Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
They could watch Magnum P.I. on 3, if they wanted.
No they couldn't. This hasn't been on on weekdays in a long time. I'm not even sure it lasted a full month after Sunrise's cancellation.
-
I personally am still extremely pissed off that "Pakeha" is no longer in the census, but the NZer term is.
The term New Zealander was not an option in the ethnicity question at the last census.
Perhaps I can ask a question a different way in order to generate some light, rather than heat: what is it that you consider makes "Pakeha" an ethnicity?
-
Ah, but you can listen to the radio while you read a newspaper (or the internet). You can't properly do either while you're watching TV.
Actually, my freeview thing has radio nz on it. 'Though the picture is kinda boring.
-
RODNEY What I would advocate is Councillors at large, there seems to be a large reaction against that, I'd actually advocate some form of STV
Indeed ... so if he'd gotten his way the people of the North Shore would have their votes elect people under STV, and wouldn't have been swamped by South Aucklanders :-)
-
I know who I think is more of a New Zealander.
I'm sorry, but how does making racist comments, or even being a racist, make someone less of a New Zealander?
[edit: particularly if we are a "very racist country"]
Are you seriously suggesting that "people who think like me, and talk like me, and agree with me" have greater claim on being a New Zealander than people who don't? Why can't Paul Henry be every bit the New Zealander that Anand Satyanand, Matthew Reid, and Graeme Edgeler are? How do any of our views on anything change this?
-
The way things are going, I suppose Rodney Hide should feel grateful that he didn't get his way on at-large voting for seats on the new Auckland Council.
Was this really a Rodney Hide thing? Or was it mostly a Royal Commission thing?
-
Tim - yes. Tactical voting is possible under all democratic voting systems. Situations like this are unlikely in real life. And there's not a lot you can do about them.
-
that now leads me to the can of worms in that answering the second question of whether to choose my most preferred option or the one I think most likely to lose in a run-off against MMP:)
Choose your most preferred option. It's not worth the risk.
Plus, STV is probably the one most likely to lose in a run-off with MMP. Most people opposed to MMP will not want STV, they want the good ol' days of first-past-the-post, or it's near equivalent supplementary member. The option of replacing MMP with something even more complicated will not be particularly popular with such people.
-
Paul - my referring to the Wellington City elections in 2007 was for exactly that purpose. Kerry Prendergast was declared elected without having an absolute majority of votes cast. Whether she'd still have fallen short of an absolute majority on the final iteration is an open question. Maybe. Maybe not.
If anyone was gonna do it, they'd have done it then, although I suspect the result may happen again this year. Feel free to challenge the result if it happens this time =)
-
So if STV were to be implement in New Zealand at government level would it be likely to be single member electorates?
The upcoming referendum on the voting system gives both preferential voting (single member electorates) and STV (multi-member electorates) as options.
If we opted for STV, it would have multi-member electorates. The 1986 Royal Commission, which recommended MMP, looked into other systems for New Zealand. It said that is New Zealand was to introduce STV, that most electorates should have 5 MPs, but that up to 20% of electorates could differ from this, having between 3 and 7 MPs.