Hard News: Briefing, blaming, backing down
191 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
The right not to vote as well.
heh and in the book I read the response was that if you didn't vote you couldn't be a citizen (and vice versa). That meant some benefits of citizenship would be denied.
Not sure where I stand on that idea but it's a good thing to think about as an exercise in understanding what citizenship is and means for different people.
As for Jury duty, I agree with you. But it shouldn't be dangerous, unrewarding or in any way difficult. It really is one of the few times an individual can be involved in the justice system. We really should want to do it. That many (rightly?) don't is not great for a society that depends on a justice system.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
I think we should make voting mandatory and non voting fineable as in Australia,
Absolutely not. Abstention is a perfectly valid option as a vote against the system (as merc says) or a vote of no confidence in any of the parties or candidates on offer.
-
merc, in reply to
It really is one of the few times an individual can be involved in the justice system. We really should want to do it. That many (rightly?) don't is not great for a society that depends on a justice system.
I have discussed this at length with my longtime lawyer friend. It is a good system, it can be vastly improved, as to whether you want to do it or not, that choice thankfully is up to you. Though it is deuced hard to get out of, unless like me, you are indispensable ;-)
I have seen enough of the system to know that if you want to see it in operation, go to the courts on any given day, you are allowed, and that is very cool. Forcing people to participate in things is anathema to me when they are demonstrably better to let people decide.
The jury service thing I like the French system, ours is inherited from the people that have it so wired they need alot of violence to maintain it...insert long rant here not. I see a place for cyber courts, my lawyer friend calls me a conspiracist ;-) then I remind him how this Govt. and past ones have undermined the justice system here. -
I'm sure if you got paid at your usual wage rate for jury service, a lot more people wouldn't arrange notes of excuse.
I doubt it would cost that much in the overall scheme of things.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
eschewed and spat out...
Abstention is a perfectly valid option as a vote against the system (as merc says) or a vote of no confidence in any of the parties or candidates on offer.
This could be covered by you still going to the polling booth and writing 'No Confidence' across the form, then at least you have had your voice heard - and fulfilled your obligation - otherwise your silent protest can be dismissed as apathy or construed as tacit approval - either way The System wins.
-
merc, in reply to
Jeebus Ian you're a hard man ;-) I personally over the years have lost any interest whatsoever in the activity described as construed or obligation fulfilment.
It's too late for me, I tried. -
The Pauline Hanson phenomenon was largely inflated by voters taking the opportunity to give a massive middle finger to compulsory voting. Not only were the major parties seriously out of whack with the electorate back then, the commentariat seemed unable to deal with a phenomenon outside of its condescending preconceptions.
Even though a few token Australian lumpenproletarians are rounded up at each election and thrashed with a feather for failing to vote, they've generally proved to be a tad better informed than the political punditocracy would give them credit for.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
This could be covered by you still going to the polling booth and writing ‘No Confidence’ across the form,
To me, 'mandatory voting' suggests that perhaps even that option would not be available. In any case, it'd be nice to pointedly not go into the voting booth at all. And if anybody dismisses my abstention as apathy, I can turn around and tell them no, it's no confidence, and there's a hell of a difference. 'No confidence' means I care but see no valid option on the ballot paper. As for construing abstention as tacit approval, could I not get at least a few t shirts printed wittily informing the public that I do not give my consent to the system as it stands? At the very least? Perhaps even, I dunno, write a blog expressing my political point of view to any and all who may care to read it?
Whatever, those options I see as vastly superior to mandatory voting.
-
Groser Jack, get off your back…
Who do we blame for this back down?Another chapter of the secret Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations has been leaked, heralding “another bad news day for National”, says TPP critic Professor Jane Kelsey.
The draft text of the investment chapter, including the section on investor-enforcement, is undated, but is understood to be recent.
It confirms that National has agreed to let foreign investors like Philip Morris, Pfizer, Warners, Exxon Mobil or Microsoft sue New Zealand for damages in private offshore tribunals, claiming that new laws or policies breach their rights under the agreement.I sure don’t trust this Government enough to sign something on my behalf sight unseen…
and here’s a coupla posters for Merc and Chris:
If Government is the answer…
and
Snappy Sammy Smoot…
’- ) -
Chris Waugh, in reply to
Nice posters, thanks. Now I wonder if I'll be able to find anything similar in my local market or bookstore.... this place could use a little brightening up...
-
merc, in reply to
I sure don’t trust this Government enough to sign something on my behalf sight unseen…
I think trust is what it's all about.
-
Jury service. Do it. Question: If you were in the dock for something you didn't do, would you want you on the jury? If you say no, then you have failed Civics 101.
I have always wanted to start the Informal Party. No fees. Tell everyone to make their vote informal and voila! You take the votes. Simple.
-
Islander, in reply to
I am totally against compulsory voting as I am against compulsory working.
The right not to work is a powerful one. The right not to vote as well. Registration by all means compulsory, voting no.Tautoko!
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Fun with Acronyms:
- Total Power to Plunder Aotearoa
- Thieves Protecting Patent Abuse -
I wanted to add support to those that are defending (most, many?) politicians. I have had pleasant surprises when working for them (admittedly my sample is small), and friends in the public service have told me stories of dealing with new ministers when the government changed that were far more positive than expected from our media-informed preconceptions. (Not that I’m just blaming the media.)
As for the ways we can get better politicians and voters etc, my view is that it is the whole culture of civics (for lack of a better word) that needs to be improved. I’m not sure that any 1 or 2 fixes would make much difference. Many people seem to feel the social responsibility aspect heavy and boring but I think there is much that can be empowering and perhaps even exciting. There is a bit of a trend in many countries where people are sick of feeling that their governments don’t represent them and that corporations don’t respect them, so they are coming together in completely new groups to solve their own problems.
If it’s a culture we need to change then it’s going to take time but some starting ideas are below. (I can feel the next question coming – so how are we going to start them?!)
- dedicated public interest broadcasting
- teaching ethics from kindergarten up (start with concepts like ‘good’, ‘bad’, ‘good for who?’ etc.)
- teaching civics, life skills, empathy etc at school
- reforming the adversarial nature of submissions on public proposals (my feeling is that people submit (complain?) and when they don’t get what they want they are angry, frustrated and disempowered, rather than knowing where and how their submission was taken into account along with other submissions)
- reforming the extremely adversarial nature of parliamentary question time (I think a departing Green MP descried that culture as ‘toxic’) while still holding politicians to account
- mandating (in some way) opposition MPs participation in policy working and advisory groups – this can help restrain game-playing (Sweden does this a bit and I think they have an added no-media pact for parts of the process)
- taking significant long term things out of 'government of the day' and into longer parliamentary processes so they are not being used as political footballs (greenhouse gas emissions, demographic retirement planning, ...)
- having a constitution (maybe?) and putting things in it such as the right to a healthy environment for future generations (as in Sweden), the right to internet access (some country has done that)
- I think there are forms of compulsory voting that could be explored that captures votes of no confidence (as some of you were exploring here)
- More crowd sourcing input into public policy proposals
- having a fund for yearly public competitions where people can develop and vote on proposals for the public good nationally and in their community (good criteria could be set and top proposals could have further independent research before finalising)
- is any Te Reo taught compulsorily at school these days?Hmm, very long - sorry if I broke any length of rant etiquette ...
-
merc,
Gloves off, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10813127
...andIf Mr Key and Education Minister Hekia Parata think they could have persuaded the public otherwise by more cunning political presentation, it insults the public to say so. They are allowed to change their minds. They will be harshly criticised only by those always wise in hindsight.
Most of us do not rate politicians who bend with every breeze but fair-minded folk respect those who can admit to an occasional mistake. It takes some backbone to back down gracefully.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10813128
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Rules of engagement...
- More crowd sourcing input into public policy proposals
...and much easier to do these days one would think
But the crowd source I want to see disappear is the "Muttering Classes' in Parliament, the echoers and barracking posse that wells up behind each speaker. It is not adult, makes them appear juvenile and petty and slows everything down - hell the signal-to-noise problems alone should see it outlawed...
-
merc,
Can't get here from there,
"National won with the biggest result it's ever had in MMP history and Labour had the worst result. So the people of New Zealand have spoken."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/7108265/Asset-sales-legislation-clears-another-hurdle
Black and white logic. Same old memes, to our detriment. Does not matter what we do when all they do is lie at you."Over the next three to five years the $6 billion in proceeds from these share offers will pay for priority new public assets like modern schools and hospitals through a new Future Investments Fund.
"That is $6 billion we would otherwise have had to borrow from overseas lenders."I call BS on that, and it's not about voter turnout, jury service, playtime parliament, journo enablement or the price of milk...it's because they lie, often, and with impunity.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Black and white logic. Same old memes, to our detriment. Does not matter what we do when all they do is lie at you.
Indeed. It only aggravates the glaring inconsistency between the hard line on asset sales, and the backdown on class sizes and possibly even the AG's probe into the SkyCity wheeler-deal.
Maybe the AG needs to probe the asset sales process too? Or let Tuwharetoa filibuster it in the courts?
-
merc, in reply to
Maybe the AG needs to probe the asset sales process too?
The reason that will not happen is the reason why the system is token.
What rights do we give away when we vote? What rights do we obtain? For me it is a rights issue foremost, then we can argue over the selling thereof. -
David Chittenden, in reply to
But the crowd source I want to see disappear is the "Muttering Classes' in Parliament, the echoers and barracking posse that wells up behind each speaker. It is not adult, makes them appear juvenile and petty and slows everything down - hell the signal-to-noise problems alone should see it outlawed...
Agree - it's part of that us vs them simplistic, childish and unproductive culture that needs changing. I find it hard to believe that we let them get away with it ...
-
Maybe one could have a system where the votes of non-voters were allocated at random in proportion to those who did vote (which would obviously make no difference to the result).
Then, each non-voter would get a letter/email informing them who they had autovoted for. Being told you'd voted for Peters or Dunne might galvanise them into voting next time.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
I find it hard to believe that we let them get away with it …
These are the "them" that you just assured me were actually decent dedicated people? Or is it just the environment of The House that stimulates that behaviour?
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
Being told you’d voted for Peters or Dunne might galvanise them into voting next time.
That's just mean.
-
Agree – it’s part of that us vs them simplistic, childish and unproductive culture that needs changing. I find it hard to believe that we let them get away with it …
But fundamentally it is us v them. I mean, really, I understand why this isn't something people shout from the rooftops, but fundamentally, the political system is a struggle over the distribution of power and wealth.
While it is very nice to imagine some kind of happy consensual etc politics, really there is a struggle over where we want the country to go.
Eh in general I just find anti-political arguments deeply deeply reactionary and unpleasant, sorry.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.