How awesome is this?? It's all there - the book depository, the grassy knoll!
View Larger Map
Monday, December 15, 2008
B-Grade
After watching the very uh... interesting and nuanced Death Race recently I was over the proverbial moon to see the original - Death Race 2000 and its prequel Death Sport at Aro Video yesterday. Unlike the new prison based film, 2000 stars Caine himself, David Carradine and Sylvester Stallone as they race across the US pickng up points for killing pedestrians along the way - the elderly are worth 100 points, toddlers 75 points, women 10 points etc. Trailer below
Death Sport also starred Carradine but was based in the year 3000 - a time where prisoners are forced into a fight to death with gladiator types who ride 'death machines'... otherwise known as motorbikes with cardboard bits spray painted silver tacked on the front and sides. It is the sequel to Death Race 2000, but bears no real similarities other than on the quality front - its average rating on IMDB is 2.7 out of 10. Adding to b-grade flavour it features an awesome/irritating synthesizer soundtrack and also starred then Playboy Bunny, Claudia Jennings who naturally treats the audience to a full frontal... or two... as you do. Classic stuff.
One of my colleagues also lent me the first two episodes of iconic 1980s Knightrider wannabe, Street Hawk. Its basically about a cop who goes around fighting crime on his wicked bike - which if you look it up on Wikipedia, you find out was just a Honda dirtbike with a few bits tacked on... I wonder if that makes it a death machine?? Hmmm on second thought I think you need some Carradine for that. Trailer below
So if you feel like a cheesy b grade movie weekend - accept no substitute!
Death Sport also starred Carradine but was based in the year 3000 - a time where prisoners are forced into a fight to death with gladiator types who ride 'death machines'... otherwise known as motorbikes with cardboard bits spray painted silver tacked on the front and sides. It is the sequel to Death Race 2000, but bears no real similarities other than on the quality front - its average rating on IMDB is 2.7 out of 10. Adding to b-grade flavour it features an awesome/irritating synthesizer soundtrack and also starred then Playboy Bunny, Claudia Jennings who naturally treats the audience to a full frontal... or two... as you do. Classic stuff.
One of my colleagues also lent me the first two episodes of iconic 1980s Knightrider wannabe, Street Hawk. Its basically about a cop who goes around fighting crime on his wicked bike - which if you look it up on Wikipedia, you find out was just a Honda dirtbike with a few bits tacked on... I wonder if that makes it a death machine?? Hmmm on second thought I think you need some Carradine for that. Trailer below
So if you feel like a cheesy b grade movie weekend - accept no substitute!
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Taking over the asylum
I was planning on avoiding politics as a topic for the remainder of the year, but the happenings of the last week have meant I just can't bite my tongue any longer. Almost unbelievably our brand spanking new tory government has seemingly used its first week in the house to shoot itself in the foot and try to bring an end to its own honeymoon period.
They had widely flagged that tax legislation and changes to KiwiSaver would be introduced under urgency, but had not even hinted that the 90 Day probation period bill would be introduced - let alone passed. Personally I don't have a problem with probationary periods - and they were actually allowed for under the Employment Relations Act. Of course as most people know, my previous employer used the probation period mechanism under the ERA and they had actually used it to remove a previous employee, but only after they had gone through a process which identified what was wrong and provided a chance for the worker to get it together. But what this bill does is actually remove any avenue for recourse or mediation - basically if you're sacked at the end of the 90 day period and you feel you have been unfairly treated or that you received insufficient training to be able to do the job or no warning etc - there is nothing you can do, you're gone. There is no independent complaints authority - you're out of luck, sunshine.
Worse still, watching the debates it was abundantly clear that the government backbenchers actually had no idea about the implications of their tax changes for low income earners (naturally the cuts favour the rich and actually disadvantage workers earning under $45k). Is there anything more dangerous in a democracy than a government passing legislation that they haven't read and refuse to release until the debate begins under urgency, with minimal debate and no consultation?
This willingness to force through legislation under urgency - when there is no real need - does beg the question whether we need another check or balance on the Parliament. The Select Committee process was supposed to alleviate the need for an upper house by providing another check on the government. Given this government's perceived eagerness to avoid Select Committee's and the historic unwillingness of the Governor General to reject laws, I wonder if we do need to look again at the idea of re-establishing an upper house as a final check.
On top of all this big Gerry Brownlee's cringeworthy, shambolic performance as Leader of the House has been like watching some sort of David Brent/Manuel The Office/Fawlty Towers hybrid. It makes you really want Labour to pick up the Yellow Fever chant from Phoenix matches - "YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING".
Meanwhile Brownlee has been the talk of the town for other reasons - with leaks flowing from all angles suggesting that because of his personal dislike for Nick Smith he has instructed officials in the Energy and Resources area that they are not to talk to or give any information to Environment ministry officials for fear that it will end up in Nick Smith's hands. That's right kids, if true - Brownlee has basically ordered by decree that officials working on things like, I dunno, Biofuels and electricity generation are not allowed to talk to the lead agency on climate change. I know right - WTF? how does that work?
And this is week one.
The knife also continues to hover over the public service with redundancies seeming almost inevitable. I only hope that National look at how ineffective the Rudd Labor government's cuts to the public sector have been in Australia. The public service over there is stupidly overworked and I know of people being expected to work 12-13 hour days, 6 days a week as a norm. Foreign Affairs has supposedly been a top priority of the new government with Rudd keen to be seen as a leader on issues like climate change, yet the budget cuts at DFAT has seen a 10 per cent staff turnover already in the first 12 months of KRudd.
I know this is what the people wanted and that this is the government the people chose. But I'm not sure anyone really thought it would be this messy quite so soon.
They had widely flagged that tax legislation and changes to KiwiSaver would be introduced under urgency, but had not even hinted that the 90 Day probation period bill would be introduced - let alone passed. Personally I don't have a problem with probationary periods - and they were actually allowed for under the Employment Relations Act. Of course as most people know, my previous employer used the probation period mechanism under the ERA and they had actually used it to remove a previous employee, but only after they had gone through a process which identified what was wrong and provided a chance for the worker to get it together. But what this bill does is actually remove any avenue for recourse or mediation - basically if you're sacked at the end of the 90 day period and you feel you have been unfairly treated or that you received insufficient training to be able to do the job or no warning etc - there is nothing you can do, you're gone. There is no independent complaints authority - you're out of luck, sunshine.
Worse still, watching the debates it was abundantly clear that the government backbenchers actually had no idea about the implications of their tax changes for low income earners (naturally the cuts favour the rich and actually disadvantage workers earning under $45k). Is there anything more dangerous in a democracy than a government passing legislation that they haven't read and refuse to release until the debate begins under urgency, with minimal debate and no consultation?
This willingness to force through legislation under urgency - when there is no real need - does beg the question whether we need another check or balance on the Parliament. The Select Committee process was supposed to alleviate the need for an upper house by providing another check on the government. Given this government's perceived eagerness to avoid Select Committee's and the historic unwillingness of the Governor General to reject laws, I wonder if we do need to look again at the idea of re-establishing an upper house as a final check.
On top of all this big Gerry Brownlee's cringeworthy, shambolic performance as Leader of the House has been like watching some sort of David Brent/Manuel The Office/Fawlty Towers hybrid. It makes you really want Labour to pick up the Yellow Fever chant from Phoenix matches - "YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING".
Meanwhile Brownlee has been the talk of the town for other reasons - with leaks flowing from all angles suggesting that because of his personal dislike for Nick Smith he has instructed officials in the Energy and Resources area that they are not to talk to or give any information to Environment ministry officials for fear that it will end up in Nick Smith's hands. That's right kids, if true - Brownlee has basically ordered by decree that officials working on things like, I dunno, Biofuels and electricity generation are not allowed to talk to the lead agency on climate change. I know right - WTF? how does that work?
And this is week one.
The knife also continues to hover over the public service with redundancies seeming almost inevitable. I only hope that National look at how ineffective the Rudd Labor government's cuts to the public sector have been in Australia. The public service over there is stupidly overworked and I know of people being expected to work 12-13 hour days, 6 days a week as a norm. Foreign Affairs has supposedly been a top priority of the new government with Rudd keen to be seen as a leader on issues like climate change, yet the budget cuts at DFAT has seen a 10 per cent staff turnover already in the first 12 months of KRudd.
I know this is what the people wanted and that this is the government the people chose. But I'm not sure anyone really thought it would be this messy quite so soon.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Monday, December 01, 2008
Are you local?
One of the most notable outcomes of the recent election was how Labour lost every single provincial seat that it held, despite many of the areas being characteristically 'Labour' areas. For example previously safe regional seats like East Coast, Otaki, Tukituki, West Coast-Tasman, Invercargill, and Whanganui have all been lost over the last two terms. In Palmerston North and Rimutaka Labour also struggled even though they had both had long solid service from popular retiring local MPs.
Five-minute PM, Mike Moore recently suggested that one of the reasons for this was MMP. He said that the safety net created by the party list meant MPs were preoccupied with impressing their leader and party hierarchy to gain promotion and to secure a decent list spot rather than putting in the hard yards in their electorates. Moore suggested this was why MPs had lost touch with their electorates and why so many of Labour's caucus seemed non-plussed at the thought of life on the list.
I think he is almost right on the money. We are told that there are huge numbers of people signing up to the party - that the membership is growing and is the strongest it has been. But take all those electorates listed above - not one of them has what you would call a strong local committee with active members and supporters. The membership in these areas has stagnated and aged to the point that basic activities such as door-knocking could not happen and deliveries in many had to be contracted out.
As UK Labour Councillor, Phillip Glanville, succinctly put it in his recent piece on the Blairite site Progress Online talking about the UK party - local campaigns are vital or no seat is safe. The parallels to our local party are stunning -
Just swap out the MP and place names and you pretty much have NZ Labour.
Indeed.
However, what parts of the recent campaign also reinforced was that with real effort and a priority given to connecting directly - I firmly believe that most of the seats above can and should be won back in three years.
Five-minute PM, Mike Moore recently suggested that one of the reasons for this was MMP. He said that the safety net created by the party list meant MPs were preoccupied with impressing their leader and party hierarchy to gain promotion and to secure a decent list spot rather than putting in the hard yards in their electorates. Moore suggested this was why MPs had lost touch with their electorates and why so many of Labour's caucus seemed non-plussed at the thought of life on the list.
I think he is almost right on the money. We are told that there are huge numbers of people signing up to the party - that the membership is growing and is the strongest it has been. But take all those electorates listed above - not one of them has what you would call a strong local committee with active members and supporters. The membership in these areas has stagnated and aged to the point that basic activities such as door-knocking could not happen and deliveries in many had to be contracted out.
As UK Labour Councillor, Phillip Glanville, succinctly put it in his recent piece on the Blairite site Progress Online talking about the UK party - local campaigns are vital or no seat is safe. The parallels to our local party are stunning -
"Campaigning in Crewe, I was struck by the lack of long-term organisation. The late, great Gwyneth Dunwoody was a formidable parliamentarian and much-respected MP, but the local party in Crewe seemed moribund at best. Sadly, it was clear that canvassing and campaigning had not taken place for a generation. No historic data, no personal relationships, no record of local campaigning.
In estate after estate, there was no sense that Labour had been talking to local people. We hadn't fostered a sense that the party was on their side - campaigning for better schools, safer streets and new homes."
Just swap out the MP and place names and you pretty much have NZ Labour.
"... Crewe and Glasgow are better after 11 years of Labour Government. Yet, for years it seems nobody has talked to local people about what we are doing and why.
Our supporters don't need Facebook, they want us to talk face to face: in their local pub, at the church fete, at a residents' meeting or on the doorstep. It may be old-fashioned or unsexy, but it works. You can't just turn up every four years (or, even worse, mid-term) and expect people to vote for you.
Clearly being in power is vital. We should never lose sight of that aim or hold the deluded view that we need to be in opposition to renew. Yet being in government can hold the party. Leaders inevitably start to listen to civil servants over party members and citizens. We get caught up in the idea that a good policy and a slick soundbite is all it takes to succeed."
Indeed.
However, what parts of the recent campaign also reinforced was that with real effort and a priority given to connecting directly - I firmly believe that most of the seats above can and should be won back in three years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
