Fishmeat: Are Labour Murdering People Now?

The Labour MP who is keeping a woman chained in his cellar thinks he's above the law. Does he really think the public won't find out who he is?

Labour leader David Shearer knows who he is, but won't tell. So much for a fresh leader bringing a new and open style of politics to Labour.

I have it on good authority that Shane Jones threw his toys out of the cot during this week's caucus meeting, because Shearer won't name names. My source tells me Jones got all pissy because Shearer's refusal to say who the sex-slaver is makes everyone the target of suspicion. I'm reliably informed that Jones dropped more than a few F-bombs during the heated argument that took place.

My spy also informs me that a brawl subsequently erupted in the caucus room, which was only stopped when Maryan Street pinned down the main culprits and threatened to tear their throats out with her teeth. Those raving loony socialists just love the taste of blood, and I wouldn't put it past her to have taken a bite.

Shearer didn't demote Jones or stand him down. He did much worse! He had Jones garotted by the whips in front of all his caucus colleagues, as an example to others. But all this is being hushed up, and the Shane Jones you think you have been seeing on your TV screens this week is an imposter, a lookalike surgically altered to fool the public. And who is hiding beneath that Jones-like skin? I'll give you a clue. Her first name is Judith and her surname almost spells "lizard". How appropriate.

So Labour's dysfunction has reached the point where they will execute anyone who disagrees with their leader.

I know this to be true, because I dreamed it all, and I have psychic powers.

Fishmeat: Taxpayer Funds Paid For Cellar Lady's Chains

The Labour MP who is keeping a woman chained in his cellar thinks his little problem is going to go away if he says nothing to anyone.

That troughing leftie loser had better think again! I'm not going to stop for anyone, and I never back down from a fight. Everyone who has taken me on has ended up on the losing side. Except for Judge Harvey. And that insurance company.

I have pages and pages of material on all the dirty things this socialist scumbag has been up to, and all thanks to my impeccable source. I provide the crayons, and he delivers up the goods.

And best of all, this rot goes right to the top. My impeccable source confirms that Labour Leader David Shearer knows all about the lady in the cellar!

But most damningly, I have irrefutable proof that taxpayer funds were used to pay for the lady's chains!

I'm not going to release this evidence just yet. I'm going to give the Labour MP one more chance to own up. And then I'm going to selectively release one document at a time, in order to drag this out interminably.

And when the truth comes out there will be nowhere for Labour or its new leader to hide.

Sayonara David Shearer!

Who Is To Blame For The Collins Suit Farce?

The Timaru Herald doesn't approve of Trevor Mallard or Andrew Little making a game out of evading Judith Collins' document servers.

Parliamentary politics is often viewed as something of a circus, and if what goes on in Wellington doesn't quite qualify yet, should it sink to that level any time soon, there's a sideshow already running to help members of the House feel at home. 

The ongoing saga of ACC Minister Judith Collins and her attempts to sue Labour MPs Trevor Mallard and Andrew Little over comments she said defamed her, in relation to the recent ACC privacy breach, has become nothing short of farcical. To the point that one is forced to wonder what possible positive purpose it can now serve for either party. 

Not that the right of Ms Collins to take action in response to a perceived slight on her reputation should be questioned, but it must be proving an unwelcome distraction for her party, the needs of which surely outweigh her own. It's hardly been a smooth recent ride for National.

The editorial questions the wisdom of Collins' actions in suing Mallard and Little, but it also condemns the Labour pair.

Certainly Messrs Mallard and Little have contributed to the farcical nature of this process. Having undertaken to make life as difficult as possible for those charged with serving legal papers on them, they have helped to set off a game of cat and mouse that has reached ridiculous proportions.  

The latest episode came yesterday when Mr Mallard said he was served papers by an elderly woman, purportedly a victim of poor hospital treatment, on whose behalf an appointment had been arranged with him. 

"She pulled out the papers and told me I was served and I said `thank you very much' and took a photo of her," Mr Mallard said. He then posted the picture on his Twitter account, ensuring extensive media coverage.

There's a distinction to be drawn between what is legally permissible and what is politically wise. Collins may well be entitled to sue Mallard and Little for defamation, and one can only assume someone in her legal team thinks she has a winnable case. If this is not the case, and if her case is legally as doomed as it seems to this non-expert in defamation law, then Collins' only hope may be to pressure her opponents into settling with her before the matter goes to court. The statements made by Mallard and Little to date suggest there is no realistic prospect of a settlement any time soon.

Politically this seems like a high risk venture for Collins. If she loses her credibility will be shot, and her opponents will never stop gloating.

But what of Mallard and Little? Are they wrong to have evaded the document servers for so long? Certainly not legally: they were entitled to make Collins' people work hard to serve them.

Nor am I convinced that politically it is as bad a look as the Timaru Herald seems to indicate. If you're faced with a daft lawsuit that appears to be motivated by spite, why should you co-operate with the plaintiff at all? If the actions of Mallard and Little achieve anything, they are to highlight how ludicrous Collins' suit is.

The usual suspects on the right have pinned the blame on Mallard and Little, without questioning why Collins is engaging in this behaviour. Some of the commentary on sites like Kiwiblog about Mallard and Little make what the two Labour MPs said about Collins appear very tame indeed. Those who serially defame should probably not be so eager to see politicians sue over perceived reputational slights.

Fishmeat: More On The Chained Lady

This morning I broke what is possibly the most sensational news story in the history of civilisation. Read on to learn more about the despicable Labour MP and his dirty secret.

So what's in the basement? Or should that be who?

My impeccable source has provided documentary evidence that a current Labour MP has a woman chained to the wall of his cellar.

I have published below a copy of the evidence. It is irrefutable proof that a Labour MP (whom I shall name if he doesn't step forward) HAS A SEX SLAVE IN HIS BASEMENT!

I'm not at all surprised. In my experience these filthy lefties are all the same.

If you think that's bad, I have even more to come! I am going to single-handedly destroy the Labour Party forever.

Fishmeat: Who's That In Your Dungeon?

A spy tells me that a certain Labour MP has a secret. A dirty little secret he keeps chained to a wall in his basement.

My source is impeccable. This is the same source who last week revealed that Trevor Mallard was a terrorist working for al-Qaeda, and who blew the whistle on the shameful treatment of fellow patients in his secure mental institution only a couple of months ago.

I won't name the MP yet, because I want to try to drag this out into numerous blogposts in order to get as much attention for myself as possible. 

Stand by for more juicy details...

Sometimes The Crappy Tools Are To Blame

Despite New Zealanders on average working longer hours than those in most other OECD countries, there's a perception we're still not working hard enough.

A recent Ernst and Young workplace survey shows that New Zealanders are masters of inefficient work practices. It seems we spend crazy amounts of time dealing with email, or just waiting for others to do their jobs.

Anyone who has worked in an organisation of any size will be familiar with the practices that develop around systems, very often completely unnecessarily. Far too many IT administrators are masters of finding ways to slow down work, and to add layers of complexity and compliance to what should be simple processes. This is particularly true in professional service organisations, like law and accounting firms, where regulatory requirements dictate that fee earners should spend most of their time tearing out their hair having to deal with filing systems and email protocols, rather than engage in useful and fulfilling work. Next time your lawyer quotes you an hourly rate that exceeds the GDP of a number of central African nations, you might like to reflect on the possibility that your lawyer is trying to recoup all that dead time dealing with those millions of f**king internal emails that say nothing important but which lazy administrators think everyone in the firm should read, and the hours spent every week struggling with IT systems that don't perform any useful function.

One columnist for the rag known as the NBR thinks it's all a case of workers wasting time and larking about, when they should be working like drones for their bosses.

A just-released Ernst and Young survey shows that Kiwis are a bunch of malingerers, wasting up to a fifth of their working day engaged in other pursuits. 

The biggest time waster is email at 17%, while 16% of time is lost waiting for others to finish their tasks. 

Such slothfulness comes at a high price, costing the country $19 billion a year in lost productivity. 

Now employees are on notice to stop wasting the boss’s time and start doing an honest day’s toil.

The survey highlights how utterly unproductive we are as workers, a fact that is reflected in our relatively low GDP per capita. It's partly because firms aren't investing enough in technology and machinery to make the efforts of workers more productive, but I suspect it's also a symptom of New Zealand's less than impressive record when it comes to managerial competence. In most international surveys New Zealand comes up short when it comes to business leadership and management, and this probably explains why so many firms are process-driven rather than focused on the bigger picture. It's easier to blindly follow a process than to challenge the prevailing orthodoxy. 

I don't think New Zealanders have a reputation for pissing about on the job, but if large numbers of them are spending hours on Facebook, then this could be a symptom of another particular feature of the Kiwi workplace: low pay. We all know the saying about monkeys and peanuts, and there's probably some truth in it. Why should an employer demand their pound of flesh if they're not prepared to pay well for it?

For everyone who is toiling the solution is not to work harder, but to do things smarter. This requires employers to invest more in better technology and better people. Managers need to be upskilled, to avoid becoming mere process followers, and business leaders must be prepared to intervene when blockages prevent meaningful work being done.

Unfortunately, our culture of mediocrity in business means it's always easier to blame someone else than to fix a problem. So blaming workers for the shitty tools they have to work with makes sense.

Key's Secret Super Plans

Why does John Key appear so confident that we are not facing a future superannuation crisis?

Young people are fleeing the country in such numbers that soon there will be mostly just the elderly left, with their only companions being the finance company directors to fleece them of their life savings.

And who will look after them? In time most aged care workers will have departed the industry in search of wages that are less demeaning.

It seems unlikely that the government would allow a cull of the elderly, due to the usual complaints from liberal hand-wringers.

So where are the solutions to the problems caused by an ageing population? John Key refuses to consider looking at the retirement age, a decision that seems as stupidly short-sighted as it is politically cynical.

However, it pays to remember that John Key knows more than we do about what the future holds, thanks to his time in the finance world, shifting money about the globe and doing deals. If there's one thing Key understands it is how to predict where a market is headed.

It is therefore almost certain that Key has a few aces up his sleeve for the day when the Super bomb drops on us.

What could they be? My picks:

• There's a huge oil reserve sitting somewhere out there, and Key knows where it is. He's keeping quiet about it for the time being because he knows that the mad socialists, if they win the next election, will go nuts and spend it all on frivolous things like education, alleviating poverty, and public transport. 
• The next two decades will see staggering demand for our nation's goods and services, leading to huge windfalls to our farmers, who will all spontaneously decide to pay more tax rather than pour most of their earnings into increasing the value of their capital. 
• A particular virulent influenza strain will arrive, wiping out tens of thousands of elderly folk. There's no way Key can know this, but a major pandemic is overdue, so it's a safe bet. If there's a swine flu futures market you can bet John Key's got it cornered.
• Government scientists have worked out a secret formula to pick the winning number in any lottery worldwide. Forget about our own Lotto, which is pocket-money compared with some overseas contests. A jackpot win in the EuroMillions or Mega Millions lottery could probably fund NZ Super for a month.
• Treasury officials have privately confirmed to the PM that the world will end on 21 December 2012. John Key has accepted the inevitability of our world's destruction, which is why he remains so relaxed about matters that should be keeping him sleepless.

The alternative to all of the above is that Key just doesn't want to do anything that might court unpopularity, that he's happy just being a manager rather than a leader, and that he doesn't care very much about the burden our young people will face in twenty or thirty years.

Or the world really is going to end on December 21.

Uncle Ernie: Our Brave Boys In Blue

Now the Urewera trouble is over, it's time we all said a big thank you to our constabulary for keeping us safe from the terrifying prospect of people playing with guns in an irresponsible manner who aren't all white.

I heard the police wanted to charge the lot of them with being terrorists, so the four people they convicted in the end are bloody lucky to get such light sentences. Those terrorists are such a nuisance in other parts of the world, hijacking planes and blowing themselves up, and I can't think of anything ruder than exploding yourself in a crowded place without asking permission first. It's just another sign that society has gone to the dogs.

But when it comes to terrorism we're usually dealing with foreigners, and I've always found foreigners to be insufferably rude and pushy.

I remember how awful the people were when I went on my only trip across the seas. It used to be that when you went into a cafe and ordered coffee the only questions they asked you were "black or white?" and "how many sugars?" Now there's more types of coffee then there are bloody Chinese running my local shopping mall, and I reckon this coffee thing is all a wily scheme invented by those foreigners to take more money off me.

That's why I'll never return to Waiheke Island.

The police took a lot of criticism over this whole Urewera business, so it's nice to see them finally vindicated. For the past four years the cops have had to listen as one liberal whiner after another took aim at them. I have always found the police a delight to deal with, so I have no doubt they behaved with restraint and respect during the Urewera raids. But then they always do. The so-called experts like to climb into the cops whenever they can, but the boys in blue do a great job and keep the streets safe for law-abiding white people like me.

Occasionally the system lets us down, and leads to people who deserve the full penalty of the law escaping justice. When that happens everyone seems to attack the poor police officer who was only doing his job.  I only have to think back to the fiasco around the Arthur Thomas case. I've always believed Thomas was as guilty as sin, and that he got lucky when he found a muddle-headed politician to give him a pardon. I've no idea what Thomas was actually guilty of, but everyone's got something to hide, so he may as well have copped his punishment. I don't blame the police for planting evidence in the Thomas case, because they wouldn't need to go to such ridiculous lengths if only judges treated them with more respect. For goodness sakes, if a police officer says a man's guilty of a crime, why would he say that unless it's true? I would trust the word of my local hard-working bobby over scientific evidence and the laws of physics any day.

I've heard all sorts of rubbish claims about policemen pointing guns at women and children during the Urewera raids, but even if it's true I wouldn't blame the cops for a moment. You have to keep your eye on kids, because if you don't you can be sure the little buggers will make you pay. Before you know it they've walked all over your lawn, stomped on your flower beds, stolen your fruit, and hollered blue murder because you gave them a well-deserved clip round the ear.

Nowadays, though, you can't even get your whip out before some lad's father's complaining to the local police. I don't blame the cops when they respond to these ridiculous complaints, because they're just upholding the absurd laws we now have, but I tell you something: all this PC carry-on about the rights of children has turned my stomach.

When I was growing up there wasn't time for any of that human rights nonsense. We knew our place in the world and were better and stronger as a family. I never complained when my old man took the belt to me, because if I had he'd have belted me even harder. That taught me at an early age that you've no business standing up for yourself, and that you're better off just taking what comes.  Society works because we respect the rights of those with bigger and better weapons than us.

And that weekly thrashing by my father, just before he stepped into the pulpit to give his Sunday morning sermon, made me a better man. It really wasn't so bad, and the flogging in the back yard was always a welcome opportunity to get some fresh air after having spent the rest of the week locked in the family cellar chained to the wall.

That Iti chap was the cause of all this trouble in the hills, so I'm not surprised the man got a jail term. I make it a rule in life never to trust a man with tattoos, so in my opinion the court was right to convict him. The death penalty was sadly never an option for the judge, although death's probably too good for someone who looks different to me and challenges my meek acceptance of traditional authority.

Now the trial is over it's time for the four people sentenced to take their punishment and stop complaining like old women. Nobody has any business running around the woods with guns and being a nuisance to others, unless they're hunters out shooting each other by accident.

Budget's School Report

Mathematics

While Budget understands the basics of arithmetic, Budget displays a concerning lack of imagination and application in this area. Mathematics involves more than simple subtraction. More effort required!

Economics

Budget really struggles with this topic, but this is a result of the disruptive influences in his class. I have tried to separate Budget from his best friend Neo, but they do everything together, and the moment I turn my back they are sitting together again making trouble in class. I don't hold out much hope of an improvement while Budget and his friend Mr Lib remain inseparable.

History

Budget displays a poor grasp of this topic. Budget's project on the Great Depression was a terrific disappointment, and showed a profound lack of understanding of the subject. Budget will have to put more effort in next term if he is not to repeat the same mistakes.

Religious studies

Budget's dedication to this subject is impressive. If I have one criticism, it is that Budget tends to get carried away during class discussions and refuses to listen to the points of view of others. Budget must learn to critically examine his own religious beliefs.

Science

Budget approaches this subject with enthusiasm, but he struggles with using real world evidence to test a hypothesis. He often writes his results down without even testing to see whether his theory is correct. On the occasions that I point out the error of his ways he becomes moody and sulky and tells me I know nothing about the subject. A difficult student who needs to work on his attitude.

Physical Education

Budget is a sluggish student who shows no enthusiasm or energy, and must be coaxed into making even the tiniest effort. His attitude is all wrong. He is something of a braggart, repeatedly telling all of his peers how fast he is, even though when challenged to a race he always finds an excuse to back out. A sore ankle, or bad weather, or a sick Greek uncle, there's always a reason. I shall not be sad to see the last of this Budget!

English

Where do I begin? I don't normally say this, but I suspect Budget would have been better off avoiding English altogether.

Activist? Moi?

Yesterday in the Herald Bryce Edwards described me as a "Labour Party activist."

When I read that I didn't know whether to be mortified, amused, offended, or pleased. "Activist" has so many connotations, some of them good and some of them not so good.

For the record, here's my involvement with Labour:

• I joined the party only a year ago.
• I helped Labour MP Phil Twyford last year with his campaign to win the Te Atatu electorate seat. That involved things like deliveries, door-knocking, and helping with election hoardings.
• I also door-knocked and delivered pamphlets in the Te Atatu/Massey area for Kelvin Davis during the Te Tai Tokerau byelection.
• I occasionally help Phil Twyford out with local Labour stuff, and try to attend local electorate committee meetings when I can, although my life is so busy it's often hard to find the time.
• I have met a few Labour MPs and candidates, and have had lunch or a beer with a couple of them.
• I have no official involvement (e.g. as a member of any of Labour's numerous committees) with the party at a regional or national level.

This clearly makes me a Labour supporter, and a strong supporter of Phil Twyford (who I think is an excellent MP), but does this qualify me as an "activist"? 

It's not that I'm lukewarm in my support of the party (even though there are things I would like to see changed). My concern about being labelled an "activist" is that some people may perceive me as some sort of blinkered leftie who is radically pro-Labour. If that's the impression my blog leaves with people, then that's fair enough. I'm not sure, however, that it's the introduction I want people to have before they come here.

Or should I be proud of this "activist" label?

Yes, This Is Just The Same

(click the image to enlarge)

A Solid Speech, But Is The Focus Right?

It looks like David Parker gave a solid pre-Budget speech this morning. Well the content was solid, though I have no idea what the delivery was like, because I wasn't there. I suppose it's possible that he stuttered and stumbled through the entire thing, making offensive wisecracks to the audience about the Jews and black people as he went, and then finished by punching the host in the face.

I'm going to assume Mr Parker did none of these things, because if he had I'd have read about it on Whaleoil, so I'm going to judge Parker by the content of his speech.

The speech is a repeat of much of the stuff David Shearer has been saying since he became Labour leader. It will appeal to people like me, who bemoan the failure of the Nats to grow the economy and who want an economy where the primary focus is on high-value export products and services, rather than low-margin commodities. But the speech goes further in setting out Parker's credentials as a man of business.

I suppose this is important, because a lot of people continue to believe that the left are traditionally poor at managing the economy, and that only a "party of business" can get it right. This ignores the fact that New Zealand is not a business, and that attempts by various politicians to treat political and social issues like they are business problems have left us in the crapper. But the framing is probably important, or so Labour's strategists have determined. Labour must be able to show it can walk the talk when it comes to "business".

But if I'm honest I'd like to hear more about what Labour's going to do to alleviate poverty and deal with pressing social problems, like inadequate housing, job creation and the like. "Growing the pie" speeches like these are important and they have their place, and no doubt they play well to savvy business audiences, but they don't mean squat to a family of five in Massey or Mangere living in substandard housing and struggling to put food on the table. If Labour wants to deliver an alternative vision, then it could start by explaining to those who stayed away from the ballot box last year what specifically Labour will do for them. I don't expect substantive policy, but if Labour won't even talk about the alleviation of poverty, then can we be surprised when voters end up looking for other options or just losing interest altogether?

It also seems to me that Labour can't push too hard the line that government debt is not the problem, while at the same time promising not to undertake major new spending until the government's books are back in surplus. If austerity is such a doomed experiment, then why not repudiate it altogether?

"They're all the same" is something I hear a lot when I talk to people about politics and politicians. If Labour wants to govern in 2014, and wants to get there on its on steam and not as a result of a messy cobbled-together coalition holding a bare majority, it must win back those who can't see any point in voting for Labour.

A Post About Big Fish

The whale shark is the largest fish species in the world, because Wikipedia told me so

JOHN EDWARDS, I DEMAND AN APOLOGY!

Take Your Medicine

You've probably heard a lot about the National government's austerity measures, and I know you're probably worrying whether this belt-tightening is really worth it.

It's going to cost you more to get your prescription filled, and the quality of the services you receive from the government is declining. If you are having to deal with ACC, for example, you could be forgiven for thinking the corporation is in fact at war with its customers.

And if you have young children, expect to see a reduction in the quality of their education, with an increase in the student to teacher ratio. More fool you for not putting your kids into private schools!

But I'm sure you understand that these austerity measures are for your own good. You need to take your medicine, and if you don't like the medicine then, well, you have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who spent up large on your overpriced bungalow in the inner city suburbs, and the holiday home in the Coromandel you can no longer afford.

What's that? You're still renting because entering the housing market remains an elusive dream? Well it's still your fault. You should have saved more while things were easier for you. You did, but then got made redundant? Well maybe you should have worked harder.

Or maybe you think it's someone else's fault that your savings were wiped out because you put your money into a number of finance companies at the recommendation of your financial adviser. What a fool you are for listening to the advice of someone who claimed to know what they were doing! If you're not even prepared to spend a few hours a day following the financial markets then why should anyone help you?

Your life is tough, but you'll just have to suck it up. We're all making sacrifices, you know. Well that's not entirely true, because I got a rather large tax cut, which will allow me to buy up some of those nice SOE shares, assuming the overseas investors don't gobble them up first.

There's no point in whining about these cuts to government spending, because they're unavoidable. Why should society have to bail you out anyway? You claim to be ill, but that's only because you were brought up  in damp and unhealthy houses, so it's actually your parents' fault. Go and complain to them. You claim to be poor, and yet you chose to have children. What gives you the right to propagate and give meaning and purpose to your otherwise unendurable life? Have you considered just dying? Wouldn't that be better for us all? Do you think I like listening to all your woes?

If you won't just die then it's time you stopped moaning and pulled yourself together. Anyone can make it in this country. Look at me, I started with nothing, other than a good and comfortable upbringing free from violence or addiction, and a quality education paid for by my parents, and look what I have turned myself into. A valuable and productive member of society who pays very little tax and who pontificates endlessly about the rights and wrongs of others less fortunate than me.

So take your medicine and stop complaining. 

Good News On Asteroid Front Shows Government On Track

A guest post from the Finance Minister

We live in tough economic times, but the New Zealand public can be assured that this government is leaving no stone unturned in dealing with the challenges caused by the global economic downturn.

You will appreciate, I hope, that I can't speak too much today about the contents of next week's budget. What I can tell you is that we will be carrying on with our hard work to date, tightening our belts, and taking a responsible and prudent approach towards government spending.

All the main indicators show that our efforts to rein in spending are having the desired effect. Today a report was released providing yet more evidence that our austerity measures are starting to work.

The report by researchers at the University of Southampton has listed the ten countries most at-risk of being struck by an asteroid. New Zealand is not included on that top-ten list, which shows that we are very well placed to ride out the effects of any asteroid-related event.

This is convincing proof that our austerity measures are working.

Since the global recession hit us all in 2008 we have had to be cautious and conservative in how we spend the public's money, and this report shows that our efforts are bearing fruit.

Even a small asteroid hitting Auckland or Wellington has the potential to be a catastrophic disaster for the nation's economy, but the report shows that as a result of the measures we have implemented that risk remains low.

We all know how little the previous Labour government did to reduce the risk of asteroid strikes. Labour have tried to argue that the statistics for the period between 1999 and 2008 point to not a single job being lost as a result of asteroid strikes, but those statistics mask the real story.

The fact of the matter is that most space particle strikes are never reported. In most cases the particles either burn up in the atmosphere, or by the time they hit the ground they are little more than dust.

This is why the effects of space debris on jobs and the economy are so often under-reported.

The fact of the matter is that Labour's statistics are meaningless, because they don't have a clue what the real danger is.

But this latest report shows that, finally, things are back on track.

This is good news for the general public, but it's also good news for businesses. I was at a business lunch recently with the Chief Executive of Business New Zealand, Phil O'Reilly, and he told me that the thing businesses hate the most is uncertainty.

An asteroid that wiped out thousands of small businesses would be bad for the economy, so our efforts in reducing that risk will make a big difference to business confidence.

I can confidently predict that, based on this latest data, better times are around the corner, but only if one of the more fiscally imprudent economies such as Greece or Spain, doesn't get hit by a giant asteroid that leads to life on the entire planet being wiped out in an instant. If that occurs we may have to reassess our current fiscal projections.

New Wiggles Line-up Announced

New Red Wiggle, Trevor Mallard

Labour MP Trevor Mallard has confirmed rumours that he will be the new Red Wiggle from 2013.

The legendary band announced on Thursday that three members of the group will retire at the end of the year.

Jeff Fatt (the Purple Wiggle), Greg Page (the Yellow Wiggle), and Murray Cook (the Red Wiggle) have confirmed that they will retire at the end of the year, leaving Anthony Field (the Blue Wiggle) as the only original member of the band remaining.

On Thursday morning it was confirmed that former ACT MP Rodney Hide would take the place of Greg Page and wear the yellow jersey.

And on Thursday afternoon Labour MP Trevor Mallard confirmed he was taking the place of Red Wiggle Murray Cook.

"It's a dream come true," said Mr Mallard, shortly after the announcement was made.

"I've been a big fan of the Wiggles since the band first toured New Zealand. I've bought tickets to all of their shows, although I've never actually seen them perform live."

Mr Mallard said he had been put on notice several months ago that he was in the running for the position.

"I've been training hard to get in shape," Mr Mallard said, "and spending long hours on the bike. I guess my efforts paid off."

Mr Mallard confirmed rumours that Wiggles management have been seeking for some time to take the group in a different direction, to create a darker and more intense entertainment experience for children.

"At the moment the kids lose interest in the Wiggles as soon as they reach school age, so the group is aiming to capture an older, more cynical market. My scrappy, take-no-prisoners approach to politics obviously fits that profile."

Learning the guitar was proving challenging, said Mr Mallard, but he claimed to be making good progress after taking a number of guitar lessons from Labour leader David Shearer.

"Usually it's me teaching the young pup a thing or two," said Mr Mallard, "but David's been hugely supportive. They actually asked David before approaching me, but David was already thinking about a leadership tilt at that point."

Mr Mallard said he knew nothing about rumours that former National Party leader Don Brash had been approached to play a new character in the Wiggles ensemble, Donald the Dinosaur, or that internet tycoon Kim Dotcom had been recruited to take over the role of Captain Feathersword the Friendly Pirate.

Mr Mallard said it would be a challenge juggling his parliamentary duties with his new role as a singing, guitar-playing and dancing children's entertainer, but he was prepared for that challenge.

Meanwhile, former ACT Party leader Rodney Hide has announced he will take over the role of Yellow Wiggle from 2013.

"They were impressed with my dancing skills, and my ability to hold reckless and irresponsible governments to account," said Mr Hide.

"I'm looking forward to mixing things up with Trevor on stage. I have a few scores to settle with that man, and I won't be taking a backwards step.

"I've already told them there's no way in hell I'm driving any Big Red Car."

Wiggles management have also confirmed that no replacement for Purple Wiggle Jeff Fatt has yet been found.

United Future MP Peter Dunne had been considered for the role. However, band leader Anthony Field said he was worried that Dunne's ability to send others to sleep with his dreary monologues about common-sense and moderation would confuse the audience, who have become so accustomed to the Purple Wiggle being the one to fall asleep during the show.

Mr Field, who is remaining as the Blue Wiggle, said he expected to continue as leader of the band until late in 2014.

"We've already got a replacement lined up," said Mr Field.

"I can't say too much, but I think people will be pleasantly surprised. It's really not a huge departure from the work he's been doing since 2008."

Harry Hindenberg: Breach Of Contract

The latest column from acclaimed Papakura lawyer Harry Hindenberg 

I'm always saddened when people don't comply with their contractual obligations.

I know how disappointing it can be when someone lets you down after you've paid good money for their services, because my clients are always telling me so. "An incompetent disgusting pervert" was how one client described me, though if you ask me her judgement was a little on the harsh side. I may not be a saint, and raiding someone's trust fund without their knowledge in order to pay for prostitutes may even be a crime (technically, anyway), but there are far worse sins committed by others every day.  "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone", is my standard defence whenever I am called before the Law Society to explain myself.

So I can understand the hurt Kim Dotcom must be feeling right now. He paid good money for his politician, but his politician has turned out to be a bit of a let-down.

But what can Mr Dotcom do about his disappointment? Might he have a legal remedy?

As a streetwise lawyer who focuses on results rather than details, I seldom bother with the black-letter law. When a client comes to me with a problem they don't care that there might be an Act of Parliament that deals with the very situation and provides a clear remedy. No, when my clients come to me what they really want is vengeance, even if they don't know it yet. I give them that vengeance by making sure their cases are dragged through the court system to the bitter end, and by persuading them not to foolishly settle.

"Don't be swayed by the weasel-words of the other party's lawyer" I tell my clients, "and don't listen to the judge when he says your claim for emotional distress is flimsy and is in any case almost certainly statute-barred. How can he know the pain you are feeling right now after running out of Marmite? I know Sanitarium will cave in soon, I just know it! By the way, here is my latest invoice. Wait, are you okay? You look pale. Shall I get you a glass of water? Let me just add that to the bill under 'miscellaneous disbursements'. Yes, I know it's a lot of money, but I'm seriously indebted to my dealer, and if he breaks my legs I'm not going to be able to stand up and give my big closing address. And could you pay the bill now? Right now? Cash would be preferable, because we don't want to leave a trail for those IRD boys, do we? No, that's all-right, I can wait a few minutes to see if your chest pains subside, and then we'll go off to the bank together, although I might just wait outside if you don't mind. The bank manager wants to talk to me about my overdrawn trust account, and I don't want to face him until after the 3:20 at Addington."

But it's not all about winning, as I tell every client after their case is thrown out of court and they end up facing an astronomical costs claim from the defence.

Anyway, as I was saying, black-letter law does not interest me. If you want a lawyer who has a handle on all the relevant legislation and cases, then be my guest. If you prefer the services of someone who finished high school and didn't have to purchase his law degree over the internet, then good luck to you I say.

But if you want someone who gets results then you should call me.

Having purchased a good number of public officials over the years, I strongly believe that you should get what you paid for. Mr Dotcom paid a lot of money for his politician, and what does he have to show for it? Not a lot. He should sue Mr Banks for breach of contract, and I will laugh in the face of any lawyer who claims no such contract exists, or that any such contract is illegal and unenforceable.

But if Mr Banks should be reading this, let me make it clear that my earlier offer to represent you still stands. I don't see any ethical dilemma in representing two parties to the same dispute, although the reason why I don't see one is because I keep closing my eyes and saying "la la la la la la!" every time someone even mentions the term "conflict of interest". There will be time to deal with the Law Society and its technicalities another day, and hopefully when that day comes I'll be in the south of Spain living it up.

So call me, Kim Dotcom. We will make glorious litigation together.

A Post About Nothing In Particular

Send in the Clowns
(Stephen Sondheim)

Isn't it rich?
Are we a pair?
Me here at last on the ground,
You in mid-air.
Send in the clowns.

Isn't it bliss?
Don't you approve?
One who keeps tearing around,
One who can't move.
Where are the clowns?
Send in the clowns.

Just when I'd stopped opening doors,
Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours,
Making my entrance again with my usual flair,
Sure of my lines,
No one is there.

Don't you love farce?
My fault I fear.
I thought that you'd want what I want.
Sorry, my dear.
But where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns.
Don't bother, they're here.

Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer,
Losing my timing this late
In my career?
And where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns.
Well, maybe next year.

In Defence Of Religion

This debate over gay marriage seems to have hit us from nowhere. I suppose that's not strictly true, because the issue's been bubbling away for a few years now; but it only came to the fore when Barack Obama announced he was a supporter of gay marriage.

As usual when debates centre around issues combining human rights and morality, religious groups have had a lot to say. It's unfortunate that religious leaders have been subjected to a great deal of hostility from gay rights campaigners, considering the great things religion has given us. Don't these people deserve our respect?

If we disregard for a moment all the terrible tragedies perpetuated in the names of various gods, the deliberate lies, the child abuse, the hypocrisy, the suicide bombers, the Inquisition, the subjugation of women, the corruption, and the ongoing suppression of scientific knowledge, religion doesn't come out looking too bad.

So let's hear it for all those priests, mullahs, pastors and rabbis who think they have the right to tell people what they should do in the privacy of their own homes. Without their efforts where would society be today?

Fixed It For You, John

"Stick to Facts, sir!"

I have had a few successes since I began blogging, but having one of my posts turn up in the first page of a Google search for "lamingtons" is probably my greatest achievement. (h/t @AlastairJNZ)

However, apart from posts about lamingtons, I have been known to write occasionally critical commentary about the current National government. Okay, so "relentlessly critical" would be more accurate.

Is my ongoing negativity justified? Perhaps I simply haven't appreciated all the good work Key, English, Joyce and co are doing. Could it be that even as I criticise them for destroying our country and transferring our nation's wealth to those who already have more than they need, while ignoring the slow but steady decline of our economy, National have been getting on with saving us all?

I have my doubts, but then I'm just a partisan hack. I don't think I'm quite as partisan as some on the left, but I know it's unlikely that I'll ever find a decent word to say about John Key's government.

But let's be fair. There must be something John Key can point to proudly and say "we did that." Some achievement that made New Zealand a better or safer place or increased our nation's wealth in a measurable and verifiable way.

So all you closet Tories who read this blog, now's your chance. If John Key stepped down as PM tomorrow, what could he claim as an actual positive achievement?

I'm not interested in nebulous BS like "made the New Zealand economy more competitive" or "reduced  inefficiency and waste in government", nor do I want to hear about policies introduced to fix perceived problems the existence of which are in dispute. For example, while you may not necessarily agree with the argument, an argument nevertheless exists that reducing government spending in a time of economic stagnation is a sin, not a virtue, and that we don't have government debt levels to justify such measures. It's an argument many economists hold. So don't preach to me about the virtues of austerity.

Just give me the facts.

Maybe more kittens were saved by National than under the Clark government. Are more old dears having hip operations than ever before?

Are we safer as a society from the ever-present threat of sorcery? And if we are, was it National's doing?

Whose Brain Is This?

Scandal Within Labour As Shearer Plays Stairway

A political crisis is threatening to end the leadership of David Shearer, after the Labour leader reportedly played Stairway to Heaven while trying out a guitar.

Witnesses say that the incident happened during a visit by Mr Shearer to Goldbeard Guitars in Owhiro Bay, Wellington.

Dave Gilberd, the owner of Goldbeard Guitars, said Mr Shearer had been "mucking around" with a hand-crafted Goldbeard guitar, when the incident occurred.

"He started to play Classical Gas, that old Mason Williams classic, as we were talking, and he seemed to know his way around the instrument," said Mr Gilberd.

"He seemed like a nice guy at first, very cool and laid back. Then he played Stairway."

Video footage on YouTube shows Mr Shearer playing the guitar moments before the alleged incident, but the footage does not show Mr Shearer playing the infamous Led Zeppelin tune.



"When I realised what he was doing I panicked," said Mr Gilberd. "I tried to take the guitar off him, but then his minders piled in and I ended up with a bloody nose. I think maybe they thought I was trying to hurt him.

"I was just trying to get my guitar back, although if I had hurt the guy it would have been more than he deserved. Stairway? On one of my instruments? Oh man!

"There is no way I am ever voting Labour again," said Mr Gilberd.

Mr Shearer's behaviour has already been condemned by the leaders of other political parties.

Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei said Shearer's actions demonstrated "an astounding lapse of judgement", while New Zealand First leader Winston Peters questioned why the Labour leader was so intent on playing overseas songs on New Zealand-made instruments.

Conservative Party leader Colin Craig said Stairway to Heaven was "devil's music", and counselled Mr Shearer to devote himself to good works and following the teachings of The Eternal Saviour Our Lord Jesus Christ Through Whom We Shall All Be Saved.

The incident has put further pressure on an already embattled Labour leader. A source within the Labour Party said a leadership challenge was now more likely than ever, and that Shearer playing Stairway was a "last straw" for many of his exasperated supporters.

However, Mr Shearer has said he did nothing wrong.

"It's just a song, and I don't see what all the fuss is about," Mr Shearer said.

"The people of New Zealand have told us loud and clear that they're not interested in partisan bickering over Led Zeppelin numbers. I didn't become Labour leader just to conform to the old musical rules."

Mr Shearer said his critics were displaying crude musical prejudices, and had lost sight of the pleasure that music could bring to the soul.

"When I play my guitar I feel a sense of wonder and happiness, and I am filled with joy and the desire for laughter," said Mr Shearer.

"Does anyone remember laughter?"

John's Lifestyle Choice

I see that Mr Key has been complaining to anyone who will listen about how hard done by he is, and that nobody understands any more.

Well let me remind you, John Key, that you didn't become Prime Minister by accident. You made a lifestyle choice and now you have to live with it, and if you don't like it any more you should take yourself off the generous taxpayer-paid benefit you're on and go get a real job.

These f***ing government beneficiaries are all the same.

Wellington Health Officials Struggle To Cope With Contagion

An emergency quarantine zone has been established around the Beehive building in Wellington, after reports of senior government ministers inexplicably falling ill.

A civil emergency has now been declared in Wellington, and health officials have been meeting under urgency to consider how to address the situation.

The crisis became apparent after a government minister began to behave in an erratic manner.

According to Ministry of Health officials the minister, whom officials have refused to name for privacy reasons, began to display symptoms of severe memory loss and bewilderment, while talking in a confused manner about cabbage boats.

But it was not until another senior figure within the administration began to behave in a similar manner that officials realised they were dealing with some form of contagion.

The man, whom officials have labelled "JK" for privacy reasons, appeared to suffer sudden memory loss when questioned by journalists on Tuesday about his knowledge of various National Party matters.

"JK" appeared to regain some of his memory by the end of the interview, officials say, but they are still deeply concerned that a virulent infection may have eaten part of his brain.

Dr Briar Lundy of the Ministry of Health, who is overseeing the Wellington quarantine operation, said that people close to JK had reported seeing a gradual change in the patient over the last few months.

"The patient was apparently full of life, jovial and happy-go-lucky, right up until November last year. But since then he appears to have undergone a sharp decline.

"People who have observed JK over a number of years say he is looking more tired and careworn than ever before. When that is combined with the sudden memory loss and irritability, and a series of inexplicable policy decisions that fly in the face of common sense and reason, it becomes clear that we're dealing with some kind of brain infection.

"We've taken the precaution of quarantining the two victims, to prevent them from infecting the brains of others. The worry now is that other ministers may already be experiencing similar symptoms, and they will all need to undergo detailed testing."

Officials are considering seeking the issue of an epidemic notice under special legislation passed in 2006 at the height of the avian flu scare. However, the issue of an epidemic notice requires the approval of the Prime Minister, and officials believe that in the circumstances it may prove difficult to get that approval.

"The Prime Minister is unavailable right now," Dr Lundy told journalists when asked whether Mr Key would provide approval for an epidemic notice, though she refused to elaborate further.

A cordon has now been placed around the Beehive, and army personnel wearing hazmat suits are patrolling the area with guns. They have orders to keep people away from the building, while those inside have been isolated as a safety precaution.

Officials were considering throwing a wider cordon around the entire Parliamentary complex, after reports of a non-ministerial government MP acting in an erratic and irrational manner.

But the plan was called off after one of the man's caucus colleagues explained the man's behaviour.

"That's just Tau. He's been like that for years."

Keeping It Clean

The leak of minutes from a National Party committee meeting provides some evidence of a potential division within the party. Never mind the supposed ructions within Labour: the battle going on within National is starting to go public, and John Key looked surprisingly unconvincing when answering TV3's questions about his knowledge of Simon Lusk.

Having said all that, I suspect the story is probably really only of interest to politics tragics.

But any story where John Key is made to look uncomfortable and answer questions in an evasive manner can only be good news for Labour, because it reinforces a developing narrative that Key and his government cannot be trusted to give straight answers.

It's the sort of scoop that the media love: a leak, and evidence of a potential power struggle behind the scenes. But it's also the sort of story best left to the media. The public don't have a high regard for politicians at the best of times, and politicians who frequently dig the dirt are bound to attract a certain reputation, and not necessarily a positive one.

I understand Trevor Mallard's desire to embarrass National over this matter, but I suspect most people are turned off when they read blogposts like this one. Labour needs to project an image of competence and credibility if it is to govern in 2014, and it should be leaving these types of "gotcha" stories to the news media. Mallard probably knew TV3 were doing a story on Lusk in the 6pm news bulletin (Mallard posted his blogpost after 5pm, and for all I know he may have given the material to TV3), so he had little to gain by posting the story.

I'm also mindful that more than a few Labour attacks have in the past blown up in the face of the attacker. So a far safer strategy for the party would be to hand over material like the leaked minutes to the likes of Duncan Garner or Paddy Gower, or leak them to a friendly blogger. The Labour Party could learn a lot about muckraking by looking at the way National gets Labour-negative stories into the news media.

If Labour's going to play "gotcha" out in the open, then it needs to make sure it focuses on issues that are actually important.

A good example is the work being done by Phil Goff to publicise various MFAT leaks. These leaks are highly embarrassing to National, because they portray a minister who is trying desperately to disguise his ineptitude through bullying and bluster. But they're also important because that ineptitude is threatening to do real harm to our nation's reputation abroad.

If Mallard et al want to expose to the nation the internal goings-on within National, then they should use proxies to do their dirty work, rather than be seen with their hands in the mud. Is there really no blogger on the left as deranged and desperate for attention as Whaleoil?

Right Thinking: My Timeshare Plan

Everyone's favourite authoritarian libertarian is back.

The French have this week again made us wonder why we bothered to liberate them in 1944. They have elected a socialist President, and it seems now that they don't want to take their much-needed austerity medicine.

When I think of all the sacrifices past generations have made in the name of democracy, the actions of the French people make me wonder if those sacrifices were all in vain. If the election of someone I don't like is democracy in action, then it's time for us to all agree that democracy has failed.

New Zealand's version of democracy is little better than the French one. We seem content to throw idiotic amounts of money at welfare beneficiaries, but then put rules in place to make it difficult for decent hard-working forgetful politicians to receive secret donations from German internet millionaires in trouble with the law.

It's ridiculous. If we are to live in a free society then we must ensure that the marketplace for ideas remains an open one. This is why I don't have a problem if people want to spend money to acquire political influence, because you can't have a marketplace unless people are selling. More importantly, if people were allowed to openly buy politicians we would see a lot more business-friendly policies coming out of government. Those lefties are so lousy with money that they'd never be able to compete in any bidding process.

On the subject of lousy things, and lice generally, a word here about beneficiaries. I am deeply concerned about the government's plans to give beneficiaries free contraception. My concern is not that as a libertarian I object to the government attempting to exercise coercion over peoples' reproductive choices. I'm only a libertarian on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. The rest of the week I'm content to judge others for their many moral failings.

Let me tell you why I object. It's a dumb idea because of the cost, and because everyone knows that if you create a system that gives poor people access to free stuff they'll abuse that system. Mark my words, before you know it these bludgers will be taking in boxes of the stuff, melting it down to turn it into P.

"But you can't turn the Pill into P", I can almost hear you laughing. Laugh away then. You won't be laughing when a solo mother and her thirty drug-crazed kids born to ten different fathers are running towards you wielding machetes and samurai swords. Just don't bother calling me for help, and don't expect the taxpayer to pay for your hospitalisation.

If we're going to give birth control to these people (and I hesitate to use the word "people" to describe this particular class of creature), let's at least make it compulsory.  Force the stuff down their throats and tie their legs together. If they don't like it, then they can go off the benefit. There are always alternatives to welfare, and if these women are so determined to spend their days on their backs, they can go and monetise their skills. I will always respect a woman who understands her own worth.

But why are we not making better use of our beneficiaries? We have tens of thousands of them, and they could be working for us, the taxpayer. Instead we give them free money and expect nothing in return. Well here's an idea: as a taxpayer* I ought to be entitled to some labour from these folk. We ought to expect an eight hour day from these bludgers, so lets divide them up among the taxpayers and put them to work. I'm thinking about a timeshare system where I get to do what I want with a bludger for maybe two or three weeks in a year. I have a garden that needs to be dug out, a set of shelves that needs to be put up in the spare room, and a host of unusual sensual needs that my regular therapist just isn't comfortable with satisfying.

If that idea is just a little too radical for you, then here's another: why don't we sell the lot of them to the Chinese? They seem to be keen on buying up all our farms, so lets throw in some human livestock to sweeten the deal. I'm not so sure about milking beneficiaries, though. I can't imagine there would be much of a market for it. Nor can I imagine they would get much good meat out of one of those drug-addled wastrels.

No, don't start feeling all sorry for beneficiaries. Being battery farmed, milked, skinned or processed is more than most of them deserve. Let's not forget that each and every one of them chose to end up on welfare. Whether they chose to be made redundant or to be born to parents with few life skills, or chose as children not to be educated and to surround themselves with poor role models, these bludgers are the authors of their own misfortune.

That's why I refuse to have any sympathy for any of them. Why should the taxpayer have to pay for the mistakes of a five-year old who wouldn't exercise wise lifestyle choices based on long-term rational self-interest?

* Hypothetically. My portfolio of trusts and offshore companies allows me to avoid all income tax.

The Week In Pictures

A Speech And An Interview: How They Fared

The two main political party leaders have been to the fore today. This morning David Shearer gave an important speech to the Wellington Employers' Chamber of Commerce, and tonight John Key fronted up on Campbell Live to talk about Kim Dotcom and John Banks.

The Shearer speech

You can see it here. It's a good, workmanlike speech, and the content focuses again on the big economic issues: growth, productivity, debt, government spending, and the looming retirement crisis.

Shearer used the speech to announce Labour is abandoning its policy of paying NZ Super contributions while the government's books remain in deficit. In making the announcement Shearer more or less admitted it was a decision based on pragmatism rather than necessarily on what was "right". In any event it may all be moot, given that the government's books may well be back into surplus by the time Labour next gets a turn in office.

As a reasonably well educated middle-class person who works with innovators and technology companies, I go positively wobbly at the knees when Shearer talks seductively about expanding the economy to focus less on commodities. It's a no-brainer (except to those Einsteins in the Beehive) that we can't hope for a high-growth economy when our main export is milk powder. We've had record commodity prices for the last few years, and yet our economy is stagnant. What's going to happen when those commodity prices slump? Oh but they won't, some are saying. Sure, and the stockmarket will never fall, and we should all put our money into South Canterbury Finance.

But I worry that all this talk about growth and innovation, while an aphrodisiac to people like me, may be falling flat in the burbs. I spent an hour or so in Henderson today getting signatures for the petition calling for a Citizens Initiated Referendum on asset sales (you can get more details here) and the thing that struck me was that, while people really really don't like asset sales, the people I was engaging with in Labour heartland territory weren't the sort to give two hoots about GDP, innovation or added-value products. For these people the issues worrying them are jobs, housing, and the cost of living.

I appreciate that today David Shearer was talking in front of a business audience, but he needs to be more vocal about the issues concerning most of the traditional Labour people who stayed away from the voting booths in 2011. David Shearer needs to give these people a reason to return to Labour.

David Shearer's a smart guy, and I've no doubt he understands this. But until he starts to deliver a few rousing speeches about poverty and welfare and jobs and the cost of living and housing and wages, he's going to face constant criticism from the left that he "doesn't get it".

Labour must position itself more clearly as the party that cares for those at the bottom. Chasing the votes of middle-class people like me is important, but the message about economic growth is not inconsistent with lifting people from poverty and addressing housing issues. A society where people look after each other is likely to be a more prosperous one.

The next big speech from Shearer needs to address these issues.  

Key on Campbell Live

When John Key came to office in 2008, I (like many others on the left) thought he was a bit of a flake. But he's not, and my first assessment of "Smile and Wave" couldn't have been more off the mark. You don't have to like the man to admit Key's a smooth operator when the cameras are on him. His performance on Campbell Live (see it here) was polished, and he managed to deal with most of the awkward questions thrown his way.

Of course, the fact that Key's good in front of the media doesn't mean nothing improper has occurred. Key probably emphasised during the interview more than he would have liked that he doesn't appear to talk to his ministers about contentious issues--or so he would have us believe. It is difficult to believe that a man so relentlessly focused on image and on polling hasn't at any time talked to any of his ministers about some contentious and potentially damaging issues, and that he hasn't asked some fairly obvious questions of John Banks.

I thought John Campbell asked some good questions about the Dotcom matter, particularly about how much Key knew. But I thought he was a positively soft touch on the Banks matter. I don't know why Campbell didn't grill Key on whether it was good enough merely to accept a minister's assurances in the face of compelling evidence of at worst wrongdoing, and at best unethical behaviour. And why not pursue the obvious argument about the importance of ethics? The fact the something isn't actually illegal shouldn't be the only consideration given as to whether someone should retain their ministerial warrant. Why didn't Campbell ask Key about this? Perhaps there was a time constraint on the interview; I don't know.

All the same, Key mostly held his ground, while giving his enemies something to poke him with. I'd call it a draw.

Destroying Everyone Around Him

One of the things we have learned from the John Banks fiasco is that John Key will apparently put up with any sort of behaviour in his ministers so long as it's not actually a matter in which criminal charges are pending.

It is tempting to think how far this principle goes.

Presumably, then, if Mr Banks was accused of stabbing the members of a mime troupe in broad daylight on Wellesley Street before flying off in his helicopter and then taking potshots at people from his chopper with a sniper's rifle, but vehemently denied accusations by the harried survivors of mass murder (even in the face of witness statements and CCTV footage putting him at the scene), Key would only stand him down as a minister once formal charges were laid.

That's the absurdity of taking the word of a minister over what appears on the face of it to be evidence of a potential offence. More astonishing is the fact that Banks simply fails to grasp the completely untenable position he is in and the position he has left the Prime Minister in. This matter will consume Banks in the end, and the only questions that remain are how long Banks remains floundering and wriggling on the harpoon the media have him impaled on, and who Banks takes down with him.

It is also absurd for John Key or his MPs to claim that the last Labour government set some sort of precedent for how wayward ministers ought to be dealt with, and that there's really nothing out of the ordinary going on. John Key has often claimed that he holds his cabinet members to a higher standard of conduct than ministers under the last Labour government. It seems, however, that the nice Mr Key might have been tricking us.

From a political perspective it doesn't matter any more whether John Banks faces criminal charges. The damage to his career is terminal, and his credibility is ruined. He has behaved shamefully, and the arguments made on his behalf that what he has done is okay so long as it's not actually illegal are frankly disgraceful. The expectations we hold of our MPs go beyond not breaking the law.

Harry Hindenberg: Fixing The Banks Problem

Acclaimed Papakura lawyer Harry Hindenberg proposes a defence for John Banks

If there was ever a time when John Banks needed a good lawyer, now is the time.

I have to feel sorry for Mr Banks, because he’s really done nothing wrong. Electoral laws serve no genuinely useful purpose, and are designed solely to keep bureaucrats in work. And who can even understand what those laws are? I tried to read the opinion piece of a few lawyers and a law professor on the internet regarding the Banks matter, but I kept falling asleep. After a heavy liquid lunch, preceded by an even heavier liquid breakfast, I like to snooze the afternoon away, before whiling away a few hours at the pokies. It doesn’t leave much time for the practice of law, but in my experience preparation is the enemy of the effective lawyer.

I have my own theories on how Mr Banks should handle the mess he’s found himself in, but you won’t find this defence in any fancy law books. I know a bit about how the legal system works, but not because of all the mumbo-jumbo I learned at law school. What a waste of time that period of my life was. I have appeared on numerous occasions before the courts, so I know how to impress a judge and jury, and I know what they like to hear. Perhaps the highlight of my legal career was appearing before the Chief Justice in a high profile fraud case. Thankfully, I was acquitted, though it was a near thing. Just as well they didn't find the shoebox of documents hidden in the ceiling cavity above my office.

The secret of good advocacy is not to get bogged down in detail. I'm an effective advocate for my clients because I don't let all the minutiae of a case overwhelm me. Like legislation. And cases. Law professors (or, as I like to call them, "failed lawyers") sitting in their ivory towers may like to think that the views of stuffy nineteenth century English law-lords are of critical importance to the practice of law, but those of us at the coalface know better. I never read cases, and a cursory glance at the legislation in question in any case is usually enough to give me a feel for the issues at hand. I always just follow my gut (which, if I am honest, is hard to miss, thanks to a steady diet of pies and whisky) rather than what the letter of the law says, and I am rarely let down. Sure, I lose an incredible number of cases, and I have had so many appearances before Law Society disciplinary tribunals that they all know me by my first name, but I always make sure I get paid. That's the mark of a good lawyer in my books.

So let's take the John Banks case. My advice to Mr Banks would be to disregard all that legal hocus-pocus his highly paid Queen Street lawyers are feeding him, because fighting the law with the law is just what his opponents would expect. Why would you play the enemy’s game?

I always like to surprise my enemies, in order to put them off-guard. The traditional way these matters work is for a police investigation to be launched, followed perhaps by a criminal prosecution if the evidence appears to show a breach of the law. But the one thing every lawyer knows is you can’t prosecute without evidence.

So if ever there was an occasion where the intimidation and disposal of witnesses was called for, this must be it. Without witnesses Mr Banks’ enemies have no case. It’s simple, really. John Banks, you really should call me.

Luckily for Mr Banks, I happen to know the right people to handle this particular complication. I like to think of myself as a creative problem-solver and a fixer, rather than your traditional sort of lawyer. If that means ethical lines (as well as the Crimes Act) are occasionally blurred or trampled on, then so be it.

Some of the ethical rules we lawyers are held to are ridiculous anyway, like all the rules around what we can do with our trust accounts. When a client gives me a wad of cash for some transaction, like the purchase of a house, I tell them it's going into my firm's trust account. When later on they ask where the money went and why their purchase didn't go through, I have to tell them a few home truths. "It's called a trust account, dammit, so trust me!"

When that approach doesn't work I usually tell them they'll get their money back, but often it requires a bit of juggling with client funds and a few punts. I can't tell you how many scrapes I've narrowly avoided thanks to a good result on the Trentham track.

The trouble with some clients, though, is that you just can't do anything for them. No matter how much effort you put into their legal affairs, they'll still complain. I have an example of this for you happening right now, if you will allow me to breach client confidentiality and explain.

So the Singhs seemed like a nice family. They were new to this country and they came to me to help with the purchase of their first home. If only I had know they would try to destroy my legal career!

These folk had the temerity to complain loudly when I failed to register the title of the property in their names, and I instead registered it in the name of a finance company that a mate of mine owns. This mate does good deals, and he and I always look after each other. On this occasion he gave me a good price for the house, which was bloody handy when it came to paying off some very scary people.

Somehow the Singhs have found out about this minor title defect, and they're now threatening to go to the Law Society if I don't fix the matter. I tried telling them they're overreacting and that we have a certain way of doing business in New Zealand, but they won't listen.

"Look, you know and I know that you own the house," I said. "What difference does a bit of paper make?"

Mr Singh told me I was an unethical, dishonest scumbag who preyed on the disadvantaged. Me! I tried to put him straight by mentioning all the pro bono legal work I do for the community, but it seems he wasn't impressed by my efforts on behalf of the Society for the Welfare of Bridgecorp Directors.

It's lucky that in this particular transaction I acted for seller, buyer and lender, and that I'm pretty good at copying signatures, so I should be able to put things right. My finance company mate will be pissed off, but I have a lot of dirt on him, and if he wants his next P supply he'll stay silent.

Like Alan Martin used to say, it is the putting right that counts, and if it's not put right ask for me. I stand behind the results I promise (very far behind, and usually with a number of offshore trusts and nominee companies in between), which is why, Mr Banks, you need to call me. But I’ll require a healthy retainer and sufficient funds to cover miscellaneous expenses. The people I will be hiring don’t generally invoice for their services, so when you come to see me bring cash, lots of it, in unmarked bills, and don’t tell anyone who you’re meeting.