bless his lycra leggings.
that's what our parliament needs more of.
Your party vote supports that party's list, minus electorate MPs. It's not a novel observation that Labour's list in 2008 was skewed and when their overall vote collapsed, MPs with low list rankings were excluded.
To me those houses say “I don’t care whether people with mobility challenges can visit me in my home”
.. and no future owners of this home will need good physical access for them, their family and friends, or workers. So stupid.
It makes me cross when people building new houses don’t just automatically make at least the main "public" spaces (i.e. entry, access to living space) wheelchair accessible
And you have to wonder why that isn't a basic requirement of building regulations like it is in the UK, despite decades of lobbying. Not that expensive either, so it has to be something else.
there is only about 9 list MPs. The rest were put there by the voting public
All MPs are put in place by the voting public. If voters do not like a party's list, they do not vote for them.
Firstly, great to see you here. Hope all is going well.
Most people don't know that the separate Act of parliament governing the Foundation of the Blind means its members are allowed to keep receiving income support payments even if they work - unlike all other disabled people.
When the last Labour government was designing the 'single core benefiit' system that they dropped as too hard, one stream of work was about income support for disabled people. It would actually have extended that same approach to all disabled people, recognising that we face some extra costs whether or not we are working.
There didn't seem to be any appetite for going the other way and taking benefits from blind people just to level up the playing field. However, it's certainly an historic accident that has no rational basis.
For me, an interesting broader issue is how much more prominent blind people are, given their low proportion of disabled New Zealanders.
I am actually impressed with the calibre of the people handling the media strategy.
Unimpressed with that statement myself.
Troublingly, even though the institutional model is gone, I’m not sure if the mindset is.
It affects the expectations of some senior disabled leaders as well.
Jones’ mode of speech is “no frills’? In what parallel reality?
Even Braunias got that one right.
Oh man, Guyon's just about eaten me out of house and home! It's got so bad that here I am sneaking out to the nearest KFC for a feed. But that's alright. It means I can spend time with the people.
I wind down the window, and say, "Hail to thee, blithe spirit! Greeting O surly bro, whose interests I wish to represent!"
He says, "What?"
I say, "I'll have a 12-pack of Fiery Wings and a Deluxe Quarter Pack."
He says, "Anything else?"
"Yes, there is something else, now you mention it," I tell him. "Something on my mind. Listen. It's like this. When I go round the regions of New Zealand, I struggle to find people at marae, workplaces, hotels, and RSAs, who say, 'Jonesy, the first vote of choice for us is Labour'. Yet their economic circumstances mean they should be Labour. Their dreams for their kids mean they should be Labour. So I ask, why are those people not naturally choosing the red waka?"
The youth says, "What?"
I say, "A BBQ Bacon Zinger, please."