Posts by Jason Kemp
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
What a perfect way to spend a Sunday afternoon. Thanks for putting these events on. I heard more than enough insights from the attendees both on the stage and off it.
What stayed with me though were the comments by Tina about having a seat at the table. I work at the edge of lots of projects around the place and I would echo that. There are often a handful of the same people involved in many projects and they would love more input from all of us.
What I liked about this IRL was the sheer range of topics. Everything from Brexit to data journalism. I thought ex Waikato farmer John Lord might have got a namecheck on the legalisation talk although maybe the mentions of Colorado implied that.
I wish I had written it down but perhaps best quote came from Harkanwal Singh who was surprised to learn that a story didn’t need to be true to get published or something along those lines.
His comments about how stories get up to 2 hrs of prime space and then they disappear if they don’t get clicks seems right but it is still worrisome. It does mean that editors are not being editorial they are going for the lowest quality metric.
Now watching the video so I can check that one and it is:
"Things don’t have to be true to be published"
-
Perhaps because it wasn’t a public transport initiative, the multi-million-dollar bungle with the “dead” lane on the St Lukes interchange never seems to have registered as a headline.
Somewhat bemused at this one. From what I can tell the lane on the bridge is closed because they couldn't bowl the 6 trees. The off ramp from the motorway on that side was also bungled which is probably a contributing factor.
Why can't it be used as a cycle lane at least?
-
I wonder if the graphic might be useful.
PDF link below
our-atmosphere-and-climate-2017-at-a-glance-poster.pdfSome good news tucked away about ozone levels dropping :)
-
Hard News: All Change, in reply to BenWilson,
This here, what happened yesterday, is why we chose MMP, more than once. It’s politics of consensus, it’s lots of talk and a lot less arbitrary power and arrogance.
I like it. I heard an interview this morning on Radio NZ. Note:
It was Annette KingSomeone asked about Winston and the Bolger government. That didn’t collapse till Shipley took power in a coup. Apparently she had been undermining Peters previously and that is what happened. People don’t remember the full context.
I am not a fan of Peters but he has been around since the 70’s and he clearly has some skills in the back room. I’m happy the Greens have a seat at the table this time even if it is slightly removed. That is just the way the votes came out.
If the Greens had 9 seats the NZF had 8 I doubt a deal could have been done so this is great.
Bill English has made history it being the second time he has inherited a prime ministership only to lose it all.
We need some vision and leadership and going with a new government is much smarter than retreading the same old team for a fourth term.
I’m hoping National might even be a half way decent opposition. There are plenty of ( now ex) cabinet ministers that needed to wake up.
-
Hard News: Cycle infrastructure: the…, in reply to Russell Brown,
Thanks Russell. I had seen photos before but the stone wall made me think it was at Greenlane.
-
Legal Beagle: Election 2017: the no…, in reply to Nick Kearney,
I suspect if there wasn't a threshold more parties would be formed, and therefore more parties represented in parliament.
I agree. Removal of the threshold would change voter behaviour. One recommendation back in 2012 was to drop from 5% to 4% - maybe that is part of the answer. Not complete removal but a different %
-
Where is that first photo (rainbow one) taken please. A street address.
-
So what happened to the recommendations from the 2012 Review of MMP. As I recall nothing was changed even there were at least 6 recommendations that would have helped a fairer system.
-
So back in 2012 there was a referendum on MMP. Dropping the target % from 5% down to 4% was one of the recommendations. Getting rid of the overhang etc. was also in there.
From memory none of the recommendations were adopted. Is that the case and if the proposed rule changes diminish the two big parties share then none of the MMP rules will change just like the reallocation.
-
Legal Beagle: Election 2017: the Special…, in reply to dave stewart,
We lament people not voting, yet we effectively flush 5 MP’s worth of votes!
But then we add that back into the calculation. I'm not clear whether this is before or after the special votes have been counted though?
"the parties not reaching the threshold have been disregarded the percentage share for each of the remaining parties has increased."
