I did look for the footage the other day, and found it excerpted here:
the video has been set to private, presumably because they called NZ a 'Tax Haven', as referenced in the response here
Is it possible that after TV3 lost the rights to the 60 Minutes name to Sky/Prime, they can no longer host footage bearing the 60 Minutes Trademark?
By the way do was their any significant interest from this committee for lowering the voting age?
The majority was against further consideration, but there was some interest in considering the issue by both the Electoral Commission and opposition members.
Lowering the voting age
Many submitters support lowering the voting age to 16. They argue that 16 and 17 year olds would have a better understanding of their rights and responsibilities as citizens through civics education at school, from which political engagement and voting habits could be developed and sustained.
Submitters who oppose lowering the voting age believe that 16 and 17 year olds could be too easily influenced by their parents or mainstream media. The commission said that it would support consideration and public consultation on lowering the voting age to 16, noting that overseas evidence indicates that it may be easier to engage 16 year olds in the democratic process than 18 year olds.
In 2007, Austria became the first member of the European Union to adopt a voting age of 16 (except at European Parliament elections, for which the voting age is 18). Electoral data shows that the turnout rates of 16 and 17 year olds were comparable to those of the wider electorate.
In September 2014, Scotland allowed 16 and 17 year olds to vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum. About 75 percent of 16 and 17 year olds are reported to have voted, higher than 18–24 year olds (54 percent) and 25–34 year olds (72 percent). After the referendum, the British and Scottish parliaments agreed to reduce the voting age to 16 for parliamentary elections and local government elections in Scotland.
We recognise that lowering the voting age would be a major change to the electoral system, requiring broad public consultation and a high level of political consensus. Provisions about the voting age in the Act are entrenched, and amending these would require a majority in a referendum or a 75 percent majority in Parliament. While the majority of the committee does not support lowering the voting age, some of the committee feel that this should be debated and considered further.
Not to threadjack, but I think everyone in a school's catchment should be able to vote for school boards. Education isn't just a service to the children currently at school, it's a service for the whole community.
And if someone is in more than one catchment, because the zones overlap?
I got a flyer saying if I’m enrolled and paying rates in one district and have a property in another I can be eligible to enrol as a ratepayer elector in the other community or local board area. This is for the local authority Elections on October 8 2016. So I can now vote twice. I find that rather unfair.
The usual argument is that if you are paying rates to a council you should have a say in how those rates are set and how the money is spent. It certainly doesn't apply to everything, however. You don't get to vote in multiple wards/boards within a single district however.
Do you also find it unfair that a parent with a child in a primary school and another at high school gets to vote on the School Boards of both schools, while a parent with kids in only one school only gets to vote on that school's board?
Does one get automatically removed from the rolls when you are imprisoned? (and automatically reenrolled when released?)
One does get automatically removed when imprisoned. I understand an enrolment form is provided to prisoners as part of the stuff they're given on their release. That isn't automatic.
My son is on bail with a special condition that he remains at his place of residence between the hours of 8pm to 7am. Because he has not been sentenced as yet he does not have an electronic monitoring device fitted so the police have to visit his residence to check he is complying.
This is all too common. They certainly don't have check every few hours, but they can and do often do this. They'll usually slow down a little as time goes on, but not always. I will note that you can be electronically monitored before being sentenced (this is called e-bail), so that can be worth looking into, although it would be odd to ask. Depending on the nature of the charge(s) your son is facing, it may be possible to ask to have the curfew condition cancelled or modified after a few weeks of complying with it.
I guess at nine one wouldn’t be too fussed about one consequence of that, which would be that NZers would no longer be able to drive overseas.
A lot of adults aren't too fussed either.
If it’s the younger people who are less likely to vote, won’t lowering the voting age just decrease voter turnout (overall) anyway?
It will decrease turnout as a percentage of enrolled voters, and will decrease turnout as a percentage of people of voting age. It will however increase turnout, and increase turnout as a percentage of New Zealand residents.
Where is our life-long investment in civic understanding?
I'm not saying we shouldn't have this. In fact we should have this. But the lack of this should not be used to deny a class of people the vote.