Conspiracy Theory! *Throws Cats*

Have you got your tin foil hats on? It's Conspiracy Time! Your favourite paranoid family show.

In July of last year there were reports that Serco, the private company that runs Mt Eden prison, was failing to meet targets and was reported with such apt headlines as Serco Fails to Meet Targets. They failed to meet 15 out of 37 to be exact. Bill English even fronted to media to defend Serco since they were under investigation in England for unsafe practices: Government Defends Prison Contractor.

Now Corrections have released, for the first time ever, a league table on prisons. This has been reported with such headings as:

Private Prison gets a ratings tick
Private Prison fairs well
Private Prison tends to ailing puppy, saves Christmas

Well, you get my drift.

The report, surely, takes the pillow of soothing and places it across the face of the nation. "Nothing to worry about in privatizing our prison system, sleeeeep." BUT, and this is when the tin foil should be reached for, there are some interesting issues with this report and this miraculous turn around where Tolley suggest that we can 'learn something from Serco'.

Looking at some of the angles media have taken with this you'd be justified in thinking that perhaps private is doing better than public. Well, that's not exactly true. Out of 17 prisons "six are exceeding their performance targets, eight are operating effectively and three are needing improvement" - their positions can also leap about on the table depending on whether any instances occur within that quarter reporting. This has just been a snapshot that shows Serco isn't completely sucking along with 14 other prisons. Voxy does a good write-up here.

The table was released with data collected from September 2012 and the year to last December and will be released quarterly after this. It should also be noted that:

Prisons with large numbers of remand, high and maximum security prisoners are treated differently from prisons with more low and minimum security prisoners, and their results are weighted so there’s an even playing field and performances can be compared.

Anne Tolley won't release the raw data. In fact she's told the NZ Herald that they'll have to go through the Official Information Act. The supposed point of releasing the prison league tables was to promote transparency, but on hearing this, and on hearing how the data has been massaged, this seems more like a public relations exercise in order to sell further privatisation down the road.

Are Serco and the Government in talks to take over managing more prisons?  All I know is that I can always use extra tinfoil for the Sunday roast.

Review of 3rd Degree

Mate, this is going to make headlines!

Mate, we're going to get flak for this!

I don't care! I aggressively hand gesture to this effect.

But mate, we could end up hunted, on the run, our names besmirchedand our past buried, forced on the lam with only a handkerchief and a stick for our belongings.

No mate, the citizens of this country demand the hard answers. I am now aggressively brandishing this pen.

Mate!

No! You, mate!

*camera pans to a fireplace, fade to black*

 

So it's with high expectations that I tune in for the first ever episode of 3rd Degree. This is the current affairs show that is promising the hard questions and soft homoeroticism. These are journalists armed with tenacity, pens, and scalding water ready to be flung at their guests.

So what stories are being covered on this nail biting, hard hitting show?

1. Taranaki's public enemy number one! Is it poverty? ? Is it the DVD starring Johnny Depp of the same name which has been number one in the Taranaki movie charts for the past 14 years?

No. It's a guy who clamps cars.

There's covert filming. In black and white. A pensioner gets angry. This is serious shit, yo. OLD LADY SPIT!

2. Anna Guy. She's moving on in the world. I think Women's Day did this already. Anna Guy, in her own words. Apparently there were still some left.

3. Wait, there's no three, four or five?! You're going straight to the car clamping story? That's it? There better be some hard god damn answers coming up from some very softball questions being tossed around...

Parking fines, they suck, but clamping cars that's a horrible job, amirite? Duncan's down with the working class. This guy clamps and he clamps and he clamps and this is full-on - Guyon leans into camera in a full-on fashion so you know it is.

Hidden camera and old lady is back with her handbag of hate and her saliva of evil. There are other bits of jostling footage and newspaper clippings pile up.

There's a showdown happening folks, except without the guns or anything vaguely interesting. Arrests, corruption, wait...New Plymouth? I thought they said Taranaki. It's outside Auckland, who cares. High School Geography only told me about volcanic rocks and tourism in Northland. People don't like the car clamper, including the police apparently. He winds the window up on them and has a 'tone'. If I was a cop I'd lob in a can of pepper spray, maybe a light bit of genital tazing. My instant reaction is the car clamper guy is incredibly unlikeable which means that I'm automatically on the wrong side of this story.

The car clamper guy covers himself in cameras; I hope he doesn't teach in a NZ High School. The same old lady footage is shown again, a man says that he'll do everything he can to put car clamper out of car clamping business, Mr Clampy is arrested by police where it sounds like he's resisting, so that's a very quick clip. The Police, the newspaper, the majority of the city, all out to get him, so he should probably join the 3 Degrees staff witness protection programme. It goes all the way up to the Mayor, dude.

The Major thinks it's because it's the guy’s demeanour, which is fancy politics talk for he's a twat. Melanie is getting to the bottom of this: the hard questions. Is the wheel clamper guy a twat? He says no. Well then, that's that.

We find out his background. Is his background twatish? He has a baby, guys. A baby. Would a twat have a baby?

He has a 'clamping career'? Pretty sure that a guidance counsellor wouldn't recommend it. He's shown with his Nurse wife and his adorable baby. Are you going to call that adorable babies dad a twat?! Melanie Reid says: no.

The clamper guy clamps the daughter of a policeman’s car. Dude, that policeman had contacts. With the rest of the police force, the newspaper, the majority of the city. And the Mayor? That was the daughter! It wasn't, but you know the Mayor is involved in this giant conspiracy on a scale this country has never seen before.

I blank out. Next minute the footage of the elderly woman is back again. Is she his only customer? There's hours of footage apparently, why the same clip played over and over again.

I'm going to level with you, I have lost interest. Where's an expert legal opinion on this? They say that the police don't know the legal position on this, well thanks to this show neither do I. This is a Fair Go episode for business owners. Oh, wait, a government enquiry is underway - what does that even mean?

Question: car clamping is about making sure people can't drive off and use their cars, which makes sense if someone has outstanding traffic fines. But isn't the point of parking restrictions so that car parks are kept free for use by the right people - wouldn't a tow truck then make much more sense? Why haven't the owners of the properties be questioned on this, and also whether he has their permission or not - seems a bit of an oversight.

After the break the Mayor gets a grilling. A third degree grilling. Jesus, now I have to tune back in, Garner and Espinor are going to cook a human being on air. The ratings war is a harsh bitch.

Melanie says no in the promo for the next part and has a pen in her hand. She means business.

Ad break. Must buy things.

The elderly spitting lady is back. I think this is a publicity for a new TV3 show that she'll be staring in. Ffwd.

Wait, letter by wheel clampers lawyer says that he believes that the interpretation by the police was incorrect under the new regime. Does this mean that there could have been confusion due to new legislation? What's the new legislation? I shouldn't ask questions I might get the spitting women foisted on me again as a distraction.

"We've had many complaints about Mr Clampy" "No..." Shouldn't the follow up been, well let’s see them then? Shouldn't there be a record? Or would that muddy the black and white waters of a town that's in cahoots?

At this point they should have brought the baby back out because I'm done with this story.

OH PLEASE! Did Guyon Espinor really just stay  that the cops 'effectively said' that if he's getting beaten up or murdered by an elderly woman swinging a handbag that the police will stand around laughing mockingly and not offer any assistance? I think there needs to be an investigation, he says sternly, hands on pocket. Like me he must have blanked out as well and so forgot the bit in the story where it says that there is an investigation going on which is why the police couldn't comment.

A complete change of space - more fluff. Anna Guy story after the break. She's trying to put tragedy behind her by moving on. I wonder how many more stories can possibly be spun out of that.

Honest to god, I was going to stick it out and watch the whole thing, but two seconds into this I realise that unlike the media machine of NZ I have in fact put the tragedy behind myself and have moved on, and I really can't be arsed sitting through a twenty minute human interest story on something that holds no interest for me. But best of luck to her.

ffwd

MATE! Maaaaate! The Dudes embrace.

ffwd

Now that we've finished airing a piece about her moving on from tragedy, let’s get her into the studio and ask her if her husband killed her brother. Sensitive. HOW DO YOU THINK YOUR BROTHER FELT AS YOUR HUSBAND CAME AT HIM? I don't know if they actually asked that, I was still ffwding.

I was thanked for watching. I don't think the thanks was warranted.

Okay, if this is a sign of things to come, nobody is allowed any more pens. This is not pen waving and biting material. Bring me that instead. Ask the hard questions on issues that will in fact make headlines, though granted a farting monkey wearing a suit and juggling a kitten would make front page news in this country. Aim higher, is what I'm saying. And then you can make serious faces and yell Mate at each other and have a pen for each hand and I will love you for delivering what you promised in the promos in the first place.

More third degree less fake tan.

 

281

On the 18th February reporter Duncan Garner tweeted:

Did Labour really close 281 schools over 9 years? Chippe u out there? Can u help? Weren't you in Mallard's office at the time?

Chris Hipkins tweets back to Garner:

Yep there were closures under Labour. The process was better, but there was still huge backlash and we promised not to do more.

He doesn't actually confirm the number, just that school closures were made.

Next the Youth section of the National Party get in on the action and tweet this:

Labour's Education spokesman was a Senior Advisor to @TrevorMallard when he & Helen Clark closed over 280 schools. #nzpol #chchschools

The Prime Minister, possibly in a relaxed manner, though this is unconfirmed, goes on to tweet this:

Via staff RT:@nzyoungnats Labour's Education spokesman was a Senior Advisor to Mallard when he & Clark closed over 280 schools #chchschools

I get interested. Over 280 schools closed, gosh that's big numbers. So I google, and I google, and I can't find a damn thing on the internet aside from old news articles on the UK Labour Government having closed over 280 schools. It could be a coincidence, but something isn't staking up. I find a NZ Herald article that quotes a lower figures but not for the entire time Labour was in Govt. Did they state in the article that Labour were going to stop school closures but then go on a last minute closing frenzy before being turfed out of Government?

Former Labour Education Minister Trevor Mallard then tweets this:

1. @Garner_Live @patrickgowernz Article from 2005 with school closures. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10347814 … Nothing like @johnkeypm or @nzyoungnats say.”

    
2. @johnkeypm @nzyoungnats liars. @chrishipkins advised on few schools @end and 2 stop the process. I owned decisions unlike u and @HekiaParata 

   
   

   Young Nats tweet back at Mallard:

   
   

   .@TrevorMallard 1999-2008. 281 schools closed. We've CC'd in your Advisor to refresh his memory. FYI @chrishipkins. http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/b/5/6/QWA_02884_2012-2884-2012-Catherine-Delahunty-to-the-Minister-of-Education.htm …

   
   

    

   Note: this link, this proof, offers no proof - in fact it refutes what they've just said.

   
   Trevor Mallard @nzyoungnats @johnkeypm still lying.

Yes, Mallard saw the article I found. I kind of would have hoped that being the person formally in the role of Minister of Education that he could have put an end to this, but eh. Nothing doing. So because nobody in Labour is around to refute this with an actual number, Nats go to town.

In Parliament yesterday this happened:

Rt Hon John Key: Has the Minister seen reports that the current, National-led Government has closed only 49 schools—on average, 12 a year—when the previous Labour Government closed 281 schools (emphasis mine), or an average of 31 a year; and if there was a change of Government where the Greens are involved, do you think it is possible that it would ever close any school? [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Hon HEKIA PARATA: The Prime Minister is quite correct.

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QOA/3/6/4/50HansQ_20130219_00000001-1-Schools-Canterbury-Proposed-Closures-and.htm

In the Questions for Written Answer:

2884 (2012). Catherine Delahunty to the Minister of Education (10 Apr 2012): Of the 281 schools closed between 2003-2008, how many were closed as a result of network reviews and how many solely because of performance issues?

Hon Hekia Parata (Minister of Education) replied: School closures have generally been the result of changing demographics and also offer opportunities to rationalise schooling building stock and provide more modern teaching environments. As I advised the Member in response to written question 2845 (2012), 205 schools closed, not 281, between 2003-2008: • 101 closed because of network reviews • 90 were voluntary closures • 14 were directed closures. No schools were closed solely for performance reasons.

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QWA/b/5/6/QWA_02884_2012-2884-2012-Catherine-Delahunty-to-the-Minister-of-Education.htm

Please note: Delahunty is a GREEN MP. Not Labour, GREEN. Labour - sort your shit out.

I think this whole thing can be summed up by an exchange I had on twitter with National Minister Tau Henare:

West Side Tory: 281 schools closed under Labour. 44 under our govt. #MoaningMurtles

Dovil: West Side Tory Where do you get that number from? Source or it didn't happen.

West Side Tory: Dovil 281

  

Dovil: West Side ToryYes, that's the number you are stating. But where did you get the info from? Young Nats twitter account or Wizard doesn't count. 

West Side Tory: ‏ Dovil Haha 281 it is buddy. 

Dovil‏: tauhenare That's not offering proof, that's just repetition. Are you just repeating what you've heard without knowing whether it's true?

He then tweets the number 281. That's our politicians at work, ladies and gentlemen. Jesus Christ.

The point is at no point was any proof offered or any sources cited. I've tweeted Garner since he seems to be the internet source of all of this but I'm guessing I'm not going to get an answer. If you now google, you will find that number linked to the NZ Labour Party - it has now been made truth.

Maybe it is? But if you're going to make claims back it up, and if you're the accused fight back with facts.

A reporter feed information that he got (from where?) into twitter that was then picked up by politicians that was then picked up by the media and was made into a real boy. 

That is scary.

Overview of Seven Sharp

So last night was the first ever episode of Seven Sharp and so far looking around reviews it's been a mixed reception, along with claims that it's given at least one viewer herpes which makes me think they should probably cover their TV in gladwrap and stop doing things to their electricals.

In the first segment we were given a tour behind the scenes of Parliament and it was a cute piece. We got to see the PM's toilet roll holder (I think it was two-ply, but hopefully they'll follow this up), we got to discover that Johnny doesn't usually drink during the day as he gently sipped at the wine he'd gifted (especially labeled, hopefully not on the company card, TAXPAYER MONEY!).

We also learned that you should never, ever, light a match in his office, because between the plastic flowers and the late night baked bean scoffing the entire place would go up - terrorists, pretend you didn't just read this.

There was a Nadzeya Ostapchuk joke. The person who came up with that should feel really, really bad about themselves. Their families should shun them. Strangers should walk across the road away from them. It was lame, is what I'm saying.

There was a solder who talked about coming back from serving with post traumatic stress disorder, and I think it was a good story because it's not one that's often told in NZ media and we seem to forget that there's a long-term price to pay for sending our people off to war. But...does the government support them, is it sufficient...none of that was covered. If you're going to use a person's story it shouldn't just sit there but be used as a jumping point for looking at the issue more deeply.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?! They kept yelling this at me. I was scared. And apparently now hired as a Senior Expert News Commentator. If they wanted an uninformed knee jerk opinion couldn't they have gone back and interviewed more politicians? Ahahaha, high-five me.

Then they did an advertorial where they interviewed a singer in order to promote his latest album, which was handy because I could duck out and start watching Campbell Live that I was recording. It was very considerate.

There was very little baby killing done live on air, so I'm not quite sure why there's so much vitriol being directed at it yet. Surely they get two more episodes to get everything perfect before we flip their cars over? Is it hard news? No. Did they answer any questions? No. Okay, maybe I can kind of see why people are unhappy, but I'm prepared to wait to see if things pick up and they hit their stride.

However, for now Campbell Live is the one first off the ranks, this is what gets watched afterwards. Tip of the Hat if they ever manage to swap that around.

Ranting About Media

The reason I can sometimes be damning of NZ Media is that I'll always remember the coverage of the last elections (and the election before that, and before that) when people were interviewed on the street as to who they were/had voted for and why. 98% of those people said exactly the same thing "He/she seems nice". We mocked Americans soundly for voting in Bush Jnr twice because he was someone people would most want to have a beer with, but I'm not sure why since that seems to be our voting strategy as well.

If we're not informed voters how can we call ourselves a democracy?

Things I would like to see in 2013:

1. Get Key and co to front up on prime time media shows. If they keep on refusing, make that the story. Document how many times Key has turned down requests and compare this to previous leaders and leaders overseas. This has been an on-going running joke in media circles, but how about making it something shameful and disgraceful instead, because that's what it is.

2. The Housing Market: compare our situation to other places such as Ireland and Vancouver. Look into what the cause of the property bubble on our economy. Why are National so reluctant to put the brakes of foreign ownership, and when Key screams 'racism', don't let him derail.

3. Prisons - Idiot Savant already covered some issues here, but call me suspicious but is the State going to be implementing this or is this going to be tendered to private commercial interests, say like, Serco. By the way, this massive corporation is also involved in Detention Centres in Australia, it's controversial as it gets, and yes, barely a squeak over here.

4. I did a blog post a while back on what I felt was an uncomfortably close relationship between the Associate Ministry of Education and Talent 2 here. The media was fantastic in the way that it picked this up, and by that I mean that it printed John Banks statement assuring there was nothing in it and seemingly never looked further in to the issue. Investigative Journalism for the win! Who else in Government is besties with these companies that we're tendering multi-million contracts to - well, I guess we'll never know what goes on in the backrooms of Government.

By reading/watching international media I've seen enough news linking politicians to businesses (Cheney/Halliburton anyone?) to know that when power and money converge sometimes ethics takes a back seat (and is then taken into the woods and buried) - I think politicians and big business have an almost free ride in the NZ press in comparison.

5. Thanks goes to the Senior Political Commentators (tm Daily Show) who asserted that that Green Party hates business (printing currency is madness they scream - maybe it is, you never explained why), which is just as helpful as someone in his position declaring that the National Party hates poor people - yeah, I can certainly take you seriously from now on in (ffwd). Thanks also goes to the segment of Brendan Horan being door stopped so we could get his expression as he closed the door, after which you packed up and drove to the cemetery so they could get a shot of his mother's grave for your story. Who says gutter journalism can't be hard work, especially on car mileage.

6. Can we please have some investigation into the legislation process, the fact that because we only have a unicameral parliament, a short sitting period, an over-use of fast-tracking that can skip committees and consultation in a single bound, that comparatively speaking next to other first world democracies we're one step away from being a banana republic. Oh, and by the way, that means that there should be closer scrutiny as to what's going on, not more human bloody interest stories.

6. Can media stop with setting every reality crime show in South Auckland? Fairly sure enough crime is committed in other parts of NZ without having to permanently set up shop there, but then again I suppose this gives white viewers a thrill in seeing a constant flow of brown faces pushed in to the back of police vans.There's no racism in New Zealand, lol.

7. The main news channels have an hour set aside for news, but putting aside sport, weather, ad breaks and chimpanzee's cuddling kittens, it's 20 or so minutes of actual news. The investigative half-hour slots, taking aside the ad breaks and requisite Nanas knitting tea cosies for charity segments to get people actually watching, means 10 minutes for reflective news. Can we all now agree that this isn't working, that a workable Fourth Estate can't function with those time limitations and that the public needs to fund this because otherwise we'll get more shots in a couple of years of people stating that yes, they're voting for x, y and z because they seem nice. Bring back TV7, or something. Blah, we're all doomed.

And ps 8. Bill English was once quizzed in the corridors of Parliament on the economy. He said that we had nothing to worry about because of the Chinese market. There was jaw droppage and swearing on my part, because are you kidding? This was the governments economic way out of the global recession - piggy backing on China?!  Again, nobody picked this up, nobody said anything. Not a peep. And NZ's economy certainly doesn't have a history of massively tanking after another country stopped buying our goods in the past (PSSST, IT WAS ENGLAND). Bloody hell, NZ. Bloody hell.

Review of Campbell Live's First Episode of 2013

Major props to Campbell Live last year, they did a fantastic job looking at issues such as SkyCity and gambling, Novopay, poverty and lunches in schools et al, so I was dead keen to see what they would bring to the table in their first episode last night. I was, unfortunately, a little bit disappointed.

The first segment, following an ACC recipient who was living the good life in Fiji, and by the accounts of his neighbours was routing the system, was something snapped straight out of the pages of Fair Go. We had hidden cameras, we had an out of breath reporter ambushing the no do-gooder with accusations...to be fair they have apparently written to ACC to ask how many people are receiving benefits who are living overseas so there is an indication that this story will be followed up. But I felt the real questions were why it was taking so long for allegations to be followed up by ACC - was this typical, atypical - were never addressed? This was an emotive story where we can get angry indignant, but I don't really feel like we learned anything. But yes, hopefully this is still to come.

The next story was on NZ firefighters in Australia battling the flames, or in reality, creating fire breaks. I learned that smouldering branches can reignite, that apparently it wasn't as hot as they were expecting, and that fire is bad as I got to re-watch previously screened footage of trees and homes ablaze. So much learning! Again this was strictly an emotive story where we were meant to feel proud of our own getting stuck in. Aussies were interviewed and said how glad they were of their volunteer firefighters, but they failed to get the sweet pop shot of them saying they were glad of the NZ firefighters, so that was added as a voice over by the reporter, ahaha.

What we need now is a bit more outrage, and what's better for doing that than bureaucracy gone mad. In this case it was someone who had planted two fruit trees on council property who asked for retrospective approval and was told that it would cost $1,000 for an inspection. I bet the PM denies all knowledge. Except apparently that's wasn't really the case and there was a mix-up and the fee is for inspecting retaining walls etc? Who knows what the actual story was about, but hey, outrage and close up shots of guava trees. Then there was the live cross over (wtf?!, maybe they were hoping to see the guava tree miraculously blossom?) which was completely gratuitous, weird and unnecessary but it did allow two grown men to wrestle about in the background, of which I was eternally grateful for. They should be hired to do that in all live cross overs from now on in.

So in conclusion, little bit disappointed. They were fluff pieces where you didn't actually learn anything and they were after an emotive reaction - outrage, pride, outrage. But, to give them their due there is potential with the ACC story, and it's only the first episode of many to come over the year. They bought their A game last year and I'm really hopeful that we'll get a bit more insight into issues that count.

So don't forget to send them your cat pictures where tonight Gareth Morgan will come on to talk about banning cats (not purely emotive, at all!) and we live cross back to see how that guava plant is doing.

Oh, god.

David Round: Maoris Are Plotting to Kill You

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10859789 

You need kidney dialysis. You’re a regular Joe Blog i.e. not Maori. But you cannot get it, because Maoris, although less deserving of treatment on purely clinical grounds, have priority. I know! You have paid your taxes all your life so you have worth as a human being and should get dialysis. You die. Maoris have stolen your dialysis machine that you paid taxes towards! 

Impossible? Absolutely. But imagine if it wasn’t! That’s some scary stuff.  Maoris are going to kill you and the Government is letting them! Several years ago when an elderly man in Northland was ruled ineligible for dialysis - on solely clinical grounds - the Maori Council declared elderly Maori people were "taonga" and therefore entitled to treatment under the Treaty of Waitangi, which would give them priority over non-Maori. If you decide to google it you might discover that the only reference of this occurring is when I’ve talked about it, surely a sign of a conspiracy cover-up and shows that this was really going to happen.

If, then, we were saddled with a written constitution which referred to the Treaty and its alleged "principles", we could easily have racial discrimination in health care. Imagine if these “principles”, disgust quotes!, went any way to alleviate the imbalance that already exists within the healthcare system with “Maori” more likely to suffer ill health and to  have shorter lifespans. What kind of liberal poppycock would that be!

Why should that surprise us? It shouldn’t; Maori are conniving and are out to get us and destroy our way of life. The Treaty's words are now twisted to mean their exact opposite. The Treaty said Maori and settler were to be equals under the Queen's government. In Captain Hobson's words, "Now we are one people". But by the modern "principles", "Maori" are not the Queen's subjects but her "partners" in governing New Zealand. How can anyone not look at the history of New Zealand and not think that Maori and Pakeha have not been treated equally. If Maori wanted to have the Government cheaply buy or take the bulk of their land, and to live in economic and social poverty, well, that’s obviously a personal choice.

The "taonga" Maori were promised are now not just their physical property - what the word undoubtedly meant in 1840 - but anything Maori might take a fancy to. Your wife? Taonga! Your job? Taonga! Your children, your pets, and your car? Taonga, taonga, taonga! If a Maori walks on to your property and yells taonga, it is now legally theirs. 

Well, not now, but very likely in the future.

To give these "principles" (pa-tooey!) overriding legal standing would be utterly disastrous for our country, our jobs gone, our wives ravaged and our pets eaten. Yet incredibly, a racially-stacked panel (there are non-Pakehas on it!) appointed by the Maori and National parties is considering how to put the Treaty into our constitution. A legal document having legal standing and acknowledging the history of this country is preposterous.

Our present Chief Justice considers herself entitled, as if she was the head of something, to declare acts of Parliament invalid if they offend against her own extreme understanding, an understanding that is not mine, of Treaty "principles" (pa-tooey!). That is, essentially, treason. And she should be, essentially, hung. Parliament has been our undisputed supreme lawmaker for centuries, yet this usurper longs to replace our democracy with her own decrees.

Maori want to take everything that we hold dear and usurper unelected traitors like Elias will let them unless we do something, like buy a gun and build a bunker to store our supplies. Maori are a different creature to you and I, not civilised. If only our Chief Justice could be more like the judges of our day such as Prendergast who recognised that the treaty was a load of pish and nonsense and called Maori’s primitive barbarians. That’s the NZ judicial system I know and love, not this modern flim flummery.

At present the Waitangi Tribunal may not recommend that private land be "returned" to Maori ownership and what the Waitangi Tribunal recommends is in no way binding on the Government. But Maoris are involved, so you just watch. They will take your bach, make no mistake.

All this is being plotted right now. I type from my bunker. The Maoris are coming. You have been warned.

David Round teaches law at the University of Canterbury. Seriously. Jesus Christ.