< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://sirhumphreys.com" > Sir Humphrey's: It's started already

SIR HUMPHREY'S BLOG

SITE MOVED:Sir Humphrey's has moved

Please join us at our new site: www.sirhumphreys.com.

The RSS feed for sirhumphreys.com is now here.

Tuesday, October 04, 2005

It's started already

The gummint is yet to be formed and Labour members can't help themselves. If you're an MP, you're an MP. Unless, of course, you're a list MP then you have nobody to answer to.

Shane Jones keeps up the 'double-dipping' tradition.
ยท Linked Article

Posted by Gooner | 10/04/2005 08:52:00 AM

11 Comments:

Blogger ZenTiger said...

I wonder if his campaign pledge was to give the job as MP a full 80%.

10/04/2005 09:56:00 AM  
Blogger darren said...

Jones is only going by the examples set before him.
He'll be getting visas for Thai immigrants next in return for a bit of tiling and painting.
To think, Jones was held up to be Labour's great Maori hope, potential first Maori PM, etc.
He's no better than the rest of Liar-bour!! Oink! Oink!

10/04/2005 10:07:00 AM  
Anonymous moth said...

Get used to it - the inflated ego of Shane Jones has no limit. To compare him to a pig with his snout in the trough is a bit harsh on pigs/farm animals in general.

His racist anti-white comments published pre-election were a dire warning of the gutter standards to be expected from this idiot - the NZ Labour Party's latest rising star!

10/04/2005 10:13:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, yes. Factual stories in the ethical journalistic tradition.

johnie

10/04/2005 10:16:00 AM  
Blogger ZenTiger said...

Johnie:

1. Shane Jones is an MP and wants to hold down a 70K job at the same time.

2. He'll draw full salaries for both positions, and MP is considered a full time plus overtime job.

3. There is a possible conflict of interest in the other role.

So why exactly can we not voice an opinion over this? How does the Herald article break the ethical journalistic tradition? How does our commenting on it break an ethical journalistic tradition (not that we purport to be journalists - we are bloggers)

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about something, but are failing to articulate it.

The concept behind commenting on a blog (since you are fond of journalistic traditions, lets not ignore blogging etiquette) is to make a comment that adds to the discussion. A short explanation of your point of view is customary. Otherwise, you are just making a generalised attack that adds nothing to the discussion, does not explain the reasoning and seemingly ignores the undisputed facts.

Please explain.

10/04/2005 10:41:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I notice previous commenters adding facts to the discussion, yeah, right! Tell me - how many national mps have directorshops in addition to parliamentary duties?

johnie

10/04/2005 12:04:00 PM  
Blogger Gooner said...

Johnie, if you read closely you'll see I refer to the generic (MP) rather than the specific. I then call it a 'tradition' (amongst MP's).

Your point was?

10/04/2005 12:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tim Groser

10/04/2005 01:25:00 PM  
Blogger ZenTiger said...

Johnie, I said that people "make a comment that adds to the discussion". I did not say "facts" needed to be added.

The comments could simply be an opinion. I said what I said because I could not see any relevance in the comment you made.

I am still not clear how your comment "Factual stories in the ethical journalistic tradition" is relevant to discussing MP's who hold down a few directorships.

I didn't know the facts were in dispute, or that Journalists should not report on a specific case.

Case in point, Shane Jones.

Was there something in the Herald article that was deficient? Perhaps a paragraph or two on how many MP's fit this category? I wouldn't disagree with that, if that's your point, but you hadn't actually said that.

However, your latest comment asks how many National MP's hold down Directorships. Why limit it to National? I'd be very interested to know what associations all MP's have outside of their "dedication" to acting as an MP.

* What shares in related companies that stand to get tax grants

* What chairs, directorships and board positions of Unions, Charities, Companies and Associations. Especially where these places receive tax funding (charities and unions) or the person holds a related ministerial interest (Jeanette Fitzsimons is chair of an environmental committee that blocked Meriden Energy from a power creation scheme, whilst she holds shares in Wind Farm technology)

My original point was I can't see how he can devote time as an MP and act as chairperson and provide 70K of value. And the position does look like an area where there may be a conflict of interest.

10/04/2005 01:29:00 PM  
Blogger Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Yes, what about Tim Groser?

10/04/2005 01:30:00 PM  
Blogger Psycho Milt said...

Ha ha! He's staying "at the encouragement of the other directors". How thoughtful of the other directors to show such concern for his financial well-being, it's wonderfully heart-warming. I think Shane Jones would fit in well in either main party, he's obviously born to be a politician.

10/04/2005 08:20:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home