I’m not sure what they’re putting in the slightly sparkling mineral water at Bellamy’s these days, but I’m guessing 'reality check juice' isn’t one of the ingredients. These past couple of weeks we have seen the emergence of Dr. Jackie Blues’ Consumer Guarantees Act and the requisite hand-wringing, passionate sound bites from Ministers upon a voyage of discovery into the murky waters of  Trade Me and the Shock! Horror! of the REAL marketplace in New Zealand.

Kiwis going about business unfettered by consumer law, comebacks, taxation, legal beagles and red tape. In other words, pretty typical commerce for the average Kiwi punter, whether in household junk, TV sets or cars.

You could almost sense the injustice of it all in Dr. Blues’ press release: “There are people out there getting ripped off. It’s really quite urgent.” Well, duh. Welcome to Trade Me - the perfect unofficial trade mechanism for a society that prides itself on fleecing one another, so much so it’s almost a sport.

As I said in my first column, it’s better to have an opinion, even if it’s not right, than none at all. The most interesting part of this lightning debate is that for the first time that I can recall, there has been such a quick reaction from TVNZ to defend their position.

Before I go further, let me remind everyone concerned- (and using Gordon’s technique) This. Is. A. Trade. Publication. Not. Intended. For. Public. There are plenty of public forums to discuss consumer rights, complaints and issues- yet few, if any, like this one, where the trade can discuss issues about the trade, by the trade, for the trade. Relax, Gordon, your target market isn’t reading this.

The problem the trade faces time and time again is that there is rarely, if ever, a proper chance for rebuttal and debate, minus any hysteria, accusations or time constraints. Yes, a story has to be told, even on Fair Go, but in the case of the automotive industry, this is rarely favourable towards the dealer if the item makes it to broadcast. Bad news sells.

Last week saw that doyen of hard-hitting investigative TV journalism, “Fair Go”, exposing the Shock! Horror! of a couple of vehicles with less-than squeaky-clean past history being sold off to unsuspecting new owners.

Not that this issue should be swept under the carpet - after all, most of our fleet whether new here or ex-Japan has, or will, at some time during the life-span, suffered accident damage to varying degrees and been repaired - with widely variable results and repercussions.

Money for old rope for the Fair Go team, who either were inflicted with poor mid-term memory loss or figured we’d forgotten and could therefore rustle up a previously-covered story under the guise of a new lead item.

And so the debate begins over the next implementation stage of the controversial Exhaust Emission Rule - former Labour comrade David Parker’s last serve to the Japanese import market before being booted unceremoniously to the Opposition wilderness in 2008. So much for a legacy.

Not since the foisted-upon Frontal Impact Rule of the Nineties has there been so much divisive argument, name-calling and hand-wringing within the motor industry- and we’re still 17 months out from D-Day!

If the MIA were selling snake oil, they’d need a whole reptile farm on this one. The outburst from Perry Kerr, MIA chief executive, is seething with self-righteous vitriol as he and his merry band of men set about attempting to derail any constructive case the IMVIA and Japanese used import industry would put forward for considering a delay to the so-called Japan 2005 standard as a minimum.