Dr Norman is outraged that members of a Chinese delegation were able to push him, hit him with an umbrella and rip a Tibetan flag from his grasp.He was protesting as Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping arrived at Parliament greeted by a few dozen pro-China supporters.

Some of the group, believed to be Chinese security, took exception to Dr Norman waving a Tibetan flag and calling for democracy.The MP brushed away attempts to have an umbrella placed in front of him, then clashed with security guards as they pulled the flag from his grasp and threw it on the ground.

He yelled they could suppress freedom of speech in China, but not in New Zealand.

The treatment Russel Norman has received today on the parliament ground is absolutely appalling.  It is no more than a shameless attempt of silencing a dissentient on the land where it suppose to have a freedom of speech. I acknowledge that entourage members do have a duty of protecting VIPs, however, after seeing the unedited footage of the incident, it is clear that the response from Chinese entourage is disproportionate.  Norman had neither had any physical contact with anyone nor vocally provoked such response - well unless "free Tibet" counts as a provocation.

However, I'm not really surprised on how Chinese entourage responded.  The novel yet extremely childish way of using umbrella to cover things that Chinese officials do not want to see is not new.  The first time that such practice brought to the attention of international media is on the 20th anniversary of Tian'anmen Massacre, where plain cloth officers used umbrella to block foreign journalists from filming on Tian’anmen Square.  Since then plain cloth with umbrella has become somewhat a standard practice in any occasion where there is a potential of protests.

What shocked me is how Chinese government is exporting such censorship practice to a foreign country with little or no hesitation.  I’m not a fan of green party, but I applaud the fact  that they never abused their parliamentary privileges – they protested peacefully on every occasion where a Chinese official is visiting. I also have to say that a lone protestor, sometimes also need to confront with a large pro-Chinese crowd, is stirring but also looked a bit stupid.  But don’t get me wrong, they have the right to be stupid, New Zealand didn’t take their right to be stupid away from them, so why should Chinese have such right?

Seeing that Chinese entourage used same way of covering up people as they did back in their own country, is a solid reminder that we simply cannot ignore the pain of others in a country on another hemisphere, just like we cannot let a criminal run loose til the date that he is actually hurting YOU.

"How many times in my lifetime am I going to get to Europe? So I thought, 'F*** it, I'm off. I'm off to Paris"

There's a few issues that Harawira needs to know.

First, on his salary, I would imagine that he could afford a trip to European once a year ... or maybe every three years. Maximum. As long as he knows how to save money, he's pretty much fine.

Secondly, the trip was a taxpayer-funded travel for specific purposes ONLY. As a taxpayer, I asked him to go Brussles to represent the country, not to fund to his private travel. Although he paid for his own trip, however, it was at expense of not doing what he was suppose to do.

Thirdly, this MP really needs to learn how to express his feeling in a polite manner that represents the culture of this country.

You know,  I'm really shocked this time. Are those principles that hard to learn and grasp? I mean, even an elementary school student knows these:  don't steal parents' money, complete the school work before having candies, and don't swear.

What is even shocker, is that after reading the Herald's online forum, I realise there is no shortage of people who are actually arguing for these MPs' inappropriate actions.

This country got some serious thinking to do.

I have to say that Bradford has been a highly successful parliamentarian. During her service she has managed get three of her private member's bill passed, including raise youth minimum wage in line with adult wage and the highly controversial Anti-smacking bill.

She has been a champion of representing people who usually don't have their voice in the parliament - the young and the unemployed.

And no, I don't regard her as an "extremist" in anyway. She is just simply a woman who has the principle and the guts to stand firm of what she believes. However, her fate was sealed since the anti-smacking bill, only 7 MPs voted against the bill, however, when the tide is turned, it suddenly becomes "Sue's own idea".  In my opinion this is directly responsible for her failed bid of the party leadership - the society is turning right, and her very extreme left image would damage the Green Party.

In my opinion, although Cullen was not prefect, he did a fine job in the past 9 years. National was reluctant to admit that but they also know it for a fact.  He also did a fine job on his baby Cullen fund, I know it has a bit of trouble at the moment, but under the current economic circumstances, which fund is still free from trouble?

I haven't got time to check who is next on Labour's list but if my memory serves me right, the person should be Damien O'Connor. Not too bad, as long as we keep Judith Tizard, the minister responsible for holding PM's handbag out.

I'm living in The Chairman Mao Memorial Hall. Welcome!!!

We all know those twitterers are fake, because we know for a fact that Chairman Mao cannot tweet from the below (or above, as some may still prefer), and for those who are still breathing, they don't need a twitter account as they don't have to go through the general election process.

But in New Zealand and other countries like the States, politicians need get up to date with all the internet new techs although they are usually a bit behind. It is important nowadays for politicians to at least set up a facebook page (although the politician may never have visited "his/her page", as it was done by the employees).

Everyone wants to get their hands on youth votes, but does a facebook page really means those politicians "understand" WWW ? I always feel pity for anyone who thinks they do - the fact is that Section 92A  was passed by all major parties, except two that are, in my opinion,  sometimes genuinely connected with youth - Maori and Greens.

So no surprise on how John Key was tricked by a twitter impostor on  the April's Fool.

I don't have time to read it yet, I'll try to do that this weekend to see if there's anything interesting. So far it looks like they didn't change the definition of environment, that's a good sign.

The bill is currently before the Local Government and Environment select committee, and the submission is open until 3 April.

So I feel very unease to talk about a "balance" between combating climate change and accommodate economic growth.  Environment, the global weather system is still something that we don't fully understand how it works and when it will strike, yet it is so closely connected with  the future well beings of  mankind. Nature should be something that every one of us respect, not something that you can do "trade and exchange" or mess up with. Our survival solely depend on environment, not economic development.

For this review, any significant change that denies the existence of the climate change will send a wrong message to the world(yes, I'm talking about Rodney Hide). This looks unlikely for now, but there are still chances for surprises in the final select committee report, for example, extracted from the terms of references:

• identify the central/benchmark projections which are being used as the motivation for international agreements to combat climate change; and consider the uncertainties and risks surrounding these projections
• consider the timing of introduction of any New Zealand measures, with particular reference to the outcome of the December 2009 Copenhagen meeting, the position of the United States, and the timetable for decisions and their implementation of the Australian government

Well, what you say? The submissions close on February 13 - it's shorter than usual, but hey, at least they didn't sneak it through the system before the Christmas.

So the vital question for both major party is, can Winston hang on?

NZ First's poll usually moves between 1 - 3% in last month, which isn't enough to help it to gets back to the partliament.

The Tauranga Electorate looks bad for Winston as well. In Augest he was 20% behind the National rival. I haven't see a recent poll but I won't be surprised to see a wider gap between the two.

However, the new website, iPredict, has a different result. The majority of people think that NZ First will win at least 4%.

But in my opinion, this parliament is the last one that we'll see Peters in it. The poll in Tauranga not only shows that people there have moved on, it is also a nationwide trend.

John Key has made a smart move by distancing himself from Peters. I think Labour should consider to do the same now. Wonder if they ever played that game called "mafia", if your mafia buddy will be definitely vote dead by majority, it's actually better to vote FOR his death to disguise yourself. So instead of live in the fading hope believing that you'll get re-elected, Labour should do the right thing now by stop providing useless protection to Mr Peters.

So a smart move for Labour today would be, give at least half of its vote fore the censure or to let each MP vote for themselves. You need to at least show people that this case was not decided on a political ground.

Anyway there is a saying goes like "Mankind's greatest hope always lies in the future" - I've just learned that LHC's first high speed collision is not on until late next month ... Another window of opportunity - maybe I can escape the final exam, and auntie Clarkie can avoid the embarrassment after her defeat in the General Election.

However I guess it might be a bit too late for our Foreign Minister, Mr Winston Peters. He denied any wrong doings in last night's privilege committee meeting, gave evidence contradicting to what Mr Owen Glenn said.

But Mr Glenn got hard evidences: telephone records, several witnesses' accounts ... what Peters got? Nothing really, I haven't see anything. Although "billionaire" and "politician" both are the kind of job that is with my least respect, I think there's nothing for a billionaire to gain by lying to the public - so I trust this one, well, for this time.

By the way, my sincerest condolences to the family of the police officer who was died on duty this morning.

It would still be interesting to see who will be able to get his/her hands on the Howick seat.

It is also glad to see more ethnic minorities on the list.

Here's the whole list.

I actually like Winnie quite a bit. As a politician, he got skills and personalities that allowed New Zealand First to become one of the most successful minor parties since the MMP.

But on suspicion of lying to the House and New Zealand public is just too much for a politician, given that the general election is less than 3 month away.

I think it's a kind of retribution and he deserves it though.  This was the man who always like to shout in the Parliament, claiming that he got somebody's dirt and making all sorts of threats.  Now finally he's being hurt by his own dirts.

And no, I don't think Mr Peters will ever need the help of the unemployment benefit after the election.  bezdomny ex patria has kindly offered him a teaching job in Beijing; and if Mr Peters does not want a change in his career direction, I think every private security firm in New Zealand would be very pleased to have him on board as a private detective.

No, seriously, Peters' priority is to get rid of the SFO investigation as soon as possible. The election is coming and there's no way that he can win a place in the House with the charges pending.

Wonder how the other corrupted guy Mr Field is doing at the moment...

The new Botany Electorate seat, should be quite interesting to watch in next election.

National has confirmed that Pansy Wong will contest this seat. About labour ... it's not yet clear whether its Chinese candidate Raymond Huo will be there as well.

Plus Kenneth Wang from the ACT, this seat will almost definitely fall in the hands of a Chinese candidate.

I cannot find the detail on the demography of the electorate, but the new seat is very likely a National seat as the area was long dominated by Nats.

However, if Kenneth Wang do his job well, like how Rodney did in Epsom in 2005, I think he has a fair chance to capture the seat as well.

In fact this seat might be quite important to ACT. After living dangerously for things like Dancing with the Stars in the last three years, I won't be surprised if Mr Hide actually loses his Epsom seat in the coming up election.

Well, it's too early to tell.

But if this happens, subject to National and Labour's overall preformance, either Sir Doug or Kenneth may needs to win the seat to keep ACT in the Parliament. Sir Doug will attempt another new seat: Hunua (which is the area around the Hunua Ranges), which is also another National dominated area.

Kenneth Wang, although not very well-known, has possibly more popularity in Chinese community among the other two contestant.

I known all three fairly well. What I like about Kenneth is, he really believes in ideology of the Party he represents (although I'm bit leftie). The other two, they are just the "I don't care where, as long as I'm Mayor MP"  type of politician, especially for the "Raymondo" Huo, he just went for the party which gives him the highest party rank.

I personally do not trust those MPs, even if they are Chinese.

It will also maximise the number of Asian MPs in the Parliament as other two "I don't care where" will get in the Parliament through the party lists anyway.

So if you happens to be a Chinese live in the area, why not consider vote ACT in this election?