90,000 - Hours of service to be cut through court closures announced this week.
18 - Dollars a week – the amount real median incomes for all New Zealanders have fallen (3.7%) over the past three years
3 - Inquiries into the Dotcom affair – by police, Rebecca Kitteridge and Paul Neazor
1 - Toy-throwing demonstration from Hekia Parata during an address to the PPTA
1 - Prime Minister looking for assistance with memory loss.
Got it wrong David, there were two ..toys out of the cot…incidents involving Hek-yeah
@Ehoa LOL
Hi David!
Those court closures are bad! 
!
What about 1 (one) panic-stricken PM summoned to Hollywood by his American bosses to explain how and why he ballsed-up the Dotcom affair when it should have been in the bag.
Also don’t forget 1 (one) more unconvincing excuse from our Dear Leader, Kim Jon Ki, telling us that GCSB made an error because the rules about spying on NZ citizens had only just changed. Surely as that new rule applied to them, they would have paid attention to it. He’s trying to cloud the issue by talking about why the spying occurred, when the real issue is how it could have happened. Without an inquiry into this, the public has no guarantee it won’t happen again.
And of course, 1 (one) very relieved John Banks happy to be out of the limelight.
1 x Prime Minister with memory loss alongside 1 x former leader of the opposition with a similar problem.
Glass houses and stones.
You conveniently forget that G
FF was vindicated! 
Why are the economic costs of time on the road counted when justifying road building, but this economic cost of closing courts (expecting those using services provided at courts to travel to others further away) is not?
Spud, in what parallel universe was Goff vindicated?
Hi Si
, not a parallel universe 
but this one 
Headline title:
“SIS boss admits no record of Goff receiving spy briefing”
To be fair, I don’t think most people know about this.
Spud is right.
Phil Goff was not briefed by the SIS. But this was not admitted until some weeks down the track. The Director was the one with the apparent memory loss. He believes he did mention it in passing and that is probably true but it wasn’t good enough… especially if it was barely audible and I suspect that might have been the case.
Don’t make excuses for Si spud. It was reported at the time. He/she would know… or he/she suffers from the same complaint as John Key and John Banks – brain fades.
What I don’t understand (without descending into conspiracy theories) is why anyone, let alone the SIS Director during a meeting, would say something in passing in a ‘barely audible’ manner?
Mr S.
Note the italics. That means I was reporting what was reported by the MSM as being what he said.
You should try harder to comprehend what you read. The addendum especially if it was barely audible and I suspect that might have been the case was the offering of an opinion – not necessarily fact. Of course, you have have never muttered something ‘in passing’ because you don’t really want the recipient to take too much cognizance? You’re perfect. Well I’m not, and I’ve done it.
@Anne LOL
Spud, it all comes down then to who you believe. If a politician told me the grass was green I’d look at my feet to check.
I’d still put my money on Tucker, Mr Goff I feel painted himself into a corner and had no choice but to die in a ditch on this one.
Anne, don’t worry, I don’t need anyone to make excuses for me. As for your thoughts that he may have mentioned it in passing, what do you think these meeting are, old boys get togethers in The Backbenchers?
I did get that, thanks for your concern though.
I was actually wondering why (and yes, I do understand it is in your opinion) the Director would murmur/mutter something so that Phil Goff wouldn’t be aware?
My apologies, I should have made the question a bit clearer. I’ll work on that with my reading.
Si, we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. G
FF was telling the truth! 
@Rob – Good point!
Regardless of who was right, hopefully out of all of this came some way of recording acknowledgements, something as simple as the entity being notified singing next to the item on the meeting record/agenda as received would be easy enough to implement (maybe it already happens now).
I think the bipartisan nature of these briefings is important, and what did concern me (to flip-flop sides for a minute) is that Goff suggested in one article that he wasn’t getting the same level of briefing. Perhaps they should even be in the same room, the PM and Shadow PM are hardly going to let each other miss a trick!
That sounds like a good idea
Agreed Rob, it’s vitally important that all sides are up to speed on security issues and are at least able to sing off the same same song sheet even if to a different tune.
Rob S @ 9:59pm
Fair enough – a reasonable response.Thanks.
I remember linking Red Alert (in a comment) to one of the online reports re-the back-down of the SIS Director, and I recollect others did so too. He admitted there was nothing on file to indicate he had briefed Goff on the Israeli spy story. I give him credit for that admission because he could easily have said nothing. It was around August last year from memory but I haven’t been able to locate it.
Look what happens when we all play nice.
Glad you noticed Si. After all it was started by Si’s provocative (and incorrect) comment on 6th Oct. @ 5:26pm.
Anne, I’m not going to further on this, but would suggest you hunt out the article.
@ si si… you can’t go further… your comment has been well and truly discredited… just deal with it like a “grownup”…
Try it like this… Johnny sparkles had “brain fade” over the fact that he knew much more than he would admit…. Phil Goff was proven right, even though the dissimilarities in those occurrences was, and is still being deliberately ignored, or suppressed by the fourth estate, and tory commentators… for obvious reasons….
Ok, I’ll indulge. Read the following and point out where it proves / disproves eithe Dr Tucker’s or Mr Goff’s version of events. No record does not mean it did not happen. Now I think that John Key’s looking a little suspect on this one, and don’t slavishly fall into belief due to some shared ideology that some appear unable to look past. Like I said I find it very difficult to trust a word that comes from any politician.