Hard News: A thundering clash of perspectives
119 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
Dennis Frank, in reply to
Email Web
Yes, I saw James say that. My point hinges on whether that is an actual rule, written as part of a procedural document (code of conduct) which binds behaviour like an employment contract, or whether it is merely parliamentary convention - and to what extent can parliamentarians act in accord with their conscience and exercise the right of free speech that most folk who believe in democracy feel entitled to?
You're right that the public jumped to their usual conclusions & moved on. Thoughtful folk will still be digesting the implications. Green party members and supporters will have been polarised into their two original camps: neither left nor right vs the leftists. There's a danger of the re-run of the Values Party schism that created that political fault-line. I doubt it will fracture sufficiently to destroy this party like it destroyed that one, but there will need to be a prolonged pounding of the sledgehammer on the coal chisel to get the learning of their mistake through the concrete in the heads of the leftists.
The Ohariu poll announced on Q+A this morning has the Greens at 12%. This is likely to reassure the leftists sufficiently to prevent them learning the lesson. The political compass website located me halfway across the left side of the political spectrum a couple of years ago, which is probably why my heart tends to make me side with the left on policy issues. Factoring in the necessity of the long-term success of the green cause gets my head back to the center every time. Both green tribes must work together. Leftist polarising is a handicap.
-
steven crawford, in reply to
Everybody relax, she’s gone, we’re safe. Meanwhile …
Y’know what, it’s been a spirituality cleansing experience. Being a former Green Party supporter, I’m reassured to see the Green Party (who are adorable) having to confront themselves. When all the finger pointing and blaming white supremacy and journalism for there own behaviour stops, I might rejoin the movement.
For what it’s worth, I think Mariria fucked up. Not becouse she outed here self about the youth indiscretions in an attempt to help vulnerable people, but becouse thats not what happened. It was the intentionally polarising a population for political gain. She took a gamble, to advance her political objectives, that people other than her will pay for.
How much easier is it now going to be to advance bipartisan agreement on amendments to laws and introduction of better provisions for impoverished people, not that people are polarised to the point of casual race and gender blaming.
-
steven crawford, in reply to
Whoops, I didn’t mean to spell Metiria’s name incorrectly. That’s not intended to be an indication of disrespect.
-
Sacha, in reply to
The Ohariu poll announced on Q+A this morning has the Greens at 12%
Only within that electorate and with a larger than usual margin of error.
-
Lynn Yum, in reply to
It was the intentionally polarising a population for political gain. She took a gamble, to advance her political objectives, that people other than her will pay for.
Wait, what? I can agree that she should have handled her confession better, i.e. cleared her account with MSD completely before confessing. But pointing out that the benefit system made her lie, and therefore the system is cruel, should NOT be polarising. In a rational discussion, we just evaluate her argument, and whether or not you believe the argument depends on whether or not you believe her story is substantially true. Other people have corroborated her story, and only after she made the confession, so no one should discount the argument out of hand. At the very least, her argument deserves a closer look. This is raising a red flag (again), not polarising.
To discount her argument is to simply ignore the problem, or as someone else suggested, speaks to the underlying prejudice against beneficiaries. Or simply view politics as a game for power, that every move is a calculated bid to win power and nothing more.
For some people, politics isn't a game of thrones, it is about improving lives. Shocking, I know right?
-
Oh for goodness sake;
New 'wrap around' services policy - fine the parents and send the kids away.
-
william blake, in reply to
Oh god they are foul. I can't see the logic in taking the 'most violent and recidivist ' youth and teaching them how to shoot accurately.
-
steven crawford, in reply to
But pointing out that the benefit system made her lie, and therefore the system is cruel, should NOT be polarising.
But it was polarising.
To discount her argument is to simply ignore the problem, or as someone else suggested, speaks to the underlying prejudice against beneficiaries. Or simply view politics as a game for power, that every move is a calculated bid to win power and nothing more.
It’s not an ether your with us or against us thing. I don’t discount the argument that the benefit system is unfare and needs improvement. It’s unfare and it doesn’t foster a sence of civic duty. Garath Morgan has been saying that, the Labour Party isn’t denying that and if you go back a few years, the Mana party campaigned on it.
And viewing politics as a game for power, isn’t required to say that what Matiria with the support of most her caucus desided to do, was promote there ” Mending the Safety Net” policy by introducing benefit fraud to the headlines in a virtuous manner, on the eve of an election campaign; it was a strategic move. i.e. doing something to advance there political agenda. Metiria came out and said that she committed benefit fraud, but the benefit system made her do it. Then that caused outrage, a media storm ensued then the polarising began. Now we have people from polite society making ugly remarks about the colour of people’s skin. I would not like to be a solo mum on a benefit right now, and not only becouse it’s not a lot of money, it’s the stigma of suspicion around benefit fraud thats now louder than ever.
If Metiria really was motivated by altruism, that was fairly unencumbered by her own desire to score politically, she could always go out there as the lawyer she is, and do some human rights work. Possibly in the defence of people on benefits, who get pushed around by bullies.
-
Email
Only four days ago, Turei would stubbornly tell media for the last time there was no poll number that would see her step down—dogged by further revelations she had been highly selective with her story of living on the DPB. Hours later, she'd quit. (But not before costing the jobs of Little and two of her own MPs).
How does Stacey Kirk get to make that claim - the fall of Andrew Little can be laid at the feet of rapacious media mistaking honesty for weakness. IMHO.
-
And an ex IRD/tax collector's point that #WearealMetiria;
https://letstalkabouttaxnz.com/category/welfare/
And a related campaign from ActionStation;
-
andin, in reply to
Email
confront themselves.
I can think of quite a few people who should go somewhere and do some honest reflection on their beliefs and how they have come to them, and while they're about it a critical reappraisal of their actions might be handy for those whose lives their policies are going to influence.
I would probably disagree with you on where the more urgent need for that is, currently.When all the finger pointing and blaming white supremacy and journalism
You are wide of the mark there. It is govt policies for the past 30yrs and the beliefs behind those that are being called into question here. Labour doesnt get a free pass there as well as the incumbents. It is clear that those ideas were adopted by those who walked the halls of government during that time. They had/are having a disastrous effect.
Nothing that wasn't warned about, at the time. Neoliberalism, Free markets, user pays, competitive business models blah blah blah. And those who were at the bottom of societies increasingly pyramiding shape for historic cultural reasons or being a mother or any increasing number of reasons, suffered and struggled. Go figure!
As for some of the commentary provided on this by journalism, it was paper thin at best and riddled with weird personal bias. Did the journalist's ancestry/ upbringing/sex have something to do with it? Well it was often opinion so you work it out. Sometimes ones opinions arent all that flash. -
Joe Wylie, in reply to
If Metiria really was motivated by altruism, that was fairly unencumbered by her own desire to score politically, she could always go out there as the lawyer she is, and do some human rights work. Possibly in the defence of people on benefits, who get pushed around by bullies.
-
steven crawford, in reply to
Excellent!
-
Christchurch East MP Poto Williams has been working on broken benefits.
-
Email
-
I think The Spin Off's policy comparison tool is pretty cool:
http://policy.thespinoff.co.nz/
Easy way of comparing policy apples & oranges (or lack of). -
Email
Which parties care about your health - Chchch public meeting
-
Email
Health Minister Jonathan Coleman sits down for a live chat with Stuff at midday regarding mental health. today Aug 15.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/95781530/Today-in-politicsHe was in fine fickle form in his rare appearance on Morning Report today - trying to push the blame back on PSA and Etu for agreeing to the government's insistence that mental health workers not be included in Aged Care workers pay rise.
The unions have to pick their fights and win where they can for their members - he needs to explain why they specifically wanted to exclude mental health workers (especially as they have just tried to say they really do care in yesterday's policy release on mental health. )
Does he also think there are no aged people with mental health issues? -
andin, in reply to
Email
Mental health? How fit is your mind. In Mr Coleman's case he is unspokenly saying
'Hey look at me I am a functioning member of parliament I cant have any mental health problems because of who I am'.
How wrong that thinking is....
Post your response…
You may also create an account or retrieve your password.