It’s no surprise to see the Act Party making headlines for a policy to give instant fines to young shoplifters.
In our political fog of confusion and distraction this policy will rate well.
I’m not aware anyone has asked ACT why it has such limited political objectives. Why doesn’t ACT target the biggest criminals rather than focusing their attention on a child nicking a packet of chewing gum from the dairy?
This graphic comes from a 2014 RNZ report headlined Economic crime costs up to $9.4 billion. The data comes from a Serious Fraud Office report which was produced in 2014 by the previous National/Act government. The Minister for the SFO at the time, Anne Tolley, said the report was to go to cabinet but it never made it there. It was buried.
Why are ACT not proposing to resurrect this report? Theft of $9.3 billion from the community should be a much bigger concern for all of us.
The reason ACT will not pick up this issue – and neither will National or Labour – is because these political parties depend on big cash donations from the corporate thieves responsible for the stealing identified by the Serious Fraud Office.
Why is Labour not doing anything about this report? Serious question. The crime issues of today should/could be taken care of by Labour yet they are no where to be seen. Nature abhors emptiness, if nothing is planted on a patch chances are it will grow a weed all by themselves. If the left is so scared of Act gaining ground – then the left needs to demand that Labour do better.
Reactionary Brat. Indeed. It’s a bit rich condemning ACT for failing to address issues which the parties in power decline to. And there’s a certain pragmatism in fining shoplifting kids, both economic and potentially deterring them from progressing to becoming bigger systemic crooks.
@RB. So, you got up at 6.00 am-ish to pop out that witless and linear brain fart. Wow.
Anyway…
All that human people must remember is that ACT is roger douglas. And roger douglas is a traitor who enabled greedy narcissistic sociopaths to help themselves to our money and our assets our taxes built which are now the playthings of the now nine multi billionaires. They gorge particularly and specifically on the money of the poorer members of what some might call our ‘society’. Mainly because the poorer members of our ‘society’ are powerless and harmless because they’ve been rendered so by greedy, narcissistic, sociopaths who know that powerless and harmless people are easy to exploit on a number of fronts which is why trade unions were deregulated. seymour has discovered that power is a short mans answer to instead of wearing platform shoes and donald rumsfeld comes to mind. An evil american neocon if there ever was one. But worse, perhaps. He was dumb. Rumsfeld was dumb in that evil sort of base-cunning way. One could say that rumsfeld was dumb enough to appear smarter than he was. Does that remind you of anyone? Does roger douglas’s short little moustache spring to mind?
The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/05/donald-rumsfeld-iraq-war-defence-secretary-legacy
“Donald Rumsfeld, secretary of defence under George W Bush, who died on 30 June at the age of 88, enjoyed one all-important attribute, which was to appear larger than he actually was. He enhanced his comparatively diminutive 5ft 8in stature with the aid of thickly padded shoes with built-up heels, which caused him to waddle when he walked. His staff called them the “duck shoes”. But he inflated his presence in other ways, too, promoting the image of a clear-thinking, decisive commander while determinedly deflecting responsibility when initiatives he had championed careened into disaster.” Sound familiar?
ACT is the short, white, neoliberal pustule on the systemic disease that now plagues AO/NZ. If you vote ACT I really hope you don’t breed or drive a car.
yeah bro, working people generally get up early in the morning.
Nah bro, your naive.
Act think tax havens and things like the wine-box fraud are good fun and worth giggling about ,,,,,
It’s where their funders operate and make the money to donate to act ,,,,, https://michaelwest.com.au/top-40-tax-dodgers-2022/
We must remember that ACT is Roger Douglas….But….Roger Douglas was Labour…So Act is Labour…Labour is ACT….How many of the Douglas policies have been rolled back since 1999 by anyone…..not many , if any…
Too bloody true. It’s well past time to roll the clock back.
But Labour is not Left…
Reactionary Bratwurst – Thank you…3 stores within my suburb have shut down due to repeated ram raids, and the local MP (Labour MP) – not a word, or support
3 liquor outlets we don’t need enabled by a National govt to prey on the vulnerable.
Countryboy has spades on stupid Bob – nope
– $2 Dollar Shop
– Night’n Day Dairy
– Mobile repair shop
I say bullshit! Name them.
Sure….
1.Night’n Day Onehunga – Onehunga Mall
2. $2 Dollar Shop, Onehunga Mall
3. Speedy Mobile Repairs, Onehunga Mall
Now what?
and you know for a fact the cause wasn’t usurous commercial rent rises nate?
gagarin – No, it was the cost for insurance to cover the ram raids that put them out of business.
ACT are just not interested in anyone else other than their big cash donors and the top 1 %
When Brooke says “all N.Z.ers need to sacrifice, she loses reality of the fact the top 1% suffer no financial hardship whilst middle- and low-income earners/beneficiaries suffer hardships at catastrophic levels.
Labour have increased minimum wages levels during their tenure, increased benefits, increased public sector wages to meet inflation levels (until now) and are committed to Kiwisaver contributions. None of those things benefit ACTs voting demographic. That is why the left is scared of ACT gaining power alongside demolishing the Human Rights Commission- think about that when you are asking questions of Labour.
ACT comes from a long and filthy monetarist lineage going back to the “Chicago Boys”, Roger ‘Traitor’ Douglas, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.
They have adopted Trumpist populism but will do absolutely nothing to resolve the problems they describe–as per Trump’s total non action for US working class people. Their policy clearly states they will in fact attack working class people and claw back what gains we have made since 2017.
Agree Tiger and John. Roger Douglas’s links right-wing links were 4-5 years with Lange’s Labour and 34 years of symbiotic links with National. Dirty Politics operatives will always offer gobshite revisionism of neoliberal history. National and ACT will be coalition partners in 2023. Even Wikipedia proves them wrong.
No argument that ACT infiltrated Labour 1984 to 1988….. then ACT and National has gone and will go hand in hand with ACT from 1988 to 2022 and will be coalition partners beyond. There were even discussions about David Seymour leading the National Party and beyond! David Seymour put out his 100 – day Coalition Plan for National and ACT:
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/07/david-seymour-s-plan-for-first-100-days-in-national-act-coalition.html
ACT and NATIONAL after 1988
From 1988 on, when Lange wanted a ‘cup of tea’, there has been a deliberate and planned symbiotic, parasitic relationship between National and ACT. Neoliberalism goes hand in hand with National and ACT. Their policies are so alike.
The name ACT comes from the initials of the Association of Consumers and Taxpayers, founded in 1993 by Sir Roger Douglas and Derek Quigley….
then…..
Don Brash National and ACT
1988-2002 Reserve Bank Governor
2002–2005 47th List 5 National
2005–2007 48th List 1 National
April 2011, still a National Party member ACT Party Leader
Roger Douglas National and ACT
2008–2011 49th List MP for ACT
John Banks National and ACT
1990–1993 43rd Whangarei National
1993–1996 44th Whangarei National
1996–1999 45th Whangarei National
2011–2014 50th Epsom ACT
Richard Prebble National and ACT
Leader ACT from 1996 to 2004….
1996–1999 ACT
1999–2002 ACT
2002–2005 ACT
How many alliances between ACT and Labour between 1988 and 2022 NONE – ZERO – ZILCH
You better get your right-wing pals at DPHQ (Dirty Politics Head Quarters) to delete all the links between National and ACT, that were clearly shown through a cursory glance of Wikipedia.
Wi Pedia
The current inflation that is affecting NZ and the world, is eroding spending power. If you think things aren’t great now with homelessness and crime, wait till ACT get into government with their ruthenasia policies on benefits. The irony is that when more people forced to live in cars, turn up parked on Brooke’s street, she will be the first to complain. FYI… how about Act tries to come up with policies that help people… just a thought. What’s the point of making things tougher on whole sectors of society, that some may see gaol as an attractive accommodation option?
So much truth in your post bottomfeeder .
Yes, indeed, RB – why isn’t Labour doing anything about this report – if it still exists?
Labour is benefitting next-to-nothing from big business donations.
Today’s headlines prove that: $2.31 million to the Nats (plus Act ‘donations’) and Labour and Greens get only a few measly thousands.
Labour got a majority at the last election, if those 50% of voters each donated a dollar there’s what, 2 million?
Labour’s done so little for their own voters that they’re not even worth a dollar. Sums it up really.
Businesses and private rich people generally put money towards the ones they believe will work for them.
With the Greens and the Labour Party atm the question you need to ask is whom are they working for and why should Joe and Jane Bloke give money to a party that in the end did not work for them.
What a stupid comment. Business and the private rich look after number one. If you think otherwise you need a straight jacket. The trickle down theory was debunked years ago.
Some people are just simply thick on this site!
Yes agree.
While I personally feel that the recent benefit increases weren’t necessary due to initiatives such as the Accommodation Supplement, and were indeed inflationary and therefore should not have gone ahead, I do not support the reversal of these benefits because inflation continues to rise and these are our most vulnerable citizens. This is also the reason why I don’t want recession. It would make it even harder on these people, a significant portion of whom are long term beneficiaries, to secure employment.
Dan have you ever been on a benefit. Do you really think that people don’t want to work. Being on a benefit and know that is how the rest of your life is going to be is scary frankly. No wonder kids go hungry.
I stated nothing about beneficiaries not wanting to work. Simply, I am trying to explore ways for long term beneficiaries who are, or who may be at some point, able to obtain employment, to find a job more easily than they generally can at the moment.
the assumption life on benefits is cushy is a false premise dan….ask a pensioner or a disabled person
That sounds no different to the Labour government that we have now! They dont give a fuck about beneficiaries either. When it comes to people in need they they load them up with debt! You know, $365m worth of accommodation assistance for them to live in shitty motels or, the bene is so low that people have to go to foodbanks.
Remember, the unemployment number is 11.3%! Not the 5% bs number that they promote. Stagflation is here and has been for a while!
Act, Labour, whats the dif? Roger Douglas!
So until houses are built, in the meantime, where do these homeless live genius, if not motels?
Labour this Labour that blah blah blah, yet no solutions? Just another moaner with a big mouth.
Thing is Tane. Labour left ACT.
ACT is still in coalition with National and will do so in 2023.
Calling absolute bullshi!t Tane on your right-wing, gobshite revisionism of neoliberal history. Even Wikipedia proves you wrong on many counts Tane/Male/Man,+not+Female/Woman/Thinker.
No argument that ACT infiltrated Labour 1984 to 1988….. then ACT and National has gone and will go hand in hand with ACT from 1988 to 2022 and will be coalition partners beyond. There were even discussions about David Seymour leading the National Party and beyond! David Seymour put out his100 – day Coalition Plan for National and ACT:
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/07/david-seymour-s-plan-for-first-100-days-in-national-act-coalition.html
ACT and NATIONAL after 1988
From 1988 on, there is a deliberate and planned symbiotic, parasitic relationship between National and ACT. Neoliberalism goes hand in hand with National and ACT. Their policies are so alike.
The name ACT comes from the initials of the Association of Consumers and Taxpayers, founded in 1993 by Sir Roger Douglas and Derek Quigley….
then…..
Don Brash National and ACT
1988 2002 Reserve Bank Governor
2002–2005 47th List 5 National
2005–2007 48th List 1 National
April 2011, still a National Party member ACT Party Leader
Roger Douglas National and ACT
2008–2011 49th List MP for ACT
John Banks National and ACT
1990–1993 43rd Whangarei National
1993–1996 44th Whangarei National
1996–1999 45th Whangarei National
2011–2014 50th Epsom ACT
Richard Prebble National and ACT
Leader ACT from 1996 to 2004….
1996–1999 ACT
1999–2002 ACT
2002–2005 ACT
How many alliances between ACT and Labour between 1988 and 2022 NONE – ZERO – ZILCH
You better get your right-wing pals at DPHQ (Dirty Politics Head Quarters) to delete all the links between National and ACT, that were clearly shown through a cursory glance of Wikipedia.
What we need to ask is why are the rich donating so much money. Power, greed, selfish cunts come to mind.
Because Labour shat on those very same donors last year in the Auckland High Court in their dodgy election campaigns in 2017, 2020!
So they wont be donating to labour again.
Labour Did it!
Piss off, have you not read anything at all lately you idiot. Labour have never ever had donations that large , you continue to embarrass yourself.
Greedy wealthy bastards with more dosh than they should ever have, but they still want more. It is disgusting and frankly shouldn’t be allowed, skews the pitch in my view.
Yes absolutely
This is hate speech from unemployed politician and long term beneficiary Van Velden. New Zealand’s social assistance program is actually geared towards those that are not truly vulnerable, unless we class the vulnerable as bludgers such as the South Canterbury Finance gamblers who received more in welfare in one sitting than the entire Treaty settlements; or our Superannuation welfare for comfy homeowners which pays out ten times the total Treaty settlements per year; or in recent times those on the two tier Covid assistance racket who drained the country of $100 billion reserves by being paid to stay home for no apparent medical reason (not to mention the billions wasted on expired vaccines and medical fetish paraphenalia). A real politician would be holding the real thieves of this world to account – typically polluting government, big business and their super star militant executive – not punching down on the poor like some two-bit bully.
because it’S ACT supporters with their hands in the till.
And Labour get union members to work for free, remember the stink when it was uncovered that workers were not doing their actual jobs but working on Labours campaign (envelope stuffing, letterbox drops).
Seems the money and staff the unions give to Labour is conveniently ignored by the left but the politics of envy is aroused when people donate money to the right?
Soooo what do the unions get out of it, what influence have they garnered when Labour win an election…..guess it’s different when the left do it eh?
It is tiddly winks we know that, I have seen what they donated last time it is tiny.
I replaced Labour for National and union members for the Brethren, Federated Farmers and the Business association I’m Wrong and then your comment made sense. Prior, it was pure crap which is not unusual for you. Different when the right do it eh?
You are talking about Maggie Barry, you idiot.
Good points John and the standout figure of course is the $2B in tax avoidance.
I actually agree with ACT’S call to lower all the spending and right the ship but every time I look at how they plan to do it, I just think WTF. Killing off some (Not all) meddlesome commissions and superfluous bureaucracy I agree with but reducing benefits? What planet are they on? Do they think anyone in NZ is going to give the big tick to that whilst people (especially beneficiaries) cant afford to eat? Maybe their core 1 – 2% but it will turn more voters off than bring them in. IMO, a mis-step by ACT, expect their polling to drop off.
The problem we have now is at this level of screw up, we need to radically overhaul the system including raise taxes and stop rorts but no govt has the mana or the power to do this.
So any new government is likely to do more damage than good. I still dont know who to vote for.
They need a good shitkicking.
He’s what’s known in the business, at least the NZ business, as a ‘futtling’ fool.
make ALL donations and ALL lobbying ilegal problem solved, tinkering round the edges just provides loopholes…anything from a free biro to a golf holiday in the bahamas a criminal offence…for both the donor and the recepient
gagarin – No, it was the cost for insurance to cover the ram raids that put them out of business.