Posts by George Darroch
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
What, you didn't go for the Just Des(s)erts?
Those are best served with Special Reserve, Aged White Drip (2004 Vintage).
-
no poll option for "needs seasoning" then?
John Key's blandness and lack of taste goes well with a range of drinks :
Rarely is he seen in a relaxed, informal setting without an acceptable drink: a glass of crisp white wine when at home, a bottle of some authentic South Island beer when he is grilling an authentic Kiwi barbecue with the Young Pretender in the garden of Government House, a bottle of the sponsor's beer when he is hanging out the gym with the All Blacks in a manly but not homo-erotic way.
I don't think it will do any lasting harm.
-
Perhaps I'm biased in all kinds of ways, but I'm still trying to get my head around Labour's irrational sense of entitlement and refusal to take the Lib-Dems seriously. It would be kind of funny if it wasn't so damn sad watching people in deep denial about how much things had really changed.
Nah, it's not just you. I don't have any emotional investment in the politics of that strange European country, but it confounds me to see how Labour have acted in such toxic ways for the last two decades, and particularly towards those with politics that in some imaginary world could be seen as similar to theirs.
I think that it's time for more Radiohead.
-
Emma, that's far more polite than anything I would have said!
-
PV has produced a two party system consistently. So it's not really much different to FPP on that score.
PV (AV) can give third parties who have enough votes in a particular constituency representation, as it essentially means that people don't have to split their vote. Australia lacks a centrist third party attracting more than 25% anywhere however, so most votes now fall to the side towards the Greens, or occasionally right/nationalist/libertarian/single issue parties.
Those are the reasons why it might be attractive to the Lib Dems. They can do well out of it. They should realise that if for any reason they start to fall under 25% they'll very likely face annihilation under PV. Hence the attractiveness of this system to both Labour and the Conservatives. It's proportional representation that locks in the major parties.
-
Since we are touching on Electoral Reform, can the Mansplainers in the house explain again why MMP is better than the Australian system? i.e. Preferential Voting.
Australia's system of preferential voting gives each voter a ballot in which they order their preferences. If their first preference is not elected their vote goes to their second, and so on (apologies if this doesn't really explain it - I can find few people even among the Australian National University's politics faculty who can in any detail). What this means in practice is that the largest two parties almost always win. It has literally been over four decades since a third party candidate made it into the lower house. Since the lower house is where most power lies (in theory the upper house is nearly equal, but not in practice), Labor and the Liberal-National coalition have guaranteed majorities and power, with all that that implies.
Some people like that, and I respect many of their arguments. However, the constraint it puts on policy debate is severe, particularly as the Australian parties tend to be very much controlled by their leaders and the caucus room. There's a narrowness of political debate and movement that NZ hasn't experienced for decades.
The upper house has multi-member electorates working on the same system. In theory you only need 16.7% of preferences to win, but depending on the deals Labor and the Coalition do with minor parties, it can be more or less, and they will almost always do everything in their power to shut out the Greens and Democrats, successfully destroying Dems representation over a series of elections. The 2004 election saw a senator elected with only 1.9% of the vote as a result of this kind of distortion.
-
I hope Clegg can see that the public "losing patience with him" is of no real concern at all. Those members of the public already didn't vote for him. If they want him to just shut up and roll over and give the Tories the keys to power with no concessions whatsoever, then they can just bloody lose patience.
The mediaocracy have their narrative, and they get upset when parties stray from them.
I've been surprised at how immature and one dimensional even the so-called 'serious' British media have been in their coverage and explanation of the election and its results. No wonder the poor British public are confused.
-
Australia (the Senate)
I disagree on proportionality in the Australian Senate.
Strictly speaking it's a multi-member electorate system with preferential voting. Because of preference deals, it often produces highly disproportionate results. The most infamous result in recent years was Senator Fielding of South Australia, elected with just 1.9% of first preferences (due to a deal with Labor). Labor and the Coalition usually work very hard to shut out Democrats and Greens.
I got to talk about electoral systems for 3 hours this week... I was very happy!
-
Feeling left out of the stalking love, can I perhaps controversially ask what aged care has in common with tobacco, whaling and shonky finance companies?
Well, Te Ohu Kaimoana are in there as well. I certainly hope they're not looking to make use of Inglewood's pro-whaling PR.
-