Legal Beagle by Graeme Edgeler

Read Post

Legal Beagle: Voting in the Flag Referendum

152 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    pressing issues...

    That’s an eejits paper. Stick to Waterford Whispers.

    Nice, puts The Civilian to shame - what we need is John Key's favourite paper The Ferndale Flyer... fractious news about fictitious places...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Attachment

    I did find this ‘fern representation’ (er, feather!) from overseas (1954!) on John Ansell’s site…
    …oh hang on that’s rugby too.

    I’ll keep looking…

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Attachment

    Christmas tree or Yacht sail?
    I have found Key’s ‘Genesis moment’ back in 2010:
    http://www.guide2.co.nz/politics/news/key-silver-fern-drawing-attracts-nearly-20k-in-bids/11/14162

    Mr Key draw the silver fern on TVNZ’s Breakfast programme at presenter Pippa Wetzell’s request.
    The prime minister said, in response to the New Zealand Herald’s newspaper campaign, that changing the New Zealand flag was not on the agenda, but if it was to change his preference would be the silver fern.

    (my bold)

    also let's not forget that Silver Fern Farms have been partly sold off to overseas interests - will a similarly flagged country have the same thing done do it?

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Attachment

    This evolution of the All Black fern was on this ’maori tattoo’ pinterest page

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    Silver Fern Farms have been partly sold off to overseas interests – will a similarly flagged country have the same thing done do it?

    Yes.....

    Maybe it already happened?

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1335 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    Christmas tree or Yacht sail?

    Some fwit paid $20,000 for that?

    That's what they mean when they say "more money than sense."

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1335 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    Otherwise they should all shut up while someone else is speaking

    It's very hard to keep quiet when this Government peddles bullshit, when the Speaker allows bullshit, when the PM is one big turd. The Opposition has to shout back in the hope that one journalist may run with the disagreement to the faux answers. The patsy questions that National ask of each other are propaganda for themselves and the Party. There's their advertising again. The Opposition can't even table documents by it's subject without the Speaker shutting it down,thus quelling any interest it may cause, again arms lengthing journalists or listeners from questioning the National party hype machine.
    There is disorder in the House though. of which I lay squarely at the feet of the Speaker. He is not doing his job fairly for all in the Chamber. He is selective and biased for the benefit of National but mostly for John Key. I'm sure he knows for what he does. The disorder he created over Key and his repulsive behaviour recently, (there are so many) could have been nipped in the bud but no, the Speaker set out to protect Key. It was at the expense of many politicians. That says the Speaker is biased. He's got to be the worst I've seen.
    Nah, robust debate is one of the only ways to catch the Government of the day peddling their lies. It becomes noticeable too when Government Ministers get all upset, the poor dears. That's a dead give away that they are lying. A lot can be gleaned by watching a politician's behaviour and not just listening to the words. Plus I shout at the TV with all the others in the House. I can't be doin' al' that on me own!

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    watchmen...
    the Panopticon beckons...
    Schrodinger's surveillance...
    the watched watch themselves...
    whatcha think?

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    whatcha think?

    Well, could work, Carter ( and Key for that matter) being reptilian shape shifters. Would help if Carter (jerkoff) sorts out his hard of hearing any incident that requires his friggin’ ears :)
    The Pan (t)opticon still needs someone in the middle though. Hey, Richie McCaw needs a new job!

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Richie McCaw needs a new job!

    He'll be there, at the breakdown of society
    going for it - a Crusader on a mission...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    Sadly it seems that no matter how you vote you end up getting politicians.

    Yes, and I’ve seen similar reasoning over and over. (They’re all useless, and so on.)

    I think what gets me, though, is the way in which many people seem to lower their expectations and become accepting of it in an absolutely defeatist way, sometimes even defending it, instead of speaking out against it and demanding accountability from all politicians.

    The Dirty Politics mess revealed a whole lot of crap going on, which various apologists naturally then claimed that they knew it all happened anyway. Even many regular people stood up and declared “We already knew they were useless scum”. “The opposition did it too when they were governing.” Whatever.

    But why is all this stuff accepted as okay by so many people?

    I get that not everyone wants to condone an opposition which they might dislike even more, but why is it somehow not okay to vote for National, or vote for Labour, or for whoever, yet still demand high standards from them?

    It’s as if some people are often afraid to criticise and demand high standards from those in power because they think to do so might come across as some kind of approval of alternatives.

    Or this…

    I also have a nagging suspicion that some of the problems with NZ politics are the fault of the bureaucracy that surrounds the MPs.

    Maybe it’s just that our system’s set up so that the political class really isn’t accountable to anyone, except the Prime Minister. But what happens when the PM’s allegedly in on it, too, or is otherwise simply not interested in enforcing accountability? What happens when the public can't reasonably hold the PM accountable in an election due to a lack of adequate alternative options?

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Jason Kemp,

    I like that the NZ public is being asked a hypothetical question this time around.

    If the flag was to be changed - A kind of - what would your preferences be vote scenario.

    I think that gets people to consider the alternatives and give them some kind of ranking if they want to take part.

    There is no way that you can cast a vote in this referendum that will be recorded as a protest

    And that is fine. Those people get their chance in the 2nd referendum.

    After all the worst thing that can happen ( after the 2nd referendum) is that we end up with the same flag or a flag that some of us don't like.

    And really given that I've never owned a flag or used one for any purpose - I'm just not bothered either way.

    There is of course a chance that the alternative some of us vote for will become the new flag and those people will be happy. What is not to like about simple pleasures.

    It is not like flag stuff is substantive at all. There are plenty of other ideas that are more important but getting a 1 in 5 chance of a change is worth a punt. Although the math is complicated by the second round - will the alternative beat the old one?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 363 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Jason Kemp,

    It would be nice if we weren't being manipulated ,don't you think? If the rules were being followed rather than willy nilly adding an extra flag just to get some votes no matter if it splits choices. Putting together a panel with conflict of interest and hey presto 3 silver ferns to choose from. Using a man passed away to make a point about silver ferns, completely inappropriate.The enormous waste of money, another point. Plus, an example of "substantive at all" will be on the lips of many war veterans. It's under the flag they stand and for the flag that they represent. I'll give them that respect if nothing else. Actually I guess you are relaxed about that, rereading your comment that you are "just not bothered either way.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • linger,

    “If anything’s repeated often enough"… it becomes normal usage, and possibly also perceived (if not actual) truth.

    Unintended consequence: It’s fascinating the way “relaxed” is now understood as “slack” in an ever-increasing range of contexts through its repetition by certain especially relaxed politicians.

    (Why do we have relaxed oversight, but stricter surveillance?)

    Even so, it seems unlikely any amount of repetition will convince NZers that Lomu Almighty wanted a change of flag to fit Our Relaxed Leader’s infernal preference.

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1876 posts Report Reply

  • victor brown, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    so why are we not just voting once for our one favourite flag? incase two flags get the exact same number of votes??

    waikato • Since Nov 2015 • 4 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to linger,

    Yes that was an intended pun. Shudda " and "

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to victor brown,

    so why are we not just voting once for our one favourite flag? incase two flags get the exact same number of votes??

    Because.... JohnKey

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • linger,

    parachuted in to head
    the party of the effluent
    squatting over us,
    his ethics and his bowels relaxed.


    (Why should Colin Craig have a monopoly on shit poetry?)

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1876 posts Report Reply

  • David Sherry, in reply to Chuck Bird,

    I am quite happy to change my name to Dick if it helps show this that awful process is seen for the farce it is. I wrote "None of these flags" and also wrote under the Red Peaks abortion that "this is a stolen design".

    I don't agree with Graeme though, invalid papers WILL be seen as a protest and the protest will be noted. If everyone who wants the NZ flag to remain does the same, John Key and his crowd WILL take notice that they need to prepare to vacate their cushy offices soon.
    For the record, I have always voted National and/or ACT - until now.

    Waitakere • Since Nov 2015 • 2 posts Report Reply

  • David Sherry, in reply to Jason Kemp,

    Herewith the rub. The flag MEANS something to a lot of us. Yet they are asking those who couldn't give a stuff to choose a flag based on their/yeh/nah/I'm just not bothered either way/what colour undies shall I wear today to me sort of thing.
    That is the real shame of this process 'cos "It is not like flag stuff is substantive at all".

    Waitakere • Since Nov 2015 • 2 posts Report Reply

  • victor brown, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    what's the purpose of voting for more than one flag? how does this ranking of five options work?

    waikato • Since Nov 2015 • 4 posts Report Reply

  • victor brown, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    Graeme, what is the reason for ranking all options? Rather than everyone just voting for their one favourite?

    waikato • Since Nov 2015 • 4 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to victor brown,

    If, during the count, your most preferred choice gets ruled out (by being least popular after counting first preferences), your vote is transferred to your second choice. Then, if your second choice remains least popular, your vote is transferred to your third. Then your fourth. Then your fifth. Eventually one of the options is left, and everyone's voted for it.

    Everybody wins!

    In practice, counting stops once an option hits 50% and it can't be overtaken.

    Preferential voting tends to make sure that a less popular option won't be elected as a consequence of a larger number of voters having their votes split between two similar options. If 60% of people wanted "a fern option" but split their first preferences 20/20/20, and meanwhile 30% wanted hypnoflag, then as long as those 60% ranked the three ferns first then we'd end up with the fern option which that 60% wanted most, instead of getting a hypnoflag which fewer people wanted.

    This, however, doesn't validate the mechanism by which everyone's choice was restricted or why we're doing this at all. That's really a question for the government.

    I think preferential voting would be a much fairer way to vote for MPs in electorates. It'd mean candidates disliked by a majority of voters couldn't so easily win as a consequence of votes being split against similar people running against them. Parties wouldn't have to do dumb things like telling their supporters to vote for someone else so as to avoid an even less preferred option. But it comes with the cost of fewer people understanding and trusting how the counting works, and that's also quite an important thing to consider.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • victor brown, in reply to izogi,

    ahhh, i see, Johnkey wants a fern.
    thanks for the explanation.

    waikato • Since Nov 2015 • 4 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.