The Cadwalladr talk is brilliant, eh. Let's hope there is a lot of media attention on masters Topham and Guerin before both the local body elections this year and the national ones next year.
we are worried about being a target for gangs and burglaries – another reason not to trust ol plod with a database
That seems like a fair reservation.
the undue haste with which this process has been conducted
We can all keep perfectly calm
you want to build an argument to change the law of this country
at least fifty of those recently. game over.
Because you did a little bit of academic study, and a bit of internship, and maybe some work around the outskirts of the 12 step programs and now make a living out your addiction job, doesn’t automatically make you an expert.
You are making a lot of assumptions there. Unlikely to help the conversation.
Yes, and smart leaders like Chlöe sure help with that.
The real meat is in the drafting of the Act itself and National are idiots to not want to join in on that.
They will prefer clean hands, to help wreck the law at their next opportunity in power. Booze barons will donate handsomely.
There’s the notion of a citizen’s jury, which is what happened in Ireland around the abortion referendum. But what I think could work, and this is just an idea, it’s obviously not set in stone, is to have a specialist select committee that works on it.
I believe Chlöe is right about the latter option. I wish we used them for many public policy decisions but citizens' juries do have some limitations:
Ideal circumstances for use
- Issues are well defined, but a political consensus on the how to tackle the issue is not in place.
- You want to consider value-based questions (citizen juries are less suitable for considering technical questions).
Drafting this law change might fail both those tests.
the repercussions will be longstanding and deep
Meaningful change ought to provoke some resistance. However, it will prevail this time.