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

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298912 6-May-2015 11:01

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)

You appear to be inviting conflict for the sake of it. Unless the person is CHARGED with a crime or is even a person of interest, they are not deemed to be directly involved and until that happens they shouldn't stand down.

Even if I didn't trust the PM, I do trust the police and they haven't charged him/her so that is the end of it until that changes which is very very unlikely.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1298917 6-May-2015 11:10

If the MP is implicated in the case or attempts to influence proceedings then that MP should be stood down.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1298924 6-May-2015 11:19

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

It is not as simple as that at all when there is potential for conflict of interest, even if that potential is small.

There are problems with name-suppression laws in NZ, in most cases it might be reasonable, but in others it is not. (In this case it probably is reasonable, as the alleged victims were no of age of consent). It is also very likely that in order to protect the victim(s), the offender's name will not be made public, and the public will have no basis from which to determine whether a conflict of interest did in fact ever exist. You have nothing more to go on than trust in the PM, and you probably never will.

It most certainly is reasonable (IMO) when suppression is granted on the premise of protecting the victim, even when the offender has a high public profile. However you don't need to look far to "stumble upon" details of name suppression cases where the victim is past the age of consent and has made a considered request that name suppression granted to protect them - not the offender - is removed. That seldom happens. It's too bad we can't discuss it.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1298928 6-May-2015 11:24

networkn:

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)

You appear to be inviting conflict for the sake of it. Unless the person is CHARGED with a crime or is even a person of interest, they are not deemed to be directly involved and until that happens they shouldn't stand down.

Even if I didn't trust the PM, I do trust the police and they haven't charged him/her so that is the end of it until that changes which is very very unlikely.

Oh for goodness sake.
Nobody is suggesting that the MP is or could be guilty of anything. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the MP him/herself is feeling very uncomfortable and wishing that the whole thing could be made public.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1298929 6-May-2015 11:25

Fred99:
nathan: Adults are not responsible for their siblings actions, simple as that.

It is not as simple as that at all when there is potential for conflict of interest, even if that potential is small.

There are problems with name-suppression laws in NZ, in most cases it might be reasonable, but in others it is not. (In this case it probably is reasonable, as the alleged victims were no of age of consent). It is also very likely that in order to protect the victim(s), the offender's name will not be made public, and the public will have no basis from which to determine whether a conflict of interest did in fact ever exist. You have nothing more to go on than trust in the PM, and you probably never will.

It most certainly is reasonable (IMO) when suppression is granted on the premise of protecting the victim, even when the offender has a high public profile. However you don't need to look far to "stumble upon" details of name suppression cases where the victim is past the age of consent and has made a considered request that name suppression granted to protect them - not the offender - is removed. That seldom happens. It's too bad we can't discuss it.

It is not just "trust the PM" there is oversight in these matters

luckysurprise

43 posts

Geek

#1299371 6-May-2015 19:47

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

Like the new flag that no-one was clamouring for?

Handy distraction from things that Do matter however. Like the secret TPPA, increasing inequality, children going hungry through no fault of their own, steady chipping away of democracy by the present govt - eg ECAN, Falun Gong edict, secret TPPA negotiations, behind the scenes poltical manipulation eg Whaleoil cash for blogs, etc etc etc.

[Moderator edit (MF): removed personal comment]

networkn

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1299383 6-May-2015 20:01

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

Like the new flag that no-one was clamouring for?

Handy distraction from things that Do matter however. Like the secret TPPA, increasing inequality, children going hungry through no fault of their own, steady chipping away of democracy by the present govt - eg ECAN, Falun Gong edict, secret TPPA negotiations, behind the scenes poltical manipulation eg Whaleoil cash for blogs, etc etc etc.

You seem to forget that until recently the flag issue was relatively popular, and obviously it would be less popular during a time of historical importance. Yes there are more important things to be done, but there is capacity in Government for things which are not a matter of life and death.

Perhaps YOU may be easily distracted and the Flag issue is taking your attention away from the "real" issues, but I'm not impressed with you suggesting I don't have the capacity to consider more than 1 thing at a time.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

luckysurprise

43 posts

Geek

#1299428 6-May-2015 20:37

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

Like the new flag that no-one was clamouring for?

Handy distraction from things that Do matter however. Like the secret TPPA, increasing inequality, children going hungry through no fault of their own, steady chipping away of democracy by the present govt - eg ECAN, Falun Gong edict, secret TPPA negotiations, behind the scenes poltical manipulation eg Whaleoil cash for blogs, etc etc etc.

You seem to forget that until recently the flag issue was relatively popular, and obviously it would be less popular during a time of historical importance. Yes there are more important things to be done, but there is capacity in Government for things which are not a matter of life and death.

Perhaps YOU may be easily distracted and the Flag issue is taking your attention away from the "real" issues, but I'm not impressed with you suggesting I don't have the capacity to consider more than 1 thing at a time.

Please could you show where I suggested any such thing about you?

networkn

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1299453 6-May-2015 21:04

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

Like the new flag that no-one was clamouring for?

Handy distraction from things that Do matter however. Like the secret TPPA, increasing inequality, children going hungry through no fault of their own, steady chipping away of democracy by the present govt - eg ECAN, Falun Gong edict, secret TPPA negotiations, behind the scenes poltical manipulation eg Whaleoil cash for blogs, etc etc etc.

You seem to forget that until recently the flag issue was relatively popular, and obviously it would be less popular during a time of historical importance. Yes there are more important things to be done, but there is capacity in Government for things which are not a matter of life and death.

Perhaps YOU may be easily distracted and the Flag issue is taking your attention away from the "real" issues, but I'm not impressed with you suggesting I don't have the capacity to consider more than 1 thing at a time.

Please could you show where I suggested any such thing about you?

You didn't limit your comments like :

"Handy distraction from things that Do matter however."

and as they were generalized, they applied to me and I thought I'd disabuse you of the notion that I (and *I* believe almost all Kiwi's), are so easily distracted.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1299534 6-May-2015 22:40

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

Like the new flag that no-one was clamouring for?

Handy distraction from things that Do matter however. Like the secret TPPA, increasing inequality, children going hungry through no fault of their own, steady chipping away of democracy by the present govt - eg ECAN, Falun Gong edict, secret TPPA negotiations, behind the scenes poltical manipulation eg Whaleoil cash for blogs, etc etc etc.

[Moderator edit (MF): removed personal comment]

no child in NZ should be going hungry

We have a very generous welfare system that looks after people that cannot work, families with children, are sick, injured, widowed etc

It is one of the most generous welfare systems in the world.

I am happy to pay my taxes to help others who are in genuine need. What I am not happy is to pay my taxes to fund those what will not work.

If a parent is unable to afford the money to feed their children there is something else wrong. It costs very little to buy lunch for your offspring, a $1 for a sandwich. Certainly less than a SkyTV subscription or tobacco habit. I think something else is at play here if a parent is unable to afford lunch for their child.

It is not the Governments responsibility to replace parents as the primary feeder of school children. People need to be responsible for their own actions not to blame everyone else.

Start providing lunches, what do parents do at the weekends and school holidays?

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1299585 7-May-2015 06:17

FFS Labour calls for a National politician to stand down ever other day.

Suggesting one stand down for a siblings alledged crimes is a stretch.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1299599 7-May-2015 07:34

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

Like the new flag that no-one was clamouring for?

Handy distraction from things that Do matter however. Like the secret TPPA, increasing inequality, children going hungry through no fault of their own, steady chipping away of democracy by the present govt - eg ECAN, Falun Gong edict, secret TPPA negotiations, behind the scenes poltical manipulation eg Whaleoil cash for blogs, etc etc etc.

[Moderator edit (MF): removed personal comment]

no child in NZ should be going hungry

We have a very generous welfare system that looks after people that cannot work, families with children, are sick, injured, widowed etc

It is one of the most generous welfare systems in the world.

I am happy to pay my taxes to help others who are in genuine need. What I am not happy is to pay my taxes to fund those what will not work.

If a parent is unable to afford the money to feed their children there is something else wrong. It costs very little to buy lunch for your offspring, a $1 for a sandwich. Certainly less than a SkyTV subscription or tobacco habit. I think something else is at play here if a parent is unable to afford lunch for their child.

It is not the Governments responsibility to replace parents as the primary feeder of school children. People need to be responsible for their own actions not to blame everyone else.

Start providing lunches, what do parents do at the weekends and school holidays?

Rising rents, power, food, etc etc are such that the Benefits are insufficient, so yes we have a good Welfare system in NZ but it is falling way short of needs.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1299642 7-May-2015 08:44

MikeB4:
nathan:
luckysurprise:
nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

Like the new flag that no-one was clamouring for?

Handy distraction from things that Do matter however. Like the secret TPPA, increasing inequality, children going hungry through no fault of their own, steady chipping away of democracy by the present govt - eg ECAN, Falun Gong edict, secret TPPA negotiations, behind the scenes poltical manipulation eg Whaleoil cash for blogs, etc etc etc.

[Moderator edit (MF): removed personal comment]

no child in NZ should be going hungry

We have a very generous welfare system that looks after people that cannot work, families with children, are sick, injured, widowed etc

It is one of the most generous welfare systems in the world.

I am happy to pay my taxes to help others who are in genuine need. What I am not happy is to pay my taxes to fund those what will not work.

If a parent is unable to afford the money to feed their children there is something else wrong. It costs very little to buy lunch for your offspring, a $1 for a sandwich. Certainly less than a SkyTV subscription or tobacco habit. I think something else is at play here if a parent is unable to afford lunch for their child.

It is not the Governments responsibility to replace parents as the primary feeder of school children. People need to be responsible for their own actions not to blame everyone else.

Start providing lunches, what do parents do at the weekends and school holidays?

Rising rents, power, food, etc etc are such that the Benefits are insufficient, so yes we have a good Welfare system in NZ but it is falling way short of needs.

suggestions? raise taxes and redistribute that money to beneficiaries?

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1299651 7-May-2015 08:56

nathan:
suggestions? raise taxes and redistribute that money to beneficiaries?

If I knew the answers I would not be on this Web site I would be sitting in that strange building in Wellington. But 24 years working in welfare tells me that it not simple at all and there is always a lot of victim blaming.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1299705 7-May-2015 09:57

MikeB4:
nathan:
suggestions? raise taxes and redistribute that money to beneficiaries?

If I knew the answers I would not be on this Web site I would be sitting in that strange building in Wellington. But 24 years working in welfare tells me that it not simple at all and there is always a lot of victim blaming.

That's an inevitable consequence of meritocratic principles, the stereotype that lack of success must be due to lack of effort is popular, supported by anecdote proving that with effort success is possible (our present PM's "rags to riches" story is one).
Stereotyping leads to prejudice, most societies under stress find someone else to blame, that their subsequent misery is deserved, and compassion wanes.
I see, hear, and read some things which make me feel uncomfortable - if meritocracy doesn't come with some commitment to maintain a level playing field (equality of opportunity), then life is going to be very tough indeed for some people - regardless of individual "effort".

1 | 2 | 3 | 4