It hasn’t been a good few days for the Minister for the Environment, Nick Smith. Not only has he had a huge protest statue made in his image gain considerable public attention, the controversial MP was also apparently assaulted by environmentalists.
Smith claimed that rat poison was smeared in his face and that his family were threatened, which if true are considerable crimes under New Zealand law. Being that Smith is a Minister of the Crown, you would want to believe his and a National party volunteer's version of events that an assault actually occurred. However that doesn’t appear to be the case.
National Party member Nick Smith said poison was thrown at him and his family were threatened while at a weekly Nelson market yesterday.
Dr Smith said he laid a complaint with police after a couple protesting over a pest operation threw poison at him and threatened his family at the market.
"The incident was disappointing because people are generally respectful at the Nelson market even when they disagree with government policy or my views.
"It started just with verbal abuse and throwing rat poison, but escalated into shoving and rubbing rat poison over my face and clothes.
The following day the accused group of protesters denied any assault took place.
A community group against a bait drop in Nelson is denying any involvement in an attack against National MP Nick Smith.
Dr Smith said he laid a complaint with police after a couple protesting over the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary pest operation threw rat poison at him and threatened his family at his weekly constituents' meeting at the Nelson Market on Saturday.
Unfortunately for Smith there appears to be video evidence showing that no assault occurred.
Video evidence appears to contradict Nick Smith's claim
“At no point in the video we have seen is rat poison thrown at Mr Smith or smeared on his face”.
In the articles audio, veteran broadcaster John Campbell confirms that no rat poison was rubbed in Nick Smith’s face, which makes the Minister for the Environment a complete liar! You can also view some of the video for yourself over at the NZ Herald.
Obviously most protesters are smart enough to realise that rubbing poison in somebodies face and threatening family members would do their cause no good at all. That’s why Smith’s claim rang hollow when he first made it. Now we know that he was blatantly lying in order to try and gain public sympathy.
Clearly the National party is a sad pack of bullshit artists who don’t deserve to be in power. That’s why you should vote to change the government this coming Election Day.
The Minister of Finance, Steven Joyce, yesterday claimed that the Labour party had miscalculated their fiscal plan by a whopping eleven billion dollars.
If this claim were proven true, it could show Labour up as financially illiterate… but if it was false, it could prove to be another whopping own goal for the National party.
Desperate for something negative to try and dampen the Jacinda Ardern effect with, the National party ran a story claiming that Labour had miscalculated and would therefore blow out government debt.
The Labour Party has an $11.7 billion hole in its fiscal plan that blows its debt out and breaks its own budget responsibility pledge, National’s Finance spokesperson Steven Joyce says.
Unfortunately for the National party and their propagandists, the claim that Labour hadn’t calculated their fiscal plan correctly was entirely wrong.
Keith Ng pointed this out on Twitter:
Worth pointing out: @stevenljoyce added up Labour's new operating spending to $16.9b. National is planning to spend $18.7b in same period. pic.twitter.com/6U134uAiIy
It’s not even that ambiguous to an economist really, unless they’re intentionally ignoring the actual figures printed on the page for some reason. Thankfully for New Zealand most economists aren't looking to politically gain from their "mistakes".
Of course people should take what Joyce says with a pinch of salt, especially after economist Bernard Hickey obliterated him and Bill English over their false claims about productivity gains. Only a few days later, and Joyce is once again being critically analysed over yet another false statement.
Analysis: There is no hole in Labour’s fiscal plan
Robertson said Joyce had incorrectly assumed that Labour had not accounted for the usual cost pressures of wage inflation and an ageing population in health and education. He said Labour had included these cost pressures in its 'Delivering a Modern Education System' and 'Delivering a Modern Health System' lines in its Fiscal Plan. This was 'above the line' spending and meant that the operating allowance 'below the line' did not need to include them. These lines added up to $8.55 billion of the $9.4 billion 'hole', Robertson said.
This was the central part of his appeal to the crowd and the ref. The ball was clearly held up over the line and never got anywhere near the ground, he said. The replays show Robertson is right about the operating balances being correctly calculated. Labour has cumulated the operating allowance figures and has included the usual inflation, just in a different place above the line.
Hickey is confirming what Keith Ng tweeted.
Joyce later told me he accepted what Robertson said about the inflation that was usually in the operating allowance line actually being 'above the line' in the 'Delivering Modern health and education system' lines.
Robertson then went on to say that Joyce was wrong about the family package being delayed. He said an early version of Labour's website mistakenly said the family package would start from April 1 next year, but Labour's fiscal plan itself had used July 1 as its start date and had clearly stated as much.
So all Joyce had really proven was that a date concerning Labour’s family package was incorrect and Labour updated it. He also confirmed that he hadn’t read or understood Labour’s fiscal plan properly.
Perhaps that error is due to the fact that the Minister of Finance failed economics.
It’s clear that Steven Joyce is failing to win the financial debate amongst New Zealand’s top economists... he's therefore likely to be failing to convince the general population that National are good stewards of New Zealand's economy as well.
Obviously the National party is desperate for something to attack Labour on, and have sadly resorted to once again making shit up. That’s not the sign of a functioning party during an election campaign… that’s the sign of political desperation.
It’s time for the politicians who think that fearmongering with lies will gain them support to be voted out… it’s time to change the government.
Yesterday, the Minister of Police, Paula Bennett, said that gang members have "fewer human rights" and National would change the law to allow Police searches of gang members whenever they wanted.
Bennett also announced a law change to allow the confiscation of property if gang members couldn’t prove how they acquired their possessions.
However today, even though Bill English was right there next to the deluded Paula Bennett when she made their stupid announcement, the Prime Minister is now reversing over what his Minister said.
Paula Bennett's human rights comments 'not right' - Bill English
Paula Bennett's suggestion some Kiwis have "fewer human rights than others" has been described by her boss as "not an accurate reflection" of National's hardline new gangs policy.
Ms Bennett made the comment on Sunday while she and Prime Minister Bill English announced an $82 million plan to fight methamphetamine. It includes new powers for police to enact searches without a warrant.
English and Bennett were effectively announcing laws that already exist.
"It probably does breach the rights of some of those criminals but they have to have had a serious violent offense behind them already and a firearm charge and on the basis of that we are going ahead with it," Ms Bennett said.
Asked if she believed criminals had human rights, Ms Bennett said "some have fewer human rights than others when they are creating a string of victims behind them".
She later said on Twitter "scum gangs that peddle drugs don't deserve protection".
Of course this is a complete dog whistle of a policy announcement, because Police can already search for illegal weapons without a warrant if they suspect somebody to be in breach of the Arms Act 1983. They can also search for drugs without a warrant if they suspect somebody of having illegal drugs.
Furthermore, Police can also already seize property they suspect has been acquired with the proceeds of crime… so there's really no point to National’s announcement other than to try and gain attention.
National getting tough on crime in the lead up to an election is nothing new... however the backlash against their latest proposals may have come as some surprise, because the bumbling old Bill English has had to pour cold water all over Bennett’s demented blathering.
Appearing on The AM Show on Monday morning, Mr English said Ms Bennett's words were "not the right way to describe the actual proposal".
"It's not really a matter of human rights - it's a matter of the legal rights around the search. Those rights would be scrutinised by the court."
He called it a "very good policy… in the context of gang activity related to serious crime and methamphetamine", and said the "word game around human rights and legal rights" wasn't as important as the goal of the policy - to wipe out meth and gang violence.
Wipe out meth? Under the National led government the complete opposite has occurred. The P epidemic is now more entrenched and pervasive than ever before, because of stupid politicians who have no real idea about what to do.
"The actual proposal is about these firearms protection orders. They're designed to deal with a situation which really does concern police, where identified gang premises and gang people have accumulated significant amounts of unlicensed and illegal firearms.
Here’s the actual law that gives the Police the ability to search for firearms without a warrant.
18 Warrantless searches associated with arms
(1) A constable who has reasonable grounds to suspect that any 1 or more of the circumstances in subsection (2) exist in relation to a person may, without a warrant, do any or all of the following:
(a) search the person:
(b) search any thing in the person’s possession or under his or her control (including a vehicle):
(c) enter a place or vehicle to carry out any activity under paragraph (a) or (b):
(d) seize and detain any arms found:
(e) seize and detain any licence under the Arms Act 1983 that is found.
There are also other laws allowing search and seizure of firearms and a lot more to the Search and Surveillance Act as well… so you’ve really got to wonder who is advising the National party on it’s proposed law reforms. It seems as if they’re under pressure and just making things up.
"Police want the ability to get in there and search without a warrant. A select committee of Parliament proposed that a number of months ago with agreement from a number of the parties, so it's not a new idea.
English is correct about one thing; it’s not a new idea... it’s already an enacted law that governs the Police in their everyday opperations.
"But the way it was described by Ms Bennett is not an accurate reflection of what it is - which is essentially being able to make a search under quite particular circumstances without a warrant."
The Prime Minister was right there with her when Bennett “described” the policy. Why didn’t English correct her then?
The fact that the Minister of Police doesn’t seem to know the law makes National look pathetic!
But what is even more telling is that English just let Bennett keep frothing at the mouth, making him look completely incompetent. Is the PM also ignorant of the law of the land?
It really is time to do something about the P epidemic in New Zealand and that doesn’t include announcing laws that already exist.
Reducing drug abuse doesn’t include framing the war on drugs as winnable through the same old tired measures that have been proven to be ineffectual both here and abroad.
If you would like to see some actual progress to reduce drug harm and gang crime in New Zealand, it’s clearly time to change the government.
We should all know by now that the Act party are a bunch of nasty right wing sycophants who should never have been allowed into our parliament let alone the government.
Their MP's are without a doubt some of the most corrupt New Zealand has ever seen. From pressuring woman to get abortions to stealing the identity of dead babies, the Act party candidates have shown on numerous occasions that they simply cannot be trusted.
But just in case you were in two minds about who to vote for this coming election, here’s another good reason to not support the little weasel of a leader, David Seymour.
Doesn’t it seem a bit ironic that the National party has been caught out trying to hide a report into the effects of climate change while some of the largest flooding disasters ever seen are devastating parts of the world?
As the death toll rises in places like India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Texas from unprecedented deluges, the Minister for Climate Change Issues has been lying about the release of a report into the global warming effect on New Zealand.
Despite the huge cost and magnitude of these horrendous storms, which are scientifically linked to climate change and have displaced more than 40 million people worldwide, the National led government is still burying its head in the sand.
NZ needs to act now to protect people and property, leaked coastal erosion report urges
A leaked government report calls for immediate action to help protect thousands of people and $19 billion of property at risk from increased flooding and coastal erosion.
The report, commissioned by the Ministry for the Environment, was delivered in April but has still not been officially released.
It concludes that $19 billion worth of buildings, about 43,000 homes, 130,000 people, five airports, more than 2000 kilometres of road and 46km of railway face "higher levels of coastal risk exposure" as a consequence of rising sea levels.
Government accused of hiding climate report that could affect homes of 130,000 people
The Government is being accused of trying to hide a report that shows the homes of 130,000 New Zealanders are at risk from climate change.
The Ministry for the Environment report was delivered to the Government in April.
It found 133,000 people were at risk of "higher levels of coastal erosion", with homes in Canterbury, followed by Hawke's Bay, are most at risk from sea level rise.
The report warns sea levels could rise 30cm-40cm by 2050, with what is now a "rare storm" event happening every year.
Green Party leader James Shaw was leaked the report and says the Government's failure to release it earlier has affected the public's and businesses' ability to plan for rising seas. The current available Ministry for the Environment data is nearly 10 years old - from 2008.
"It seems that there are inconvenient truths in this new report, which the Government would rather not talk about in the lead-up to the election," says Mr Shaw.
"This 284-page document makes disturbing reading and National seems determined to hide it so it can continue to avoid real action to reduce climate pollution and real action to deal with its consequences, such as rising seas."
Clearly it would've been much better to have just released the report back in April.
The office for Ms Bennett told Newshub she has "received some early advice from the group.
"The draft final report is due in November and then the final report in March. The Minister fully intends to release the reports once the final one has been completed."
Voters need to realise that the National party will do almost anything to hide information it doesn’t want in the public domain. This is even more evident when it comes to Paula Bennett.
With dishonest climate change deniers in our halls of power, it’s little wonder the government is being taken to court over their lack of action. The fact that the National party is trying to hide relevant reports from the public before an election should also add weight to Sarah Thomson’s worthwhile case.
If you'd like to see some real climate change policy being implemented, don't vote for the National party. This video from 2014 shows what they really think about the world's most pressing issue.
The National party doesn’t seem to have their stories straight when it comes to the growing homelessness problem in New Zealand.
First they spent a couple of terms in government denying that there’s an issue at all… a problem they helped cause by selling off and demolishing state houses. Then they finally acknowledged that there is a housing crisis, and have rushed to re-announce policy that won’t actually address the shortage.
Now, after many years of reports showing the problem was getting progressively worse, National have once again changed their tune because of the election.
Homelessness the downside of 'positive' immigration story - Paula Bennett
Deputy Prime Minister Paula Bennett has admitted there are more people homeless in New Zealand than there was when National took office.
But she says the reasons for that tell a "positive story".
Speaking to The AM Show on Friday, Ms Bennett said New Zealand's quick recovery from the global financial crisis (GFC) and the growing threat of terrorism overseas has seen people flock to our shores.
Despite this admission, the National party is still criticising Labour for their immigration policy.
"New Zealanders decided they wanted to come back to New Zealand and stay here, so as a consequence we've had more people in this country pretty much in a really short period of time, and that has put pressure on the housing market - there's no two ways about it," she said.
Clearly Bennett has run off at the mouth without checking the facts.
But Statistics New Zealand data shows in the last 40 years, there has not been a single year in which more Kiwis came home than left.
The exodus peaked in 2012, which saw a net 39,507 New Zealanders depart. It's since recovered to a net outflow of 1284 Kiwis. On a net basis, most immigrants in 2017 have been from China, India, the UK and the Philippines.
At least Bennett has kind of acknowledged that housing pressure comes from having too many people and not enough houses to go around, even if she did blame the wrong cohort.
Obviously Bennett’s belief that returning Kiwis are to blame for homelessness is entirely wrong! However what about National’s other excuses, like the one where homeless people actually want to sleep rough?
English shares memory of relative who insisted on sleeping rough
The NZ Herald changed the online headline.
Prime Minister Bill English has revealed one of his own relatives had slept on the streets, giving him personal experience in the difficulties of resolving chronic homelessness.
Nothing like a bit of anecdotal evidence in an election campaign.
Setting out the homelessness announcement, English said his goal was to completely eliminate "rough sleeping" - but he knew from personal experience that this was challenging.
National hasn’t got any real intention of developing policy that will actually reduce homelessness, because homelessness puts pressure on the housing market and keeps the bubble artificially inflated.
There are now over 40,000 homeless Kiwis specifically because National's policy, or lack thereof, has helped cause the housing crisis.
He said one of his own relatives had been a rough sleeper. "No one was able to keep him in a house, despite many efforts.
"I've had the personal experience of dealing with some of the conditions of homelessness. It's a very difficult problem to solve."
That doesn’t give English personal experience in the difficulties of resolving chronic homelessness; it just makes English think that all homeless people are to blame for their own predicaments.
Perhaps this is the reason why the National led government has been so woeful in its response to the homelessness problem… the experience of Bill English who thinks that people actually choose to live on the streets.
This really comes down to the National party believing that the people who are homeless are somehow inferior and deserve to be homeless.
Even though the National party has put some homeless people up in motels, at great expense to the taxpayer, after nine long years in government the National party is still unable to develop policy to reduce the growing number of Kiwis sleeping rough.
Becoming homeless is not a choice anybody would make if there were affordable homes and it’s not a sign of a successful economy or society.
Bill English and Paula Bennett need to stop making stupid excuses and accept that Labour’s policy will work and should be adopted in the unlikely event that National gain a fourth term in government.
It hasn’t been a good few days for the Minister for the Environment, Nick Smith. Not only has he had a huge protest statue made in his image gain considerable public attention, the controversial MP was also apparently assaulted by environmentalists.
