OnPoint by Keith Ng

Read Post

OnPoint: What Andrew Geddis Said, But Shorter and With More Swearing

235 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 4 5 6 7 8 10 Newer→ Last

  • Idiot Savant, in reply to Michael Roberts,

    As I understand it the GG is actually appointed by the queen, albeit on the PM's advice. So Key would not be able to replace him if HM refused to play ball.

    They're also sacked by the queen on the PM's advice. For the monarch to refuse to act on such advice would be unthinkable, and time to roll out the constitutional guillotine.

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1713 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to George Darroch,

    A friend of mine’s quip on Facebook. In two senses, he’s absolutely right. The first is that anything that is being redacted is almost certainly something that should have been highlighted, and the second is that by redacting the entire thing they’ve highlighted just what they’ve done.

    That's an awesome paragraph, bro. Just sayin'.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22761 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX, in reply to Sacha,

    I'd welcome any journo drilling in to why Ryall has fought this so hard and so long.

    There is something lurking deep at the seat of all this evil.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1224 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Steve Curtis,

    New Zealand was not "an independent Commonwealth realm" before 1947, but a quasi-colony under British suzerainty.

    Britain appointed the Governor and then the Governor-General [EDIT: they were called G-G before they became independent of the UK] and directed the delay or veto of legislation. Note that it was not the Queen or King deciding on the veto, but the British government of the day.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Idiot Savant,

    And Whitlam was just too slow. Mutually Assured Dismissal as Lewis Holden called it. If Whitlam had fired Kerr first and appointed a more favourable G-G, he'd have stayed in office (until the yanks invaded or the Aussies voted him out, anyway).

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Homer, in reply to Susannah Shepherd,

    It would be a very odd RIS that consisted entirely of legal advice (especially on something like the carer legislation). The cost-benefit aspects should be releasable

    Most of the statement isn't blacked out - just a couple of whole pages, several isolated paragraphs and parts of sentences, and an entire column of all the tables which is labelled "Contents of this column legally privileged" (including the headings).

    I would be really interested in what has been redacted from table 8. The number is clearly a zero, but the row label itself is secret.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 82 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to Idiot Savant,

    In the case of so many policies national is rejecting ATM – food in schools, extended paid parental leave, or non-discriminatory home-care for the disabled – the costs are not unaffordable. Its just that these things rank behind irrigation subsidies to farmers and low taxes on the rich in National’s queue

    Don't forget umpty-billion-dollar motorways with negative economic returns, either.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to DexterX,

    There is something lurking deep at the seat of all this evil.

    In the very bowels...

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10641 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole,

    This whole thing just makes me so impotently furious. And the impotence just makes me more furious. Seriously, what can be done? Pretty much fucking nothing, as best I can tell, because these fuckers sure don't give a fuck about public opinion. And I'm quite certain that nowhere near enough people who own guns are going to get outraged and storm Parliament for it to matter.

    I should just be enjoying having a five-day-old son but, no, I have to have this shit charging around in my head as well.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • hitch lives, in reply to Idiot Savant,

    It's not odd at all - we only 'supposedly' support many principles, but like reeds in the wind, our politicians are only too eager to throw principle to the wolves of convenience and connivence. Foreshore & seabed and the ignorance of relevant UN treaties to which NZ has signed up to as lip-service are the most recent egregious examples.

    Since May 2013 • 1 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace, in reply to Matthew Poole,

    Congratulations Matthew. How lovely.
    I sympathise with your fury. I experienced that on Thursday afternoon. Cheering that at last the family caring issue had been addressed (which was one of the main things I was looking for in the Budget, being a disability policy enthusiast) but shortly after that realising it was actually a two finger reaction to the decade-long court case. Then anger at the passing of the whole thing on Friday under urgency, just like the National Standards legislation had been in 2008. And then the despair that no one outside the Facebook disability groups would notice or care.
    But they have. So there is hope.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3204 posts Report Reply

  • George Darroch,

    Dunne: "I saw all the Cabinet papers". There is presumably an unredacted version of this document that went to cabinet. Which was then censored before being given to Members of Parliament to vote on.

    I wish Patrick Gower would report shit like this, instead of literally making up leadership coups within the Labour Party. (He was today speculating that Andrew Little doing a lot of tweeting meant that he might be tilting for the leader's office. I wish I was making this up.)

    WLG • Since Nov 2006 • 2264 posts Report Reply

  • George Darroch,

    Hilary, how large (roughly) is the disability 'community', and how political are they?

    [Asking from ignorance.]

    WLG • Since Nov 2006 • 2264 posts Report Reply

  • George Darroch, in reply to Matthew Poole,

    Seriously, what can be done? Pretty much fucking nothing, as best I can tell, because these fuckers sure don’t give a fuck about public opinion.

    If they know they're losing votes, quite a bit. It depends on how organised sectors who are able to sway voters are. That, in this case, is the disability sector. In others, it might be the people of Canterbury, or any other affected population. We cannot rely on the media to facilitate any of this movement, we must do it ourselves.

    (Most things that are important are scarcely reported in this country.)

    WLG • Since Nov 2006 • 2264 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to George Darroch,

    it might be the people of Canterbury, or any other affected population.

    You mean those same people of Canterbury who elected a National Party MP into the formerly safe-Labour-seat of Christchurch East? That "affected population"?

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Idiot Savant, in reply to DexterX,

    There is something lurking deep at the seat of all this evil.

    Nothing we don't already know about: a deep-seated belief that its not the state's job to make sure that everyone gets a fair go.

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1713 posts Report Reply

  • Martin Sullivan, in reply to Ianmac,

    Ianmac

    My understanding is that the Ministry has always considered it culturally appropriate for whanau rather than strangers to care for their disabled members, and have always paid whanau to do so. So the Bill had no effect on whanau and this might have made it a lot easier for the Maori Party to supported it.

    Manawatu • Since Dec 2007 • 9 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Roberts, in reply to Idiot Savant,

    "They’re also sacked by the queen on the PM’s advice. For the monarch to refuse to act on such advice would be unthinkable, and time to roll out the constitutional guillotine."

    I can't see Queen Elizabeth getting her head chopped off (or the GG for that matter). The worst that might happen is that Key might resign and call a snap election, assuming he was willing to push his luck.

    Since May 2013 • 5 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens, in reply to Andrew C,

    and the officers there still, despite being repeatedly told by members of the public present that 3 stories was possible, tried really really hard to stick to the line it was only 2.

    Read transportblog, with the best comment ever from Stu Donovan
    on May 20, 2013 at 5:55 pm:

    "...does this imply that the people objecting to the 3 storey height limits, such as Auckland2040 are a bunch of uninformed snobs who don’t even know what currently exists in their own neighbourhoods..?"

    Sevilla, Espana • Since Nov 2006 • 2213 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Matthew Poole,

    You mean those same people of Canterbury who elected a National Party MP into the formerly safe-Labour-seat of Christchurch East? That "affected population"?

    That would be a massive surprise to the people of Christchurch East, and their MP, Lianne Dalziel. The National Candidate in Chch East was a guy you might have heard of before: Aaron Gilmore. He called himself "the National MP for Christchurch East", but that doesn't make it so.

    You are thinking of the people of Christchurch Central, who don't live there any more, because it's gone.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace, in reply to George Darroch,

    Hard to say. I mentioned somewhere that the rough estimate of self-identified disability in NZ is 20% of the population and that Carers NZ suggests that everyone will be at some point in their adult life either cared for or a carer. However, the activism is more diffuse. There are several Facegroup groups I follow, such as DPA NZ, Aspergers Syndrome NZ, We Care NZ (Carers NZ) and the current one shaming people who park in disabled car parks, and several with international membership such as the excellent Black Triangle Campaign for Disability Rights (UK) which Deep Red mentioned, and the Autistic Self Advocacy Network based in the US. There is a lot of sharing of relevant blogs. There are also DPOs for disabled people only (which I do not belong too as I am not).

    They are all political to a degree, some subject specific (eg Carers NZ is very active around carer type issues as you would imagine rather than disability rights per se, while others often reference the UNCRPWD). They are very good at sharing information, locally and internationally, and I guess good at keeping people connected when it is very easy to feel isolated.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3204 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to Emma Hart,

    You are thinking of the people of Christchurch Central, who don’t live there any more, because it’s gone.

    Ah, yes, my bad. However, the wider Canterbury area also didn't express particular disgust with their National Party MPs over the whole ECan thing.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Roberts, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    Actually the House of Lords vetoed a House of Commons bill when Lloyd George was PM at the turn of the twentieth century. It created a constitutional crisis and the king had to step in and instruct the lords to pass the legislation.

    Since May 2013 • 5 posts Report Reply

  • George Darroch,

    Hilary, thanks. I’ve had a few discussions with my Uncle on this matter (who I’m sure you know). Disability absolutely shouldn’t be a party-political issue, but when one party firmly has

    a deep-seated belief that its not the state’s job to make sure that everyone gets a fair go

    as I/S so succinctly put it, then it will have to be.

    At least until a subsequent administration, under which these are considered rights, rather than obligations – which can then be abrogated. Giovanni Tiso has written compellingly of how a ‘needs’ approach which allowed for shut doors was perpetuated under Labour, and elsewhere that they’re not sufficiently understanding the need or how to address it. Nevertheless, I think there’s room to move, and that a combined front that worked deeply with King, Mathers, Hague, and others, could make for a potent force.

    I understand that this would be hard; it means giving up the ability to influence the ear of Government. No matter how closed, some input ability is preferable to none. However, the environmental movement had to make this choice several years ago, and is now in an open war with this Government. The merits of this choice for disability are not mine to evaluate.

    However (again as an outsider, with all the caveats that entails) I think there’s a place for Big Disability, and that getting together as a political force (no matter what that political force decided on) would be quite useful.

    WLG • Since Nov 2006 • 2264 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    Sorry guys, I've been snatching posting moments in a very full, complicated day and clearly doing a terrible job of it. Feel embarrassed.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22761 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 4 5 6 7 8 10 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.