Hard News: The Death of Evidence
179 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last
-
Even Goff thought it was worth looking at and seeing whether we could use the information for the better of the Country and if there was a platform to combat drugs, at least look at the bloody thing before dismissing it. Y'know, DEMOCRACTIC process. Sacha, Fair call
-
Craig might know some context that I am unaware of
-
What's disingenous about noting that a Minister has made crystal clear there is no point discussing what is in an official discussion paper? I don't recall hearing that, other than about the Brash 2025 report. What am I missing?
You're not missing anything so far as I see. Power can't even have had time to read the thing properly before he did his over-my-dead-body rant.
There's nothing that says "don't bother" like a pre-emptive declaration that it's all moot.
The leader-writers seem to agree:
Surely these are exactly the kind of ideas that any progressive, responsible government would want to explore.
Drug abuse – like the much bigger New Zealand problem of alcohol abuse – is a health issue. Much of the associated crime is the result of addiction.
Mr Power and Mr Key should take the blinkers off for long enough to at least have their thinking challenged.
Ms Dalziel is, however, right to say the report raises issues that warrant debate. Current policies have proved only spasmodically successful, and there is a disconnect between the law on drugs and those for alcohol and tobacco. Mr Power should not be effectively shutting down that debate before it has even begun.
The Government's quick dismissal of the bulk of the Law Commission's work on drug use in New Zealand is regrettable ... It deserves to be taken seriously.
-
any progressive, responsible government
So, umm.. wake me up when we get one of those again?
-
In the absence of a better place, and since this thread is tangentially related to health, a study by Canterbury researchers suggests that men's health is getting very short shrift on the funding front, for a number of reasons but not least of which is a lack of advocates within the system. Not helped, either, by a Minister of Health who thinks that it should be good enough for men that money is spent on general health matters that happen to affect them, such as heart disease, cancer, and primary care. Wonder what women's health advocates would say if he tried to spin that with them.
-
What's disingenous about noting that a Minister has made crystal clear there is no point discussing what is in an official discussion paper?
That's not what he's done, Sacha, and it's not worth being cute about it. You can say that Power's response is whorish (except for the insult to actual prostitutes) and dangerously short-sighted. You can be entirely cynical and say Power's greatest sin was excessive candour, when any experienced Minister would at least pretend to crack the spine before stuffing it under the wobbly leg of the coffee table.
But "shutting down discussion" and "don't bother even participating in the consultation"? Broadway bound, dear.
There's nothing that says "don't bother" like a pre-emptive declaration that it's all moot.
I recall a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the recommendations of this 1999 study paper recommending same-sex "registered partnerships" -- and it took another four years before it got on the statute books. I am glad that people bothered doing the work.
Don't think I'm going to stop agitating for marriage equality because neither National, Labour nor the Law Commission are particularly keen to light the fuse on that political bomb.
-
What's disingenous about noting that a Minister has made crystal clear there is no point discussing what is in an official discussion paper?
That's not what he's done, Sacha, and it's not worth being cute about it. You can say that Power's response is whorish (except for the insult to actual prostitutes) and dangerously short-sighted. You can be entirely cynical and say Power's greatest sin was excessive candour, when any experienced Minister would at least pretend to crack the spine before stuffing it under the wobbly leg of the coffee table.
But "shutting down discussion" and "don't bother even participating in the consultation"? Broadway bound, dear.
There's nothing that says "don't bother" like a pre-emptive declaration that it's all moot.
I recall a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the recommendations of this 1999 study paper recommending same-sex "registered partnerships" -- and it took another four years before it got on the statute books. I am glad that people bothered doing the work.
Don't think I'm going to stop agitating for marriage equality because neither National, Labour nor the Law Commission are particularly keen to light the fuse on that political bomb.
-
That's not what he's done, Sacha, and it's not worth being cute about it.
I don't personally have any doubt that Power's intention was to make the discussion go away asap -- and when I'm on the same page as he Herald editorial on it, it's hard to say I'm an outlier.
I recall a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the recommendations of this 1999 study paper recommending same-sex "registered partnerships" -- and it took another four years before it got on the statute books. I am glad that people bothered doing the work.
I recall differently. That was also the year that Prime Minister Jenny Shipley attended the Hero Parade and spoke publicly there about the possibility of giving people in same-sex relationships "normal legal rights in matters of matrimonial property, adoption, inheritance and immigration."
If there's any similarity with Power's behaviour it's utterly eluding me at the moment.
-
You can be entirely cynical and say Power's greatest sin was excessive candour, when any experienced Minister would at least pretend to crack the spine before stuffing it under the wobbly leg of the coffee table.
Or you can quote what he said:
Justice Minister Simon Power immediately ruled out any liberalisation before the commission received public submissions on the discussion document.
"There's not a single, solitary chance that as long as I'm the Minister of Justice we'll be relaxing drug laws in New Zealand," he said.
Perhaps we are all missing something, some code which is known only to Freemasons or to members of the Secret Seven; or perhaps not.
-
There's not a single, solitary chance that as long as I'm the Minister of Justice we'll be relaxing drug laws in New Zealand
Beep beep beep.. here is your Hopeful News Bulletin for 7.30pm. Leading the news:
Justice Minister Simon Power has resigned, saying that it was the only way to progress drug legislation in the light of his petulant outburst several days ago.
:))
-
"There's not a single, solitary chance that as long as I'm the Minister of Justice we'll be relaxing drug laws in New Zealand," he said.
You see, what he is actually saying is that there are in fact multiple chances of the drug laws being relaxed - not just a single, solitary chance.
He is a lawyer, after all.
-
And he's clearly trying to suck up to the boss with all that talk of relaxation
-
I recall differently. That was also the year that Prime Minister Jenny Shipley attended the Hero Parade and spoke publicly there about the possibility of giving people in same-sex relationships "normal legal rights in matters of matrimonial property, adoption, inheritance and immigration."
Thanks for the mainsplain, Russell. I was slightly more involved in the National Party on the issue at the time. Yes, Shipley deserves personal credit where it is due, but it would be sheer wish fulfilment to suggest that same-sex 'registered partnerships' as recommended by that Law Commission issues paper would have been any kind of priority if we'd won a fourth term.
I don't think it was a waste of time for the Law Commission to do the work, though.
Or you can quote what he said:
Or I could try not being particularly naive, and suggest I know the man well enough (and the temperature of the party I've belonged to for twenty years) and surmise that it was never on the cards. Which is a shame, but I won't pretend to be particularly surprised.
-
but it would be sheer wish fulfilment to suggest that same-sex 'registered partnerships' as recommended by that Law Commission issues paper would have been any kind of priority if we'd won a fourth term.
Probably not, but hardly the point.
The Prime Minister stood in front of a crowd of people and held out the hope of change in view of the Law Commission's review, in pretty much the words of the Commission itself.
Power dismissed his LawComm report out of hand an hour after its release.
I just can't see a comparison.
-
There's nothing that says "don't bother" like a pre-emptive declaration that it's all moot.
It worked for the smacking referendum.
-
Or I could try not being particularly naive, and suggest I know the man well enough (and the temperature of the party I've belonged to for twenty years) and surmise that it was never on the cards. Which is a shame, but I won't pretend to be particularly surprised.
Feel free to change tacks in your argument as you need.
-
There's nothing that says "don't bother" like a pre-emptive declaration that it's all moot.
It worked for the smacking referendum.
Totally. All that advertising and lobbying and whining in the media. Completely shut down the debate.
The big difference is that the s59 repeal has mostly been a non-event. Prosecutions for parents assaulting their children have decreased. Reported incidents of parents assaulting their children have decreased. The law has clearly not lead to rafts of parents being hauled before the courts for giving Little Joanne a swat on the rear for having a tanty in the supermarket. A referendum to overturn a law that was not fulfilling its opponents' deepest, darkest fears was hardly a worthwhile exercise.
Compare that with the MDA, which the Law Commission feels is doing significant harm to the health of the country, and you can see that one debate is very definitely worth having. The other debate only became apparently irrelevant once it was underway and information became available about how irrational the fears of the instigators actually were.
-
3410,
I know the man [Power] well enough (and the temperature of the party I've belonged to for twenty years) and surmise that it was never on the cards.
So we're all in agreement, then.
No one's saying it wasn't predictable; just that it displays bad faith.
-
Gotta love those relaxing drugs...
"There's not a single, solitary chance that as long as I'm the Minister of Justice we'll be relaxing drug laws in New Zealand," he said.
Perhaps we are all missing something, some code which is known only to Freemasons or to members of the Secret Seven; or perhaps not.
... having quaffed lashings of ginger beer,
put on my apron, and rolled up my trouser leg
...making all the local goats very nervous...
and at the risk of having my tongue buried at the high water mark - I would posit that Mr "Higher" Power (aka Nyarlathotep) has invoked The One,
The Singularity, The Ultimate Unit - in his role as Prince of Prevaricators he has used those hoary
old gambits - overstatement and omission!
Business as usual, then... -
"There's not a single, solitary chance that as long as I'm the Minister of Justice we'll be relaxing drug laws in New Zealand," he said.
Somehow that actually seems more honest to me than "There is a chance, after I weigh up all the evidence, that any drug shown rigorously and scientifically to cause no harm whatsoever to anyone ever, might not get banned, if I feel like it, after all that". That just seems like a more effective way of stonewalling.
-
Somehow that actually seems more honest to me
No one's saying it wasn't predictable; just that it displays bad faith.
Also that, this governmentals is all about "It's my way and the high and mighty way. experts in their field? Pah ! I listen to me, myself, and I."
-
Prime Minister John Key has defended the Government categorically ruling out relaxing drug laws, saying doing anything else would send the wrong message to children.
Stuff
Won't someone think of the rest of the country for a change?.
Why the fuck are we being pushed around by children all the time?.
FFS ShonKey. How many fuckin' children read National policy statements? When are you going to grow some balls and stop being dictated to by Family Fist or the Mongrel Mob. Mr Key, you are an embarrassment to this country.Mr Key told Radio Live today that reform was not the agenda.
"No one is probably arguing necessarily that if someone uses a small amount of marijuana that that is necessarily of itself the end of the world," Mr Key said
"But, and I have to acknowledge because its factually correct that a lot of New Zealanders do, but what's the message we want to send youngsters? And the message is don't engage with drugs."
Marijuana was often a stepping stone to more aggressive drugs such as P or cocaine, he said.
Mr Key said young people should get involved in sports, culture or drama and not dabble in drugs.
Sigh, what a Plonker.
-
@Andin
Boy does she completely misunderstand what Feynmann means by that. And even what he is referring to. But hey, a physicist said it, and used the word "ignorance" so that means ignorance is A'ok.
Agreed. I have pointed out to a number of people that to do science the knowing a lot is necessary, but insufficient and really only a means not an end. You have to know all there is to know about a subject in order to understand what questions still remain unanswered.
So in that sense of knowing humanity's ignorance, scientists are the most ignorant people on the planet, and they know it, as well as being able to tell you with what confidence interval they do so.
BTW Russ I don't see my previous post as a recital of my 'virtues', I was just using my experience to rebut an assertion that we cannot be in control of our appetites. I don't claim to be in control of all mine either, I find my cheese addiction very hard to break and I suspect the remains of my middle aged spread would be gone by now if I could. But it does seem true that you can only beat an addiction when you truly want to and it seems I don't have sufficient motivation to cut the cheese.
I am also lazy and one of the world's great procrastinators and time wasters. Knowing that some people, including my wife, think the running is a waste of time helps motivate me to do it. Square that one ;-)
-
Marijuana was often a stepping stone to more aggressive drugs such as P or cocaine, he said.
Cocaine? In New Zealand? You'd have to be on a merchant banker's salary to afford it. Didn't The Economist say it was $700 a gram here?
I don't have sufficient motivation to cut the cheese.
Mmmmmppppphhhh! (OK, yes, I am eight years old. Sue me.)
-
it seems I don't have sufficient motivation to cut the cheese.
For that, Peter, the people of Scotland are thankful.
How I hate the stench of Haggis in the morning.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.