Simon Power quitting politics - Key losing touch with his party...

Image via Wikipedia

Labour questions Power's explanation for quitting politics - Key losing touch with his party.

The Labour Party leader is questioning whether problems within Cabinet are behind fourth-ranked minister Simon Power's decision to quit politics.

The MP for Rangitikei, who holds the justice, commerce and state-owned enterprises portfolios, says he wants to explore opportunities in the private sector.

Prime Minister John Key said he was stunned and flabbergasted when Mr Power told him he would stand down at the election. He said Mr Power had the potential to be leader of the National Party.

Labour leader Phil Goff says it's very unusual for a first-time minister with a high ranking to leave politics. He expressed doubts about the simple explanation being offered for Mr Power's announcement.

But Mr Power said through a spokesman that suggestions of a split in Cabinet are laughable. He said there had been no ructions in caucus or Cabinet with Mr Power and his colleagues were shocked about his decision.

He has had a gutsful of neanderthal fscists in the National Party.

Acknowledgements: © 2011, Radio New Zealand

Related articles

• Power resigning at election (homepaddock.wordpress.com)
• John Armstrong: Key's ploy a dilemma for Labour (nzherald.co.nz)
• Which is the real Goff? (homepaddock.wordpress.com)
• Steve Jobs Knighthood nomination shot down by Gordon Brown: Ex- British PM opposed as Apple CEO refused an invite to Labour Party Conference? (devicemag.com)
• The essence of Irish Labour (politics.ie)
• Pat Rabbitte: Voters don 't want Labour to remain as wallflowers (politics.ie)
• Ehud Barak to quit Israeli Labour party (guardian.co.uk)
• NZ poll set after Rugby World cup (bbc.co.uk)
• Barak quits Israeli Labour party (ft.com)

Key doesn't fit the National Party lock...

Image via WikipediaJohn key appears to be out of line with the philosophy of the ruling National Party in New Zealand. key claims that National will not , if re-elected next year, raise the eligibility age for National Superannuation to 67 years over the next few years. Yeah right!

The colourful Winston Peters, leader of the NZ First Party who were routed and kicked out of parliament at the last elections, returned to the House to give evidence to a committee considering a report that wants the eligibility age increased to 67 years eventually, because the country could not sustain a National Super from 65 years. Peters claims the country can and should continue to afford it.

While in power, Labour began its Cullen scheme of virtually prepaying a certain percentage of National Super funds each year by investing them overseas. Some say a certain percentage should also be invested in the domestic economy too. This would be in line with the compulsory NZ Super scheme of the former Labour Government in 1974 which invested locally. Robert Muldoon arbitarily and illegally forced employers to stop deducting their employees contributions when he was elected in 1975.

Perhaps a return to the Labour compulsory scheme of 1974 would be of benefit to the NZ economy. A scheme similar to that of Australia who has billions of dollars invested locally from their scheme.

Related articles

• Key: Poll predicting Peters' return not credible (nzherald.co.nz)
• First-term MP to replace Wong (nzherald.co.nz)
• NZ First conference this weekend (nzherald.co.nz)
• Poll puts NZ First back in contention (nzherald.co.nz)
• PM urged to take Finlayson off foreshore duties (nzherald.co.nz)

Are loans National's new social welfare...

Are loans National's new social welfare?

John Key's explanation of the NATS policies in relation to redundant workers is a load of old cobblers, unfair and totally unworkable. We have student loans and now National wants redundant workers loans!

It shows just how much out of touch the National Party is with reality. There should be low taxed compulsory redundancy agreements in all workers contracts!

Are loans the new National Party social welfare?

National's ham-fisted attacks against the neutrality of public service.....

The Government is accusing National of trying to bully the Auckland District Health Board.

National's health spokesman Tony Ryall wrote a letter to the DHB warning of significant political issues should it promote activities associated with the Government.

Health Minister David Cunliffe describes that as a ham-fisted assault on the neutrality of the public service and a craven act of political interference. He says John Key should get Mr Ryall to apologise for his blatant attempt to bully the DHB.

However, National's health spokesman Tony Ryall says he has received information which suggests the DHB may go beyond the rules in acting independently. He says there is a big difference between informing the public and proactively spinning news to make Labour look good. Mr Ryall says DHBs should be spending the public's money on frontline services for patients and not PR departments.



Compliments:
© 2008 NZCity, NewsTalkZB

Labour must be elected for a fourth term...

It is now 2008 and there is an election in about 11 months or so. It will be one of the most important elections and watersheds in New Zealand political and electoral history. It is extremely important that New Zealand gets this fourth term. Forget the propaganda of the last year - National has been spreading the political manure around by the truckload - they don't have any policy to hang their credibility on. They don't have any credibility, no policy and no party. They are a bunch of right wing apologists.

Forget the Electoral Finance Act; I haven't lost any democratic rights. I can feel more comfortable in bed knowing that religious extremists won't be given another opportunity to try and buy another election. I still have those pamphlets delivered to my letter box during the last election campaign. I actually felt quite indignant receiving that fascist propaganda in my box. They are actually a bunch of hypocritical bastards considering they don't believe in the electoral process.

John Key was right up to his little red right wing neck during that campaign - he stood a little to the rear and to the left of Fuhrer Brash, but he knew about those meetings between Brash, other party leaders, and the Exclusive Brethren. John Key may have, and he may not have, participated in these meetings. But he can not, two years later, deny he knew they happened.

Neither John Key or the National Party are fit to govern; of course they think they have a divine right to rule. If Satan is successful this year, like he was back in 1990, we will need plenty of God's help. Of course we can assist God by not voting for a fascist political party. Labour must lead the next government back to the front benches. Helen Clark must lead the country for a historical fourth term. our future depends on it. Democracy depends on it!

What's John Key's memory like I wonder?

What's John Key's memory like I wonder? Not the best I would suggest. Memory's are made of this, goes an old song.

Back in 2002 John Key was saying the DPB was, for the want of a better word, breeding for business - bit of an inane comment I would also suggest. But, however, this was disputed by his colleague Katherine Rich, who by contrast said most people who were on the DPB were pretty motivated people who have the same dreams and aspirations as anybody else. Benefit bashing was a most unsatisfactory practice that didn't achieve any positive outcomes at all. Katherine Rich resigned from her shadow cabinet post in protest, disillusioned with people such as Don Brash and John Key.

National's polling has been described as "push polling" during which supposed independent telephone pollsters ask questions containing damaging allegations about government politicians to turn voters off a particular candidate ie " Would you support a particular candidate if you knew something(derogatory)about that person", something that may actually not have happened at all - but too late after the election to disprove.

This sort of polling is obviously at the forefront of Key's publicity tactics. This form of polling was used by Don Brash, John Key and the National Party before the last elections. An election that National actually lost, but not according to the National Party? The people of New Zealand elected the Labour- led Government for a three year term.

The National Party has been white- anting this Government from Day One. I would suggest they pull their collective heads in and create policy that would make New Zealand a better place for all its people with a change of government in twelve months time - not the elite of New Zealand society on $250,000 plus per year and able to send their offspring to some elite private school. But that is the Key way ahead of New Zealand with a millionaire potential prime minister.

John Key was part of the decision making that led to Mark Textor and others from Australia who made many visits to this country, including one in late November of 2004, and many more up to September of 2005. A number of telephone calls and written reports were also made and sent to the National Party here.In one of the reports the National Party was urged to raise finance for two election campaigns - the second election was meant to take place when the Labour coalition government broke down, and other parties wouldn't have the finance available to campaign successfully a second time against the National Party. Slim hopes for the dreamers in dreamland. Labour would always be able to raise sufficient funds for an unexpected election. National should always remember that!