Posts by Keir Leslie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Everybody's Machiavelli, in reply to Rik,
Rather than worrying about how the message got out, are there not more important questions to be asked here, such as does Len command the respect of his fellow council in a way that would be required to perform his duties?
What? Look, until a week ago no one even knew this affair was happening. If it's been damaging Brown's work performance, no one could tell. Seriously, this isn't an issue about Brown's work performance unless you're already committed to it being an issue.
-
I do not agree they had a ‘legitimate’ working relationship – a married mayor in a sexual relationship with an employee is not a legitimate relationship, working or otherwise. Therefore giving the reference was not legitmate.
The married man issue is irrelevant, firstly. Secondly, clearly you can have a sexual relationship with people who you share a workplace with, and clearly you can provide a reference for them. This stuff is just weasly attempts to bring private morality into the public sphere.
-
Actually the Australian multi-seat STV experience is full of fuck ups and bizarre preference deals, but ignoring that aspect, I never said anything that disagrees with you.
-
Hard News: The non-binary council, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
And, you know, let's remember it's not like Len Brown's on an hourly rate. Most people with salaried jobs would consider it pretty legit to disappear for an hour to have a coffee with a mate or whatever every now and then, as long as the work gets done. This "it was taxpayer time" stuff is just petty.
-
Hard News: The non-binary council, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
There's no reason for most voters to rank all candidates. If you just put a 1 besides the candidate you'd vote for in an fpp election, you've already engaged just as much as you would have then; if you order the five or so most likely winners you've almost certainly had as great an input as you really care about.
I agree that expecting people to rank more than five or six candidates is stupid. The solution is to get rid of multi-member wards! (And abolish DHBs full stop.)
-
Unfortunately Keown will certainly sit on the Shirley-Papanui Community Board. I just hope he's not the Chair.
-
In practice the removal of the financial veto would merely force minor government parties to explicitly kill off bills, and not let the Finance Minister carry the can. If I was English I'd be pretty happy to lose it.
-
Cracker: Lundy and Me., in reply to Bart Janssen,
Remember, the jury don't hear all the evidence. They hear two stories constructed by two groups of advocates using the evidence that falls within the rules of admissibility.
(Which isn't to say that we're in any better position, or that, in fact, anyone is.)
-
Hard News: The Crazy Gang Nation, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
It is the same effect. The Tea Party control a majority of the Republican selectorates, so they control the majority of the Republican caucus, which given it controls the majority of the House means they control the House. Likewise, Douglas controlled the inner Cabinet and so had a majority in Cabinet, which had a majority in the Parliamentary Party which had a majority in the House. You don't need FPP for this (although it helps), you just need party discipline and a certain degree of idiocy.
-
"prioritization of spending" is, of course, unconstitutional. The Congress passes acts that raise money and spend money, and those acts are law. The President doesn't get to pick and choose which money to spend (as that would be a breach of the separation of powers).