] VIDEO: Journal 46 - the last Video Journal before the election - Rt Hon John Key
Video

10 Comments
28 September 2008
VIDEO: Journal 46 - the last Video Journal before the election

This is John's last Video Journal before the election. From now until then, he'll be making videos on the campaign trail.


Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 - Kelly Te Heuheu 2008-09-28 20:23 - (Reply)

John Key, Party Leader01 November 2007 Speech to the Police Association National Conference Wellington By viking of nzcpr general debate chamber I notice that there is no mention of removing the bent cops at the top and ensuring the integrity of the police. ( Plenty about them of late.) There is no mention of setting better priorities and bonuses to reflect those priorities. e.g. four cops on Petone esplanade this morning with their favorite little radars but none at night to stop criminals breaking into cars and other wanton destruction in the same area. Just attack ordinary NZers for going too fast. ( We all know how we feel about that.) And last and to me the most important point, No mention of removing the Prosecution service from the police to an independent unit as they have in Northern Territory and other places. The benefit of that is enormous. We would no longer have the dishonesty that goes with police prosecution service. The police would have to justify their evidence before the prosecutor acted. I am of the opinion that David Bain ,Ellis, Watson and probably a few more would have either had no trial or would have had a better trial. The other important reason to change the Prosecution Service is that if any person or agency found a criminal act by some other person they could go to the Prosecution service and have their complaint dealt with by a court. At present only the police can do that and for many hundreds of cases where evidence exists the Police simply haven't got the resources. PI's could then be used to catch criminals and take the evidence to a Prosecutor. This would be a major deterrent to business crime. ( If you doubt this then consider that the "Tuhoe Terrorists" would have been in jail now but for the Solicitor General ruling against the Police. (and rightly so.) ( Of course they are now having a probe of him just to extract revenge for Helen and the rest of her lowlifes.) Most of the rest is all good and should have been done long since but we do need to point out that the Police themselves at the top have a proven inability to manage their resouces properly. e.g. the vests, the tasers and satisfactory radio communications. All their decisions.

#2 - john elliott 2008-09-30 23:25 - (Reply)

Hi there, I'm a swaying voter who would vote National in a heartbeat, but I am concerned by the lack of informed proposals in the area of education. I am a principal of a small rural school and I love the idea of slashing meaningless jobs and supplying PE gear as part of your sports policy. However, I am concerned by the National Standards that you are proposing. This is where I am concerned that there is a lack of informed decision making and there are no real answers being offered. My experience tells me that you can walk into any classroom, in any school, and the classroom teacher will quickly and accurately identify the 'tail' in any learning area you choose. They can do this because, as you say, 90% of schools already undertake standardised norms assessments as part of their learning and teaching. These are called 'standardised', 'norm-referenced' assessments because they give national standards of achievement for year levels from Year 3 up, depending on the assessment. What this red-herring policy fails to detail is just how you intend to lift achievement of the tail "through your teachers." We absolutely do not need any more suggestions of assessment analysis from people with no clue about how to lift achievement. Please. I am begging you. Come up with some real, meaningful policy direction in this area so that I can vote for you because this 'National Standards' is an empty vessel of hot air that offers no solution for the 20% that you claim to be targeting.

#3 - Jake Edwards said:
2008-10-02 17:55 - (Reply)

Its a shame that you guys have bothered to set up this forum but will not print my perfectly reasonable and well argued comment. Is it because I was right to suggest that: A: blaming Labour for the recession is hokum. B: Your ecological standpoint is in fact a contradictory muddle. [Admin: Only this comment appears in our queue. Almost any "well argued" comment is welcome. This one is not particularly well informed. From your posting on your website, you seem to be caught up in the idea that National will allow coal generation plants. You might try actually reading the policy statement on energy, in which we say coal is not part of our plan unless the science of carbon containment allows it to be. Coal cannot be disallowed on ideological grounds. As for the recession, there are many ways to insulate an economy and make it grow. Labour has done nothing in that respect.]

#4 - Mike Klinkenberg 2008-10-03 13:50 - (Reply)

Hi John 1st rule of business is know your opposition Do not put your opposition down or be negative about them Show your clients \ voters that you can be better You clients \ voters are not silly and will make up there own minds I hope its good advice ??? Cheers Mike

#4.1 - Anonymous 2009-04-27 02:30 - (Reply)

Hello Mike, are you by any chanche related to Bobby Klinkenberg? We would like to get back in touch with her family... Kind regards, Liesbeth Dees, The Netherlands. Liesbeth@schevers.com

#5 - Anne Rennie 2008-10-04 08:50 - (Reply)

It is little wonder that attacks on dairy owners are increasing. What is this policy that if one is attacked with a knife, one must remain calm, controlled and reasonable and only use 'reasonable force' to protect one's own life. Talk about the 'Merchant of Venice' and the pound of flesh! I fully understand that we do not want to live in a world of an 'eye for an eye' but I continue to submit that expecting people to remain entirely reasonable while facing their own death, and those of their family members, is absurd, unnatural and dangerous. People defending their lives should not be then prosecuted by the police force who are not prepared to face such criminals, even in numbers, without weapons to disable them. There has got to be more discussion and debate, and a change, in this area to enable people to protect themselves legally or I would imagine far worse things will begin to happen as the community take action on their own. It is completely unreasonable to ask people to hold still while criminals victimise, steal from, threaten, beat and stab them. To assume that this can be effectively dealt with by youth programmes is ridiculous. Violent crime is always going to exist in this society and ordinary citizens have to have legitimate ways of coping other than being prepared to surrender their lives to the criminals. How would you tell whether someone coming at you with a knife was intending to kill you or not? And would you, in the midst of it all, think to yourself "Well, as long as I'm only stabbed in the hand, leg, etc".

#6 - Anne Rennie 2008-10-04 09:02 - (Reply)

I also completely agree with the comments from Kelly Te Heu Heu on the Police.

#7 - Ethel 2008-10-04 10:30 - (Reply)

I want to know that if we vote for National, we are going to get tougher on criminals,these latest shop owners been attacked and then charged it is outrageous,you call the police and they dont come or if they do it is days later, not good enough,PC in this country has gone too far,you do the crime you need to be held responsible and none of this bs of oh he had a hard life,what a cop out,there are alot of us out there struggling with everyday life in one way or another but we dont go committing crimes to make ends meet,their are alot of people that cant even afford the neccities as the prices are skyrocketing out of the average persons reach.I really fear for our young ones growing up, the streets are not safe,take Mr Hummings the other day went to the aid of a women and ended up loosing his life,and the guy gets name suppression--why--,he is the criminal and gets handled with kid gloves,we have to pay for these scum with either legal aid,been kept in prison in alot better conditions than some people live,gyms,tv,etc etc,it is not right,no wonder there is no shame in going to prison these days.I for one am sick and tired of the crims getting off light and the victim suffers,whoever gets my vote this year will have to be having a hard stance on crims and more rights for the victims.

#8 - Peter Sefton 2008-10-04 10:56 - (Reply)

Regarding the NZ economy. Give New Zealanders the confidence to ride through this economic turmoil by pledging: " If you have a deposit with a licensed bank in New Zealand and should that bank fail, a National government will protect your deposit and refund it to you in full." This statement alone will win you the election and start NZ on a positve path to recovery.

#9 - Julie Tan 2008-10-06 20:03 - (Reply)

Hi John Any plans of exempting worldwide income tax?


Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

 
Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.