- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

John Key slips up on Breakfast


John Key slips up on Breakfast

National have announced that they are going to be so hard on crime they are going to need to build ANOTHER prison, my god as of our imprisonment rate isn’t bad enough National wants to put MORE people into prisons! Oh and I think we can safely assume that National will get the Private Prison Industrial Complex into build and run this prison, allowing the American example of Privatised Corrections to rear it’s ugly malformed head in our country.

Interestingly on Breakfast this morning, where Simon Dallow actually forced a really good interview out of John Key, after accusing National of being the political arm of the sensible sentencing trust, Dallow asked Key if he thought the mix between punishment and rehabilitation had gotten out of hand, Dallow was expecting Key to say that it had and we needed to do more about rehabilitation, but unprovoked John Key said that Prison had become too soft, he started to spout the same bullshit Simon Powers always serves up and John says, “Do you know some Prisoners choose not to work in Prison”, a surprised Dallow asks doesn’t Key think losing your liberty is punishment enough, in his zeal Key realizes that he may have overstepped the mark based on Dallows’ surprised look and quickly starts talking about how Prisoners need to be sent a message, creepy, very, very creepy. As John starts getting pressed on questions and with his Poll lead looking so strong the mask seems to slip now and again and we start seeing glimpses of what he is really about, and the glimpse is turning a little ugly.

20 Comments:

At 25/6/08 8:11 am, Anonymous SIck of the breakdown in society said...

I think the OMG belongs here!

The reality that prisons, in their current form, are not working as a deterent to crime is clear from the amount of recidivism in the system. If prison is to be a deterrent it needs to be a something to be avoided at all costs, not just an inconvenient home from home.
Only when the law is the law, and the police apply zero tolerance to breeches, and prison is Gaol and not a place to pass the time away, will the disaterous failure of societal law and order that we currently experience start to revert to a society of people with mutual trust, regard and respect.

 
At 25/6/08 8:51 am, Blogger Barnsley Bill said...

Yeah, too true Bomber. And if you look really closely you can see the seam on his human costume. Just you wait if they win he will rip it off and reveal himself as a Lizard person. And then where will we be. Michael Ironside is dead you know.

 
At 25/6/08 9:08 am, Blogger Truth Seeker said...

The people demanding tougher prisons should be volunteering to go work in them for the wages on offer today.

Let them tell the patched gang members to pick up their picks and start breaking those rocks. Let them to be told to go f*** themselves...and then they prove what tough hard men they really are. They can SHOW these crims that MORE and MORE violence really DOES get you what you want.

Just watch your back. Put walls around your home. Get some attack dogs. Keep a loaded shotgun in every room and make sure your concrete "panic room" is well stocked. If you're a real, hard man, you're making yourself a lovely target for young thugs looking to prove themselves against The Man.

For every action there is a reaction. If you want war, there are those who will give it you.

Careful what you ask for, though idiots very rarely show any care or caution with OTHER people's lives.

In this case, those of the people who already work in prisons.

National would come in, privatise prisons, pay peanuts / hour and then want to import cheap staff from overseas. More on-shore outsourcing.

 
At 25/6/08 9:57 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

John Key is downright creepy. So is Nick Smith, in fact most of the male National MPs are. They look like the kind of fellows with a fondness for being 'punished' in S&M dungeons, especially with all this talk of prison, incarceration and being 'tough' on criminals. It's a psycho-sexual fantasy for these blokes isn't it?

Argox

 
At 25/6/08 10:44 am, Blogger Lyndon said...

More or less the policy they had in 2005. Yet their shadow budget, from memory, had only $8 million p/a extra for corrections by the third year.

 
At 25/6/08 10:57 am, Anonymous Avenger said...

I've had enough of do-gooders like truth seeker and his/her ilk.

People like him/her are the reason why NZ is becoming a joke amongst developed countries.

 
At 25/6/08 12:38 pm, Blogger Tim Selwyn said...

People like him worked in the prison system and is in the best position to critique Key's ideas on how prisons should work. Coming at it from the prisoner side I would say that every medium and low-medium security prisoner will be forced into work one way or the other. The majority of the prison muster is in that category.

There are not enough jobs at present to keep everyone occupied, but some units are near 100% employment for the long-term muster. There will always be short-term inmates going in and out of units in stints that don't warrant them being given a job.

There's reasons why some inmates don't have jobs, but the idea that there are prisoners who want to do nothing and have no job is stupid. Those numbers would be very small, and they will find themselves moved into a shitty unit designed to be unpleasant if they keep rejecting job offers.

I don't think people realise that each prisoner has a management plan and is allocated a case officer when they enter a new unit. They monitor them, report on behaviour, attitude etc. - all noted. If they don't want a job it is not going to look good for the parole board. Placement in work through unit jobs or through the employment scheme interacting with the outside, or even taking prisoners out to work in the field, are already commonplace.

 
At 25/6/08 1:26 pm, Anonymous Blood of Kaylis said...

what do you think they are supposed to be all beer and skittles?
another reason I am going to vote national
two ticks

 
At 25/6/08 3:54 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tim, you haven't re-offended since going to prison. Do you think you think there would have been of a probablity of you doing so say if the Judge had convicted and discharged you? Or has being shown that there is a consequence and punishment for your actions had some sway in you keeping clean?

 
At 25/6/08 4:17 pm, Blogger Barnsley Bill said...

How do you know Tim hasn't reoffended?
I don't think using Tim's brief sojourn with Club Med Corrections is relevant. I don't consider him a "proper crim" and he probably doesn't either.
At one end we have bomber advocating anarchy and scrapping the last semblance of personal responsibility from the national zeitgeist at the other we have the senseible execution trust advocating death. Some where in the middle we will find a soltion. For me that starts with stopping labour eroding our freedoms anymore and firming up the rights of the accused. In return we must attack the lawlessness problems where they start which is before most of these crims are 10 years old.
Most people do not commit crimes, why is that? is it because they have a moral compass or because the consequences are not worth the risk? personally I feel it is the latter. The risk reward pendulum has swung too far towards reward. make it hard to lock people up but when we do it needs to be an experience that is so horrendous they will never take the risk of ending up in there again.
And before Bomber starts banging on about half our cons are mental and shouldn't be there... I AGREE, BUT THAT IS A DIFFERENT ARGUMENT.
However, unlike me he probably wouldn't want the big Victorian loony bins reopened to house these people.

 
At 25/6/08 4:57 pm, Blogger Tim Selwyn said...

Yes, how do you know I haven't re-offended? Are you following me? Have you breached my privacy? Have you got a copy of that dossier?

As for my case - and it probably applies to many people - is what you thought and did in the past, and I mean several years ago, ten, fifteen years ago, is different from what you think and do now. That transition only makes sense when you look back on it and see it for what it was. I simply couldn't even imagine doing the sort of things I did then, now. I had a reckless disregard for my own future back then. My rampage was relatively brief, directed at, or at the expense of the government, and came to a halt because I chose to - not because I was subsequently investigated. I had already made the decision not to try to screw them in that way years before being prosecuted.

It didn't matter whether the judge sentenced me to one day or ten years, the fact is the crimes were an historic case and it hasn't affected at all how I behave. Being in prison and coming out had no rehabilitative use in my circumstances (beyond the general reflections of resolving not to waste one's life on foolish enterprises), but I have spoken to people that I believe will not reoffend and will address their issues because of the prison sentence. Fathers being away from their families can have a heavy impact on both - and some don't ever want to let them down again. But they are in a very small minority.

A prison shock does work for some - not for others.

 
At 25/6/08 4:57 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I don't consider him a "proper crim" and he probably doesn't either"

He stole the identity of dead babies out of nothing more than absolute greed and selfishness. He traumatized the families all over again, and all for what, so he could defraud the government of even more money to finance his greed?

I think he does meet the criteria of being a proper crim, hopefully he realises his debt to society and spends the rest of his life repaying it.

 
At 26/6/08 3:52 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Prison is way to soft they get way too much in there I reckon crack down on them hard they do the crime let the bastards pay the time

 
At 26/6/08 8:13 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My rampage was relatively brief, directed at, or at the expense of the government..."

As anon said above, Tim is forgetting, once again, about his VICTIMS.

I have had this conversation with Tim before, and his, excuse, was ideological. Tax is theft, so he was taking it back (not his tax please note).
His viewpoint hasn't changed.
That, Barnsely Bill, not only makes Tim a criminal, but one with No Remorse.

 
At 26/6/08 9:04 am, Blogger Tim Selwyn said...

The police didn't contact the "victims" because that would have created "victims". They did not need to be "traumatised" and they were not - the judge ruled there were no victims beyond the government in my case. The police never made contact with them - it wasn't necessary to proceed with the case. I hope this clears things up.

As for the tax: it works out at about 5c per taxpayer - the IRD never forgets these things. They'll work tirelessly on your (victim's) behalf to get it all back.

 
At 26/6/08 10:34 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

While Tim probably still probably views his crimes as some sort of Robin Hood like escapade he still essentially took money that should have been directed to the truly needy, schools, hospitals or such like. Money that law abiding taxpayers paid over to the government to hold in trust and use for the betterment of society.

Still he did crime, he did the time, all is forgiven.

Argox

 
At 26/6/08 3:22 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The police didn't contact the "victims" because that would have created "victims". They did not need to be "traumatised" and they were not"

Really?
So the parents weren"t traumatised when they found out that their dead childrens identities were stolen so someone could make a quick buck?
Identity theft is hardly victimless.

"the judge ruled there were no victims beyond the government in my case."

So the judge was right and quotable when he upholds your version of morality huh?
Just because you say there was no victims doesn't make it so.

"As for the tax: it works out at about 5c per taxpayer - the IRD never forgets these things. They'll work tirelessly on your (victim's) behalf to get it all back."

Well Tim it's the principle isn't it.
You steal, you repay, no matter how piffling you think the amount is.

"While Tim probably still probably views his crimes as some sort of Robin Hood like escapade"

No. Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor.
Tim stole from the taxpayer, (not the Government Tim, the taxpayer) money he was never entitled to, and kept it for himself.
Hardly altruistic.

You note Tim's justification for the crime, his smug dismissal of what he owed IRD, along with the use of quotations when using the word victim, demonstrates his contempt of the charges, and his absolute lack of remorse.

 
At 26/6/08 5:59 pm, Blogger Tim Selwyn said...

I'm indulging this discussion because it is not off-topic. I have previously deleted the personalised and off-topic comments on this issue before - and will do so again if necessary - but here and now is the right time to clear this up...

I've never claimed to be Robin bloody Hood. Never.

To the anon. who keeps going on and on about "victims" without reading or comprehending what I'm saying, ie.
So the parents weren"t traumatised when they found out that their dead childrens identities were stolen so someone could make a quick buck?
Identity theft is hardly victimless.

- How many times and in how many ways can I say it so you will understand?

The parents were not told. OK. They don't know anything about it - and the details are suppressed. Why? So as to avoid the possibility of creating victims. I know you seem to want there to be victims, but the police and the prosecution and me and the judge all disagree with you.

You and every other taxpayer are my victims to the tune of about 5c each and that will be collected by the IRD - plus the penalties and interest - and then the position will be neutral again.

Just because you say there was no victims doesn't make it so.
- And just because you say there are victims doesn't make it so either. OK. The judge ruled that they weren't victims. My actions have not affected them in any way. OK. They live there lives having never been affected by me.

As for remorse, I made my position quite clear to the judge in quite a bit of detail. But seeing as how you want a personal one, from me to you. I'm sorry. I'm remorseful. I'm just trying to get on with my life. I hope you accept this, anon, because you've wasted a lot of time on this point, and now so have I.

 
At 27/6/08 11:58 am, Anonymous deano said...

Prison is not for rehabilitation.

Prison is for punishment and to keep us safe from scum.

While they are in prison they cannot rape, kill and steal from innocent people.

Make them break rocks. Build another prison. It is all good if you ask me. I will give up a few tax dollars to feel safer.

We need tougher sentencing for violent crimes also.

 
At 27/6/08 8:09 pm, Anonymous clonegunman said...

Re: Oh and I think we can safely assume that National will get the Private Prison Industrial Complex into build and run this prison

Yeah Key has probably already promised the contract to Halliburtons to build the thing, and Key is somwhat irate that the Electoral Finance Act will show Halliburton's "donations" to the National Party.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home