In part that's because the only other thing I've done with the Fabians struck me as offering the basis of a coherent and credible economic strategy that got us beyond the short-term window of much current policy
I very much enjoyed attending the voyage of a lifetime discussion in Wellington. Any idea if this is likely to travel south this time?
CE’s of companies are bound by the law, enforced on behalf of stakeholders by any number of government entities.
Unless the CE can get someone to smear the head of the SFO badly enough that they back off...
edited to add: Or the funding for the IRD investigations for tax fraud is reduced, (while the funding for investigating welfare fraud of much less funds is increased)
It should be noted that perhaps the biggest journalistic success in that last few years has come from a journalist outside the favoured clique.
And Nicky Hager isn't exactly rolling in dosh and wearing the sharp suits now is he?
Success can be measured in different ways, and possibly if you need to pay a mortgage in Auckland, dollars can be a persuasive measuring stick.
but the Conservatives insatiable desire to lock people in prisons, just gives me the shits.
"the Conservatives insatiable desire to lock poor and brown people in prisons"
Maori kids with spray cans should go to prison; White-guys-with-knives who chase Maori-kids-with-spray-cans down the road and stab them to death should be applauded for being tough on graffiti.
Sure, someone could steal the code from your letterbox, in the same way they can steal your EasyVote card now. The proposed system is no less secure than the current one.
But if you nick someone's EasyVote, and they actually go down to vote, then you end up with two votes for that name, and the wheels of ... I was going to say justice, but shall we say "electoral law" start to roll.
I think that does make the current system slightly more secure than the proposed one.
From time to time I forget that I despair of my species, and then I am reminded.
Now I'm cruising the web playing happy music and dancing around the house (with the curtains pulled so I don't scare the neighbours) to try to use exercise as a way of feeling better.
I asked about the requirement to verbally confirm your name to the electoral officer - even with the easyvote card - and whether this was a problem for any non verbal or disabled people and the man assured me there is always a way to communicate.
When I advance voted, they asked me to confirm I was <name> and I said "yes", so there doesn't seem to be a set formula for requiring the voter to say their own name.
I get much more rigorous identity confirmation when I donate blood. I think anyone who could hear the question would be able to affirm their identity to the satisfaction of the polling clerk, and if they were hearing impaired, I imagine the polling clerk would be happy to try to work something out.
Leading questions like this are always weird, as if some parties actually believe what they're doing is wrong.
Yet when I've responded to questions that way "Actually, I think all of them *think* they're doing what's right" I get weird reactions, like the caller can't quite wrap their head around me believing that even people I disagree with might be doing things for good motives.
To make it perfectly clear, the crux of the issue is that it is more rational to believe that deity exists than not because evidence exists that supports such existence, but no evidence to the contrary has been shown.
You used to be JTB on Realms of Insanity, didn't you?
There's many ways in which the NZ government could fuck with them and theirs so I think their right to vote is not something to take away lightly.
Agree completely, but then this also applies to people in prison, which is why I sort of hope the current challenge is successful, and people who's lives are currently completely controlled by the state can have some input in how the state treats them.