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

Sunday, August 05, 2012

Q+A and The Nation review


The Nation

It's Colin Craig vs Louisa Wall - LET'S GET IT ON! I like me political interviews like I like me Gladiator sports - bloodied.

Vaguely interesting thing about the death of Rugby.

Shrill screams that there should be no media regulations and delicious speculation that Mark Sainsbury is about to be dumped from Close Up.

It's the rugby thing on first. I don't care about rugby, this is a politics show, I watch it for politics. Why is there a sports story on? I hate how the 'news hour' at 6pm is taken up by so much bloody sport, that's why I'm forced to flee to the waste land of Sunday morning TV, yet here it is, Sport stories masquerading as news.

If you want sports go watch 'The Crowd goes wild' and get out of my news.

I've flicked over to Comedy Central during all of this, Family Guy is on. I'm flicking backwards and forwards as I don't want to miss Colin and Louisa.

While flicking backwards have just been struck by the dress Rachel Smalley is wearing. What on earth is with the large green shoulder frills? She looks like a giant techno Preying Mantas.

Colin James is on, always one of the best features of The Nation. Colin points out why can't the state do Charter schools and do we really want the faith based element coming in. Colin gives flexibility a lot of positives.

They argue about Labour's role at the margins and Colin repeats the mantra that Labour hasn't recognized the 'realities' of the recession. Ominously notes that Jacinda Ardern is moving away from social 'welfare' to social 'security'.

Colin missed that the threshold is likely to be 4% giving Conservatives a better shot than he is giving them.

Louisa Wall vs Colin Craig. Louisa is well spoken and articulate, Colin claims marriage has a unique relationship with NZers and has to be a referendum. He has a big problem with gay parents adopting kids.

Colin try's to argue that there have already been changes that makes marriage relationships equal and claims that the definition is still via the church. He is sounding good right up until he staggeringly claims that homosexuality is a choice and that child abuse creates homosexuals.

It's such an ignorant and bigoted view, all that moderate casual conservatism facade collapses once he starts down that road. All that careful work to create a moderate pretense is ruined in one interview. Watching him take the rope, put it around his neck and throw himself off the edge of the interview is a must see.

The sanctimonious clown then has the audacity to claim that countering his bigotry is an infringement on his rights.

Tumeke!

Discussion that the media industry in Britain had an arrogance that must now be punished between Rachel and visiting British law expert. Not a clear enough separation of power between media players and politicians seems to be the root cause of the hubris. Can't wait to hear Bill Ralston demand less regulation when he's on.

The powers Journalists use for investigative journalism are something we probably don't want to blunt, but the media abuse examples in Britain that have generated the most amount of anger weren't great examples of investigative journalism, they were examples of gutter trash journalism.

Brian and Bill maul Close Up. Bill is good mates with Mark Sainsbury so he defends him and says its outrageous that TVNZ haven't supported him. Brian points out that Close Up is suffering and changes are necessary because Campbell Live is a far better show. Notes Campbell has become a trusted personality and is championing the small guy. Bill claims TVNZ have dumped caring about serious current affairs and they will put together a lite news format.

The ghost of Paul Henry returning was mentioned. A chill ran through me.

Gossip about the Scott Guy murder case. Yawn.

Discussion turns to Olympics porn. Interest fading...


q+a

Corin Dann is hosting. Thank god. He is not annoying and he asks hard questions, it's about bloody time they just announce him as the new host, give the Gen Xer a go!

Sigh. And we cross to Paul Holmes. I've never felt such an anti-climax. Sigh.

He's doing the monologue. Sigh. It's going on for ages.

Cringe. Sigh. Cringe. Sigh. Cringe. I hope he wasn't the special guest.

It's Catherine Isaac vs Ian Leckie from the NZEI. Catherine's ghoulish tone doesn't help sell her right wing utopia. Ian goes straight to the throat of the issue and says unqualified teachers are unacceptable. He is pressed by Corin on whether NZEI will blacklist Charter Schools. It's an excellent question line. Ian says it will have to be considered but children's needs have to be paramount.

The assurances by Catherine that the standards will be high when the charter schools don't need to have qualified teachers is such a ridiculous statement it shouldn't be allowed to go unchallenged. The point should be made that this is an ideological crack at the Unions to create cheaper unregistered teachers for corporate education profits using taxpayer money.

That point is not made.

The religious nutter fringe education movement is touched upon and ignored. They are a convenient side show to

Catherine was tripped up at the end and became frosty Catherine as Corin pushed her on why Banks couldn't front and whether that made him a liability. Her eyes narrowed as Corin pushed and pushed and pushed, 'was he not showing because he can't answer questions about the Kim Dotcom scandal', 'is that disappointing', 'when will he front'.

Right at the end as Catherine was giving withering glares at Corin, Ian jumps back in and points out that this is education policy from the fringe far right 1%.

Ian Leckie by a knock out.

The panel is Tamihere, McCarten and Dr Raymond Miller is the panel. Matt points out that our public education system is actually very good but fails some and the right have co-opted that space by suggesting right wing solutions would help them.

Excellent interview on the influence of China.

FACEBOOK TWITTER

1 Comments:

At 5/8/12 10:09 am, Blogger bsprout said...

I was disappointed that the following panel still discussed school failure, rather than the huge issue of poverty, as a contributor to underachievement. No matter how good schools and teachers are they must still manage the huge deficits that children can bring through their school gates. Surely the fact that many schools are having to spend community funds on food and shoes for their children rather than educational resources speaks volumes.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home