. I hate it as a sport. Playing it is pedantic, watching is as painful as removing glass from your foot with tweezers. It's not so much a sport but a bad excuse to stand in a searing heat when you'd be better served staying in a bar.

But enter the Remuera Rooter. He is making tennis 80's sexy again.

What makes this story broken by Whaleoil so fabulous is that it is entirely believable. The Remuera Rackets Club was in the 80's the place to be. Hotties everywhere it stunk of a mixture of testosterone with admired female form. The Club went into a wee decline over the years as tennis took a backseat to the 87 crash and a new culture in New Zealand where you had to actually turn up to work. Going to "The Club" was not billable anymore.

I see this leaked anonymous letter from an aggrieved patron as the most clever sports marketing ploy I have seen in many years. Every sports club lacks female members and what better way to increase the populous than get it out there that the men at the Club are as hot as a rotisserie and hornier than the Parnell Rose Gardens? I may even look at joining myself when I am back next if the coaching staff are anything to go by. It seems a more interesting option than foreign membership to the Northern Club.

The letter itself reeks of a man who hasn't satisfied his lady since Jim Bolger was Prime Minister. I mean really what sort of man complains in a letter about another man prolifically rooting around at a sports club? I thought such activity was compulsory and graded. Every sport has them - rooters. Even politics. Every sport has people attracted to the particular activity based on their chances of getting a leg over. How else do all MP's seem to have not only official partners but lines of groupies willing to shag even the most heinous of them? Sport is sexy.

While men have voracious sexual appetites with or without multiple partners, the female is wired as such that if her box is being wrecked morning and/or night, a daytime rest and recovery is required, not being served by the local professional. It takes far more unhappiness for a woman to cheat on her husband than the other way around. Women for some reason have a conscience about it or perhaps a deep financial interest to keep their knickers on. The Remuera Rooter seems to melt this conscience away to remove the panties with his endless charms, ball machine and firm backhand. Bringing back the ADIDAS motto - all day I dream about sex.

This publicity as well as being a recruitment drive serves as a huge wake-up call for Remuera men that it is not good enough to get up at 6am, have a shower, get changed and go to your fancy job in the city and look at the Secretary or Juniors titties all day hoping one Christmas Party you can slide one in, followed by being fed when you get home with a 3 course dinner and pretending to be too tired at 9pm to engage in a bit of spank the married mank.

For God's sake men, root your wife. Wake her up before 6am and give her one before you even shave and then go to work, do it again after dinner. Perhaps even thank her for cooking dinner and apologise for not rooting her enough until in a fit of men-o-pause she begs you to stop.

If you don't do this it seems that the Remuera Rooter will service her for you as there's a gap in the market well short of the baseline.

Labour Does The Numbers

Whaleoil has outdone the 1st XV I did for Cunners and produced this just in from his tipline of exclusive coverage inside the Labour caucus engine room.

Doing Cunners' Numbers Cont....

Yesterday we fed the forwards.

Today we will look at the backs. They seem split 3-3-1.

9. Mallard - Shearer. Allegedly former Team Parker. Hasn't lasted as long as he has without being able to pick the winner at any point in time. Threw in some confusion today toying with HoS reporter he may be in the race. Confused political guesser Bryce Edwards suggests he is named interim leader.

10. Moroney - Unknown as everything she touches turns to clay. Would either want her on their side?

11. Chauvel - Cunliffe as he's so self-interested that it is better for him to clean out the forwards.

12. Mahuta - Cunliffe as he's smart enough to have offered her baubles.

13. Ardern - Shearer. Allegedly in Team Parker to start with. No seat so would be looking to pick up the pieces in Mt Roskill, Rongotai or even after shafting Cunliffe in New Lynn. For sale as Kardashian is as ambitious and slippery as a whore in a brothel wresting for a dropped gold coin.

14. Robertson - Shearer at present but allegedly bolted from Team Parker so vote is light and for sale. Same features as Kardashian.

15. Little - Cunliffe and I base this on Little thinking it is easier to roll him and Shearer not supporting the leftist funders of Little.

Coddington on Men

Deborah Coddington has had a go at a young hotel worker who was allegedly harassed by members of the Rugby World Cup England team. Putting the right or wrong of that to one side let us look at the pearls of wisdom from DC:

English players behaved like prats and Newton enjoyed the attention until it became more than serious flirting.

Then she saw there might be money in it after the apology she received was not "good enough".

Oh, grow up and dry your eyes. Sharpen your tongue and smile, Newton, if you want to deal with men in the real world. They are simple creatures; easily tamed.

Let this be a lesson to any other minx wanting to try it on. Hopefully, Haskell's action might give them pause, because nasty games like this can ruin reputations.

The entire incident reflects badly on both sexes. Men behaving badly, and making women look pathetic.

Annabel Newton, you let the side down

Shame Annabel Newton didn't have a Parliamentary Security Guard at her disposal to run to nor could the man be "easily tamed" by writing to him and engineering the plastering of the letter all over the front pages of the paper. Or allegedly obtaining then acting on advice from the Diplomatic Protection Squad.

That's how a real lady would have handled it.

Peters A Kept Man

I had to have a giggle when I read of Winston Peters new life. As sexist as it may be, I always giggle when men are living off the proceeds of a woman. It's very emasculating for them. To balance matters I groan when I see women living off men but that seems to be the norm even nowadays.

Winston Peters on the balcony of his home in St Marys Bay, Auckland, the morning after last month's election.

"His" home? You are having a laugh! When women are pictured on the balcony of their wealthier partners home the media never state "her home". All of a sudden Winnie is granted enough success in his life to own a multi-million dollar home. Surely she made him sign a defacto property agreement when he moved in or chucked the mansion in a trust.

Mr Peters has an enviable life. He and his glamorous and successful partner, Jan Trotman, the former managing director of pharmaceuticals company Janssen-Cilag, live in a beautiful house in St Marys Bay, Auckland, with their chocolate labrador, Bella.

The three-level home, which boasts a swim-jet pool and bar facilities, was bought for $2.25 million in 2008 and has expansive views of Waitemata Harbour.

On what planet could Winston Peters own a $2.25 million home (based on 2008 valuation)? I doubt very much Winnie even "owns" the dog, let alone participated in purchase of the house.

If he has come into some money perhaps he could pay back the $158,000 owed to the taxpayer.

Else I think the media need to start giving credit where it is due that Winston is returning to the tit of the taxpayer rather then living off the tit of his wealthier and far more successful female partner.

He really should be renamed Mr Jan Trotman 66, Kept Man of St Marys Bay.

Cunliffe Owns Shearer Again

Shearer is turning into a dog on the telly. Cunliffe has now owned him in a second debate. Cunliffe is getting a wee bit of mongrel that is required. Labour's caucus must be getting as confused as the rest of us as to whom is the best man for the job. Shearer can't even name Labour's Climate Change Spokesperson. I can't either but Cunliffe can. Shearer also thinks Labour's rank and file members and their meetings are boring.

In the meantime people are excited about Shearer's humanitarian background. Cunliffe should be quick to point out, a job he was paid a small fortune for out of UN coffers.

Labour's elongated leadership battle is a fabulous example of why these things should not be played out in public.

Cunliffe is simply looking like the man who wants the job more.

Doing Cunner's Numbers

Let us take the forward pack of the Labour Party list and do the numbers for Cunners. It is not looking good for him.

1. Goff - Shearer because that's his mate. Allegedly abandoned Team Parker.

2. King - Shearer because Cunners has promised a clean out. Allegedly abandoned Team Parker.

3. Cunliffe - Cunliffe as it has always been.

4. Parker - Shearer because he's a member of ABC (anyone but Cunliffe). Even abandoned his own Team Parker.

5. Dyson - Shearer because Cunners has promised a clean out.

6. Horomia - Cunliffe because Nanaia said so and she's da' Boss. Abandoned Team Jones.

7. Street - Cunliffe if he promises her a slot like Nanaia.

8. Cosgrove - Shearer because he's a bloke.

The issue Shearer then has is he has the support of 5 of the top 8 on the list and he will have to axe all of them. Some whom have switched from Team Parker.

Cunners is the only one with a sustainable plan for renewal. Everyone from 9 down should be voting for Cunners. Can't see where they are coming from otherwise.

Attacking Banks For Winning

I have been asked why in my NBR article, that I didn't include Stephen Whittington in the text alongside the likes of David Seymour, as the future of the Party.

The Herald answered this for me.

I heard rumors Whittington mouthed off on election night about John Banks. I ignored that and thought better of him. It seems to have in hindsight been true. Whittington campaigned alongside John Banks in ACT knowing all about his history, was happy to take the upside of Banks, yet launched an instantaneous pre-prepared attack on him that night:

While the situation with John Banks is not ideal for an ACT purist, attacking Banks himself is a silly exercise. Even politically naive when Banks himself is negotiating an agreement with John Key and National that would see him supporting National Party policy regardless of his own political views.

Of more concern accusing Banks of being "economically ignorant" is just priceless coming from the mouth of a manchild who is still at the stage of mastering the photocopying as a graduate at a law firm. A graduate who himself is so practically economically capable that he doesn't even cash a cheque in time:

When John Banks was 25 years old he was well on his way working his way up through business from the bottom up to earn his millions. He may not have been near a University or an Economics textbook or 15th best speaker in the world* but he deserves more respect than to have such pseudo-intellectual snobbery chucked at him when he's yet to even finish negotiations with John Key.

Whittington is a Sir Roger Douglas stooge promoted on Sir Roger's word ahead of far more loyal and long-time servants to the Party who were a few places on the list below him. Douglas been at the forefront of bringing in Don Brash, the supposed Party saviour who turned a coup into a tits coup. Barely with the Party a Pariamentary term, Whittington diddled around deciding whether he would stand for the Party and now he's spat on them by mouthing off. At number seven on the list he would have only made it to Parliament if ACT could break the 5% threshold. Given at the time of the list selection there realistically was only a very small hope in hell that number seven had that chance, it should be Brash he launched the broadside at for his failure, not Banks for doing his job and actually being on message the whole campaign in winning the seat with his team in Epsom.

Touted as a massive vote winner among young, liberal and hipster in Wellington, Whittington managed to poll just 360 Party Votes for ACT in Wellington Central and 317 votes for himself. Heather Roy pulled 1,628 for ACT and 922 for herself in 2008. Roy therefore outpolled Whittington on party votes 4.5 times. When ACT in 2008 scored 3.65% of the vote to 2011 when they got 1.07%. Whittington therefore proportionally underachieved on Roy and ACT's 2008 effort.

It is pretty clear for ACT members and supporters.

If you don't like where ACT is headed, stay around and be constructive and work with John Banks and support the Board in doing so.

Or just piss off.

* doesn't include Obama