Posts by Rich of Observationz
-
Don: By "Labour" are you referring to UK Labour. Because they aren't even the ghost of a left-wing party. They're a hard-right party with an urban rather than a rural base.
Ok, so politics is the art of the possible, but what required an alleged left-wing party to:
- fabricate evidence to justify joining Bush in the Iraq invasion
- introduce laws allowing anyone to be convicted of an entirely arbitrary crime
- use an almost entirely spurious terrorist threat to introduce unprecedented systems for tracking and surveillance
- criminalise the mere expression of ideas
- use public funds to bribe a corrupt foreign state's rulers to buy weapons, and block attempts to investigate this scandalA conspiracy theorist could conclude that the hard right realised that the game would be up for Thatcher at some stage and decided to take over Labour in order to block the voters from choosing a left-wing government.
-
At least one of those items is illegal in NZ.
-
Though, to be fair, your timing -- days after the anniversary of the D-Day landings when quite a few people were killed by actual fascists
Hey, I could write a little program where you type in a date and it comes up with a suitable WW2 anniversary.
April 12th: Only weeks after the anniversary of the Norwegian Campaign, when quite a few people were killed by actual fascists
March 22nd: Only weeks after the anniversary of the Dresden bombings, when a few actual fascists were killed by people
-
Surely it would make sense for councils to get a share of GST spent in their areas?
I think local communities should be able to choose their taxation model on any fair and workable basis, e.g. rates, local income tax, tourist taxes. The one tax that doesn't fit well into this is GST, because if a local district had say 15% GST, people would just shope elsewhere.
Communities (which need not be geographic) should be able to choose their own form of local government. One could see each council having a "charter" that defines what it does, how much tax it can raise, etc.
For instance, we in Central Wellington could control our own roads, cultural facilities, planning and maybe education provision. Wellington City could have water, buses and health. The regional council could run the rail network and strategic planning. If we wanted to change this, we could do so by a charter vote.
-
Also, what is the purpose of the permanent suppression order?
It can't be to protect evidence for a future trial, because there can never be one.
Is it to protect David Bain's reputation from evidence that couldn't be tested in court? If so, couldn't that be done by stripping privilege from the information so he could sue for libel if he wanted, but the mere publication wouldn't be contempt?
-
How about the Google cache?
-
That's why you need STV voting in Auckland. It's much fairer and much more empowering.
It's fairer. Fairest would be to have councillors elected by a proportional system who then elect a leader. That ensures that the leader (or "mayor", if you must) has a consensus behind them. (Much as for national elections, really).
I would point out that last time Banks and/or the Citrats would have won in any system, based on those voting. Most times however, that wouldn't be the case. In '04, for instance, we may have got a Labour mayor.
Plus the Auckland urban region (containing as it does South and West Auckland) would most likely elect a Labour-led council quite often, based on parliamentary polling. The Banks-o-mander being pushed through is deliberately designed to neutralise this tendency.
-
ask a few people when they're heading into exile.
On the 22nd, since you ask, to visit numerous countries with left-wingish governments, plus Britain. But only till the weather warms up, which, despite the maladministration of the Key government, will most likely be this spring.
as long as we have secret ballots in this country
How are we assured that a postal vote *is* secret, really?
Also, I had a vote in Auckland, but couldn't bring myself to choose between Banks and Hubbard. If I'd had a chance to vote Green, or even Labour, I'd have taken it. Voting for a choice of two right-wing personalities I fundamantally disagree with is not my idea of a fair electoral system.
-
I get the impression (as a fairly new member) that the Green Party has been quite succesful in building a membership of people who will pay $50 and put a sticker on their car, but less so of the type of people who join traditional parties and go out in the rain, etc.
Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except when an election comes along.
Also, pulling stuff like this isn't going to get certain Green councillors my help at election time, but that's a personal view..
-
I believe obstruction is the normal charge when one disobeys the lawful instructions of a police officer.
But is that applicable if you weren't personally instructed, but just snuck through somebodies back yard?
Also, what is a "lawful instruction"? Do the police have a right to exclude the public from an area?
(I'm not arguing that it isn't sensible for them to try and do so, but am interested in when they can cordon off an area - to stop people protesting, for instance?)