I don't know if you can call it racism, but it is there, in some of them and it's a thorough dislike for anything Australian.
New Zealand benefits greatly from it's proximity to Australia, in so many ways and we as a nation and taxpayers give them so much that it seems that very act of brotherhood has caused some of the population to harbour a resentment that is quite obvious.
One of the things that seems to ire those more parochial NZ'rs is when some of them migrate to Australia and then become successful and the media claims them to be an Aussie star.
The latest issue it seems is the new in production "Hobbit" movie which has had drama right from the start and now that it is a go under new producer Peter Jackson, there have been questions over whether bit part actors are being fairly remunerated for their labour, a controversy that has been just one more as this production begins to get into the filming stage.
Peter Jackson seems through his spokesman, Auckland-based actor Mark Harrison, to have blamed an Australian Actors association for the initial stop work even though it was actually directed from the New Zealand Union, NZ equity which wanted to see minimum standards agreed upon for its members.
Because NZ Equity is closely related to Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) the Australian Actors association the producer Peter Jackson has laid the blame on them. Further he has , via his spokesman Harrison, said "I believe the Kiwi way of doing things should be protected and celebrated," and "Turning us into another state of Australia under the sway of a destructive organisation carries the very real risk of destroying the great big heart that beats inside our films." and
"As an industry we are very well equipped with our various guilds to provide excellent terms and conditions to our film workers." and
"If there are problems it's up to us to use our various guilds to resolve them. That's what they're there for." and
"We don't open the door to an Australian trade union who will never put the interest of Kiwis first and invest that union with the powers to destroy everything that we have built."
This is a blatant attack on workers rights by the mega rich Jackson, who must have some real fear about allowing an agreement between the ANZAC Countries actors associations, which might give him less dictatorial control over the little people on the sets and reduce his power over them just so very slightly.
I'd say if you are an Aussie actor, you probably won't get a gig on this film, and you probably won't want a bit part anyway because by the sounds of it you will be paid peanuts, and NZ peanuts at that.
And, remember one of our peanuts is worth about 1.3 NZ peanuts around now, . . . and I think the same goes for idiots.
If it's not good enough for Actors to be treated fairly across the Tasman, then I for one won't bother wasting my hard earned, to line the pockets of someone like Jackson who has more money than I could spend in my life already, i won't be adding to his racist, hating greed.
.
.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Is Bob Brown the saddest man in politics?
Bob Brown has led The Greens from the comfortable and risk free seat in the senate never having to put his neck on the block and never having to put up or shut up with the big boys in the Lower House, and one would assume that his days as leader are very much numbered now that a Green member is holding a seat on the Labor government side of that house.
Bob brown has tried over the years to have his pet bill, the equality of marriage bill, put to the house many times, and with a personal agenda some say, and it has failed to even get much more than a mention and cursory dismissal.
Bob has never got over ex Liberal PM John Howard's rejection of even the validity of proposing the bill and has held him personally responsible for the fact that gays cannot get married in the same way that mixed sex (we are not allowed to call them normal) couples do, with Mr Howard sticking to the more traditional and common religious definition of marriage as a "union between a man and a woman"
It seems that Howard has the belief that even if there was legislation allowing same sex marriages, he couldn't guarantee that any religious could be forced to actually go against it's dogma and perform ceremonies against its religious beliefs.
Still we see at every opportunity Bob brown continue to blame Howard and the Liberals for everything he can put his hands to in any and every speech, including the latest where the Gillard government of which his party is a minor coalition partner now, has publicly announced that Australian Armed Forces will remain in Afghanistan for around 10 more years, and Bob Brown has given the majority of the blame to John Howard and his close relationship with the US and it's allies.
I think Bob should have bowed out gracefully, he's had a career based on one achievement, an environmental coup against giant logging companies and the Tasmanian government, a real David and Goliath feat, but remember he was not alone in that fight, but he was the one who got the majority of the kudos and the recognition.
Bob seems to have turned the Greens, from its humble beginnings as an environmental watchdog party, concerned with bettering our life and the planet in a harmonious way to a party that has the most Leftist policies since Cuba became communist and more than likely to the dismay of followers and supporters who were there for the value of the environmental policy alone.
Bob Brown to me seems to be filled with loathing for Howard, and seems to be a very sad man, probably the saddest man in politics.
.
Bob brown has tried over the years to have his pet bill, the equality of marriage bill, put to the house many times, and with a personal agenda some say, and it has failed to even get much more than a mention and cursory dismissal.
Bob has never got over ex Liberal PM John Howard's rejection of even the validity of proposing the bill and has held him personally responsible for the fact that gays cannot get married in the same way that mixed sex (we are not allowed to call them normal) couples do, with Mr Howard sticking to the more traditional and common religious definition of marriage as a "union between a man and a woman"
It seems that Howard has the belief that even if there was legislation allowing same sex marriages, he couldn't guarantee that any religious could be forced to actually go against it's dogma and perform ceremonies against its religious beliefs.
Still we see at every opportunity Bob brown continue to blame Howard and the Liberals for everything he can put his hands to in any and every speech, including the latest where the Gillard government of which his party is a minor coalition partner now, has publicly announced that Australian Armed Forces will remain in Afghanistan for around 10 more years, and Bob Brown has given the majority of the blame to John Howard and his close relationship with the US and it's allies.
I think Bob should have bowed out gracefully, he's had a career based on one achievement, an environmental coup against giant logging companies and the Tasmanian government, a real David and Goliath feat, but remember he was not alone in that fight, but he was the one who got the majority of the kudos and the recognition.
Bob seems to have turned the Greens, from its humble beginnings as an environmental watchdog party, concerned with bettering our life and the planet in a harmonious way to a party that has the most Leftist policies since Cuba became communist and more than likely to the dismay of followers and supporters who were there for the value of the environmental policy alone.
Bob Brown to me seems to be filled with loathing for Howard, and seems to be a very sad man, probably the saddest man in politics.
.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
QR Float, . . .disaster for mum & dad investors?
I am totally against the sale of Queensland's assets, the Port and the Freight Rail Business hitting the market already and already there are concerns about how people will take up the share offer in QR and how institutional investors will take their allocation and even that there will be a huge amount of unallocated shares that will have to be held by the government.
The Queensland Treasurer who has so far failed at all counts , losing Queensland's AAA credit rating, costing Queensland ratepayers billions in Amalgamated council costs and seeing the price of basic services like water more than double in some places is now on the back foot as usual defending the way the QR float is pushed mostly at mum and dad investors.
If as I predict nearly half the shares remain unallocated and the Qld Government has to hold them there is no doubt we will see a future "telstra 2" type offer so that investors who have lost money on the first share buy can lose again on a second buy.
One of the big worries is that the Qld Government under the Treasurer rejected an offer for a good part of QR that related to mining and offered a pretty good price for it. However the treasurer wants more and more cash and a full scale share offer was deemed the way to get it.
What worries me firstly is the share price, it will be close to $2.80 a share and that for what will be a public company with no forecasts of profit, no back up figures and no real value of asset base or projected costings, secondly the return dividends are down around the 5% mark or less and thirdly the ownership will be dominated by the government holding still even with a high amount of corporate allocation due to the skepticism of ordinary investors taking up the offer.
Personally, it is my opinion that the float is designed the way it is on purpose, to sucker in mum and dad investors, who will sell as the price drops significantly and allow corporate investors to buy back at low prices and therefore hedge some of their loss as the price comes back after a dumping, when the price comes back the Government which will still own up to 40/50% will have a second sell off and set in motion a second wave of the same scenario.
Corporate investors will be the winners the price will stabilize around the $1.30 and we'll probably then find out that the major holder are none other than the miners with the original rejected offer who have now bought up at a lower price and got a bargain.
Of course this is all conjecture and hypothesis, but as we wait and see, I'm not rushing out to bolster my portfolio with QR stock.
The Queensland Treasurer who has so far failed at all counts , losing Queensland's AAA credit rating, costing Queensland ratepayers billions in Amalgamated council costs and seeing the price of basic services like water more than double in some places is now on the back foot as usual defending the way the QR float is pushed mostly at mum and dad investors.
If as I predict nearly half the shares remain unallocated and the Qld Government has to hold them there is no doubt we will see a future "telstra 2" type offer so that investors who have lost money on the first share buy can lose again on a second buy.
One of the big worries is that the Qld Government under the Treasurer rejected an offer for a good part of QR that related to mining and offered a pretty good price for it. However the treasurer wants more and more cash and a full scale share offer was deemed the way to get it.
What worries me firstly is the share price, it will be close to $2.80 a share and that for what will be a public company with no forecasts of profit, no back up figures and no real value of asset base or projected costings, secondly the return dividends are down around the 5% mark or less and thirdly the ownership will be dominated by the government holding still even with a high amount of corporate allocation due to the skepticism of ordinary investors taking up the offer.
Personally, it is my opinion that the float is designed the way it is on purpose, to sucker in mum and dad investors, who will sell as the price drops significantly and allow corporate investors to buy back at low prices and therefore hedge some of their loss as the price comes back after a dumping, when the price comes back the Government which will still own up to 40/50% will have a second sell off and set in motion a second wave of the same scenario.
Corporate investors will be the winners the price will stabilize around the $1.30 and we'll probably then find out that the major holder are none other than the miners with the original rejected offer who have now bought up at a lower price and got a bargain.
Of course this is all conjecture and hypothesis, but as we wait and see, I'm not rushing out to bolster my portfolio with QR stock.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
When will the LNP in Queensland clean up its own mess.
A recent report on TV news raised questions about a couple of things primarily in connection to one particular political aspirant and past candidate who had to be disendorced in what was one of Australia's easiest and safest seats in the last federal election.
The disendorsment came after it was revealed that on her application to be scrutinised for preselection she had omitted to inform the LNP that she had a case to answer to the Queensland Civil and Administrative tribunal relating to an alleged misuse of an adults money/property over which she had power of attorney.
It seems that this candidate, who says she is a barrister, has a problem understanding the legal requirements of a simple power of attorney and the out come was that as such, she was removed as Power of Attorney and may have to pay back money used for her personal expenses.
In the a TV Interview, John Mickel, speaker of the house in the Queensland State Parliament said that her statements were so alarming that he wonders if there is criminality there and that he will refer the matter to the CMC.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/video.aspx
Scroll down their menu until you find, News:Councillors accused of financial deception.
In a twist, it seems the candidate who has called for the dumping of State Government calling it irrelevant, has since made a statement published in the Sunday Mail in Queensland, that she intends to seek preselection to run for the LNP against Mr Mickel, and in my opinion that is simply a ruse to try to make a claim that his calling for further investigations are politically motivated.
My Question is to the LNP though, why haven't you, as described by her, "faceless men" cleaned up your act, sorted your membership, and got rid of the caustic, infected, tainted and the dead wood and made your party look as if it is the zero tolerance party on corruption, crime, and dishonesty that the people of Queensland want to elect, and by allowing this woman to remain as a Party member and potential candidate it's the appearance of the party in general that looks to be tarnished.
She called you the faceless men, but the reality is you are the gutless men.
The disendorsment came after it was revealed that on her application to be scrutinised for preselection she had omitted to inform the LNP that she had a case to answer to the Queensland Civil and Administrative tribunal relating to an alleged misuse of an adults money/property over which she had power of attorney.
It seems that this candidate, who says she is a barrister, has a problem understanding the legal requirements of a simple power of attorney and the out come was that as such, she was removed as Power of Attorney and may have to pay back money used for her personal expenses.
In the a TV Interview, John Mickel, speaker of the house in the Queensland State Parliament said that her statements were so alarming that he wonders if there is criminality there and that he will refer the matter to the CMC.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/video.aspx
Scroll down their menu until you find, News:Councillors accused of financial deception.
In a twist, it seems the candidate who has called for the dumping of State Government calling it irrelevant, has since made a statement published in the Sunday Mail in Queensland, that she intends to seek preselection to run for the LNP against Mr Mickel, and in my opinion that is simply a ruse to try to make a claim that his calling for further investigations are politically motivated.
My Question is to the LNP though, why haven't you, as described by her, "faceless men" cleaned up your act, sorted your membership, and got rid of the caustic, infected, tainted and the dead wood and made your party look as if it is the zero tolerance party on corruption, crime, and dishonesty that the people of Queensland want to elect, and by allowing this woman to remain as a Party member and potential candidate it's the appearance of the party in general that looks to be tarnished.
She called you the faceless men, but the reality is you are the gutless men.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Logan, the bloated beurocracy.
When a few people, none of the councillors I might add, stood up against the amalgamations of councils in the old Beaudesert Shire, it was because of several things that were touted by the State Government and what was also coming from Councils, Beaudesert and Logan.
Logan still continue to propagate the story that they didn't want to amalgamate and that their proposal (submission to the State) to have a huge area (the MLNBSA) of Beaudesert Shire added to their shire was only in response to Beaudesert asking for the part of it's shire annexed in the forming of Logan, and Beaudesert claimed they made their submission based on the fact that Logan had previously asked for their boundary to be moved south at least twice before, (both times being defeated at referendum). Personally I believe the latter and the fact that Logan has changed it's story several times on the issue props my belief up.
Those against the Amalgamation always said that if we had to be forced to amalgamate to Logan it would not go well for us, that development of satellite cities would be fast tracked, that planning would rob us of important budget money, that Logan would increase it's staff unseasonably, that the costs of council would rise causing increases in rates and charges, that the few services we get would be reduced severely and that Logan would attempt to rule us as they rule Woodridge and create laws and regulations making rural lifestyle impossible.
So far, all of the above have been proven and without exception we have well and truly been shafted by Logan and we are almost without representation as two of the three councillors who look after our area are preoccupied with their power games, federal aspirations, facing questions from the authorities, bullying, personal life issues and causing disunity and disharmony within council.
There is little doubt that we have seen services reduced, and that our rates have gone up for the displeasure, Logan has been to us, the typical wooden nickle, absolutely of no use at all except for the in crowd to get funding and kudos that they would have got from which ever council we were under.
As Logan continues to ebb away our rights to continue to live a rural lifestyle, with laws and regulations pouring forth from that orifice that sits in Wembely Road, Woodridge, we continue to pay.
Worse we are in no mans land with investigations areas, urban footprint and MDA's making our ability to sell and profit dubious at best.
Logan still continue to propagate the story that they didn't want to amalgamate and that their proposal (submission to the State) to have a huge area (the MLNBSA) of Beaudesert Shire added to their shire was only in response to Beaudesert asking for the part of it's shire annexed in the forming of Logan, and Beaudesert claimed they made their submission based on the fact that Logan had previously asked for their boundary to be moved south at least twice before, (both times being defeated at referendum). Personally I believe the latter and the fact that Logan has changed it's story several times on the issue props my belief up.
Those against the Amalgamation always said that if we had to be forced to amalgamate to Logan it would not go well for us, that development of satellite cities would be fast tracked, that planning would rob us of important budget money, that Logan would increase it's staff unseasonably, that the costs of council would rise causing increases in rates and charges, that the few services we get would be reduced severely and that Logan would attempt to rule us as they rule Woodridge and create laws and regulations making rural lifestyle impossible.
So far, all of the above have been proven and without exception we have well and truly been shafted by Logan and we are almost without representation as two of the three councillors who look after our area are preoccupied with their power games, federal aspirations, facing questions from the authorities, bullying, personal life issues and causing disunity and disharmony within council.
There is little doubt that we have seen services reduced, and that our rates have gone up for the displeasure, Logan has been to us, the typical wooden nickle, absolutely of no use at all except for the in crowd to get funding and kudos that they would have got from which ever council we were under.
As Logan continues to ebb away our rights to continue to live a rural lifestyle, with laws and regulations pouring forth from that orifice that sits in Wembely Road, Woodridge, we continue to pay.
Worse we are in no mans land with investigations areas, urban footprint and MDA's making our ability to sell and profit dubious at best.
Local council mergers fail to halt bloat and waste
by Kelmeny Fraser From: The Sunday Mail (Qld) October 03, 2010
LOCAL government bureaucracy has ballooned more than two years after controversial mergers to make councils leaner and less costly.
Staff levels for Queensland councils grew twice as fast this year compared with 2007 – the year before the State Government's forced amalgamations transformed the local government landscape, slashing the number of councils from 157 to 73.
A new workforce census released to The Sunday Mail by the Local Government Association of Queensland shows the number of local government workers grew by 6 per cent in 2010, compared with 2.75 per cent in 2007 and less than 2 per cent in 2006.
Staff numbers in 2008 and 2009 rose by about 3.9 per cent a year. But by March this year, that had soared to 6 per cent, compared with the same time last year, with an extra 2392 employees joining the state's 57 non-indigenous councils.
The rise in staff is estimated to have added more than $119 million to council wage costs.
It comes despite State Government promises to make local government more efficient through the mergers, with then local government minister Andrew Fraser predicting it could save ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
Merger critics, such as former Aramac Shire Mayor Gary Peoples, have seized on the figures.
"A lot of what was said by councils and mayors has probably come to fruition, in that there is not going to be increased efficiencies, but there is probably going to be a loss in services," he said.
At Logan City another 454 people have started work since 2008, taking the total number of workers to 1371, even after losing 218 staff to the area's new water business Allconnex.
Staff levels at several councils, such as Cairns and Maranoa Regional Councils, stagnated. Townsville City Council shed more than 2000 staff.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)