Hypocrisy in low places and naivety in the electorate

Is this the symbol of the those who are guided by the Hippocratic or those who follow the hypocritical one?
Is this the symbol of the those who are guided by the Hippocratic or those who follow the hypocritical one? | Source

We are all familiar with the saying, “Do as I say; not as I do”. It should have been the election campaign slogan for the National Disgrace party in 2011 rather than that bollocks about “a brighter future”

I can’t really see anything bright about rising unemployment levels, static wages and ever increasing prices.

I can certainly see plenty of hypocrisy in a Government that is busy telling us all to pull our belts in and denying ordinary civil servants wage increases while taking massive ones themselves – and just before Christmas to really rub everyone else’s nose in it. No wait; I actually get it now. Wage restraint for the ordinary worker will bring about a brighter future – it’s just that it will be brighter for the captains of industry and MPs rather than the ordinary folks.

But this is a Government that is keen on private enterprise and competition and that must be good for the economy, right? Well no, actually closer inspection reveals this Government only likes competition in certain circumstances. They let the smaller businesses compete vigorously and when they have worn themselves out of puff and money they can be slurped up by one of the many headed monsters that belong to the business elite. In other words those massive corporations that can afford to hire lawyers and accountants to ensure they pay minimal tax at most and none if at all possible are allowed to become larger and thus reduce the level of competition to a board game between consenting robber barons.

This attitude of protecting the fabulously wealthy is evidenced by the guarantee Jianqi gave to Mediaworks worth $45M so they could spend their licence money on other things and attend to such boring administrative matters when it was more convenient for them. It is hard to imagine a small businessman whose very survival might depend on being able to get such an extension on a regulatory fee being indulged in similar fashion – and yet a large multi-national has the red carpet rolled out and told to take their time.

Another example of hypocrisy Jianqi style is his decision to overrule the Commerce Commission ruling that wholesale broadband pricing should be reduced from $21.46 per month to $8.93 per month. The Commission reached this conclusion after studying all the facts and finding that Telecom via Chorus has been gouging us all for months on these prices and given we have some of the highest broadband prices in the world it is time this stopped. And what was Jianqi’s logic for ignoring the recommendations and trampling all over the Commission’s independence? He is quoted as saying it would substantially reduce the income of Chorus and its capacity around broadband. Apparently it is better that Chorus makes huge profits than every Kiwi citizen having access to affordable broadband. What’s even dafter is this pillock’s Government actually put in place the legislation that provided for this report from the Commission.

Herein lies a warning for all Kiwis; you can’t trust these people even when they enact legislation that appears to do what you want. Jianqi’s response when asked whether one of the main points of having a regulator like the Commerce Commission is that they are free to do their work free of political influence is very telling; “They are free to go about their work but then we are free to decide whether to adopt it or not.” As the CC’s report is only a draft at this stage Jianqi was asked if he would rule out legislation if the final report was the same and he said he would not.

So here is the deal; they bring in legislation to regulate the excesses of the Telcos via an independent report from the CC. Jianqi doesn’t like the draft so says he won’t adopt it and that if the CC comes back with a final report that is unchanged he will change the law again so that he can continue to ignore them.

Jianqi obviously has a lot in common with Little Bo Tox who also views independent reports differently to most people in the free world. She rejected the independent report that she commissioned on the David Bain compensation issue because she had obviously forgotten to send Justice Binnie a draft of the report he was commissioned to turn in. My guess is that ACC staff probably sent it out to some poor geezer in a wheelchair and his files went to Justice Binnie instead. Karma.

And while we are on legal matters for a moment consider this; who in New Zealand should qualify for legal aid? I have just read of an arrogant French sheila who is applying for it at the moment. In fact her case has been adjourned so that she can do this. She was charged with dangerous driving (driving on the wrong side of the road and colliding head-on with a taxi); driving with a blood alcohol level of 765mcg and refusing to accompany a police officer without delay. It’s bad enough this bitch is over here getting bladdered on New Year’s Day, crashing into the taxi and causing a fuss when the officers tried to arrest her, but she has tried to blame US for the crash. Her logic was that she was following French road rules (Oh so they allow you to drive while pissed as chook do they? Well that probably figures considering what happened to a certain BMW in a certain road tunnel a few years back, but hello, you’re in New Zealand ya daft bat. And we are keen to offer this vache legal aid?

But then that is the irony of us Kiwis we offer everyone everything they don’t offer us – like Unemployment Benefit for Aussies.

But back to the hypocrisy and in this case hippocratic hypocrisy. The next bright move from the Jianqi gang is to reduce the costs of elective surgery (and no that’s not the stuff they do for guys who can’t use Viagra).

So what is considered elective surgery these days? If I had my way it would be to cut out all the nasty cancerous growths that sit in our parliament. However Jianqi and his Vile little sidekick (or dropkick if you like) are closely studying a report from the Welsh health system – well they both have leeks/leaks in common I suppose. The Government committee that is looking at these is being cagey about exactly what they intend to cut, apart from the fact that they will surgically remove $30M from the budget. They aren’t actually cutting the budget as such, because they have introduced a new word into our language to explain it better. ‘Disinvestment’ is the new term to describe cuts to important services which you hope nobody will notice.

One thing we do know they are looking at disinvesting in is grommets. Apparently they feel the kids with glue ear would be better off learning to lip read, so that is bound to go. What else they decide to ditch is not entirely clear at this stage, but if they follow the Welsh lead you can add tonsillectomies, gallbladder removal, caesarean sections, D& C’s, hysterectomies, lower back procedures, haemorrhoid removal, circumcision, eye-lid surgery, surgery to correct protruding ears and varicose veins. Who the hell is able to get most of these now, anyway?

So it would seem that the bright new future for us does not involve a healthy nation. We must save money by cutting out early interventions and hope the conditions they are designed to correct either go away or the patients win Lotto and go private, or better still fall off the perch. Of course the fatal flaw in this cunning plan is that varicose veins, haemorrhoids, lower back injuries, infected tonsils and many of those other conditions actually worsen if not dealt with early on and thus the final bill can be triple or quadruple what it might have been with early treatment. But what the hell – it’s only the po’ folks; not anyone important.

The final hypocrisy is a deft trick played by Governments of both hues. It is the lies, or rather half-truths we were peddled following the waka jumping of Alamein Kopu. Following the fuss that erupted when it was discovered politicians had left the door open so that a list MP could fall out with their party but remain in Parliament the Clark Government brought in the ironically titled Electoral Integrity Act. However what they failed to give much exposure to, was the fact this Act was only a temporary measure until 2005, when presumably they all hoped we had forgotten. Sure enough by 2005 the NZ voters had either forgotten about the expiry of the Act or been blissfully unaware of its temporary nature and thus we now have a battle on our hands trying to evict Horon the Moron from our Parliament.

Don’t expect a quick fix anytime soon. No politician wants to kill his or her golden goose or handy escape route. These people look after their own – type that is; not constituents.

Comments

No comments yet.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working