Not even the Ombudsman can do anything? If worst comes to worst, what possibility of going to the UN Human Rights Council or the World Court?
The Ombudsman is not a court or tribunal, and so still has jurisdiction. They might very well find that a family care policy was improperly discriminatory or simply wrong - but at best they can issue a recommendation. It is unthinkable for government to refuse to obey such recommendations, but so is ousting the jurisdiction of the HRC and courts...
As for the UN, they're the ultimate fallback. We're oddly not a party to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (which allows international complaints), but the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR could be used instead. However, international complaints require the exhaustion of all domestic remedies first, and they're quite strict about this, so a case would have to be brought and kicked back by the Supreme Court first. Even then, if a complaint succeeds, the decision is not binding on the government. Its embarassing, but that's not an effective remedy.
Clare Curran usually hyperventilates a bit much for my liking, but her Pundit column on Geddis, the Crown Minerals Act and various other elisions of democracy is worth reading
That would be Claire Browning.
what the fucking fuck!
this is WRONG and yes i actually yelled at my computer
Plus fucking one.
Clare Curran usually hyperventilates a bit much for my liking, but her Pundit column on Geddis, the Crown Minerals Act and various other elisions of democracy is worth reading.
Claire Browning =/= Clare Curran.
We’re oddly not a party to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (which allows international complaints)
That's not that odd. We're not a party to the optional protocols allowing complaints to UN bodies about a bunch of the international treaties to which we are party.
I think the council is explaining this poorly, but I don’t think there has been intent to deceive.
Perhaps. But maybe you had to be there. When someone stands up and says 3 stories are possible and are told, no its 2, that's a bit worse than mumbling your words or cocking up your marketing of an idea...
I was there for other reasons though, Significant Ecological Areas (sea's) was the topic that interested me, so I am only going by what I saw with my eyes half closed.
BTW if anyone has an SEA across your property, and you can check here, it wouldn't be a bad idea to get up to speed with what it will mean to you.
Clare Curran .... her Pundit column on Geddis, the Crown Minerals Act and various other elisions of democracy is worth reading
Add to that taking over Christchurch, New Zealand's second-largest city.
The whole thing is part of the wider issue of Auckland being dragged kicking & screaming from overgrown country town to proper globalised city.
It defies logic for a city to be bursting at the seams while the rest of the country seemingly empties out. Unless of course, you're setting up a business that supposedly needs to be on the next flight to LAX/LHR/NRT at a moment's notice.
Add to that taking over Christchurch, New Zealand’s second-largest city.
Add to that condescending indifference at best towards Wellington. That means the usual suspects are effectively offside with NZ's 3 biggest cities - notice a pattern here?
It defies logic for a city to be bursting at the seams while the rest of the country seemingly empties out.
doing something about it either way requires a plan, and as their opposition to the UP and PT and any regional development plan indicates, this government is ideologically opposed to plans.
before the civilian steals my thunder..
this government is ideologically opposed to plans.
Unless of course, the plan involves effectively raising the barriers to entry to full participation in society. Just like a cartel from a high school economics textbook.
Mentioned in passing on Stuff. The Granny was a bit better, but not headline stuff.
Stop Press: Govt slammed over censored caregiver legislation
“It defies logic for a city to bursting at the seams…”
Actually, it’s perfectly logical. It has been the continued trajectory of human social evolution for 10,000 years. There have been some attempts at reversing urbanisation – e.g Cambodia – but none successful AFAIK.
though the legislation itself is described in the Herald article (para 2) merely as
Legislation which allowed people who cared for disabled family members to get paid by Government
which gives prominence to [the Government’s] spin regarding what the bill accomplishes (and what its opponents oppose),
and which, regardless of intent, is likely to misdirect public attention
(bearing in mind the solid research showing that contradictory details buried past the third paragraph of a story either don’t get read or aren’t retained by readers).
This is fucking scary. Here in Canterbury we’ve been treated to a preview of the nominal democracy y’all will be getting.
Our regional council was placed under statutory management in 2010, because it did not simply rubberstamp massive new irrigation projects. The dry Canterbury Plains, perfect for arable farming, are being turned over to dairying, which steals massive amounts of water and pollutes the land and drinking water. EColi contamination in the public water supply in mid-Canterbury is already common.
Our Parliament this year approved the continued suspension of regional elections , meaning we may get an election in 2016, unless a further suspension of our voting rights is made.
Also in 2010, following the September Quake, we got a law that put Gerry Brownlee in charge of our “Earthquake Response and Recovery”, giving him absurdly wide-ranging powers to override existing laws. That law was replaced after the February 2011 earthquake with the CERA Act, which extended “emergency” powers for another five years. While we technically still have City Council elections, any decision they make can be overriden by CERA at will. Which is what happened with the CCC’s Draft Plan for our new central city, produced after extensive consultation and over 100,000 public submissions. The Council Plan was thrown out by CERA, who produced their own Plan, and they are now compulsorily acquiring properties for it to be built. They also require that Christchurch residents pay for the new plan, and that the City Council sell our assets if required to raise money. They are forcing us to pay for new facilities that we don’t want, and have had no input into.
Then there are the school closures, rushed through while Chch people are exhausted and half-crazy in the aftermath of 4 major disasters. Already-devastated communities are being torn apart at the whim of the Education Department, on trumped-up excuses, in the face of all advice, and against the wellbeing of the children.
It’s happening here, now. This government has no respect for democratic rights and processes. The very least we can do is kick up a mighty stink.
Interesting that apparently the Maori Party voted this through. Must ask one of the party, why?
Must ask one of the party, why?
Just as long as you don’t ask Pita Sharples, he won’t have a clue why.
Technically, the legislation was part of the budget, hence covered by the MP's agreement for confidence and supply.
That, and they wouldn't have read it before voting.
It defies logic for a city to be bursting at the seams while the rest of the country seemingly empties out
More than half of NZ's population has lived in cities for over a century now, despite the rural myth we continue with.
However we only have one world-scale city. That's where most new settlers and busineses want to be, so they are close to the right opportunities and services and people that scale attracts.
That's why StatsNZ projects Auckland to have 60% of all the nation's population increase over the next few decades - and where that extra million people we've heard about comes from. Listening to some squawkers, you'd think the Council has gone and set it as an optional target on their own or something.
We either plan for that future, or keep fuming in traffic jams from our sprawling suburbs and building half-arsed harbour bridges that need clip-ons just a few years later, or motorways to nowhere that chew up all the funds.
As a disabled person and someone currently studying towards a law degree, this is alarming to me on many levels.
Aside from the fact that this Government has clearly shown that they consider disabled people nothing more than a financial burden to society, and therefore a group underserving of the most basic of human rights, the blatant disregard of democratic process is very worrying.
Perhaps the saddest thing is that, while there are disabled people working very hard to advocate and influence from the inside of these organisations, taking a moral stand against this puts them at risk of losing their jobs and thus, their ability to influence. So, how are we supposed to make any kind of change?
Even more interesting is that the Minister for Disability Issues is the co-leader of the Maori party, which voted this through...
What does that say?
What does that say?
Asleep at the wheel? And that's the kindest interpretation :(
Tories can't do numbers? How many of the swingers can they severely piss off and win in 2014?
Well that appears to (continue to) say "Much like ACT and United Future, the Maori party is a party for hire".