Posts by eszett

  • Hard News: Taxpayers' Union: still…,

    Curious whether DPF will push the story.
    As the "founding father" of the TPU he quite likes to push the "scandals" they have uncovered.

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Hard News: Taxpayers' Union: still…, in reply to Tom Semmens,

    Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity,"

    I don't think we should distract from the farce that the TPU is by peddling some obscure conspiracy theories, which will only be used by them to obfuscate any criticism

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Legal Beagle: The Greg King Memorial…,

    Now, strike crime is down in general, but the ~20% fall in strike offending is dwarfed by the ~62% fall in strike recidivism.

    We have some data already – strike recidivism appears to be falling much faster than strike offending, so what more do we need?

    I guess one question would be what was the trend for recidivism for all offendings (not just strike offendings). Does the strike offending recidivism follow or buck the trend of general recidivism?

    Agree that there certainly isn’t one provable cause and effect, but certainly the data does support the hypothesis that 3 strikes has a deterrent effect.

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Hard News: Not yet standing upright,

    Couldn't agree more, Russell. I championed the change only to be bitterly disappointed in the choice of the final four.

    As much as it pains me, right now, I am posed to ignore the first referendum and vote to keep the current flag.

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Legal Beagle: Election 2014: The Special…,

    Great analysis, Graeme.

    Did you do any work on the electorate level? I'd be interested in the specials might change the result in Auckland Central and/or Hutt South. Both seem marginal enough.

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Legal Beagle: MMP or not MMP,

    BTW, the electorate seat under MMP is determined by FPP.

    Would it make any sense to change this to PV?

    Other than the fact that it would make voting even more complicated, it would make the results in the electorates more clearer.

    It would also encourage independents and smaller parties to stand for electorates, especially if dual candidacy is removed in a review of MMP

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Legal Beagle: MMP or not MMP,

    Māori seats currently make up 10% of the constituency seats, but less than 6% of Parliament as a whole. With a 120 seat first-past-the-post Parliament, Māori seats would make up 10% of Parliament as a whole - that's at least 12 Māori seats, and we'd be close to getting a 13th. Overhang isn't anywhere near this useful to the Māori Party.

    Good point, I didn't take into account that the number of Maori seats would rise with FPP..

    I was trying to point out that the Maori party has a greater influence that their proportional share of votes under MMP.

    But under the above scenario it would be even more so. If they win more than the 7 seats today that is.

    Interesting. I presume that would be the case with PV as well

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Legal Beagle: MMP or not MMP,

    Except the Māori Party. First-past-the-post could be really good for them.

    As long as there are Maori seats they shouldn't care much, as these are elected under FPP (the electorate seats under MMP that is)

    In fact, they could profit under MMP slightly due to overhang as long as overhang seats are not corrected by some addition seats.

    The only "danger" for Maori party under MMP is that the Maori seats could be abolished.

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Legal Beagle: MMP or not MMP,

    @ BenWilson

    I agree, the referendum will at least put some final legitimacy to MMP if it wins the first round. And I am actually pretty sure that it will, the arguments by Peter Shirtcliffe are pretty weak so far and not taking hold that easily.

    Valid criticism of the current MMP process can be addressed by reviewing and tweaking the system.

    I am not too sure about all the minor parties. Rodney Hide seems to think FPP is the greatest thing ever, even though it would reduce his party to 1 MP and thereby confine it to obscurity. Actually he probably would loose his seat under that scenario as well, because National would truly contest it.

    So yes, small parties should have an interest in MMP, but ACt (or at least some parts it ) don't seem to see it that way. Oddly enough.

    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report

  • Legal Beagle: MMP or not MMP,

    But more broadly, I understand that Shirtcliffe is now arguing in public meetings for PV or SM, because he thinks they can be sold to the public as "not as bad as FPP" while still being undemocratic enough for his tastes.

    That's correct. I heard him talk last week with Rodney Hide in Auckland. He is promoting PV as he sees that FPP will not make it against MMP. Actually he says anything is better than MMP. He seemed obsessed with getting rid of MMP at all cost.

    Bets moment was this one.

    Rodney Hide: "I believe that FPP is far superior to the other systems."
    Moments later Peter Shirtcliffe says: "FPP is yesterdays system, I support PV, the Aussie system."


    Since May 2009 • 10 posts Report