Hard News: Time to get a grip
126 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Despite what the Fat White Dicks say, Judith Tizard didn't lose Auckland Central because she was a bad MP. I was a constituent of hers in 04-07, and voting at Herne Bay polling station, I was amazed that Labour got any votes at all in the area, it was just that much of a wealthy peoples suburb. Pretty much all of central Auckland has become that way now (John Banks selling off social housing helped), and it's hard to sustain an electorate on rich white liberals voting against their class interest.
Would Judith have had more of a mandate if she'd been a list-only candidate (there are very few of these - Don Brash was one I can think of)? I can't see why. A winning list candidate has got 40,000+ votes from the whole country. A winning electroral candidate typically gets 10-15000 votes, all clumped in one place. Why are voters that live near each other more worthy than those scattered around the nation?
-
On Hide's Regulatory Reform Bill, I was looking for a platform to express my views on the stupidity of this, so forgive me a further post this morning.
This seems to be an attempt to create "basic law". These laws (such as the US constitution or the ECHR) express fundamental principles which are broadly agreed and cannot be overridden by legislation. The NZ BORA is a (weak) attempt at this.
Basic law works well when it expresses a general consensus and is entrenched beyond the short term whims of public and legislators. The RRB is neither - if passed, it will have scraped through parliament on a bare majority of votes. It could be fittingly repealed under urgency in the first week's business of the next left-wing government (it could possibly be nullified by a "notwithstanding clause" in a single piece of legislation - I'm not qualified to take a view on whether this would actually work).
Ironically, as the government promotes this legislation, it simultaneously passes the Canterbury earthquake laws that sideline parliament in favour of rule by decree. How these diametrically opposite measures interact is questionable. (The Canterbury laws would be illegal under the US constitution, which specifically proscribes such measures).
I'm actually in favour of having a strong, enforcable framework of basic law. But it should be entrenched by popular mandate and reflect real human rights and principles, not the "right to make a fast buck".
-
I'm not so sure. Some of Tizard's comments last week did come across as petulant and as sour grapes. Her criticism of Phil Goff, which I know she's entitled to, was also a bad look as well.
Neither she or the Labour heirachy handled this well. They shouldn't have hung their dirty wash out publically. (I'm talking specifically about the process to get the next on the list, not the Hughes affair itself or Goff's leadership, etc).
-
In the recent Baden Wurttemburg state elections ( where the Greens will lead the new government in spite of coming second),
Wikipedia says B-W doesnt have a list at all ( uniquely in german state elections), The supplementary members are selected from the defeated electoral candidates , by party and by the highest numbers of votes they received. -
The curious thing about Hide's Bill is that almost no one, apart from the Act Party and the Business Round Table, actually seems to want it. Even a paper written for the conservative Maxim Institute has come out against it.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I’m not so sure. Some of Tizard’s comments last week did come across as petulant and as sour grapes. Her criticism of Phil Goff, which I know she’s entitled to, was also a bad look as well.
She could have handled it better. But I think the shit flung at her was on another level altogether.
Meanwhile, Paddy Gower's still on the warpath.
-
The idea that parties should be forced to field two separate and incompatible slates of candidates has no virtue that I can think of.
It's a made-for-talkback proposal. Any time a party that isn't ACT, National or NZ First proposes legislation of any sort, the cry will be "Out-of-touch elitist list MPs imposing their will on Real New Zealanders!"
I am interested in creative tweaks to our electoral system, but that's one that just seems wrong-headed on so many levels.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
I was amazed that Labour got any votes at all in the area, it was just that much of a wealthy peoples suburb.
Well they've always won it in the past. My folks are lamenting living in a blue electorate for the first time in their lives. Mum, a staunch Labour supporter, even reckoned Tizard had been completely invisible during the election campaign. I think that's simply piss-poor. Don't put someone who can't be arsed into close electorate race.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Tizard had been completely invisible during the election campaign
Not the first time I've heard that one.
-
Idiot Savant, in reply to
Wikipedia says B-W doesnt have a list at all ( uniquely in german state elections), The supplementary members are selected from the defeated electoral candidates , by party and by the highest numbers of votes they received.
I wonder what Gower et al would think of that. But really, it just means a different list, which replaces explicit ranking by party with implicit ranking through candidate selection.
As for the Welsh law, its about patch protection by incumbents; they not only ban dual candidacy, but they try and prevent list MPs from doing constituency work, robbing the public of a service (and the MPs of a direct and visible connection with their constituency) in order to limit competition in the electorate vote.
-
I accept that Tizard was ill-treated by some pretty vindictive commentary. But hang on: she said she had "unfinished business", and cited as the sole example her desire to give a valedictory speech. It takes a high degree of solipsism - not to mention a tin ear - to even contemplate the prospect of being paid $150,000 to give a speech. Her remarks about Goff, though not inaccurate, were petty and redundant. And her complaint that she was "bullied through the media" by Little was infantile. This is politics - and the party she represented is in rather dire straits. It's not Play School.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
It's a made-for-talkback proposal. Any time a party that isn't ACT, National or NZ First proposes legislation of any sort, the cry will be "Out-of-touch elitist list MPs imposing their will on Real New Zealanders!"
Remember the Granny's infamous 'Economy goes into nosedive' headline 11 years ago? John Key after the same length in office wasn't put under the same blowtorch.
Well they've always won it in the past. My folks are lamenting living in a blue electorate for the first time in their lives. Mum, a staunch Labour supporter, even reckoned Tizard had been completely invisible during the election campaign. I think that's simply piss-poor. Don't put someone who can't be arsed into close electorate race.
Hope fully Jacinda Ardern can succeed where Tizard didn't. Intellect, charisma, you name it. I'm starting to sound like I'm describing an RPG char.
-
The idea that parties should be forced to field two separate and incompatible slates of candidates has no virtue that I can think of.
You're not the only one. The Royal Commission on the Electoral System thoroughly rejected the idea:
If list candidates were excluded from contesting constituencies voters would retain the power to remove unsatisfactory local representatives and list members could focus on the representation of wider groups and interests, or on national issues. On examination, however, we consider the prohibition of dual candidacies to be undesirable in principle and unworkable in practice. First, the creation of 2 rigidly distinct types of candidate (and hence representative) would be likely to contribute to party disunity. Second, we see considerable advantage in allowing parties to both protect a limited number of their more valuable MPs in marginal seats and reward superior candidates in unwinnable seats. Banning dual candidacies would prevent such practices and be of particular harm to small parties who are unlikely to be assured of any constituency seats but who nonetheless wish to have their high profile members contest such seats. Third, a smaller party would win more list than constituency seats. This may be reversed if that party does particularly well in an election. Under MMP, therefore, a party may lose some of its list members while gaining seats overall. In our view this is an unacceptable prospect if dual constituency/list candidates are banned.
It would mean small parties standing electorate MPs they didn't actually want to see elected, which would in turn increase the number of required candidates and hence the barrier to participation. Though big parties would probably regard that as a Good Thing.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Don’t put someone who can’t be arsed into close electorate race.
To be fair, she was still recovering from viral hepatitis at the time, so it wasn’t strictly “can’t be arsed”. I gather there were also problems at the local electorate committee level, which led to a poor campaign.
Nikki Kaye, by contrast, spent the whole year knocking on doors, and deserved to win. But she still only got about as many votes as Pansy Wong got three years before. A lot of voters – on the face of it, Tizard/Labour voters – didn’t turn up.
In that sense, it’s the same lesson as John Banks being trounced by Hubbard in the mayoral race, then sweeping back three years later with almost exactly the same number of votes. If the Left gets its campaign right, it wins in central Auckland – but the right’s vote is much more reliable.
I would expect Jacinda Ardern to do well this year. Kaye’s had three years to impress, and really has not done so.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
To be fair, she was still recovering from viral hepatitis
Which explains a lot. It's a very nasty, debilitating disease. And, it can take a very long time to recover from, especially if you're fond of wine. (I'm not suggesting she's a lush, by the way, just that alcohol is very hard on a recovering liver.)
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Hope fully Jacinda Ardern can succeed where Tizard didn't. Intellect, charisma, you name it. I'm starting to sound like I'm describing an RPG char.
Fingers crossed. With any luck, she's a paladin in the retribution tree.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Which explains a lot. It’s a very nasty, debilitating disease. And, it can take a very long time to recover from, especially if you’re fond of wine. (I’m not suggesting she’s a lush, by the way, just that alcohol is very hard on a recovering liver.)
I think she has the odd glass now, but she stopped drinking for a long time.
-
To be fair, she was still recovering from viral hepatitis at the time, so it wasn’t strictly “can’t be arsed”.
Lived in Ak central 15 years same house, never had a candidate, sitting or otherwise knock on my door until Nikki Kaye. Maybe she just fluked it and we were home I don't know.
I know for a fact she's been working fairly hard with varying degrees of success for some of the central ak schools and the issues they are facing at the moment.
I've heard one school principal say they're glad they don't live in Ak Central or they might have had to vote for Nikki Kaye, that says something in itself.
I think the chopping off of Pt Chev into Mt Albert from AK Central had an impact too last election.
-
Richard Wain, in reply to
Her remarks about Goff, though not inaccurate, were petty and redundant
Wow, Jude made a point? I interviewed her once for a music feature around funding issues and despite chewing my ear off for half an hour or more, there wasn't one grab worth using...
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
I think she has the odd glass now, but she stopped drinking for a long time.
I had to give up the booze for a whole year, which wasn't that hard for me - I was the occasional glass of beer-type then. Wouldn't like to do it now, though :)
But it was the fatigue, and the fast-changing moods - the utter rage that used to take over that I remember most.
Perhaps she's still not quite up to par?
-
BlairMacca, in reply to
I would expect Jacinda Ardern to do well this year. Kaye’s had three years to impress, and really has not done so.
Sure its Breakfast, but it was kind of telling that at the beginning of this term Kaye was put up as one of the ‘Young Guns’ they chat to. She was replaced by Simon Bridges after about 2 weeks.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
Perhaps she's still not quite up to par?
Well, maybe the New Zealand Herald newsroom has also been affected by a virus for the last several years. Have you ever thought about that? It would explain so much.
Seriously, though, folks, I understand that a large sector of the media went to lunch on this thing, but if Tizard had been more disciplined and loyal none of this would have happened. She didn't open her mouth but to hurt her own reputation and the party last week. The race to finding excuses for her seems a little odd to be honest.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
she's a paladin in the retribution tree
Prot FTW.
She'll have to learn to cover her contempt better. Her slots on Breakfast TV with the Nat boy are hilarious for the look on her face as he babbles party line. Sadly she isn't much above babbling party line either.
As for Ms Tizard she has never been able to say anything and I suspect she was trained by her Mom who also was very good at talking a lot without saying anything, basically perfect Gov Gen material.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
basically perfect Gov Gen material.
And a thoroughly nice woman to boot. (I mean in the "as well" sense, folks!)
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Um, yes.....can't argue with that.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.