Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Don - in base terms, a welfare state is one that gives you money to raise your children, a Nanny state is one that tells you how to raise your children. I'd note that my use of the terms was largely rhetorical to get across the point that the Conservative vote Field might take wouldn't be to National's detriment.
More honourable than those he left behind - no. But I probably think more of him in some sense than I otherwise would have. Much in the same way I started to admire Milosevic in his final years...
Paul - I've no problem with the existence of politicians who vote against everything. I don't think I'd vote for them, but ACT (particularly of late) seems to be setting itself apart as a party that opposes state intervention. The alternative of "well, I oppose the unbundling of the local loop, for example, so I'll make it so only those who support it are in Parliament" would be a little odd :-)
-
If Copeland wants to fight the bill, that's fine. But to say that he is resigning on PRINCIPLE is false.
Or his principle is that the Government shouldn't interfere in NZer's family lives. And he doesn't want to be a member of a political party that doesn't hold to that principle.
-
Copeland's rationale for resigning seems more that United Future won't adopt a policy that it will undo this given the chance, rather than anything shorter term.
In this sense, his defection is more akin to how the Greens left the Alliance - we won't be standing with you at the next election, so it would be wrong for us to stay in your party now.
-
Yes, Copeland is arguing against a conscience vote - did he ever argue in favour of one (perhaps other than rhetorically)? Or did he instead seek to argue the merits of the bill (or argue that the consciences of certain Government MPs should force them to leave the Government)?
I suspect his view is that as UF is a strong supporter of New Zealand families it should have been opposing a bill that would make something most New Zealand families consider a pretty normal part of raising a family a criminal offence.
There is nothing absurd in saying that this bill should not be a conscience vote (and nothing absurd in saying that it should, either).
-
nic - IF you voted for UF then it's highly likely you wanted your party to vote against the anti-smacking bill and would also like them to promise to repeal it.
This is what you'd have wanted...
-
Paul - Copeland personally opposed the bill, but believed his party should also oppose the bill (as some 90%+ of its supporters agree). His personal opposition was so strong that he was not happy being a member of a political party that did not oppose the bill.
-
Robert - there are only MPs, not first class and second class MPs.
Gordon Copeland is in Parliament because enough people voted for the United Future list so that the top three people on that list would be in Parliament - he's in Parliament, so he's in Parliament - if people don't want him there, then they can kick him out in 2008.
Those who think list MPs are Clayton's MPs who don't have the rights of other MPs should be calling for the return of First Past the Post.
To be honest, I'm surprised Copeland didn't pull out an Anderton-esque I didn't leave my party, my party left me.
-
If Taito Philip Field's party pulls a further 1% of the conservative Christian vote, so much the worse.
This depends on where Field pulls it from.
I've little doubt that Future New Zealand with 1 or 2 % of the vote will be to the detriment of a National-led coalition Government, but a Phillip Field-led party - assuming he actually runs - might instead pull coservative (perhaps PI) votes from Labour.
Field is conservative, and his supporters are conservative, but they're not market-liberals, they're Social Democrats who believe in a strong welfare state - just not a nanny state.
Time to start the discussion on the abolition of the undemocratic threshold? Certainly not my cup of tea, but Destiny New Zealand scored enough votes at the last election to get Richard Lewis into Parliament. What right in a democracy have the rest of us to tell them to stuff off unless they earn enough votes for 6 MPs?
-
For now, it would be nice to hear someone in the MSM ask Wishart whether Idour was a source and, if so, how that squares with his statement in September last year emphatically denying he had ever used Idour as a source.
Simple:
One - protect your sources.
Two - have only used him since September. -
We don't exempt any other section of the population from assault law
'Cept Passengers on aircraft and ships. Masters of ships and pilots of aircraft can use reasonable force to maintain discipline...