Posts by George Darroch
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Drivers don't all get to band together to vote on whether membership of the AA should be compulsory, and nor should students.
But there are bodies that are non-Government yet regulate and have significant compulsory elements. Fish and Game New Zealand is such an organisation. New Zealand Historic Places Trust is another, and there are plenty more examples.
Such organisations are recognised as providing the kind of governance that is needed in that area, filling a lacuna that other forms of Government have left open. Replacing semi-official students organisations with state mandated compulsory students representative/governance structures is one option, but it isn't what the VSM crowd are proposing.
In practice, opt in representation and governance means much weaker ability to perform core functions. Which is what this all comes down to - VSM folks don't believe that students should be represented by a representative body, but instead by private associations.
-
But isn't it absurd that if Carter had (quite understandably) missed that final kick, the calls for Henry's passport to be revoked so he couldn't return from Sydney would have been deafening and letting Deane go would be held up as the greatest loss to NZ statehood since Savage's funeral?
Quite. And the attacks on the referee would have been constant. The consistent Australian defence made slow play and penalties inevitable, which is unfortunate but a fact of life. And with a lot of penalties there will inevitably be wrong calls, even with such an experienced ref.
-
I was talking to a Scottish guy who couldn't believe I was going for the English, but we eventually agreed that what it boils down to is your general proximity to the tossers that inhabit the victor nation.
I support whoever is playing Australia. With one exception, the English.
It was a strange series, and while Australia deserved to lose the last test, I'm not so sure about the series.
I have to say that the English deliberately playing slow in the first test was awful to watch, and they shouldn't have got away with it. Constant drinks breaks, putting the physio on the field, doing nothing between bowls and overs. They were fined for doing the same in the fourth, but slow play in a test should be a forfeit. And the pitch in the fifth was awful, and gave the English a significant advantage after winning the toss.
Still, it was only Australia losing, so nothing to worry about.
-
I'm surprised that amid all this debate about smacking, there hasn't really been much discussion of whether smacking is actually an effective form of child discipline.
I'm completely unsurprised. I wish I was surprised...
-
-most- of the No vote aren't sadists, but by voting that way they are excusing the people who are.
Absofuckinglutely. Does New Zealand think it is acceptable to hit kids? All the public emoting about how Lillybing and dozens of other dead children are a national tragedy.
I've been close enough to know that beatings, abuse, and serious physical harm result from and start under the guise of "good parental correction".
I really do think that the darkness of character (resentment, violence, dislike of others) that characterises the other side of New Zealand never truly went away. And once again there are public figures tapping it to their own advantage, while those with the power to condemn them stay silent.
-
I can't figure out why the powers-that-be haven't used reaction time tests to determine driver impairment by any cause, alcohol, illegal or legal drugs, fatigue, dementia, stupidity, whatever. Even the simple ruler test will pick up that someone shouldn't be in control of a car. Dangle a 12" rule in front of the testee, with their finger and thumb ready to try to grab the rule as it is released. A drunk will be lucky to react in time to catch the rule at all.
I don't want to understate the impact that most drugs, including alcohol have on driving. I don't want people on the road who have consumed any drug that affects their state of consciousness. But a very large number of fatal accidents involve lack of sleep as a sole or co-factor. 20 hours without sleep is about equivalent to a blood alcohol level of 0.05.
That man driving home after a night in the club is putting himself and others at risk, because he has taken a substance, and has not slept since the previous morning.
Unfortunately, sleep deprivation has been chucked in the too-hard basket, as far as enforcement goes. There is simply no good way to test for it at the moment.
The Victorian TAC does advertise very heavily on the issue, and ACC should too. The message also needs to be - if you're exhausted, take a taxi. I've driven home from the clubs a few times at 6am, and it's not something I'd recommend.
-
Caffeine is a significantly performance enhancing drug, but not illegal. Athletes not using it disadvantage themselves...
-
I don't remember Anderton behaving like this in his ministerial roles during the fifth Labour Government.
It's different of course, but Helen Clark took New Zealand to war in Afghanistan in the knowledge that it would split the Alliance, and then used the opportunity to declare an early election (despite having the confidence of the House).
-
The New York Times asks an interesting question: What if you're elderly, and need those drugs?
-
So to all those sceptics, where is the evidence? BTW for the record I am one of those who thinks Dwayne Chambers should have been banned for life, I don't care how clean he is now
Agreed. One positive test and you never compete in professional sport again.
5.6 - there's a time to aim for. Perhaps it's time to start engineering those muscles fibres from cheetahs into humans?