You'd stick to your guns and just continue to refuse fleshing out the conflict zone, talking instead of the similarities and concessions that are not blockers to either group.
As I see it, Labour should be automatically doing that with Greens and NZFirst. Point out what similarities exist, then how the differences are strengths if they join forces for the benefit of what the public want. Point out the happy middle ground is with working as one together.
Ok, done that but any tone you express is completely understandable and frustration is often the good cause for emails. Sacha ,on the other hand can appear to be reliving his punk days where head bangin' was the norm . Not sure that's pro active though. ;)
So, no, asking a question like that is not reasonable - it's a wasted opportunity and utterly stupid behaviour that Labour shows no sign of improving on
That particular question was put down and transferred with much ado about Key avoiding it, which left Andrew Little trying to get it in via a supplementary of NZ First, which was unfortunate. Yes, Key squirmed past it, and yes, double barrelled questions don't work however the Speaker allowed Key to not answer any of question 3 by allowing the transfer when Key is sitting right there. It was about a pledge Key made not the associate Minister of Finance. Why is that ? Key is the "go to guy" the media love to have an opinion from, of which the pledge had strength because it was Key. Little had no opportunity.
The one thing that question revealed yesterday was that it appeared that Key wouldn't defend his pledge in the House at question 3 or knew nothing about details reflecting his pledge to be a crock.Either way it said a bit shifty.
Why not simply stop asking Key, Joyce, English, Brownlee, Guy and McCully anything, they’re all economists of truth. Why not instead play The Weakest Link and attempt to isolate less mendacious members, members with some semblance of a moral compass, find issues (there are enough around) related to them and focus more energy directing questions at them?
Agreed ,good idea, shall I suggest it to them or do you want to?
I think this Government delays information in general. Requests take time and the delay involved makes the public forget. By the time something comes to light, the papers printing new information or TV interviewing Politicians who have already rubbished any inquiry, " nothing to see here," are left trying to remind the public of what it was. The Government effectively subdue and suppress by delay tactics.
Not sure if you are aware Katharine but below the response box is info how to link stuff. It has other ideas as well which can be really helpful. Your post above for example could look like
We could always go back to the originally initiated P3 / 4 trade deal.
Before the US et al shoehorned their way in.
Not sure how Draconian that was, though?
A deal which no other Country involved had a problem with signing. All Parties involved appeared to have equal standing
NZ walking away would have a chilling effect on the negotiations.
Who says ?I don't understand this comment. Our Country by virtue of size isn't chilling and any other Country in the Pacific region can negotiate without us if they are so interested in this agreement.
Absolutely! Although the problem with that is (as I always see with this lot) Groser, and by default National, see a deal as "winning " and as the dealer, "winner". Groser wont be a "Loser" so will do whatever it takes to stroke his ego. It becomes that shallow.
It's a pretty weak call she's making. It amounts to "he shouldn't stand down...yet"
And that's the entire article. Almost a radio soundbite. Blah blah blah blah Murray McCully ok blah blah blah, I cant read documents blah blah Auditor General can blah.Nothing to see here, have I written 100 words yet? What a piece of shit journalism.Quite surprised she didn't blame Labour. She's getting way up there with Hoskings and to be worried about our reputation in the World? Well, I think our largest Newspaper is evidence of reputation out the window way back.
However I’m not convinced that working so diligently within the parameters (the box) provided – as Labour have been doing – is reaping much of a harvest
And there is the nub of it. If they try to compete on National's level, it is dirty dishonest politics. I frankly find that deplorable. The Greens hold their composure (oh how they do ) the only Greens that get up in anyones face seem to have disappeared. Winston is classed as the evil incarnate by many but yes is a good shitstirrer because let's face it, we are in a pile of shit.Remember also the man's skills come with time in the job, a lot of time. Labour, well now it just seems everything is Labour's fault, even Audrey Young thinks so because john Key said . The "gotcha" quality of what is being accepted for news in this country is appalling and I'm really disappointed that any new student will be taught this. I do like a suggestion up some thread earlier that simple words like "Is that the truth John? when he obfuscates and downright lies may just be quite powerful because he can always be called on his bullshit in the future from anyone. Trouble is, we need the media doing it. I also think the power of people and their keyboards gives joe public the ear of any mp. One may not get a response always although one should, but the message gets sent. Don't expect them all to read Public Address,just expect them to read your email if you write one. It is their duty. I also think it's our duty to be involved and really, interactive emails with an mp can be quite encouraging. email is our friend :)