Posts by Idiot Savant
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I imagine a fair proportion of people who signed the petition (if fewer who were behind it) actually support an amendment to the status quo ante, whether Chester Borrows' or John Key's.
Then let them put up something specific, so we can vote on it. Because the vague, leading motherhood statement in this referendum petition does no-one any good.
As for loaded phrases, I'm happy with status quo ante. But I'm not sure that Family Fist would want to be so blatant about their goals.
-
Dave: there's a strong presumption in the CIR Act that referenda will be held around election time if at all possible, and I'd expect the politicians to respect that. But if its impractical, its impractical. I'm sorry if that disrupts your little crusade, but then maybe you should have got your act together sooner.
(As for whether its really impractical, unlike Family Fist, I'm not given to dark conspiratorial mutterings about the perniciousness of government departments. I certainly expect the electoral bodies to give me a straight answer on whether its logistically possible or not. And on that, its worth noting that referenda don't really feature in their statement of intent or their ongoing election planning. Perhaps because they're so rare...)
-
The fundamental problem with CIR's is that they often reduce a grey issue into a simplistic yes/no answer.
There's nothing wrong with a yes/no answer, and our politicians give them all the time on actual legislation. Which points out the real problem: that our CIR system allows referenda on vague, leading questions ("do you like apple pie"?), rather than on specific pieces of legislation.
The fact that they didn't even go for something as simple as "should the crimes (substituted section 59) amendment act 2007 be repealed and s59 of the crimes act restored to its pre-child discipline bill state?" speaks volumes about their honesty and integrity. But I guess that would be taking the people seriously as a potential legislative body, rather than simply seeking to vent your spleen.
-
Dave: well, I've phoned the Chief Electoral Office as well, so hopefully I'll get a straight answer out of them.
-
This simply has to be false. We've had competently run snap elections on much much less than 7 months notice.
Yes, but the Chief Electoral Office is funded for that capability, and you'll note that the last two were in election year, when preparations for an election were already well-advanced. So I don't really find it that unbelievable at all.
It will be interesting to see the actual advice and see what they have to say about the logistics.
-
Oh, also: a referendum would cost $10 million no matter when it is held, so the financial argument Graeme relies upon is simply bogus.
Apparently they could have done it, but would have needed to have started in April. The childbeaters were simply too late.
-
According to the PM in Parliament five minutes ago, the Ministry of Justice has advised that based on the 1999 experience, holding a referendum at the same time as the election would lead to voter confusion and disruption of the count. Instead, they're advising that it be held by postal ballot sometime next year.
I've already OIAd the advice.
-
Surely this is an important question when considering optimimum levels of resourcing for Policing?
The police aren't interested in optimising the level of resources committed to policing. They're interested in maximising it. Hence, studies like this.
-
A reasonable compromise might be:
If the allegations were true then the rugby players should be censored.
What, not prosecuted?
In the absence of proof we are better to let matters take their course and wait until a misdemeanor is proved.
"Misdemeanor". Classy way to talk about rape.
-
Meanwhile, I can't help but notice that the voices who were screaming about the "injustice" of the right to silence in the Kahui case are being silent themselves over this one. Is it because they've learned the value of the right to silence? Or is it just because in this case, the silent accused are rugby players rather than poor Maori?