Posts by Gareth Ward
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
i think you'll find that "political advisers" held by minsters are actually *extremely* powerful gatekeepers in relation to their typical age and experience.
I don't doubt it
-
tenuous and high-flying existance that ministerial staffing.
"Yeah, I'm an under-assistant for inter-departmental liasons for the Minister. I like to live dangerously baby..."
Re the Cold War economy - read an interesting piece a while ago that described how the US economy was a high-savings, high-production one during WWII, but shifted to a low-savings, high-consumption model during the Cold War. It was a specific national security policy - they were the consumers of the production of their allies (ensure a strong export in their allies in the Iron Curtain and voila, nobody wants to give up that new TV to be a commie) -
Fiscal policy is the only game in town.
An issue we don't currently face in this economy.
Unfortunately, my view is that monetary policy in this country is more loosely coupled to productive growth than it is in the US - it flows through to the consumptive sector more than productive investment.I hasten to add that this view is based solely on an overall impression of our economy, not any kind of solid research
-
Linda Clark declared that she had only had one pamphlet in her letterbox in Ohariu-Belmont, and this was surely the fault of the EFA
In that case, leave the Act exactly how it is k thnx...
-
i was just glad to make it past the guards loading public servants into railcars...
On a related topic, how does redundancy work for the Ministerial staff who are now to be replaced? Is it redundancy with an associated package? And what about the MPs and/or Ministers themselves?
-
Apparently when FDR met Keynes he actually said something along the lines of "guy's a mathematician, not a politician"
-
Goff is the right choice to lead an Opposition - the next 18months will tell us if he's the right choice to lead a next Government
I will say I'm a fan of what I've seen of the man...
-
all MPs are legitimate, but some are more legitimate than others.
Excuse me a second while I just remove these words that have suddenly appeared in my mouth... =|
If you read through it all, I was extending it off the tongue in cheek comment that the "people want him there" - I agree with Kyle that all MPs are in Govt however they legally get there, but for ACT and it's supporters to be pushing the "people have spoken, Douglas should be a Cabinet Minister" schtick is rather a step too far in the other direction...
I'm not looking to disenfranchise the man. -
Well, everyone's got to have goals in life... ;)
Shit, really?! That's where I'm going wrong then...
But you can see my point (I hope) - I have no issue with list MPs being in Cabinet etc as the country has voted for that list through the party vote. And yup, ACT's party vote percentage gets them a Douglas (and a couple of others) - but only because of someone else winning an electorate. The system is designed on one-side to keep out the MPs of parties that don't meet 5%, although on the other-side it allows them in as part of the parcel to allow electorate representation. I just think that coming in that way gives you a little less of a "moral mandate" (to use that awful term) to demand Cabinet power in the way him and his buddies are.
But yes, you're right that he's an MP regardless. -
I think the only mandate there is, is the Chief Electoral Officer putting your name on the list of MPs. Anything after that you make through coalitions etc, not from the votes you do or don't get.
Spoilsport...
=P