Posts by Paul Williams
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm not cynical. I'm sure they mean well, but it strikes me as a totally ineffective way to handle social justice, that people have to petition an extremely scarce resource, with undefined powers and responsibilities, and a political agenda to boot.
It's not the entire way we handle social justice Ben, it's a part, I just think you've undervalued their specific role. For the most part, social services are provided universally and in accordance with specific standards. However, as is inevitable, there'll be occassions of failure or ineptitude (or of abuse) and this gives rise to the need for an advocate.
Aren't these people almost always simply going to be put in contact with whoever it is that actually deals with their problem, with the added weight of "because <name MP> says so"?
That's part of it yes, and sometimes the mere act of elevating the concern is sufficient remedy but you need authority to do so and they have this; positional authority. It's not always inappropriate which is what it seems you think.
I expect what they do in these offices is mostly righteous. What I'm confused about is why these people have to have so much political power.
In my experience, they don't. They have the advantage of office, resources and detailed knowledge. That's about it.
On the other, they're passing fire-at-will laws, selling off our railways, passing surveillance laws, privatizing education, cutting social welfare funding etc.
You're conflating the role of an MP with the absurd power of Executive Government in the NZ parliament.
I'm happy to stop discussing the very existence of local MPs - it's academic anyway - none of the alternative electoral systems proposed dispense with them. They seem like an archaic throwback, but actually, most of our political system seems that way to me.
There's a quote from Churchill that applies here. I'll merely say, by comparison with Australia, the NZ system seems to work well, and consistently well, at a much lower cost.
-
Hard News: The Politics of Absence, in reply to Joe Wylie,
Is this Hawkins? Not one of my mob I've got much time for frankly.
-
Hard News: The Politics of Absence, in reply to BenWilson,
No, I really don't. There are anecdotes of people who have got help from them. I can't independently evaluate if any of these people actually deserved the help they got. There are also people who didn't get any help, and again, I can't judge whether they deserved it. There are no rules about it, no standards. I can't judge the scale of the help.
There are no standards that I'm aware of but there's clear custom and practice that anyone who has ever worked in an agency, parliament or ministerial office could explain.
MPs vary in their effort and the issues vary according to the electorate but whether it's domestic violence, state housing, local schools or hospitals, you can go to an electorate clinic and speak directly to your MP, you can wonder into their office, you can call them or email them and most, in my experience, will do everything they should to ensure your issues are fully and adequately addressed.
If you've not experience of this, why so cynical?
-
Hard News: The Politics of Absence, in reply to BenWilson,
Only the local school satisfies the quality of being something I'm intricately interested in, and my local MP has zero power to do shit about it, because his party isn't in power and probably won't be for 4-7 years. If I want something done at the school, I'd approach the principal, a public servant with considerable power to influence the outcomes for my family. I did this and he helped a lot.
Ben, I agree that if you want something done at a school, you talk to the principal and/or the Board. NZ schools are comparatively independent.
However, if you were unhappy about schools plural in your area or you had a failing Board, your local MP can and should help. Many years ago, there was a concerted effort to close many smaller schools, the people affected where across National and Labour electorates and MPs from both sides lobbied the then Minister, Creech (National), very effectively.
I've not followed all of this morning's discussion so may have missed a few points, but merely want to observe - having been in NZ, Australian State and Federal Education agencies - that local MPs have an important role and can be very effective.
Whether, in some other unknown model, individuals could be as effective, I don't know for sure but doubt; not everyone will ever be well enough informed of what they should expect or have the time of skills to insist on those expectations being delivered on.
-
Hard News: Guess that Prince thing was…, in reply to JacksonP,
Yeah, this is a rumour that surfaced a few days back but has not developed. Surely they'll tour Kings of Limbs but... <anxiousmiddleagehopefullness>
-
There's a rumour that Radiohead will do BDO, in Sydney, and I'm well keen to see The National who're playing here in November.
-
OnPoint: Set it on fire, then, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
I'm pretty sure those will still exist. Indeed, the Vic Debating Society is older than the Vic Students' Association.
Perhaps they will. I note from the third reading debate, the Minister now has final say on what student services and fees institutions can offer/charge, do you think they'll propose alternative calendars? Lucky students are now "free".
-
Kyle and others have made many of the points I would have but can I just observe that several Associations, including NZUSA, have reformed themselves albeit perhaps not as much as they might have. I had some involvement with changes at both Waikato and Lincoln which were intended to manage the risks around VSM. I was also involved in some of the changes at NZUSA though not the merger of the polytech and university national bodies.
To say there's been little or no effort is mistaken (and Lew, the strength of your argument is, I feel, a little undermined by your lack of knowledge about the history of this issue and the efforts that many people and organisations have applied to solving the problems). To then conclude that, absent this, Students' Associations get what they deserve also ignores the obvious political motivation which is a key part of this.
Ben said:
In another anecdote, a female friend of mine proudly bragged that she had scored $500 from AUSA just by going into the office and crying about how hard her life was. No further investigation was made, they just handed her the cash. She was actually proud of this.
Few SAs provide hardship grants and of those that do, most would have a more rigourous process than you describe.
Regardless, I and others here have direct personal experience of many SAs helping students avoid unfair eviction from rental properties and residential halls, representing students in academic grievances, improving services and support for student who are parents, gaining national and institutional funding for students with disabilities, improving library services, successfully opposing class closures and mergers of departments, getting changes to allowance and loan arrangements, forcing institutions to adequately justify various charges... A handful of laughable or ridiculous decisions/actions by a handful of student politicians is just that.
Finally, on the issue of the democratic merit of SAs and how it is measured, I agree that voting is a valid measure and by that measure, they do poorly. However, by assessing students use of services, facilities etc, you get a different picture. I know from the mid-90s when I was more actively involved, there were estimates that 60 per cent of students at some universities were involved in clubs/socs for instance.
-
Craig, that equivalence is false, you're right... certainly though, I believe, Students' Associations were closely involved, sometimes at the helm of, broad progressive reforms and I'm pretty happy about that.
-
OnPoint: Set it on fire, then, in reply to Russell Brown,
Jesus fuck
But Russell, its entirely exceptional. The parade of scandals in student politics will always be more colourful given the age of the actors but I suspect the consequence compares favourably with scandal elsewhere, local and other government included. Also, it doesn't argue for their evisceration, just reform.
18 years ago today I was radicalised when I and other students got caught in a police riot while protesting at Otago university. Terribly sad to have this bill pass on an anniversary.
Is it really? Oh hell, although I wasn't there, I remember it was yesterday. It was a shocking over-reaction, entirely indefensible and unjustifiable. You were at the occupation a few years later too, when the Police and the administration clearly had learned lessons.