Hard News: Political Idol, or whatever you want to call it
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
paynter, in reply to
There's your word of the year right there.
My take is that if the Government can legislate to take away caregivers' rights to compensation and to legally challenge Government decisions, then the precedent has already been set, and the casino company in question should not be surprised to find its own property and legal rights legislated away in a similar fashion.
Rob Stowell, in reply to
A consequence of reneging on the 30 year part of deal would be that other parties in future might not believe the government if they attempted to negotiate such a deal again. It would set up a precedent that corporations couldn’t buy our laws, so we’d never be able to sell them again. I think I could not only live with that, but indeed would actually prefer that.
ETA: And the consequence of not undoing this deal is that there is now a precedent for making deals like this. It’s the thin end of a scary wedge, IMHO. If we are going to start eroding the supremacy of our own parliament, I’d rather we did it on things like human rights, rather than corporate rights.
I'm only replying so I can read this again :) Beautifully put, Ben.
Matthew Poole, in reply to
The only rights that matter, as far as the current regime are concerned.
Lucy Telfar Barnard, in reply to
You mean… work together? Across party lines?
Even if the parties can't or won't do this, I was thinking more that whichever company was wanting to sign the contract should go to the opposition and say "hey, here's what we're trying to thrash out with the Government, could you live with that?"
For example, back when Gregory Fortuin was appointed Race Relations Commissioner, he made a point of going to the (then National) opposition and saying basically "The [Labour} Government have offered me this job, but would you have any objections to my appointment".
If something similar were done when entering into a contract with the government, there'd be greater confidence that the deal would be less likely to be undone with a change in government. The onus is as much on the other party as on the Government to ensure there's cross-party support - possibly more, since they're the ones who'll lose out if the next Government renegs.
llew40, in reply to
maybe, but politics is a blood sport, so while it would be nice to think that any opposition will consider such an approach entirely on its merits, I'm cynical enough to think that political opportunism will always be a factor.
Mark's hissed theory...
Welcome to the 'Lie dream of a casino soul'
There's a silent rumble
In the buildings of the night council
It's a meeting of controllers
Who drive right through the gates
In white roll-tops
And i guess this just goes to show
The lie dream of the casino soul...
Meanwhile in the sticks
Proles rich, dance in cardboard pants
And i guess this goes to show
The lie dream of a casino souls scene
Anyone wanting to send John Key or Steven Joyce a copy of this essential Fall track - you are in luck I have one on Trade Me at the moment...
Hebe, in reply to
Fall track? I’ll raise you The The. This thread makes me think of the “this will be the day/when things will surely change” line. The Muldoon-Thatcher-era parallels in our political landscape and society are startling to me. Or did I not get enough sleep?
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
I’ll raise you The The...
thanks for that, but...
...I prefer my 'This is the Day' with more 'Beef'!
Hebe, in reply to
‘This is the Day’ with more ‘Beef’!
Haven't heard of that before. BMT.
Post your response…
You may also create an account or retrieve your password.