VIDEO: Japanese tribute to Helen Clark ( ゆっくり話してください)

どうぞ

It is hump day and we all need a good laugh on this often hard to get by day.

From the talented half of the former Mickey Havoc and Newsboy team comes Jeremy Wells with a Japanese ode to Helen Clark and her exploits around the globe.

Mr Havoc's funny bone seems to have disappeared since he disappeared so far up Helen's posterior he needs a proctologist to get him out.

Done in the typical "game show" style that the Japanese seem to love the 1 minute clip is very funny.

If the Japanese people in the audience knew and loved Helen like us in New Zealand do they may well not be laughing so hard though.

トイレ は どこ です か !!

c Political Animal 2008

Ruth Dyson triple whammy denied

Ruth Dyson had favoured a Threes Company approach to families of
the future but now denies giving support for such a menage a trois.





Fairfax has finally got hold of this story, a week later, but never mind.

It is the story of Ruthy Dyson and her penchant for supporting diversity, with taxpayer money, in the bedroom.

I got it wrong on Monday that Dyson gave a speech in Parliament in which she mentioned her now infamous "triples" remark. The speech was apparently delivered by Dyson at Victoria University on May 6 and Gerry Brownlee asked a question in Parliament about it.

She was referring to de factos, civil union couples and "triples", etc, etc and her governments future support for them.

Now she denies having said it or in fact that it was written for her:


"I get speeches a lot that I don't give. I don't want to be too critical of people who draft my speeches, but I get a lot of speeches, in draft, that I never use. They have no relationship with what I say."

She "didn't have a clue" what the speech notes meant nor what they were referring to.
"I haven't bothered asking because I'm not interested in it "


Below is the question(in full context) referring to a speech Dyson apparently made at Victoria University in May. Gerry Brownlee in Parliament from Hansard. It was moved from its original URL:


9. Social Trends—Recent Advice

[Advance Copy - Subject to minor change before inclusion in Bound Volume.]

9. RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Has she received any recent advice on New Zealand’s social trends?

Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) : Yes, I have. I have been advised that the gap between rich and poor households has closed for the first time in 20 years. The proportion of people with low incomes is also considerably lower. The earnings per person was higher in real terms in 2007 than it was in the mid-1990s, and overall poverty fell from 19 percent in 2001 to 13 percent in 2007, using the Social Report measure, representing a total of 190,000 fewer New Zealanders in poverty in the last year.

Russell Fairbrother: Has she has received any advice that explains why the gap between lower household incomes and higher household incomes has closed?

Hon RUTH DYSON: Yes, I have. The fact that incomes for lower and middle income households has grown more rapidly than others is attributed mainly to the Working for Families package. This is, of course, why National’s Bill English says their message to the public before the election is to keep Working for Families intact, because they do not want to be seen as taking money off people. However, after the election, if National is the Government, it will give it “a bit of a sort out”.

Gerry Brownlee: Does she recall giving a recent speech in which she said: “We must cater for the diversity we know exists. By this I mean the range of relationships, from single, couples, triples, blended de facto, and so on. That’s where we are going with social policy.”, and in the recent advice she received on social trends in New Zealand, was there a description of the relationship she describes as a triple; if so, what was that advice?

Hon RUTH DYSON: No.

The speech was clearly written for her because she doesn't deny a speech existed and she cant anyway because it was posted on the Parliament website, then removed.

It seems someone may have got to the Labour loving website scoop.co.nz as well. A Monday press release from the "Family Party" about this has been removed as well, from a Google search:


Scoop: Labour gearing for more social engineering
11 Aug 2008 ... In a May speech to Victoria University social policy students, Dyson ... Here Ruth Dyson signals Labour’s intention to broaden that scope ...www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0808/S00171.htm - 58k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this


Just click on "Cached" to get the story though.

Ruth Dyson's comments regarding her denial of having made her "triples" speech seems to fly in the face of evidence to the contrary. The speech was definitely written so why would Dyson deny it was hers?

Another secret labour agenda?

I say a resounding yes!

Related Political Animal reading

Bigamy on Labour's secret agenda?
Not that there is anything wrong with it

c Political Animal 2008

Know your market

Sorry to my regular readers, this topic is something of an obsession of mine.

The piece that I wrote last week about the failure of Starbucks in Australasia got me thinking about Burger Fuel Worldwide [BFW] again.

Starbucks [SBUX] failed in Australasia partly because the model that the coffee giant has used in the United States and other regions across the world doesn't fit local tastes.

The "coffee culture" in this part of the world, especially in Melbourne and parts of New Zealand, is much more sophisticated than in the United States and we already have our favourite cafe's here, owned mostly by smaller operators who know their market well. They know what to sell them, how to price the product and where to put their stores. Their customers therefore are loyal to their local cafe and wont go within a lattes' roar of a Starbucks.

Consequently Starbucks failed.

Ho does this relate to Burger Fuel?

Well, Burger Fuel has a very strong local New Zealand culture. It also knows its customers very well, they have a strong youth appeal, it is trendy, upper end and loved by those who frequent it on a regular basis.

Like Starbucks though, a question one has to ask if one were to invest money in Burger Fuel shares is, how will Burger Fuel management successfully transport the culture that they have fostered in New Zealand to new international markets that might not fit the culture that has made the company such a success locally?

I mean, that is where Starbucks went wrong. Many other fast food chains that have entered this country have entered thinking they could just import an idea from the USA, without changing it to fit the local market, then expect to see the money roll in.

El Pollo Loco, the US chicken chain, a couple of taco chains and even Wendy's Burgers, who are now doing well here, all entered New Zealand in the 1980s and 90s and failed quickly.

They failed to adapt their franchise model to fit the local tastes. Assuming you know your market is one of the biggies when it comes to starting a business, get that wrong and you might as well forget the rest.

In the case of Burger Fuel, they have a concept; trendy high quality, high priced burgers with an edge.

In their first international market in Sydney Australia though, this concept has been well established for years and those operators have lengthy local knowledge, which as I have said above is all important when transporting a foreign business and expecting it to fly.

What have BF management done to fit local Australian tastes and expectations and how will they change that model to fit in when they begin business in their newest territory, Dubai?

I have previously shown an interest in investing in this company, at a lower than current share price, but given the Starbucks example that I have pointed out above and some more thinking, I would have to now completely ditch any ideas that I had of buying a stake at any price.

What was I thinking?

Its too tough a burger to bite on.


Burger Fuel @ Share Investor

Discuss this company at the Share Investor Forum

Stocks Id buy: At a price
Burger Fuel leaves investors hungry
Burger Fuel management cagey over company progress
Burger Fuel cooks up Dubai deal
NZX share trades with strings attached
Don't buy Burger Fuel, yet
Burger Fuel: Inside info?
Burger Fool IPO: Burger Fool?
Exclusive Interview with Burger Fuel's Josef Roberts
Burger Fuel's Daytime drama
Burger Fuel share price out of gas
Beefing up store numbers
Director explains share price drop
Burger Fuel slims down in value
Burger Fuel and Coke
Marketing Burger Fuel's future
Pumpkin Patch VS Burger Fuel
Burger Fuel results and commentary

c Share Investor 2008

70 years of dependence and failure

Prime Minister Michael Joseph Savage helped introduce

the Welfare State to New Zealand in 1938. This move

led to thousands of New Zealanders becoming dependant

on taxpayers and the inevitable breakdown in families,

crime, abuse and recently the murder of countless young'

children and babies. Savage is held as a hero to the present

Labour Government but in reality his introduction of welfare

has led to 70 years of decline for our society and will get worse

unless something is changed. John Key yesterday telegraphed

a change.

In the wake of John Key's forward looking announcement of a "restructuring" of the welfare system yesterday, today Helen Clark celebrated 70 years of the welfare state by opening a "museum of social security".

I had to take a second look at the TV and open my ears as I couldn't believe the news report. Yes a museum of welfare!

Ms Clark and her party are stuck in the past and are continuing in action the phrase that the hapless Michael Joseph Savage coined in 1938 "from the cradle to the grave".

John Key's announcement yesterday could well be as momentous and pivotal for this country, in a positive way, as Savage's introduction of welfare was destructive.

Far from celebrating the socialist cotton wool wrapped welfare State that Labour and Sir Arnold Nordmeyer foisted upon the New Zealand population in 1938 and has largely destroyed thousands of kiwis lives since, we should be instead pinpointing that day 70 years ago as the start of the decline of the New Zealand way of life.

From that date we were no longer independent individuals. We became dependant slaves of the State machine.

Savage and Nordmeyer are collectives not to be looked up to, for their introduction of welfare and the dependence and grief it has subsequently caused is something shameful and must be critiqued at every opportunity.

Only the truly ignorant and those in the present Labour Party with their socialist agendas would celebrate such a failure as the welfare State.

Kiwis now clearly want a return to a fairer system of welfare, one used as a backstop, not a lifestyle and any celebration of the creation of the welfare state should be done so in dark rooms, with whispers, Labour Party disciples only and downward cast eyes.

So today should be a day of mourning for our welfare system, not celebration.

Simply because it doesn't work.

Related Political Animal reading

The Bludging must end

c Political Animal 2008