Stand down a MP for a crime a family member is accused of?

Forums › Off topic › Stand down a MP for a crime a family member is accused of?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

1139 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1298494 5-May-2015 16:30

surfisup1000: ................. as it is my inclination to argue.

Yes, yes it is!

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1298495 5-May-2015 16:32

trig42:

This.

What frustrates me, is that the two 'sides' are not actually that different. National is a little Right of Centre, Labour a little left (although with Andrew Little at the helm, probably a bit further off centre).

You're unlikely to ever get consensus on what "centre" actually is.
Not only that, but it shifts with time (we are living in times which are becoming more liberal in some ways, more conservative/draconian in others).
Mostly we're living in times where too many people are screaming at the same time via social media, journalism struggles for funding, and our perception of politics is manipulated by consultants. If something is presented which flies in the face of what you believe, it's too darned easy to respond with a knee-jerk.
Most "forums" are in one way or another platforms for shills.

No - I don't think there should be a GZ political forum. It will attract the wrong kinds of people (and many shills) to join simply to post disguised propaganda.

Relative anonymity kind of works here - disputes tend to be few and minor. That would change.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298498 5-May-2015 16:37

networkn:
Exactly. Labour continue to fail to grasp that being in opposition doesn't mean opposing for the sake of it. This is just nonsense as far as I can see, and does nothing but damages Littles credibility.

He would have looked a lot better coming out in support of it.

Actually, they do have to oppose the government. It is part of the deal for being sworn in in as "Her Majesty's Opposition". Their job is to oppose the government of the day.

Matthew

NZCrusader

646 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1298778 6-May-2015 07:37

mdooher:
networkn:
Exactly. Labour continue to fail to grasp that being in opposition doesn't mean opposing for the sake of it. This is just nonsense as far as I can see, and does nothing but damages Littles credibility.

He would have looked a lot better coming out in support of it.

Actually, they do have to oppose the government. It is part of the deal for being sworn in in as "Her Majesty's Opposition". Their job is to oppose the government of the day.

Not in everything.
They could actually support good policies and for things like this in the media, just keep their nose out of it.

In fact, real "opposition" would mean that the Labour party would create some compelling policies and display strong leadership - to actually make them attractive to vote for.

I suppose somewhere along the line, opposition by being competitive, was dropped just to be "opposing for the sake of it".

NZ / AU Battlefield 4 Gaming Community
http://www.sonsofvalour.net/forums/forum.php

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1298787 6-May-2015 08:08

Why the blind assumption that 'family' means anything special? It does for some but many families are not close at all, or are at war. Most people are much closer to their best mates than they are to any sibling. For these reasons I do not see why any connection should be made, except in cases where the possibility of conflict of interest clearly might exist.

Not sure about a political forum. Doesn't Kiwiblog exist for that?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

scuwp

3888 posts

Uber Geek

#1298800 6-May-2015 08:29

networkn:
Wade:
networkn: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11443425

So as I understand it, a current National MP's BROTHER has been ACCUSED (Not CONVICTED) of Child Indecency Charges.

Different quarters but including Andrew Little, have suggested he be stood down. WHY?

This potentially affects a lot of people:

1) The accused, has requested name suppression. Will become identifiable as soon as the MP is identified.
2) The accused, prejudiced against.
3) Victim becomes much more likely to be identified, which would be pretty poor form.
4) MP becomes "associated" with the potential behaviour which affects his standing in the community and as an MP despite likely not having any involvement or knowledge of anything that may not have even happened!

Am I missing something?

Political gain must be the overruling motive, I would be confident enough that if processes and protocols are followed this MP will not have any ability to sway the outcome so his connection becomes a moot point

Exactly. Labour continue to fail to grasp that being in opposition doesn't mean opposing for the sake of it. This is just nonsense as far as I can see, and does nothing but damages Littles credibility.

He would have looked a lot better coming out in support of it.

Yes, Labour hasn't moved on from their past failed methods, focusing on chastising everything the government does regardless, instead of being constructive or creative in their own right. Conflict of interest means the minister would have ability to influence the outcome, if that's not possible then let the MP get on with their job.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298807 6-May-2015 08:42

scuwp:

Yes, Labour hasn't moved on from their past failed methods, focusing on chastising everything the government does regardless, instead of being constructive or creative in their own right. Conflict of interest means the minister would have ability to influence the outcome, if that's not possible then let the MP get on with their job.

I think that applies to all parties. They all criticise what the other party does or wants to do. The govt has been mandated to rule with 100% control during their term, and the other parties are the Opposition. As mentioned above, they are expected by the Queen to oppose. Imagine if the opposition rarely opposed, or was light in opposition, that would infer support for the government, who would win every election thereafter theoretically

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

shk292

2858 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1298813 6-May-2015 08:46

... and even if there should be a conflict of interest, this can be managed - and JK has said he will ensure it is managed properly.

It's very different to the Labour case, where the MP daughter of the crim was asking very pointed questions in the house, which had direct relevance to her mother's case.

Athlonite

1828 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1298838 6-May-2015 09:36

johnr:
nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

+1

Why should the MP stand down cause the family member is a twat!

from what I heard on breakfast yesterday it's nothing to do with the MP as such but the position he holds

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1298847 6-May-2015 09:49

until or if name suppression is lifted it would be difficult for Mr Key to do a Cabinet reshuffle and a stand down. That action would by association compromise name suppression etc.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1298850 6-May-2015 09:51

Athlonite:
johnr:
nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

+1

Why should the MP stand down cause the family member is a twat!

from what I heard on breakfast yesterday it's nothing to do with the MP as such but the position he holds

that is still stupid

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1298896 6-May-2015 10:46

nathan:
Athlonite:
johnr:
nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

+1

Why should the MP stand down cause the family member is a twat!

from what I heard on breakfast yesterday it's nothing to do with the MP as such but the position he holds

that is still stupid

How on earth can you rationally conclude it's "stupid" when details are suppressed?

What is stupid (IMO) is placing all faith in the ability of a 3rd term PM to determine such matters fairly, when (again IMO) that PM has had a remarkable "honeymoon period" due to lack of serious opposition which has now been taken advantage of to such a level of teflon-coated perfection, that hardly anything said by opposition parties is ever taken seriously by the press, the relentless sycophant blogs, and consequently by the general public.

networkn

Networkn
32359 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298897 6-May-2015 10:49

Fred99:
nathan:
Athlonite:
johnr:
nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

+1

Why should the MP stand down cause the family member is a twat!

from what I heard on breakfast yesterday it's nothing to do with the MP as such but the position he holds

that is still stupid

How on earth can you rationally conclude it's "stupid" when details are suppressed?

What is stupid (IMO) is placing all faith in the ability of a 3rd term PM to determine such matters fairly, when (again IMO) that PM has had a remarkable "honeymoon period" due to lack of serious opposition which has now been taken advantage of to such a level of teflon-coated perfection, that hardly anything said by opposition parties is ever taken seriously by the press, the relentless sycophant blogs, and consequently by the general public.

Oh brother! Really? !

Unless the MP is directly involved, in which case HE/She would face charges themselves and rightfully step down, everything else you have suggested is nonsense.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1298905 6-May-2015 10:53

networkn:
Fred99:
nathan:
Athlonite:
johnr:
nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

+1

Why should the MP stand down cause the family member is a twat!

from what I heard on breakfast yesterday it's nothing to do with the MP as such but the position he holds

that is still stupid

How on earth can you rationally conclude it's "stupid" when details are suppressed?

What is stupid (IMO) is placing all faith in the ability of a 3rd term PM to determine such matters fairly, when (again IMO) that PM has had a remarkable "honeymoon period" due to lack of serious opposition which has now been taken advantage of to such a level of teflon-coated perfection, that hardly anything said by opposition parties is ever taken seriously by the press, the relentless sycophant blogs, and consequently by the general public.

Oh brother! Really? !

Unless the MP is directly involved, in which case HE/She would face charges themselves and rightfully step down, everything else you have suggested is nonsense.

Being "directly involved" absolutely includes potential conflict of interest. We don't know - so can't conclude anything.
You appear to have 100% faith in the PM on such matters. I don't.
(Edit to say that I don't trust any of them - opposition included)

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1298910 6-May-2015 10:59

Adults are not responsible for their siblings actions, simple as that.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4