Posts by izogi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Fran O'Sullivan,
but not for Key to declassify New Zealand’s own files to prove he isn’t a liar
If he’d actually declassified files which had any relevance to the allegations then it might be worth at least arguing about that point in hindsight. He didn't. Now all he’s done is to bring into question why they were classified to begin with if he can so casually declassify secrets of the state for no other reason than to apparently obfuscate and distract from allegations against him personally and his government.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to tussock,
Parliament holds the PM to account, see. We basically told them not to worry.
I don't know what we told them and neither does the government, because the election doesn't ask people why they're voting for who they vote for. For all we know, people might have just been saying they think the opposition's worse or that they want a bunch of Ministers who can win an Olympic rowing medal. I don't see why this should make it okay for the government to ignore the rules.
But the law and the cabinet manual both state how Ministers and their staff are meant to be doing their jobs, either according to accepted precedent or according to the law. Enforcing that detailed type of stuff with a popularity contest where 2 million people also have to consider a million other things which also affect them is a dangerous system to rely on. We might as well just do away with all the other laws and processes which protect the rights of everyone, even when they voted for someone else.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Chris Waugh,
I do agree that the Police should be reluctant to get involved in politics.
I see where you’re coming from and the Police were just a hand-wavey idea. I don’t know the perfect solution.
It just seems strange to me that there’s apparently no effective type of authority holding the PM and Cabinet to account when it comes to actually following the law and the documented rules, except themselves. Having the PM determine the power and extent of an investigation of his own political colleagues for a range of allegations in which he allegedly has his own hands dirty just seems insane.
Sure, he’s popular, but all these laws and rules and process are also there to protect the people with whom politicians aren’t popular. Following them shouldn’t be optional, or subject to a popularity contest. If it is revealed by members of the media or someone else, then consequences shouldn’t be restricted to the possibility of resigning or being voted out during years when there’s a competent opposition.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Keith Ng,
The idea that a mob of journos chasing politicians around sticking a mic in their face could hold them accountable needs to be reexamined. But of course, that’s tantamount to a radical reinvention of political journalism
Is there a reason why it needs to be journalism that’s responsible for this? Why not (I don’t know), the Police, who always seem so reluctant to get involved in anything that involves politics? Or some constitutionally-designed non-partisan overlord of Cabinet which is there to make sure the laws and rules are followed and that Cabinet members and their staff are held accountable, instead of those laws and rules simply being ignored on the grounds that it’s easy enough to eclipse any bad publicity with a popularity contest?
As you say, there’s possibly only so much that journalists can do. Ministers stonewall or completely avoid them, while at the same time obfuscating the issues through outlets more favourable to them, and it ends up being stuff that much of the public doesn’t want to hear about anyway. People get sick and tired of watching when nothing’s happening. Even a crusader like John Campbell has to give up and find other stories, or his ratings would plummet.
CE’s of companies are bound by the law, enforced on behalf of stakeholders by any number of government entities. Even government dept chief executives are accountable to the SSC. But Cabinet’s apparently responsible to the Prime Minister? IMHO that’s something that needs an impartial review longer term of how it works. We shouldn’t have to simply trust Cabinet members and their staff to be doing the right thing, especially with all the political conflicts of interest, no matter who’s in power.
Maybe the PM and his colleagues and staff are all completely innocent of all of these recent allegations, but when it’s Key himself who kicks things off and controls its terms of reference for an inquiry, don’t mind me if I’m sceptical of how complete and meaningful its conclusions will be.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Andrew Geddis,
Albeit that you’re being a bit unfair to Wallace!
I agree. Also, is there a reason why such an awesome show like Back Benches, which lets people see their representatives in a less-negative and more fun environment, has to screen so late at night? Is there some thought that it wouldn’t rate if it were screened earlier?
It’s one of the best developments to have come out of TVNZ7, where its audience must also have been throttled, before that channel was canned. Good on Prime for picking it up, but the potential audience must be quite dumbed down by that timing.
-
OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
it’s available on kindle/ebook thru Amazon
Hmm, your link’s also rewarding that particular Amazon affiliate. If you lot intend to be doing this then please forgive and ignore me. :P
-
Great collation and insight, Keith.
As a meta-comment, I don’t understand Amazon’s affiliation programme too well, but I wonder if you intentionally left that ‘tag’ parameter in the URL you supplied for Simon Lusk’s book. Possibly some of the other ones, too, but I’m not sure what they’re for. Or maybe just go to Amazon’s front page, locate the book, and take the URL from there. :)
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Alfie,
Technical insolvency? So that’s not like real insolvency then?
Probably more a question for an accountant, but my speedy googling suggests this is a well defined term. Technical Insolvency basically means you can't pay your bills, even if your assets exceed your liabilities. Once your liabilities exceed your assets, you're into Accounting Insolvency.
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
an excellent letter in today’s Press
also echoes your thoughts (and mine):I don’t know. Does it?
This letter doesn’t do it for me quite the same way as Sofie’s comment when I read it. I can accept people choosing all that stuff given in the letter, even though I strongly disagree with it, because people are actually choosing it.
What I have more trouble with is the willing ignorance and acceptance of corruption, lack of oversight and lack of accountability at the highest levels of the executive branch of our government. If people don’t care about the rules and laws set down for a government to follow, so that we can ensure transparency and accountability back to voters, what the hell are they expecting?
Maybe there’s no reasonable alternative for casting a vote when you have to weigh so many concerns, but it’d be nice to at least see some cross-partisan acknowledment that there’s a serious problem, instead of just getting tribal, kicking the messengers and writing it off as an attempt to sabotage an election. I really hope it doesn’t all end here simply because the incumbents won.
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Not The Messiah,
And Ohariu Belmont votes him back in again. Oh dear oh dear. What are they smoking or popping there.
I suspect there’s a fairly close correlation with demographics. Checking out the Herald’s compilation for Ohariu, there definitely seems to be a marked difference in preference depending on which booths you look at. For anyone who knows Ohariu, the huge swings in his favour were specifically around Khandallah and Churton Park/Glenside, where Dunne won individual booths by many hundreds at a time. Other areas like Johnsonville, Ngaio around to Wadestown, and most of Tawa were usually at most 50/50, if not significantly in Anderson’s favour. Cross the motorway to Newlands and Anderson’s convincingly taking every polling booth except the one nearest to Mark Avenue which is a new development with different characteristics.