Polity by Rob Salmond

Read Post

Polity: Cold, calculated and cynical

175 Responses

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

  • Alfie,

    Here we go again. Carter claims he "didn’t hear" Key’s offensive comments yesterday. Unlike everyone else in parliament and anyone who's viewed the video on TV or online. It’s not like Key was speaking quietly, was it. In fact he was shouting.

    Of course Carter couldn’t do anything about the incident or make Key apologise today because “any offensive comments had to be dealt with at the time of the offence.” Handy.

    Dunedin • Since May 2014 • 1386 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    Carter today ruled that he had "carefully" reviewed yesterday's tape, and concluded that Key said "you back the rapists" only once.

    I'm not a qualified lip-reader, but what does he say at approx. 55 seconds?

    http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/distant-riot-causes-unrest-at-home-2015111017

    Looks to me like he's repeating it. (Once or twice, it should make no difference, except ... the Speaker ruled that it was only once, and so Key did not have to apologise).

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1321 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Here's today's utter fucking horrorshow:

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • simon g, in reply to Russell Brown,

    In which he says:

    "There is no evidence of that remark being repeated".

    None that he wanted to see or hear.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1321 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald, in reply to Hilary Stace,

    (By the way the new Australian minister for disability issues has helped with this othering by calling disabled people a burden on the state)

    clickety clack, clickety clack...

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1344 posts Report Reply

  • Lucy Telfar Barnard, in reply to Russell Brown,

    utter fucking horrorshow

    A perfect description. Chills of horror is exactly what I felt watching it – to see all those women shut down… If you want to know what rape culture looks like, that’s (one facet of) it.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 580 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Speaker totally out of his depth. What a mess.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace, in reply to Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    Those women are so brave and must be so angry. Photo here of them in the foyer together following their walk out or ejections. Interestingly, the article is by one of the press gallery women who is usually very supportive of the PM

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/73925970/parliament-in-fresh-uproar-over-prime-ministers-rapist-remark

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Angela Hart, in reply to Hilary Stace,

    Speaker totally out of his depth

    He's a speaker in name only.

    Christchurch • Since Apr 2014 • 614 posts Report Reply

  • Lucy Telfar Barnard, in reply to Angela Hart,

    Well, if you take the meaning of "speaker" as something that magnifies the volume of sound input elsewhere...

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 580 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Hilary Stace,

    Those women are so brave and must be so angry. Photo here of them in the foyer together following their walk out or ejections. Interestingly, the article is by one of the press gallery women who is usually very supportive of the PM

    On that note, bias among political journos is quite normal. What’s not so normal is when political journos deliberately repackage their partisanism as impartiality - which effectively makes it a case of journalistic entryism and a cynical shifting of the Overton window.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5418 posts Report Reply

  • chris, in reply to Seriatim,

    I suspect Little was implying ONE decent house each to LIVE in, before bothering about anyone (of any kind of surname) acquiring further houses for profit!

    Thanks for the update. Now about those detainees...

    Mawkland • Since Jan 2010 • 1302 posts Report Reply

  • Lilith __, in reply to ,

    Making a joke of deafness? That’s a really shitty thing to do. There was a deaf MP in the House, and she walked out. Show some respect.

    Dunedin • Since Jul 2010 • 3887 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to ,

    Have sent an email in support of the Speaker….

    Mr. Speaker,

    Here is the contact details for the appropriate support agencies.

    The National Foundation for the Deaf

    Please don't link real hearing organisations with this, Rosemary. As Lilith notes, the sole deaf MP was one of the women who walked out.

    Given that there wasn't much else to the comment but the bung joke, I've deleted it.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    So how does the house remove an incompetent and biased speaker?

    Serious question, given his/her ability to shape the debate in the chamber, it is important the speaker is unbiased and has a competent understanding of the rules of the house (as well as an ability to hear shouted abuse and read and comprehend the Hansard).

    If the speaker is biased in his/her rulings and also incompetent then surely there must be a mechanism to remove him or her.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4451 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Steve Withers,

    But the thing that confounds me is the possibility that maybe 47% of Kiwis are just as unethical and arrogant as Key and his party. Really? I hope not.

    I'm also confounded by some people who constantly apologise and outright mock or insult anyone who disagrees with their chosen ideology (as is rife in Stuff and Herald comment threads for example---you're not with me so you must be "ONE OF THEM"), but I don't think all those 47% of voters are like that based on various friends and family of mine who claim to have voted National for whatever reason. People decide what to vote for on any number of issues, but it doesn't necessarily mean they like everything about what they're voting for. Even with the Dirty Politics stain, maybe partly because of it, the opposition still wasn't exactly doing a fantastic job of showing it could provide a good alternative.

    I think a wider issue is possibly that many people are afraid (or unmotivated) to demand quality and integrity from those they do vote for, as if they somehow think that to do so is an implied endorsement of what they might dislike even more.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • william blake,

    "I’m not seeing the source. It’s like mushrooms. "

    Sometimes they clarify things other times they just make you cry, politicians and shrooms.

    Since Mar 2010 • 378 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Journalists who've seen the list of crimes attributed to New Zealanders held on Christmas Island say there are no rapists or murderers among them.

    Some bad people, sure, but it appears the Prime Minister was making shit up yesterday.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • Martin Brown,

    Mr Speaker

    Auckland • Since Mar 2013 • 136 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Today in a nutshell, for those just catching up ...

    Carter acknowledged that Key yelling "you back the rapists!" at Labour and the Greens yesterday was unparliamentary. But then said that Key couldn't be required to apologise because no one objected at the time. When Opposition MPs pointed out they *had* objected, Carter said they had taken "four and a half minutes" to do so, which was too long. Those four and a half minutes were actually taken up with points of order objecting to the other instances of Key's "backing the rapists" line, which Carter ruled were okay because he'd used the word "if". It was a farce whose only possible purpose can have been to protect Key from having to withdraw and apologise. Then it got really awful. Several female MPs rose to say that as victims of sexual violence, they were offended – Carter started cutting the mic on them and then allowed Marama Davidson (who he'd bullied the day before) to get as fas as "As the victim of a sexual assault ..." before actually expelling her from the House. That was when the walkout happened.

    Key told Gower he wouldn't be correcting or apologising for what he said yesterday.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    If the speaker is biased in his/her rulings and also incompetent then surely there must be a mechanism to remove him or her.

    The Governor-General? The Ombudsman (when she's not too overloaded)?

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5418 posts Report Reply

  • Seriatim, in reply to chris,

    Same subject, matey - caring for those in need.

    Wellington • Since Dec 2010 • 57 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Kumara Republic,

    In Britain, it only happened to John Trevor in the 17th century because he was done for bribery. The only other known case was Michael Martin, in the midst of the parliamentary expenses scandal.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5418 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Kumara Republic,

    The Governor-General? The Ombudsman (when she’s not too overloaded)?

    It's really a question for someone with the right legal expertise for something authoritative, but as far as I can tell this is ruled by sections 12 and 13 of the Constitution Act 1986.

    And as I read those two sections, it seems to be that:

    * The House elects a speaker immediately upon its first sitting, and immediately on the first meeting after any vacancy.
    * The Speaker gets to continue in their job unless they "vacate office" or unless Parliament dissolves or expires.

    Have I understood this correctly?

    Section 13 in particular seems to strongly suggest that the Speaker can't be dumped by others, if I understand its tone, meaning that maybe they have to resign or die. Or are there other ways they could "vacate their office"?

    Other than that, dissolve parliament, have a new election and elect a new speaker? If parliament could be convinced to agree to replacement and he didn't want to resign, some kind of informal golden handshake style enticement is probably more likely.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    If there was a way to get rid of a Speaker, the Nats would have used it on Margaret Wilson.

    You could call a vote of no coinfidence, but the party benefitting from bias is hardly going to add their votes.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19686 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.