Trans-tasman rower Shaun Qunicey the latest to support Radio NZ against funding cuts – Facebook page now has 22,000 fans.
RT Shaun Quincey I recently rowed a boat from Australia to New Zealand National Radio was a huge supporter from Day 1 and linked me with home as I got to listen to the news on sat phone before chatting to Sean Plunket, Peter Blake also used to talk with National Radio and so did Sir Ed, National radio is as much a part of history.
Meanwhile, 2,500+ signatures on the e-petition . We are getting closer to the hearing of the Radio NZ Amendment Bill, so timely to sign the petition now if you haven’t yet…
Yes, save RNZ!!!!
Meanwhile, 2,500+ signatures on the e-petition
After how long? Doesn’t sound like it’s a huge issue as far as most people are concerned.
How about a petition against getting rid of 150 wastebins in Chch? You’d probably get 2,500 signatures overnight.
George. I take it that you are not a supporter of National Radio? Talkback Radio more your style or maybe you are George of Herald fame?
I value National Radio so much and I think that they may be the sole source of News and Current affairs. Beyond some Blog sites of course.
Ian – I’m neither for or against National Radio per se.
As a former Brit, though, it does always seem to me to be a poor attempt at imitating Radio 4, but with presenters who are merely ‘world famous in New Zealand’ yet very aware of that fact.
I am against the hysteria has greeted the expectation that RNZ economise in these days of economic challenge. It seems to have far more to do with Labour’s increasingly desperate search for that illusive bit of traction than a reasonable response to the actual proposals.
In the weekend magazine of The Press a couple of weekends ago the deputy editor wrote a piece where she said that she saw this as an issue where people would be taking to the streets. This is just another example of how far off the money the few are on this issue.
Labour seems to be having enormous problems picking winners these days. Are those in the party so out of touch with ordinary people that they have so little idea of what resonates at (floating) voter level? It appears so.
As for Talkback, I find it exceptionally tedious, apart from when I have occasion to listen to it in the wee small hours when it’s an art form
. Some of those fruitcakes must work on their scripts for months before phoning in!
George, you raise an interesting point. The general public does not seem to get ‘riled up’ over anything much these days, and National Radio is no exception. Say the tories said ‘okay, it’s up for sale’. Some folks would have a melt down, but most folks wouldn’t give a damn. Just like mining in the parks and privately owned state schools and compulsory unemployment insurance and all the other stuff going on. Why is that? Have people just given up on politics?
Have people just given up on politics?
I think the general public is significantly less interested in politics than we all are. We think they’re odd because they don’t get worked up about things that incense us, but really it’s people like us who are the oddities!
I do believe that there are many issues that could / would stir the people up, just that these aren’t the ones Labour chooses to focus on at the moment.
If the government proposed to put an open cast mine in the middle of an area outstanding beauty visited by lots of people it would have a problem on its hands, don’t you worry. But at the moment it isn’t saying that, and the ‘thin end of the wedge’ argument Labour and the Greens are using doesn’t appear to be getting people worked up to the extent hoped for.
Same with social issues. People will get very passionate about things that are important to them, but often these are not only totally different issues from those that are important to Labour activists, the feelings are often completely in the opposite direction. Again often tricky ground for Labour. S59 is an ideal example of this.
You mention privately owned state schools. What’s important to most people who don’t have a strong ideological preference one way or another is to have kids decently educated in a decent environment as cost-effectively as possible. Labour has jumped it at the very suggestion of PPPs with all the reasons why they’re evil. That sort of thing isn’t likely to push people’s buttons outside of a small circle (that probably are stong Labour supporters anyway). It has been suggested in our tea room (however typical or not that place may be) that this reaction is because Labour are worried that PPPs will be tried and be seen to work rather than because they won’t. That’s the sort of doubt that Labour is currently fighting against.
I do think Labour is talking to its friends too much. What it hears encourages it, then the every few weeks it gets totally bamboosled by the latest poll results.
Ian’s comment (above) to my post (Talkback Radio more your style?) is symptomatic of this attitude. Labour needs to listen to what callers to Talkback are saying (however distasteful) and try to at least understand why they hold the views they do, and what they can do to meet them in some sort of compromise. At the moment those on the Left appear to hold the people who contribute in total contempt. That might be good for the soul, but it’ll do nothing in the polls because these people are often expressing very commonly held views. Views held by those who should be natural Labour voters.
Sorry to everyone for going on a bit.
Cheers george, nice!
George: I hope Germaine Greer won’t be writing about NZ like she wrote about her native Oz… (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/1452851/Oz-outrage-at-Germaine-Greers-attack-on-cultural-wasteland.html)
“If your ambition is to live on Ramsay Street, where nobody has even been heard to discuss a book or a movie, let alone an international event, then Australia may be the place for you,” she wrote in The Australian newspaper. “The pain of watching its relentless dilapidation by people too relaxed to give a damn is more than I can bear.”
Oh dear,
, there’s a lot of fodder at the moment , 
Apathy, ignorance and ill-informed preconceptions are going to be the norm in a society which values and understands what it takes to be a good consumer above and beyond what it takes to be a good citizen.
@ George, I just wonder if we really need to pander to the lowest common denominator? Just observe where US politics is heading. Score any point, milk any prejudice and oppose any policy if it is going to get you a couple more votes. The aim of the game is not to lead the country and its people, it is to get and keep power for your party at any cost – everything else is secondary and tertiary.
I’m hoping to see some sensible, principle oriented leadership in politics before long. Maybe I will be waiting for a while. But using talk back radio as some sort of de facto focus group is meh.
Radio NZ as I understand it have an annual budget of $38m. The Government is quite rightly telling them (as they have told nearly every other Department to live within existing budget. There are things Radio NZ can do to raise additional funds – like lease space on their well positioned land to Cell phone companies, and I understand they have much technical knowledge that they could sell – all to raise additional funds.
Your hysteria and scare mongering is sad.
Monty: What about the KPMG report? Hardly a bunch of raging socialists, those guys.
Loota says: “Apathy, ignorance and ill-informed preconceptions…”
“I just wonder if we really need to pander to the lowest common denominator?”
“using talk back radio as some sort of de facto focus group is meh.”
Here we have the problem in a nutshell. Labour has to decide whether it wants to be a pressure group or a prospective government.
If it wants to be the former it can afford the moral superiority of describing those dumb people who don’t share their view of the world as “ignorant and ill informed”.
If it wishes to be the latter it has to listen to what the mass of people think (and, Loota, they do think, just not the same way as you do), and take this into account when deciding what to offer the voters.
What’s wrong with treating talkback as some sort of focus group? Wouldn’t any politician who was realistic about being elected want to use every means open to them to find out what people think about issues? It’s no good just sticking to those who agree with you, even if you like the answers they give.
DeepRed says: “I hope Germaine Greer won’t be writing about NZ like she wrote about her native Oz…”
Who really cares what Ms Greer says/writes about anything?
You kind of get the feeling that if you’re upsetting people like her you’re on the right sort of track…
@ George: sorry, we need leadership, not followship in this country. That means informing, inspiring and increasing awareness amongst people, more education, public information and productive debate about major issues, not less. And certainly not pandering to the lowest common denominator and prejudice.
Talk back radio – make it a minor focus group then, one to add into a much larger mix.
Loota says: That means informing, inspiring and increasing awareness amongst people, more education, public information and productive debate about major issues, not less.
I think that there’s been a lot of this, actually, over the years. There comes a time when you have to accept that people have listened, have heard, and have rejected what you’re saying. Contrary positions to one’s own aren’t always the result of ignorance, you know.
And certainly not pandering to the lowest common denominator and prejudice.
Reading the response of many people to various postings on this blog over the last few months I’d say that prejudice isn’t the reserve of those who oppose the Labour Party. There are clearly some who contribute here who still see the world in terms of “The Toff” in his top hat versus The Downtrodden Worker in a flat cap. So frequently the term ‘prejudice’ is used as a synonym for ‘views that are different and (in my opinion) less valid than my own’.
It might help if you imagine a business that once had a best-selling product which is now very dated. You might be selling a product made from higher quality raw materials that is hand crafted with loving care in quaint workshops by skilled craftsmen. The alternative might be one that is mass produced in factories, and made of shiny plastic, but which still does the job and at a much cheaper price. Regardless of the superiority of your product, if people don’t want to buy it, and you’re not prepared to change it to take on your competitors, then you’re either going to become a small niche player or go out of business.
That’s where Labour is. It can stick to principles that few people are really interested in, and become irrelevant in a political system where getting the (despised?) masses to vote for you is the only way to power. Or it can listen to ordinary folk and provide a version of what they want.
He he he – that talkback focus group
George, I don’t think that’s where Labour is, sure they did a few things, a couple of which even p****D me off
But most of what they did and what they stand for I think is great! 
And I’m proud of how they’ve been out listening to the public! 
Yee haa Labour! 
@loota – too right we need leadership that informs, inspires and leads to greatness – not apathy and ’she’ll be right mate’, while I smile and wave off the growing concerns.
I am not sure we have that yet – from any party – and I do not buy into the hype and false facade of Key – because I can see right thru his ‘emperors new clothes’ line. I also know that most of NZ still has not seen thru this facade – but I do have faith in my fellow kiwis that at some stage the rose tinted glasses will come off – I just hope it is not too late. IN the meantime, I, like others, will continue to do what we can to re educate and chip away at the teflon coating – because eventually, that coating does get scratched. And when the rest of you realise that you have been sold a mouldy lemon, your taxes get you nothing – and your health insurance is not enough (sound like the US?) and private or public education is all bad and the tail has lengthened to the point of no easy return – and the disadvantaged are breaking into your house, all the professionals are in aussie or elsewhere, cars are being car jacked and people are stealing and killing to feed their kids, and even the tourists have said sod off – I won’t say ‘told you so’. Am I being over dramatic – maybe – but time will tell. Not so sure I want to take that risk.
paul says “I, like others, will continue to do what we can to re educate…”
What I’m interested in is whether the consensus is that there’s a point when The Party stops trying to re-educate (i.e. stops taking a we’re right, you’re wrong stance on everything) and starts adapting itself to majority opinion, or whether principles remain paramount forever and should prevail, even when they’re constantly rejected. After 10 years in opposition? Never?
How hungry is the Labour Party for power? How hungry should it be?
I remember in the early 1980s that it was a commonly held view in the UK Labour Party that the worse it got under Thatcher the better it would be in the long run because people would eventually come to their senses and vote for the extreme left wing policies that the party, at that time, advocated. It took 2 decades and a massive shift to the right within the party before Labour were elected again.
To some of us merely to use the word re-education sends a chill down the spine and invokes images of Mao’s China and Pol Pot’s Cambodia. I know you’re not suggesting anything quite so thorough (I hope), but the principle is there: A small cadre knows best, and the masses need to be indoctrinated in the correct party line until they have the right attitude.
@George – “..The Party stops trying to re-educate (i.e. stops taking a we’re right, you’re wrong stance on everything) and starts adapting itself to majority opinion, or whether principles remain paramount forever and should prevail, even when they’re constantly rejected. After 10 years in opposition? Never?”
Where to start? You are making several assumptions.
1. That I am the party
2. That when informed, the general public (when not under a haze of apathy) is ok with second best and the senario above – are you ok with our society falling into that kind of disarray that is seen in many so called 1st world countries. I am not convinced that the msjority of kiwis want that kind of senario – and I am not convinced that when they are fully informed of what the real issues are and the real consequences, that they will say its ok.
3. That Labour are NOT listening and adapting…again, I think they are – are there more things they can do – sure is – but what I see is Labour (perhaps because they are in opp) listening and taking on board far more that the govt is – eg: Adult ed, nat stds, and many other examples of so called consultation that is really a snow job (smacking referendum anyone?) when they have no intention of changing their minds – even when they are wrong.
4. Re education equals enforced doctrine – oh dear – my fault for being a bit on the basic side – in my world re educate means to undo the brain washing (0pps – thats likely to be misconstrued as well) – as in, inform people so they can make their OWN mind up – god forbid we had a whole bunch of lambs happily eating up what the wolf says. An enlightened and informed society is far better than one happy to eat up the hype, PR and blatent bull that is feed to us – esp by the one sided rubbish the media gives us.
5. That polical parties That have principles and values that are for the good of society should evolve into greed, unsustainability and other such unproductive values and principles, and the public want that. Don’t get me wrong -evolving and changing to meet the needs of society is critical – but not when it means going backwards. That is not a future I would wish for any of our kids.
paul – I think the main thing I’m uncomfortable with, which appears to be a common thread of those who hold passionate but minority views, is the proposition that the main reason the majority of people don’t agree with them is because either they don’t properly understand the issues, or they’ve been deprived of the true story by a biased or trivialising media.
Somehow, however, when the passionate person’s views are supported by the majority this isn’t a problem.
It seems that because you’re in a minority at the moment you jump to the conclusion that the majority have eaten up hype, PR and blatent bull. I find that quite contemptuous of lots of people whose views are the result of as much serious contemplation as are your own.
What I dislike is the suggestion that Labour is doing something wrong whenever it critiques the government or tries to give the public messages. – The negative spin being put on Labour for doing their job. This is a democracy and a strong democracy has a strong opposition!
Fair enough, Spud.
That wasn’t/isn’t my intention.
I just want to be convinced it’s time for me to ‘come home’!
We’ve got a way to go, but as I see it this discourse is part of the process.
Can Monty make a post without using the word hysteria, or hysterical or the other NACT words du jour?
Ok George – we are not going to change each others povs anytime soon – and the beautiful thing about living in a democracy (granted George in our part of the kiwi world it would seem this democracy is being eroded – perhaps this means we dont have to pay the ecan part of our rates??? At least that would be a silver lining) is that we don’t have to agree – its ok to disagree.
Besides, time will tell.