Posts by Jackie Clark
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Ah yes, Christian Rock. I'd rather listen to this...
-
That Jackie was Hyde's argument... 'three Maori councillors would be tokenistic, so let's have none, but we may allow them to have a little advisory committee that we can ignore'.
I'm agreeing with you Roger. What I was saying was that I don't see the need for representatives of other cultures (Niuean etc) to be represented, necessarily.
-
If biculturalism is the first step towards multiculturalism, and if biculturalism is served by Maori seats, then multiculturalism must be served by all seats being allocated to other ethnicities.
But that isn't what biculturalism is about, James. It is about recognising that we have a shared history, and that our stories intertwine. In my understanding, anyway. A bicultural nation is not necessarily the same as a multicultural society. I would find the concept of members of each ethnicity on this, or any, "supercouncil" highly tokenistic, and somewhat superfluous. Especially as, and once again this is only my limited understanding of what's been proposed, there will still be local representative boards, which will, assumedly, be comprised of people of all sorts from that local community, or borough, or whatever it is they are calling them. And as one who has studied the Treaty pretty extensively in the past, it would seem to me that the tenets of the document - and this is open to interpretation of course - are primarily partnership, reciprocity, communication and consultation. If that is the case, then we have a constitutional obligation, do we not? So yes, I'm all about tangata whenua being a partner in the formation of this super duper mega metropolis. And let's not forget that Tamaki Makaurau is nothing if not a very important part of this nation's pre European history. Much warred over, hard won - what has changed? On another tangent, did I hear right? Will the ARC be no more? That worries me.
-
It has a slo-mo replay mode!
I don't follow rugby so I have no idea who I'm perving at but a perve is a perve, right?
It's not perving, Isabel. It's just enjoying beauty. One may appreciate the aesthetic without sexualising. I mean, I don't want to have sex with them. But I do like to look. Okay, so it's perving.
-
Oh, I see. You're supposed to write something. Silly me.
And I have various spooky feelings about nature.
Yes. Same. Who could go into primeval bush, and not have those feelings? As to the religiosity or not of NZers, I must confess to being surprised that the survey shows less of us as Believers (note the capital B). I was of the impression just from driving around our fair city that church building was on the increase. But then that's just me. I understand that attendance at church imbues a sense of community for many, but I wonder, sometimes, why there are people who can't talk to their neighbours, and be kind to each other, without having some form of religious belief. I dunno. I'm also staggered that only 45% of us believe in the theory of evolution and that 40% of us think that same sex relationships are wrong. Because the whole thing says to me that people are wandering around, without a sense of community, and with no sense of connection to reality. Now, that's scary.
-
-
Huh. That guy didn't get to the Campbell Islands because the bloody boats only go once a month or so, and he was too late.
-
Oh, Emma, that was priceless. And I agree with Judy. It was nice, for once, to be in on an in-joke!
-
Tuttering and wittering? Now I'd join those.
-
DC. Please. Middleaged? Do not ever refer to 35 as middleaged again. I implore you. It's not fair to those of us who are <ahem> not 35. Nor are we 40. Nor are we......you get the picture.